Attachment C - ELDT B to A Final Rule 84 FR 8029

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 380
[Docket No. FMCSA–2017–0371]
RIN 2126–AC05

Commercial Driver’s License Upgrade
from Class B to Class A
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:

FMCSA amends the entrylevel driver training (ELDT) regulations
published on December 8, 2016, titled
‘‘Minimum Training Requirements for
Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle
Operators’’ (ELDT final rule), by
adopting a new Class A CDL theory
instruction upgrade curriculum to
reduce the training time and costs
incurred by Class B commercial driver’s
license (CDL) holders upgrading to a
Class A CDL. This final rule does not
change the regulatory text proposed in
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM). The Agency believes that this
modest change in the Class A theory
training requirements for Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL
maintains the same level of safety
established by the ELDT final rule, and
the regulatory burden reduction will
result in annualized cost savings of $18
million.
DATES: This final rule is effective May 6,
2019. The compliance date for this final
rule is February 7, 2020.
Petitions for Reconsideration of this
final rule must be submitted to the
FMCSA Administrator no later than
April 5, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Richard Clemente, Driver and Carrier
Operations (MC–PSD) Division,
FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave SE,
Washington, DC 20590–0001, by
telephone at 202–366–4325, or by email
at [email protected]. If you have
questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, contact Docket
Services, telephone (202) 366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final
rule is organized as follows:
SUMMARY:

I. Rulemaking Documents
A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
B. Privacy Act
II. Executive Summary
III. Abbreviations
IV. Legal Basis
V. Background
VI. Discussion of Proposed Rule
VII. Discussion of Comments and Responses
VIII. International Impacts

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

IX. Section-by-Section
X. Regulatory Analyses
A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures as Supplemented by E.O.
13563)
B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small
Entities)
D. Assistance for Small Entities
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection of
Information)
G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
K. Privacy
L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use)
N. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
O. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (Technical Standards)
P. Environment (NEPA)

I. Rulemaking Documents
A. Availability of Rulemaking
Documents
For access to docket FMCSA–2017–
0371 to read background documents and
comments received, go to http://
www.regulations.gov at any time, or to
Docket Services at U.S. Department of
Transportation, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
B. Privacy Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c),
DOT solicits comments from the public
to better inform its rulemaking process.
DOT posts these comments, without
edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL–
14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
II. Executive Summary
The Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act (MAP–21) required the
issuance of final regulations establishing
minimum ELDT requirements
addressing the knowledge and skills
necessary for the safe operation of a
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) that
must be acquired before obtaining a CDL
for the first time or upgrading from one
class of CDL to another (49 U.S.C.
31305(c)(1)). On December 8, 2016,
FMCSA published a final rule
establishing minimum ELDT
requirements meeting the MAP–21
mandate (81 FR 88732) (‘‘ELDT final
rule’’). Today, as part of the Agency’s
ongoing effort to review existing

PO 00000

Frm 00051

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

8029

regulations to evaluate their continued
necessity and effectiveness, FMCSA
amends 49 CFR part 380 by adding a
new theory instruction upgrade
curriculum for Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL. This final
rule does not change the regulatory text
proposed in the June 29, 2018, NPRM.
The ELDT final rule required the same
level of theory training for individuals
obtaining a CDL for the first time as for
those who already hold a Class B CDL
and are upgrading to a Class A CDL.
FMCSA now concludes that, because
Class B CDL holders have prior training
or experience, they are not required to
receive the same level of theory training
as individuals who have never held a
CDL. Accordingly, the Agency adds an
optional theory instruction upgrade
curriculum for Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL, which
removes eight instructional units
involving ‘‘Non-Driving Activities.’’
However, Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL remain free
to choose to complete the Class A theory
instruction standard curriculum, which
includes the eight units of theory
instruction not included in the upgrade
curriculum established by this rule.
This rule applies only to Class B CDL
holders; therefore, individuals obtaining
a Class A CDL who do not already hold
a Class B CDL must complete the full
Class A theory (standard) curriculum, as
required by the ELDT final rule.
The theory instruction upgrade
curriculum for Class B CDL holders
does not require a minimum number of
instruction hours, but the training
provider is required to cover all topics
in the curriculum and driver-trainees
must receive an overall minimum score
of 80 percent on the written theory
assessment. This approach is consistent
with the theory curricula requirements
in the ELDT final rule. This final rule
does not change the behind-the-wheel
(BTW) (range and public road) training
requirements set forth in the ELDT final
rule. All driver-trainees, including those
who hold a Class B CDL, must
demonstrate proficiency in all elements
of the BTW curriculum in a Group A
vehicle.
Costs and Benefits
The Agency estimates that an annual
average of approximately 11,340 drivertrainees are affected by the rule, with
each experiencing a reduction of 27
hours in time spent completing their
theory instruction. This results in a
substantial time cost savings to these
driver-trainees, who no longer must
attend this training, as well as a cost
savings to the motor carriers that
employ these drivers. The rule does not

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8030

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

result in any increase in costs. As
presented in Table 1, the Agency
estimates that the rule results in a 10year cost savings of $182 million on an
undiscounted basis, $155 million

discounted at 3%, $127 million
discounted at 7%, and $18 million on
an annualized basis at a 7% or a 3%
discount rate, representing a decrease in
cost or a cost savings. Most of this

annualized cost savings ($17.10 million)
is realized by driver-trainees, with the
remainder of the annualized cost
savings ($1.04 million) realized by
motor carriers.

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF THE TOTAL COST OF THE RULE
[In millions of 2014$]
Undiscounted
Year

Driver-trainee
costs

Motor carrier
costs

Discounted
Total
Costs (a)

Discounted
at 3%

Discounted
at 7%

.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................

(b) ($16.7)

(16.8)
(16.9)
(17.0)
(17.1)
(17.2)
(17.3)
(17.4)
(17.5)
(17.6)

($1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.1)
(1.1)
(1.1)

($17.8)
(17.8)
(17.9)
(18.0)
(18.1)
(18.2)
(18.3)
(18.4)
(18.5)
(18.6)

($17.2)
(16.8)
(16.4)
(16.0)
(15.6)
(15.3)
(14.9)
(14.5)
(14.2)
(13.9)

($16.6)
(15.6)
(14.6)
(13.8)
(12.9)
(12.2)
(11.4)
(10.7)
(10.1)
(9.5)

Total ..............................................................................

(171)

(10)

(182)

(155)

(127)

Annualized ...........................................................................

........................

........................

(18)

(18)

(18)

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029

Notes:
(a) Total cost values may not equal the sum of the components due to rounding. (The totals shown in this column are the rounded sum of
unrounded components.)
(b) Values shown in parentheses are negative values (i.e., less than zero) and represent a decrease in cost or a cost savings.

In the regulatory evaluation for the
ELDT final rule, FMCSA estimated that
not only would driver-trainees and
motor carriers incur costs, but that
training providers, State Driver
Licensing Agencies (SDLAs), and the
Federal government would also incur
costs, as a result of the ELDT final rule.
For this rule, FMCSA does not
anticipate any change in costs relative to
the ELDT final rule for training
providers, SDLAs, or the Federal
government, because the regulatory
obligations of these entities, as set forth
in the ELDT final rule, are not affected.
The Agency believes that this rule
does not result in changes to the
benefits of the ELDT final rule. In the
regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final
rule, the Agency estimated quantified
benefits for three categories of nonsafety benefits, including savings from
reductions in fuel consumption,
reductions in CO2 emissions related to
those reductions in fuel consumption,
and reductions in vehicle maintenance
and repair costs. These estimated nonsafety benefits were derived from the
Speed Management and Space
Management instructional units in the
Class A theory instruction curriculum in
the ELDT final rule. Because these two
instructional units remain in the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum, the
Agency does not anticipate any change
in these non-safety benefits from this
rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

The regulatory evaluation for the
ELDT final rule addressed the potential
safety benefits of ELDT. In considering
the potential safety impacts from the
June 29, 2018, NPRM, the Agency noted
that Class B CDL holders have prior
training or experience in operating
CMVs, which serves as an adequate
substitute for the eight non-driving
instructional units not included in the
optional theory instruction upgrade
curriculum. The Agency therefore
presumed that the NPRM would not
impact safety, and specifically requested
comment on whether the proposed
optional Class A CDL theory curriculum
would reduce safety benefits relative to
the ELDT final rule. The Agency
received no comments in response to
that request. Therefore, the Agency does
not anticipate that this rule will change
potential safety benefits previously
identified in connection with the ELDT
final rule.
III. Abbreviations and Acronyms
ANPRM Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
ATA American Trucking Associations, Inc.
BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
BTW Behind the Wheel
CDL Commercial Driver’s License
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLP Commercial Learner’s Permit
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle
CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety
Act

PO 00000

Frm 00052

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

CVTA Commercial Vehicle Training
Association
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
ELDT Entry-Level Driver Training
E.O. Executive Order
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
FMCSRs Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations
FR Federal Register
HM Hazardous Materials
IT Information Technology
MAP–21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the
21st Century Act
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OOIDA Owner-Operator Independent
Drivers Association
OOS Out-of-Service
PIA Privacy Impact Assessment
PII Personally Identifiable Information
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PTDI Professional Truck Driver Institute
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RIN Regulation Identifier Number
SBA Small Business Administration
SDLA State Driver Licensing Agency
§ Section symbol
TPR Training Provider Registry
U.S.C. United States Code

IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
As noted above, FMCSA’s publication
of the final rule, ‘‘Minimum Training
Requirements for Entry-Level
Commercial Vehicle Operators’’ (81 FR
88732 (Dec. 8, 2016)), satisfied the
MAP–21 requirement that the Agency

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
issue ELDT regulations. This rule,
which amends regulations established
by the ELDT final rule, is based on the
authority of the Motor Carrier Act of
1935 (the 1935 Act) and the Motor
Carrier Act of 1984 (the 1984 Act), both
as amended, and the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA).
The 1935 Act, codified at 49 U.S.C.
31502(b), provides that ‘‘The Secretary
of Transportation may prescribe
requirements for—(1) qualifications and
maximum hours of service of employees
of, and safety of operation and
equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2)
qualifications and maximum hours of
service of employees of, and standards
of equipment of, a motor private carrier,
when needed to promote safety of
operation.’’ This rule addresses the
qualifications of certain motor carrier
employees, consistent with the safe
operation of CMVs.
The 1984 Act, codified at 49 U.S.C.
31136(a), provides concurrent authority
to regulate drivers, motor carriers, and
vehicle equipment. Section 31136(a)(1)
grants the Secretary broad authority to
issue regulations ‘‘on commercial motor
vehicle safety,’’ including regulations to
ensure that ‘‘commercial motor vehicles
are . . . operated safely’’. The remaining
statutory factors and requirements in
section 31136(a), to the extent they are
relevant, are also satisfied here. In
accordance with section 31136(a)(2), the
elimination of duplicative theory
training does not impose any
‘‘responsibilities . . . on operators of
commercial motor vehicles [that would]
impair their ability to operate the
vehicles safely.’’ This rule does not
directly address medical standards for
drivers (section 31136(a)(3)) or possible
physical effects caused by driving CMVs
(section 31136(a)(4)). However, to the
extent that the various curricula in the
2016 final rule on ELDT address
FMCSA’s medical requirements for
CMV drivers, section 31136(a)(3) was
considered and addressed in that
rulemaking. FMCSA does not anticipate
that drivers will be coerced (section
31136(a)(5)) as a result of this
rulemaking. However, the Agency notes
that the ELDT theory training curricula
for Class B CDLs, as well as the Class
A theory instruction standard
curriculum, includes a ‘‘Whistleblower/
Coercion’’ unit, addressing the right of
an employee to question the safety
practices of an employer without
incurring the risk of losing a job or being
subject to reprisal simply for stating a
safety concern. This unit also instructs
driver-trainees in procedures for
reporting to FMCSA incidents of
coercion from motor carriers, shippers,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

receivers, or transportation
intermediaries.
The CMVSA provides, among other
things, that the Secretary shall prescribe
regulations on minimum standards for
testing and ensuring the fitness of an
individual operating a CMV (49 U.S.C.
31305(a)). This rule addresses the
fitness of specified individuals (i.e.,
Class B CDL holders upgrading to a
Class A CDL) operating a CMV.
Finally, the Administrator of FMCSA
is delegated authority under 49 CFR
1.87 to carry out the functions vested in
the Secretary of Transportation by 49
U.S.C. Chapters 311, 313, and 315, as
they relate to commercial motor vehicle
operators, programs and safety.

8031

processes, the Agency revised the theory
training requirements applicable to
CMV drivers already holding a Class B
CDL who wish to upgrade to a Class A
CDL. The requirements pertaining to
BTW (range and public road)
instruction, as set forth in the ELDT
final rule, remain unchanged for all
driver-trainees, including Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL.
VI. June 29, 2018, Proposed Rule

V. Background
On December 8, 2016, FMCSA
published a final rule establishing
minimum training standards for certain
individuals applying for their CDL for
the first time; an upgrade of their CDL
(e.g., a Class B CDL holder upgrading to
a Class A CDL); or a hazardous materials
(H), passenger (P), or school bus (S)
endorsement for the first time. The final
rule, which set forth ELDT requirements
for BTW and theory (knowledge)
instruction, fulfilled the Congressional
mandate in section 32304 of MAP–21
and was based in part on consensus
recommendations from the Agency’s
Entry-Level Driver Training Advisory
Committee (ELDTAC). The ELDT final
rule, effective on June 5, 2017 1 (with a
compliance date of February 7, 2020), is
the culmination of previous efforts by
FMCSA and its predecessor agency, the
Federal Highway Administration, to
address the issue of CMV driver training
standards.2
The Department has longstanding
processes to periodically review
regulations and other agency actions
and, if appropriate, revised to ensure
that they continue to meet the needs for
which they were originally designed,
and that they remain cost-effective and
cost-justified.3 Consistent with these

The ELDT final rule required the same
level of theory training for individuals
obtaining a CDL for the first time as
those who already hold a Class B CDL
and are upgrading to a Class A CDL.
FMCSA subsequently concluded that
this approach imposed an unnecessary
regulatory burden because, due to prior
training or experience in operating a
CMV, Class B CDL holders do not
require the same level of theory training
as individuals who have never held a
CDL. Accordingly, the Agency proposed
the following change: Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL
would not be required to complete eight
instructional units currently included in
Section A.1.5, ‘‘Non-Driving Activities,’’
of the theory instruction portion of the
Class A CDL training curriculum as set
forth in Appendix A to 49 CFR part 380.
Under this proposal, the theory
instructional units that would no longer
be required for Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL are:
Handling and Documenting Cargo,
Environmental Compliance Issues, PostCrash Procedures, External
Communications, Whistleblower/
Coercion, Trip Planning, Drugs/Alcohol,
and Medical Requirements. These units
would, however, remain required
elements of the theory instruction
standard curriculum for any individual
obtaining a Class A CDL who does not
already hold a Class B CDL. These units,
which provide instruction in activities
that do not involve actually operating a
CMV, are identical, except for minor
editorial differences in some of the topic

1 The ELDT rule was initially effective on
February 6, 2017. In accordance with the
Presidential directive as expressed in the
memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the
Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff,
entitled ‘‘Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,’’ the
effective date was temporarily delayed three times
by final rules published on February 1, 2017 (82 FR
8903), March 21, 2017 (82 FR 14476), and May 23,
2017 (82 FR 23516).
2 For a more extensive review of the legal and
regulatory history of these efforts, see 81 FR 88732,
88739–40 (Dec. 8, 2016).
3 See Exec. Order No. 13777, section 1, 82 FR
12285 (March 1, 2017) (‘‘It is the policy of the
United States to alleviate unnecessary regulatory
burdens placed on the American people or . . .’’);
Exec. Order No. 13610, 77 FR 28469 (May 14, 2012)
(requiring agencies to conduct retrospective

analyses of existing rules to determine whether they
remain justified); Exec. Order No. 13563, section
6(b), 76 FR 2831, (Jan. 21, 2011) (requiring agencies
to submit a plan ‘‘under which the agency will
periodically review its existing significant
regulations to determine whether any such
regulations should be modified, streamlined,
expanded, or repealed so as to make the agency’s
regulatory program more effective or less
burdensome in achieving the regulatory
objectives’’); Exec. Order No. 12866, section 5,
(Sept. 30, 1993) (requiring each agency to ‘‘review
its existing significant regulations to determine
whether any such regulations should be modified
or eliminated so as to make the agency’s regulatory
program more effective in achieving the regulatory
objectives, less burdensome, or in greater alignment
with the President’s priorities and the principles set
forth in this Executive order’’).

PO 00000

Frm 00053

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8032

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

descriptions, to the above-specified
instructional units included in Section
B.1.5, ‘‘Non-Driving Activities,’’ of the
Theory Instruction portion of the Class
B CDL Curriculum as set forth in
Appendix B to 49 CFR part 380.
The NPRM explained that drivertrainees affected by the proposal would
fall into one of two categories: those
who obtain a Class B CDL after the
compliance date of February 7, 2020,
and thus are subject to the training
requirements set forth in the ELDT final
rule, and those who obtain a Class B
CDL before the compliance date of the
final rule and thus are not subject to
those requirements.4 The first category,
drivers who obtain a Class B CDL by
completing ELDT training after February
7, 2020, will have already demonstrated
proficiency in the eight non-driving
theory topics, identified above, included
in the Section B.1.5 of the Class B
training curriculum, the content of
which is virtually identical to the
content of section A.1.5. The Agency
noted that, accordingly, requiring Class
B CDL holders who are upgrading to
Class A to be re-trained in those topics,
which they have already mastered by
successfully completing the Class B
theory instruction, imposes an
unnecessary regulatory burden on those
individuals.
The second category of driver-trainees
affected by the NPRM would be drivers
who obtained their Class B CDL prior to
the February 7, 2020, compliance date
of the final rule. These Class B CDL
holders would already have experience
operating a CMV and would have
received some training, including, for
example, the ELDT required in
§ 380.503 5 and/or finishing training
provided by motor carrier employers.
Accordingly, FMCSA proposed that
these drivers not be required to
complete the entire Class A theory
instruction curriculum as set forth in
the ELDT final rule. Under the NPRM,
any Class B holder could thus choose to
complete the Class A CDL theory
curriculum (upgrade or standard) best
suiting their individual needs.
FMCSA also explained that, unlike
the eight Class A theory instructional
units not included in the proposed
upgrade curriculum, instruction in two
‘‘non-driving’’ theory units—Hours of
4 The latter category would also include drivers
who obtain a Class B CLP before the compliance
date of the ELDT final rule and obtain the Class B
CDL after the compliance date, but before the CLP
or renewed CLP expires. See 49 CFR 380.603(c)(1).
5 The current ELDT requirements, set forth in
subpart E of part 380, will be removed and reserved
and replaced by new subparts F and G on the
compliance date of the ELDT final rule. See 81 FR
88732, 88783.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

Service (HOS) Requirements and
Fatigue and Wellness Awareness—
would vary to some extent, depending
on the vehicle group (Group A or Group
B). Consequently, the Agency proposed
that those instructional units be retained
in the Class A theory upgrade
curriculum.
FMCSA also noted that instruction
would vary, depending on the
underlying vehicle group, for the theory
topics identified in Sections A.1.1 and
B.1.1 (Basic Operation), A.1.2 and B.1.2
(Safe Operating Procedures), A.1.3 and
B.1.3 (Advanced Operating Practices),
and A.1.4 and B.1.4 (Vehicle Systems
and Reporting Malfunctions)—all of
which address, to varying degrees,
operational characteristics of the two
vehicle groups. FMCSA therefore
proposed to retain those topics in the
theory instruction upgrade curriculum.
In the proposed rule, FMCSA
emphasized that the Class A BTW range
and public road curriculum would
remain unchanged for all drivertrainees, including those who hold a
Class B CDL. The Agency also stated
that, to the extent that Class B CDL
holders already have previous training
or experience in the CMV industry, they
are not novice drivers. FMCSA therefore
concluded that the proposed addition of
an optional Class A theory instruction
upgrade curriculum would not impact
the level of safety established in the
ELDT final rule, and invited comments
addressing this issue. The proposal set
forth minimum theory training
requirements applicable to Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL.
Nothing in the NPRM precluded
training providers from imposing more
extensive theory training requirements
for Class B CDL holders to whom they
provide Class A theory training.
Additionally, under the proposal, States
remained free to impose theory training
requirements more stringent than those
proposed in the NPRM, just as they
remain free to impose ELDT
requirements more stringent than those
set forth in the ELDT final rule.
VII. Discussion of Comments and
Responses
The Agency received eight comments
in response to the NPRM. As discussed
further below, none of the comments
warranted a change in the proposed
regulatory text or in FMCSA’s rationale
for the proposal, as set forth in the
preamble to the NPRM. The American
Trucking Associations (ATA) supported
the proposal, describing the NPRM as
‘‘an important improvement to the
ELDT regulations that will help keep
these experienced drivers in the
industry.’’ Citing the difficulty of

PO 00000

Frm 00054

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

recruiting drivers capable of meeting
DOT’s driver qualification requirements,
ATA also noted that ‘‘[l]ooking for ways
that provide flexibility in the hiring
process but maintain a high level of
safety is important to the growth and
continued success of the trucking
industry.’’ Similarly, C.R. England, Inc.
(C.R. England) appreciated the Agency’s
effort ‘‘to reduce unnecessary
requirements and ‘red tape’ for the
benefit of drivers and carriers alike.’’
Overall, the Owner-Operator
Independent Drivers Association
(OOIDA) favored the ‘‘elimination of
these duplicative requirements.’’
The Commercial Vehicle Training
Association (CVTA) opposed the NPRM,
stating that the proposed removal of the
eight topics from the Class A CDL
theory curriculum ‘‘is not warranted.’’
Two anonymous individuals opposed
the proposal, but neither commenter
provided a substantive explanation for
their position.
The remaining two comments were
also submitted by individuals, but both
were outside the scope of the NPRM.
1. Retention of Drugs/Alcohol and Trip
Planning Units in the Class A CDL
Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum
Comment: C.R. England suggested
that drugs/alcohol and trip planning
should be retained in the proposed
Class A CDL Theory Instruction
Upgrade Curriculum ‘‘due to the
ongoing importance of these two
topics.’’
FMCSA Response: The Agency notes
that, as discussed in the NPRM, all Class
B CDL holders who choose the Class A
CDL theory instruction upgrade
curriculum will already have received
training in drug and alcohol testing.
Class B holders who obtain their CDL
before February 7, 2020, must receive
detailed information from their
employer concerning the drug and
alcohol use and testing requirements
and prohibitions set forth in 49 CFR
parts 382 and 40, as required by
§ 382.601. These employer-provided
materials must also include information
concerning the impact of drug and
alcohol use on an individual’s health
and ability to perform safety sensitive
functions and require that each driver
certify in writing that he or she received
these materials. Class B holders who
obtain their CDL after February 7, 2020,
will have demonstrated their
proficiency in the drugs/alcohol theory
topic included in the Class B Theory
Curriculum as Unit B1.5.9, in addition
to being subject to the requirements of
§ 382.601.
Similarly, drivers who obtain their
Class B CDL after February 7, 2020, will

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
have demonstrated proficiency in the
trip planning topic included in the Class
B Theory Curriculum as Unit B1.5.8.
Drivers who obtain their Class B CDL
before February 7, 2020, will have
gained knowledge and experience as
CMV operators and thus will be familiar
with the core principles of trip
planning.
FMCSA therefore continues to believe
that inclusion of these non-driving
topics in the Class A CDL theory
instruction upgrade curriculum is not
necessary. The Agency notes, however,
that Class B holders who want further
training in these topics when upgrading
to a Class A CDL may choose the Class
A theory instruction standard
curriculum, which includes units on
drugs/alcohol and trip planning.
2. Application of Class A CDL Theory
Training Requirements to Drivers
Obtaining a Class B CDL Prior to
February 7, 2020
Comment: OOIDA, while supporting
elimination of duplicative Class A CDL
theory training requirements for drivers
who obtain a Class B CDL after February
7, 2020, stated that ‘‘commercial drivers
with a Class B CDL prior to February 7,
2020, should not be exempt from the
training requirements discussed in this
rulemaking.’’
FMCSA Response: FMCSA did not
propose that drivers who obtain a Class
B CDL before February 7, 2020, should
be exempt from Class A CDL theory
training requirements. Under the
proposal and this final rule, all Class B
CDL holders seeking to upgrade their
license to a Class A CDL must
successfully complete Class A theory
training, regardless of when they
obtained their Class B CDL. The Agency
proposed providing Class B CDL holders
with the option to fulfill the Class A
CDL theory instruction training
requirement by completing either the
standard or the upgrade curriculum. As
discussed in the NPRM, drivers who
obtain their Class B CDL before
February 7, 2020, will already have
some degree of training, knowledge, and
experience and, in that sense, are not
new to the motor carrier industry.
Accordingly, these Class B holders may
choose the upgrade curriculum, which
contains fewer non-driving instructional
units than the standard curriculum.
Drivers who obtain their Class B CDL
after February 7, 2020, will have
completed the Class B theory
instruction curriculum set forth in the
ELDT final rule, which includes the
eight non-driving units not included in
the Class A upgrade curriculum.
Therefore, these Class B holders, who
have already demonstrated proficiency

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

in those eight non-driving instructional
units, may choose the upgrade
curriculum when seeking a Class A
CDL. FMCSA reiterates that Class B
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL may
choose the theory instruction
curriculum that best suits their needs,
including the full standard curriculum.
3. The Proposed Class A CDL Theory
Instruction Upgrade Curriculum
Comment: CVTA, while
acknowledging FMCSA’s effort to
reduce redundancies for Class B CDL
holders seeking to upgrade to a Class A
CDL, nevertheless opposed the NPRM.
First, CVTA argued that because most
commercial truck driving schools are
likely to offer a Class A curriculum that
meets or exceeds the minimum
requirements established by the ELDT
final rule, ‘‘[i]t is more efficient to
subject Class B holders to a full Class A
curriculum rather than dedicating
resources’’ to ‘‘create a special program
for a limited number of people.’’
Second, CVTA argued that even if
FMCSA allowed a training provider to
offer the abbreviated upgrade
curriculum, as proposed, ‘‘students
would still be required to take and pass
an assessment, which will contain
questions covering these eight subjects.’’
Lastly, CVTA disputed FMCSA’s
assertion that Class B CDL holders ‘‘will
already have demonstrated proficiency
in the eight non-driving theory topics’’
not included in the Class A theory
upgrade curriculum, concluding that
‘‘the NPRM wrongly presumes all Class
B holders have some experience
handling freight.’’
FMCSA Response: Under the ELDT
final rule and this rule, training
providers are free to continue or
develop ELDT programs that exceed the
Agency’s requirements. The Agency did
not propose to require that training
providers offer the Class A theory
instruction upgrade curriculum.
FMCSA also disagrees that students
subject to the upgrade curriculum
would be required to take and pass an
assessment covering subjects that are
not part of that curriculum. CVTA
correctly noted that the ELDT final rule
requires that driver-trainees must
demonstrate proficiency in the
knowledge objectives described in the
theory curricula by achieving an overall
score of 80% on a written assessment.
However, FMCSA does not intend that
driver-trainees who complete the Class
A upgrade curriculum be tested on the
eight non-driving theory instructional
units not included in that curriculum.
The introductory paragraph to
‘‘Appendix A to part 380, Class A CDL
training curriculum,’’ as set forth in the

PO 00000

Frm 00055

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

8033

ELDT final rule and this rule, notes that
training providers must cover all theory
subjects set forth in the curriculum.
Additionally, in the ELDT final rule,
§ 380.715(a), ‘‘Assessments,’’ states that
training providers must ‘‘determine
driver-trainees’ proficiency in the
knowledge objectives in the theory
portion of each unit of instruction in
appendices A through E of part 380, as
applicable.’’ Accordingly, drivertrainees would be tested only on the
instructional units included in the Class
A theory curriculum (i.e., standard or
upgrade curriculum) they choose to
complete.
Finally, FMCSA’s statement that
certain Class B holders will already
have demonstrated proficiency in the
eight non-driving theory instructional
units referred specifically to drivers
who obtain their Class B CDL after
February 7, 2020, and therefore are
subject to the ELDT final rule. To obtain
a Class B CDL, these drivers would be
required to complete the Class B theory
instruction curriculum (thereby
demonstrating proficiency), which
includes the eight non-driving units not
included in the Class A upgrade
curriculum. FMCSA emphasizes,
however, that as proposed in the NPRM
and as adopted in this final rule, these
Class B CDL holders upgrading to a
Class A CDL, as well as drivers who
obtained their Class B CDL before
February 7, 2020, can receive theory
instruction in handling and
documenting cargo (as well as the other
seven non-driving units) by selecting
the Class A standard curriculum rather
than the upgrade curriculum. The
Agency believes that this approach
obviates CVTA’s concern that Class B
holders who operate commercial
passenger vehicles, such as motor
coaches and school buses, would not
necessarily have experience in handling
and documenting cargo.
4. Estimated Cost Savings Resulting
From the NPRM
Comment: OOIDA suggested that the
estimated cost savings of $182 million
‘‘be reallocated towards other ELDT
programs.’’
FMCSA Response: This rule retains
the estimated 10-year cost savings of
$182 million on an undiscounted basis,
as discussed in the NPRM. However, the
cost savings attributable to this rule
would not accrue to FMCSA or any
other part of the Federal Government,
and the Agency has no authority to
‘‘reallocate’’ the savings to other aspects
of ELDT. The cost savings would be
primarily experienced by driver-trainees
able to complete their Class A theory
instruction in fewer hours relative to the

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8034

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

baseline of the ELDT final rule, resulting
in lower tuition costs and reducing the
opportunity cost of time for these
individuals. Motor carriers employing
these drivers would also experience
reduced opportunity cost, or cost
savings, relative to the baseline of the
ELDT final rule. The estimated cost
savings resulting from this final rule are
discussed further below in Section
VIII.A, ‘‘E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563, and
DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures.’’
VIII. International Impacts
The FMCSRs, and any exceptions to
the FMCSRs, apply only within the
United States (and, in some cases,
United States territories). Motor carriers
and drivers are subject to the laws and
regulations of the countries in which
they operate, unless an international
agreement states otherwise. Drivers and
carriers should be aware of the
regulatory differences among nations.
IX. Section-by-Section Analysis
FMCSA made no changes to the
proposed regulatory text in response to
the comments it received.
As proposed, this final rule amends
§ 380.707(a) to add ‘‘or Class A theory
instruction upgrade curriculum
applicants’’ to the last sentence in the
paragraph to account for the fact that
training providers must verify that Class
A CDL theory instruction upgrade
curriculum training applicants possess a
valid Class B CDL.
In Appendix A to part 380, Class A
CDL Training Curriculum, as proposed,
FMCSA adds a sentence to the
introductory text that states, ‘‘Class A
CDL applicants who possess a valid
Class B CDL may complete the Theory
Instruction Upgrade Curriculum in lieu
of the Theory Instruction Standard
Curriculum.’’ Additionally, the Agency
renames the Class A ‘‘Theory
Instruction’’ as ‘‘Theory Instruction
Standard Curriculum.’’ Finally, the
Agency adds a new section, ‘‘Theory
Instruction Upgrade Curriculum.’’
X. Regulatory Analyses
A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review), and
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
FMCSA performed an analysis of the
impacts of the rule and determined it is
not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning
and Review, as supplemented by E.O.
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011),
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review. Accordingly, the Office of

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

Management and Budget (OMB) has not
reviewed it under that Order. It is also
not significant within the meaning of
DOT regulatory policies and procedures
(DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980;
44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26, 1979)).
As discussed earlier, because Class B
CDL holders have previous training or
experience in the CMV industry, the
rule establishes a new theory instruction
upgrade curriculum that removes eight
instructional units involving ‘‘NonDriving Activities’’ for Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL. The
rule does not change the BTW training
requirements set forth in the ELDT final
rule. Consistent with the ELDT final
rule, the Class A theory instruction
upgrade curriculum does not have a
required minimum number of
instruction hours, but the training
provider must cover all topics in the
curriculum, and driver-trainees must
receive an overall minimum score of 80
percent on the written theory
assessment. FMCSA estimates that this
new curriculum results in cost savings
by taking less time to complete, without
impacting the benefits of the ELDT final
rule.
The Agency estimates that an annual
average of approximately 11,340 drivertrainees are affected by the rule, with
each experiencing a reduction of 27
hours to complete the theory
instruction. This results in a substantial
cost savings to these driver-trainees, as
well as a cost savings to the motor
carriers that ultimately employ these
drivers. The rule does not result in any
increase in costs. As presented in Table
3, the Agency estimates that the rule
results in a 10-year cost savings of $182
million on an undiscounted basis, $155
million discounted at 3%, $127 million
discounted at 7%, and $18 million on
an annualized basis at a 7% or a 3%
discount rate. Most of this annualized
cost savings ($17.10 million) is realized
by driver-trainees, with the remainder of
the annualized cost savings ($1.04
million) realized by motor carriers.
Scope and Key Inputs to the Analysis
The rule revises regulations
established in the ELDT final rule and,
therefore, the ELDT final rule serves as
the baseline against which the effects of
the rule are evaluated. The compliance
date of the regulations established by
the ELDT final rule remains February 7,
2020; therefore, the same analysis
period of 2020 to 2029, used in
evaluating the effects of the ELDT final
rule, is used in evaluating the effects of
this rule. Furthermore, to ensure that
meaningful relative comparisons can be
made between the results of the
regulatory analysis for this rule and the

PO 00000

Frm 00056

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

baseline represented by the ELDT final
rule, all monetary values are expressed
in 2014 dollars, the same base year used
to express monetary values in the
evaluation of the ELDT final rule.
Many of the key inputs to this
analysis are based on the same data
sources as those developed and used in
the evaluation of the ELDT final rule.
Therefore, a copy of the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule is
available in the docket,6 and, where
applicable, the Agency cites that
document in the analysis below.
Number of Driver-Trainees Affected by
the Rule
The Agency estimates that an annual
average of 11,340 driver-trainees are
affected by the rule, totaling
approximately 113,000 driver-trainees
affected over the 10-year analysis
period. Annual estimates of the number
of driver-trainees affected by the rule are
presented below in Table 2.

TABLE 2—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF
DRIVER-TRAINEES AFFECTED BY THE
RULE
Year
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029

Driver-trainees
affected by
the rule

......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................

11,069
11,129
11,188
11,248
11,309
11,369
11,430
11,491
11,553
11,615

Total ..................................

113,403

The estimated number of driver-trainees
affected by the rule is a key input in
determining the potential cost savings to
driver-trainees and to the motor carriers
that ultimately employ these drivers.
To derive the estimates presented
above in Table 2, FMCSA first estimated
the total annual number of Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL.
These estimates are based on a June
2015 information collection, performed
as part of the regulatory evaluation for
the ELDT final rule, requesting data
from the 51 SDLAs, including
6 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT),
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA). ‘‘Regulatory Evaluation of Minimum
Training Requirements for Entry-Level Commercial
Motor Vehicle Operators. final rule. Regulatory
Impact Analysis. Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis. Unfunded Mandates Analysis.’’
November 2016. Docket ID FMCSA–YEAR–2007–
27748. Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=FMCSA-2007-27748-1291 (accessed
September 7, 2018).

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
information regarding the number of
upgrades of Class B CDLs to Class A
CDLs issued in 2014.7 Seventeen SDLAs
responded to this data collection, 13 of
which provided data regarding the
number of upgrades. For these 13
SDLAs, a total of 13,937 upgrades from
Class B CDLs to Class A CDLs were
issued in 2014. Accounting for the
difference in the number of licensed
drivers across states, FMCSA
extrapolated this value to a national
total that is representative of all 51
SDLAs. This adjustment results in a
national estimate of 67,000 upgrades
from Class B CDLs to Class A CDLs
issued in 2014. Further details regarding
the June 2015 information collection
and the methods used to develop the
national estimate of 67,000 upgrades
from Class B CDLs to Class A CDLs
issued in 2014 can be found in the
regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final
rule.8
This 2014 baseline value of 67,000
upgrades from Class B CDLs to Class A
CDLs was then used to develop
projections of the number of Class B
CDL to Class A CDL upgrades issued
annually for the 2020 to 2029 analysis
period. These future projections were
developed by increasing the current
baseline 2014 value consistent with
occupation-specific employment growth
projections for several commercial
vehicle-related occupations obtained
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS) Employment Projections
program.9 FMCSA projected that the
annual number of Class B CDL to Class
A CDL upgrades for the 2020 to 2029
analysis period would range between
69,000 and 73,000. These projections
and further details regarding their
development can be found in the
regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final
rule.10
Finally, the resulting annual
projections of the overall number of
upgrades from Class B CDLs to Class A
CDLs are then adjusted to account for
7 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT),
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA). ‘‘Report by State Driver Licensing
Agencies (SDLAs) on the Annual Number of EntryLevel Commercial Driver’s License (CDL)
Applicants and Related Data.’’ OMB Control No:
2126–0059.
8 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 19–20, 26.
9 U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS). Employment Projections
Program. ‘‘Table 1.2: Employment by detailed
occupation, 2014 and projected 2024.’’ Available at:
http://www.bls.gov/emp/ind-occ-matrix/
occupation.xlsx (accessed July 29, 2016).
10 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation.’’ Annual projections for 2020 to 2029
for ‘‘Upgrade of Class B CDL to Class A CDL’’ are
presented in Table 11 on page 18, and discussed on
pp. 27–30.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

the portion of these drivers who are not
affected by the ELDT final rule because
these drivers are already receiving
training in the absence of that rule.
These drivers are not affected by the
rule. In the regulatory evaluation for the
ELDT final rule, FMCSA estimated that
84% of driver-trainees obtaining a Class
A CDL already receive training in the
absence of that rule and therefore are
not affected by the ELDT final rule.11
The remaining portion (16%) of drivertrainees are those affected by the ELDT
final rule, and therefore, by this rule.
The annual projections of the overall
number of upgrades from Class B CDLs
to Class A CDLs developed earlier are
adjusted accordingly, using this 16%
value to estimate the number of Class B
CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL
who are affected by the rule. This
results in the estimated number of
driver-trainees affected annually by the
rule, as presented earlier in Table 2.
Estimated Hours To Complete the
Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum
The estimated number of hours
necessary to complete the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum, and the
resulting time savings compared to the
estimated time necessary to complete
the Class A theory instruction
curriculum that was set forth in the
ELDT final rule, provide key inputs in
determining the potential cost savings to
driver-trainees and to the motor carriers
that ultimately employ these drivers.
Under both the ELDT final rule and this
rule, there is no minimum number of
hours that driver-trainees are required to
spend on the theory portions of any of
the training curricula. The training
provider must, however, cover all topics
in the theory instruction curriculum,
and driver-trainees must receive an
overall minimum score of at least 80
percent on the written theory
assessment. The Agency estimated that,
on average, driver-trainees need 60
hours to complete the Class A theory
instruction curriculum set forth in the
ELDT final rule,12 which, in this rule, is
renamed the ‘‘Theory Instruction
Standard Curriculum.’’ For this rule, the
Agency estimates that Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL on
average need 33 hours to complete the
theory instruction upgrade curriculum.
Accordingly, the Agency estimates the
rule results in a time savings of 27 hours
for each Class B CDL holder upgrading
to a Class A CDL.
11 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 52–62.
12 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 70–74.

PO 00000

Frm 00057

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

8035

The Class A theory instruction
curriculum set forth in the ELDT final
rule included 30 instructional units,
among them 10 instructional units
related to non-driving activities. The
theory instruction upgrade curriculum
removes eight of these instructional
units related to non-driving activities. In
the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT
final rule, the Agency did not develop
separate estimates of the time necessary
to complete each of the 30 instructional
units comprising the Class A theory
instruction curriculum. Accordingly,
FMCSA cannot make a direct estimate
of the time savings resulting from the
elimination of eight instructional units
related to non-driving activities.
Although the number of instructional
units is reduced by 27% (with eight out
of 30 instructional units removed), the
varying subject matter and content of
each of the 30 instructional units means
that the number of hours required to
complete the training is not necessarily
reduced by a proportional 27% (i.e., a
16-hour reduction from the 60-hour
estimate for the theory instruction
standard curriculum discussed above).
Therefore, in order to develop an
estimate of the number of hours
necessary to complete the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum and the
resulting time savings compared to the
estimated time necessary to complete
the Class A theory instruction
curriculum in the ELDT final rule, the
Agency examined the theory
instructional units of the curricula
standards for driver-trainees as
established by the Professional Truck
Driver Institute (PTDI).13 These PTDI
curricula standards were reviewed
previously during the development of
the ELDT final rule. The theory
instructional units of the PTDI curricula
standards align closely with the 30
instructional units of the Class A theory
instruction curriculum in the ELDT
final rule. Furthermore, the PTDI
curricula standards specify a minimum
number of hours for six major categories
into which each of the individual
instructional units is assigned. These
PTDI estimates help to provide a
relative measure of the amount of time
necessary to complete each of the
individual instructional units in the
rule. Based on the minimum number of
training hours required under the PTDI
standards for each of the individual
13 Professional Truck Driver Institute, Inc. (PTDI).
‘‘Curricula Standards and Guidelines for EntryLevel Commercial Motor Vehicle Driver Courses.’’
February 15, 2017. Page 16. Available at: http://
www.ptdi.org/resources/Documents/Standards/
CURRICULUM%20STANDARDS%20ENTRY%
20LEVEL%20021517.pdf (accessed October 2,
2017).

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8036

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

theory instructional units, the
elimination of the eight instructional
units related to non-driving activities
reduces the total hours of Class A theory
instruction by approximately 44.2%.
Applying this 44.2% reduction to the
estimated 60 hours needed to complete
the Class A theory instruction
curriculum in the ELDT final rule
results in a 27-hour reduction in the
time needed for Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL to complete
theory training by taking the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum.
Accordingly, the Agency estimates that
Class B CDL holders upgrading to a
Class A CDL, on average, now only
require 33 hours to complete the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum.
Accordingly, the Agency estimates the
rule results in a time savings of 27 hours
for each Class B CDL holder upgrading
to a Class A CDL.

forgone by, or is now made available to,
the firm as a result of that regulatory
action.16 Under the rule, an input of
production (driver labor) that was
previously unavailable to carriers in the
absence of the rule is now available to
carriers, for a time equivalent to the 27hour reduction in theory training for
each of the affected driver-trainees. The
value of this time to the motor carrier
is measured by estimating the change in
profit to the firm, and is a function of
the estimated 27-hour reduction in
theory training for each of the affected
driver-trainees, the marginal cost of
operating a CMV, and an estimate of a
typical average motor carrier profit
margin. As discussed in the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule, the
Agency estimates that the marginal cost
of operating a CMV is $68 per hour, and
that the average profit margin for motor
carriers is 5%.17

Other Inputs to the Analysis

Costs

The reduction of 27 hours in theory
training for each of the driver-trainees
affected by the rule results in a change
in the costs incurred by these drivertrainees, relative to the baseline of the
ELDT final rule. This change in cost is
comprised of two components, a
reduction in tuition costs incurred by
these driver-trainees, and a reduction in
the opportunity cost of time for these
driver-trainees.
FMCSA evaluated tuition costs using
an average hourly cost of training of $26
per hour, based on a review of nearly
nine hundred CDL driver training
programs as discussed in the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule.14
The Agency evaluated changes in the
opportunity cost of time for drivertrainees using the driver wage rate to
represent the value of driver-trainee
time that, in the absence of the rule, was
spent in training but now is available to
driver-trainees for other uses, such as
productive employment. FMCSA uses a
driver wage rate of $30 per hour,
representing the median hourly base
wage rate for truck drivers plus fringe
benefits, as discussed in the regulatory
evaluation of the ELDT final rule.15
Finally, the reduction of 27 hours in
theory training for each of the drivertrainees affected by the rule also reduces
the opportunity costs incurred by motor
carriers that ultimately employ these
driver-trainees. The opportunity cost to
motor carriers from a regulatory action
represents the value of the best
alternative to the firm that must be

The rule does not result in any
increase in costs. In the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule, the
Agency estimated that not only would
driver-trainees and motor carriers incur
costs, but that training providers,
SDLAs, and the Federal government
would also incur costs as a result of the
ELDT final rule. For this rule, the
Agency does not anticipate any change
in costs relative to the ELDT final rule
for training providers, SDLAs, or the
Federal government because it does not
affect the regulatory obligations of these
entities as set forth in the ELDT final
rule.
Costs to training providers resulting
from the ELDT final rule included costs
for submitting a Training Provider
Registration Form (TPRF) for each
training location to the Training
Provider Registry (TPR), costs for
electronically submitting training
certification information to the TPR for
driver-trainees who have completed
training, and costs for preparing for and
being subject to compliance audits.18
Under the rule, training providers still
need to register with the TPR, and for
those driver-trainees affected by the
rule, training providers still need to
transmit training completion
information electronically to the TPR.
Accordingly, FMCSA does not
anticipate any change in costs to
training providers resulting from the
rule.

14 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 68–69.
15 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 11–14.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

16 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 76–79.
17 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 76–79.
18 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 79–81.

PO 00000

Frm 00058

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Costs to SDLAs resulting from the
ELDT final rule included costs for
updates to SDLA information
technology (IT) systems to be able to
receive driver training completion
information from CDLIS and store this
information in the driver history record.
Under the rule, SDLAs continue to
receive and store the same information.
Therefore, FMCSA does not anticipate
any change in costs to SDLAs resulting
from the rule.
Finally, costs to the Federal
Government resulting from the ELDT
final rule included costs for FMCSA to
create and manage the TPR and to
enforce the regulations established by
the final rule. Under the rule, the TPR
must be developed and maintained in
the same manner as under the ELDT
final rule. In addition, training program
enforcement activities, such as
compliance audits performed on
training providers, remain unchanged
under the rule as compared to the ELDT
final rule, and FMCSA’s review of
training provider registration forms also
remains unchanged. Accordingly,
FMCSA does not anticipate any change
in costs to the Federal government
resulting from the rule.
As discussed above, FMCSA estimates
a reduction in costs incurred by drivertrainees and motor carriers affected by
the rule. Because there is an estimated
reduction of 27 hours of training for
each driver-trainee affected by the rule,
the Agency estimates that both drivertrainees and motor carriers experience
negative costs, that is, a decrease in
costs or a cost savings. The rule does not
result in any increase in costs for drivertrainees or motor carriers. The rule
reduces tuition costs, as well as the
opportunity cost of time for these
driver-trainees, relative to the baseline
of the ELDT final rule.
For each year of the 10-year analysis
period, FMCSA multiplied the
estimated number of driver-trainees
annually that are affected by the rule, as
presented in Table 2, by the estimated
reduction of 27 hours in theory training
for each of these driver-trainees. FMCSA
then multiplied the resulting total
aggregate reduction in theory training
hours by $26 per hour (the estimated
average hourly cost of training),19
yielding an estimate of the overall
change in tuition costs experienced by
19 The tuition costs noted above are derived from
observed tuition charged for the CDL training
programs identified by FMCSA, and are proxies for
tuition costs that might be charged for a curriculum
that meets the requirements of the rule. More
details can be found in section 3.2.1 of the
regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule. DOT
FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,’’
pp. 68–69.

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8037

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
driver-trainees for each year of the
analysis period. Additionally, the
Agency multiplied the total aggregate
reduction in theory training hours by
the estimated driver wage rate of $30
per hour, yielding an estimate of the
change in the opportunity cost of time
experienced by driver-trainees for each
year of the analysis period. As presented
in Table 3, the Agency estimates that the
rule results in a 10-year tuition cost
savings to driver-trainees of $80 million
on an undiscounted basis. The Agency
estimates that the rule also results in a
10-year opportunity cost of time savings
to driver-trainees of $92 million on an
undiscounted basis. In total, the Agency
estimates that the rule results in a 10year cost savings to driver-trainees of
$171 million on an undiscounted basis,
and $17.10 million on an annualized
basis at a 7% discount rate.

The development of the key inputs
necessary to estimate the change in cost
to motor-carriers, described earlier,
includes the marginal cost of operating
a CMV, an estimate of a typical average
motor carrier profit margin, and the
estimated 27-hour reduction in theory
training for each of the driver-trainees
affected by the rule. For each year of the
10-year analysis period, the estimated
number of driver-trainees who are
affected by the rule as presented earlier
in Table 2 is multiplied by the estimated
reduction of 27 hours in theory training
for each of these driver-trainees. The
resulting total reduction in theory
training hours is then multiplied by the
estimated marginal cost of operating a
CMV of $68 per hour, and the estimated
profit margin of 5% for motor carriers.
As presented in Table 3, the Agency
estimates that the rule results in a 10-

year opportunity cost savings to motor
carriers of $10 million on an
undiscounted basis, and $1.04 million
on an annualized basis at a 7% discount
rate, representing a decrease in
opportunity cost, or an opportunity cost
savings to motor carriers.
As presented in Table 3, the Agency
estimates that the rule results in a 10year cost savings of $182 million on an
undiscounted basis, $155 million
discounted at 3%, $127 million
discounted at 7%, and $18 million on
an annualized basis at a 7% discount
rate, representing a decrease in cost or
a cost savings. Most of this annualized
cost savings ($17.10 million) is realized
by driver-trainees, with the remainder of
the annualized cost savings ($1.04
million) realized by motor carriers.

TABLE 3—TOTAL COST OF THE RULE
[in millions of 2014$]
Undiscounted
Driver-trainees
affected by the
rule

Year

[A]

Discounted

Driver-trainee
tuition costs

Driver-trainee
opportunity
costs

Motor carrier
opportunity
costs

Total
costs (a)

[B] = [A] ×
[¥27 hours] ×
[$26 per hour]

[C] = [A] ×
[¥27 hours] ×
[$30 per hour]

[D] = [A] ×
[¥27 hours] ×
[$68 per hour]
× [0.05]

[E] =
[B] + [C] + [D]

Discounted
at 3%

Discounted
at 7%

.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................
.............................

11,069
11,129
11,188
11,248
11,309
11,369
11,430
11,491
11,553
11,615

(b) ($7.8)

(7.8)
(7.9)
(7.9)
(7.9)
(8.0)
(8.0)
(8.1)
(8.1)
(8.2)

($9.0)
(9.0)
(9.1)
(9.1)
(9.2)
(9.2)
(9.3)
(9.3)
(9.4)
(9.4)

($1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.0)
(1.1)
(1.1)
(1.1)

($17.8)
(17.8)
(17.9)
(18.0)
(18.1)
(18.2)
(18.3)
(18.4)
(18.5)
(18.6)

($17.2)
(16.8)
(16.4)
(16.0)
(15.6)
(15.3)
(14.9)
(14.5)
(14.2)
(13.9)

($16.6)
(15.6)
(14.6)
(13.8)
(12.9)
(12.2)
(11.4)
(10.7)
(10.1)
(9.5)

Total ......................

113,403

(80)

(92)

(10)

(182)

(155)

(127)

Annualized ...................

........................

........................

........................

........................

(18)

(18)

(18)

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029

Notes:
a Total cost values may not equal the sum of the components due to rounding (the totals shown in this column are the rounded sum of
unrounded components).
b Values shown in parentheses are negative values (i.e., less than zero), and represent a decrease in cost or a cost savings.

Benefits
The Agency anticipates no change in
the benefits of the ELDT final rule as a
result of this rule. In the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule, the
Agency estimated quantified benefits for
three categories of non-safety benefits,
including savings from reductions in
fuel consumption, reductions in CO2
emissions related to these reductions in
fuel consumption, and reductions in
vehicle maintenance and repair costs.
These estimated non-safety benefits
were derived from the Speed
Management and Space Management

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

instructional units in the Class A theory
instruction curriculum set forth in the
ELDT final rule.20 Because these two
instructional units remain in the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum, the
Agency does not anticipate any change
in these non-safety benefits from this
rule.
The regulatory evaluation for the
ELDT final rule addressed the potential
safety benefits of entry-level driver
training. In considering the potential

impacts on safety from this rule, the
Agency notes that Class B holders have
previous training or experience in the
CMV industry, which serves as an
adequate substitute for the eight nondriving instructional units that are not
included in the theory instruction
upgrade curriculum. Therefore, the
Agency anticipates that there is no
change in potential safety benefits
associated with this rule.

20 DOT FMCSA, ‘‘ELDT Final Rule Regulatory
Evaluation,’’ pp. 87–122.

PO 00000

Frm 00059

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8038

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs)
Executive Order 13771, Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs, was issued on January 30, 2017
(82 FR 9339, Feb. 3, 2017). E.O. 13771
requires that for every one new
regulation issued by an Agency, at least
two prior regulations be identified for
elimination, and that the cost of
planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a
budgeting process.21 Final
implementation guidance addressing
the requirements of E.O. 13771 was
issued by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) on April 5, 2017.22 The
OMB guidance defines what is an E.O.
13771 regulatory action and what is an
E.O. 13771 deregulatory action,
provides procedures for how agencies
should account for the costs and cost
savings of such actions, and outlines
various other details regarding
implementation of E.O. 13771.
This final rule has total costs less than
zero, and is therefore an E.O. 13771
deregulatory action.23 The present value
of the cost savings of this rule, measured
on an infinite time horizon at a 7%
discount rate, expressed in 2016 dollars,
and discounted to 2020 (the year the
rule goes into effect and cost savings
would first be realized), is $278 million.
On an annualized basis, these cost
savings are $19.5 million.
For the purpose of E.O. 13771
accounting, the April 5, 2017, OMB
guidance requires that agencies also
calculate the costs and cost savings
discounted to year 2016.24 In
accordance with this requirement, the
present value of the cost savings of this
rule, measured on an infinite time
horizon at a 7% discount rate, expressed
in 2016 dollars, and discounted to 2016,
is $212 million. On an annualized basis,
these cost savings are $15 million.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
21 Executive Office of the President. Executive
Order 13771 of January 30, 2017. Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. 82 FR
9339. Feb. 3, 2017. Section 1 (Purpose).
22 Executive Office of the President. Office of
Management and Budget. Memorandum M–17–21.
Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771.
April 5, 2017.
23 Executive Office of the President. Office of
Management and Budget. Memorandum M–17–21.
Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771.
April 5, 2017. Q4 on page 4.
24 Executive Office of the President. Office of
Management and Budget. Memorandum M–17–21.
Guidance Implementing Executive Order 13771.
April 5, 2017. Q25 on page 11.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

1996 (SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104–121, 110
Stat. 857), requires Federal agencies to
consider the impact of their regulatory
actions on small entities, analyze
effective alternatives that minimize
small entity impacts, and make their
analyses available for public comment.
The term ‘‘small entities’’ means small
businesses and not-for-profit
organizations that are independently
owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with
populations under 50,000.25
Accordingly, DOT policy requires an
analysis of the impact of all regulations
on small entities, and mandates that
agencies strive to lessen any adverse
effects on these entities. Section 605 of
the RFA allows an Agency to certify a
rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis, if
the rulemaking is not expected to have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule affects a subset of drivertrainees and motor carriers. Drivertrainees are not considered small
entities because they do not meet the
definition of a small entity in Section
601 of the RFA. Specifically, drivertrainees are considered neither a small
business under Section 601(3) of the
RFA, nor are they considered a small
organization under Section 601(4) of the
RFA.
Motor carriers affected by this rule are
most likely those that hire Class A CDL
drivers. Passenger motor carriers
generally rely on CMVs that do not
require a Class A CDL to operate (i.e.,
Group B vehicles), and thus are not be
affected by this rule. In the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule,
FMCSA estimated that there were
approximately 1.1 million inter- and
intrastate freight motor carriers, of
which a subset operate Group A
vehicles, and thus are affected by this
rule. FMCSA estimates that this rule
affects between 11,000 and 12,000 CMV
driver-trainees per year, resulting in
fewer than 12,000 motor carriers
affected per year, which is
approximately 0.9% of the total number
of inter- and intrastate freight motor
carriers. FMCSA does not know how
many of these motor carriers would be
considered ‘‘small.’’
The U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) defines the size
standards used to classify entities as
small. SBA establishes separate
standards for each industry, as defined
by the North American Industry
25 Regulatory Flexibility Act, Public Law 96–354,
94 Stat. 1164 (codified at 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.).

PO 00000

Frm 00060

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Classification System (NAICS).26 This
rule could affect many different
industry sectors; for example, the
transportation sector (e.g., General
freight trucking industry group (4841)
and the Specialized freight trucking
industry group (4842)), the agricultural
sector, and the construction sector.
Industry groups within these sectors
have size standards for qualifying as
small based on the number of
employees (e.g., 500 employees), or on
the amount of annual revenue (e.g.,
$27.5 million in revenue). FMCSA does
not have specific information about the
number of employees or revenue for
each of the motor carriers. However,
FMCSA is aware that the motor carrier
industry largely consists of smaller
firms. Of the 1.1 million freight motor
carriers, roughly 1 million have between
1 and 6 power units. If all of the
approximately 1 million freight motor
carriers with 6 or fewer power units are
considered small based on the
applicable size standard, then a
maximum of 1.2% (12,000 ÷ 1 million)
of small entities are affected by this rule.
Therefore, FMCSA estimates that this
rule does not impact a substantial
number of small entities.
As discussed earlier in the Regulatory
Analyses section, FMCSA estimates the
impact to the affected motor carriers as
a reduction in opportunity cost, or a
cost savings, relative to the baseline of
the ELDT final rule. This rule removes
some of the training requirements
accounted for in the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule,
allowing those drivers who are
upgrading from a Class B CDL to a Class
A CDL to begin working and earning a
profit for the motor carrier earlier than
under the current training procedures.
Therefore, this rule provides affected
motor carriers with increased access to
labor hours, and consequently profit,
resulting in an opportunity cost savings
to the motor carrier. FMCSA estimated
the opportunity cost to the motor carrier
as a function of the number of hours
previously spent in training that are
now available for labor, an estimate of
the profit margin, and the marginal
hourly operational costs of the CMV. As
discussed earlier in the Regulatory
Analyses section, the Agency estimates
that the rule results in a cost savings to
all motor carriers of $1.04 million on an
annualized basis at a 7% discount rate.
On a per driver basis for those drivers
affected by the rule, the cost savings
26 Executive Office of the President, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). ‘‘North American
Industry Classification System.’’ 2017. Available at:
https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/
2017NAICS/2017_NAICS_Manual.pdf (accessed
December 1, 2017).

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
realized by the motor carriers is
approximately $92 (27 hours × 0.05
profit margin × $68 marginal operating
costs).
The RFA does not define a threshold
for determining whether a specific
regulation results in a significant
impact. However, the SBA, in guidance
to government agencies, provides some
objective measures of significance that
the agencies can consider using.27 One
measure that could be used to illustrate
a significant impact is labor costs,
specifically, if the cost of the regulation
exceeds 5% of the labor costs of the
entities in the sector. The American
Transportation Research Institute
(ATRI) performed an annual survey of
motor carriers and published its
findings in the ‘‘Analysis of the
Operational Costs of Trucking: 2017
Update.’’ ATRI found that driver wages
and benefits represent approximately
33% of average marginal costs to a
carrier.28 ATRI further estimated that
average marginal hourly driver costs,
including wages and benefits, were
$27.09 in 2016. FMCSA hours of service
regulations allow drivers 60 hours of onduty time in a 7-day period. This
equates to approximately $84,500 in
driver labor costs per year ($27.09 × 60
hours per week × 52 weeks). The impact
of this rule is approximately 0.11% of
labor costs ($92 impact ÷ $84,500 labor
costs)—well below the 5% threshold
identified in the SBA guide. Therefore,
this rule does not have a significant
impact on the entities affected.
Accordingly, I hereby certify that the
action does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
D. Assistance for Small Entities
In accordance with section 213(a) of
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
FMCSA wants to assist small entities in
understanding this rule so that they can
better evaluate its effects and participate
in the rulemaking initiative. If the rule
affects your small business,
organization, or governmental
jurisdiction, and you have questions
concerning its provisions or options for
compliance, please consult the FMCSA
point of contact, Mr. Richard Clemente,
27 U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of
Advocacy. ‘‘A Guide for Government Agencies.
How to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility
Act.’’ 2017. Available at: https://www.sba.gov/sites/
default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-theRFA-WEB.pdf (accessed on September 7, 2018).
28 American Transportation Research Institute.
‘‘An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking:
2017 Update. Available at: http://atri-online.org/
wp-content/uploads/2017/10/ATRI-OperationalCosts-of-Trucking-2017-10-2017.pdf (Accessed on:
September 7, 2018).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
section of this rule.
Small businesses may send comments
on the actions of Federal employees
who enforce or otherwise determine
compliance with Federal regulations to
the Small Business Administration’s
Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and the Regional Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
Ombudsman evaluates these actions
annually and rates each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on actions by
employees of FMCSA, call 1–888–REG–
FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The DOT has a
policy regarding the rights of small
entities to regulatory enforcement
fairness and an explicit policy against
retaliation for exercising these rights.29
CONTACT

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act requires agencies to
prepare a comprehensive written
statement for any proposed or final rule
that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$161 million (which is the value
equivalent of $100,000,000 in 1995,
adjusted for inflation to 2017 levels) or
more in any one year. Because this rule
does not result in such an expenditure,
a written statement is not required.
However, the Agency does discuss the
costs and benefits of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) (PRA) requires
Agencies to provide estimates of the
information-collection (IC) burden of its
regulations. This rule does not alter the
Agency’s estimates of the paperwork
burden outlined in the final ELDT rule
at 81 FR 88788 (Dec. 8, 2016). Since
publication of the ELDT final rule, the
OMB, on April 19, 2017, approved the
Agency’s estimate of 66,250 hours for
the IC collection titled ‘‘Training
Certification for Entry-Level
Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers’’
(2126–0028). The approval expires on
April 30, 2020.
29 U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). ‘‘The
Rights of Small Entities To Enforcement Fairness
and Policy Against Retaliation.’’ Available at:
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/
docs/SBREFAnotice2.pdf (accessed December 1,
2017).

PO 00000

Frm 00061

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

8039

G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
A rule has implications for
Federalism under Section 1(a) of E.O.
13132 if it has ‘‘substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’ In
assessing the federalism implications of
the ELDT final rule, FMCSA stated that,
because the CDL program is voluntary,
it does not have preemptive effect on
the States. The Agency therefore
concluded that the ELDT final rule
would not have substantial direct costs
on or for States, nor would it limit the
policymaking discretion of States.30
This final rule does not change that
conclusion.
H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of E.O.
12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and
reduce burden.
I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), requires agencies
issuing ‘‘economically significant’’
rules, if the regulation also concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
an agency has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, to
include an evaluation of the regulation’s
environmental health and safety effects
on children. The Agency determined
this rule is not economically significant.
Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on
children is required. In any event, the
Agency does not anticipate that this
regulatory action could in any respect
present an environmental or safety risk
that could disproportionately affect
children.
J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private
Property)
FMCSA reviewed this rule in
accordance with E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights, and has determined it does not
effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications.
K. Privacy
Section 522 of title I of division H of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2005, enacted December 8, 2004 (Pub. L.
108–447, 118 Stat. 2809, 3268, 5 U.S.C.
552a note), requires the Agency to
conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment
30 See

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

81 FR 88732, 88788 (Dec. 8, 2016).

06MRR1

8040

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

(PIA) of a regulation that will affect the
privacy of individuals. The assessment
considers impacts of the rule on the
privacy of information in an identifiable
form and related matters. The FMCSA
Privacy Officer has evaluated the risks
and effects the rulemaking might have
on collecting, storing, and sharing
personally identifiable information (PII),
as well as protections and alternative
information handling processes to
mitigate potential privacy risks. FMCSA
determined that, while this rule does
require the collection of individual PII,
it does not result in a change in
collection, process, or the data elements
previously identified in the ELDT final
rule.
The privacy analysis of the ELDT final
rule, which conforms to the DOT
standard Privacy Impact Assessment
(PIA), is published on the DOT website
(www.transportation.gov/privacy). It
addresses business processes identified
in the ELDT final rule and new or
existing information collection systems
to be implemented in support of those
processes. The FMCSA Privacy Office
determined that this final rule does not
alter the privacy impact detailed in the
PIA for the ELDT final rule.
The Agency submitted a Privacy
Threshold Assessment (PTA) analyzing
the new rulemaking and the specific
process for collection of personal
information to the Department of
Transportation’s Privacy Office. As
required by the Privacy Act, FMCSA
and the Department will be publishing,
with request for comment, a system of
records notice (SORN) addressing the
collection of information affected by
this rule and the ELDT final rule. This
SORN will be published in the Federal
Register not less than 30 days before the
Agency is authorized to collect or use
PII retrieved by unique identifier.
L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental
Review)
The regulations implementing E.O.
12372 regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and
activities do not apply to this program.
M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use)
FMCSA has analyzed this rule under
E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.
The Agency has determined that it is
not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under
that order because it is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore,
it does not require a Statement of Energy
Effects under E.O. 13211.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

N. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal
Governments)
This rule does not have tribal
implications under E.O. 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments, because it
does not have a substantial direct effect
on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
O. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use
voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency
provides Congress, through OMB, with
an explanation of why using these
standards would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards (e.g.,
specifications of materials, performance,
design, or operation; test methods;
sampling procedures; and related
management systems practices) are
standards developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies.
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, FMCSA did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
P. Environment (NEPA)
FMCSA analyzed this final rule for
the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined this
action is categorically excluded from
further analysis and documentation in
an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under
FMCSA Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680,
March 1, 2004), Appendix 2, paragraph
(6)(z). The Categorical Exclusion (CE) in
paragraph (6)(z) covers (1) the minimum
qualifications for persons who drive
commercial motor vehicles as, for, or on
behalf of motor carriers; and (2) the
minimum duties of motor carriers with
respect to the qualifications of their
drivers. The requirements in this rule
are covered by this CE and the action
does not have the potential to
significantly affect the quality of the
environment. The CE determination is
available for inspection or copying in
the regulations.gov website listed under
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 380
Administrative practice and
procedure, Highway safety, Motor

PO 00000

Frm 00062

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing,
FMCSA amends 49 CFR chapter 3, part
380, to read as follows:
PART 380—SPECIAL TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS
1. The authority citation for part 380
is revised to read as follows:

■

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31305,
31307, 31308, and 31502; sec. 4007(a) and (b)
of Pub. L. 102–240 (105 Stat. 2151–2152);
sec. 32304 of Pub. L.112–141; and 49 CFR
1.87.
§ 380.707

[Amended]

2. In § 380.707, amend paragraph (a)
by adding the words ‘‘or Class A theory
instruction upgrade curriculum
applicants’’ to the end of the final
sentence.
■ 3. Amend Appendix A to part 380 by:
■ a. Revising the introductory text;
■ b. Revising the undesignated heading
‘‘Theory Instruction’’ to read ‘‘Theory
Instruction Standard Curriculum;’’ and
■ c. Adding a section entitled ‘‘Theory
Instruction Upgrade Curriculum’’ to the
end of the appendix.
The revision and addition to read as
follows:
■

Appendix A to Part 380—Class A—CDL
training curriculum.
Class A CDL applicants must
complete the Class A CDL curriculum
outlined in this Appendix. The
curriculum for Class A applicants
pertains to combination vehicles (Group
A) as defined in 49 CFR 383.91(a)(1).
Class A CDL applicants who possess a
valid Class B CDL may complete the
Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum
in lieu of the Theory Instruction
Standard Curriculum. There is no
required minimum number of
instruction hours for theory training, but
the training instructor must cover all
topics set forth in the curriculum. There
is no required minimum number of
instruction hours for BTW (range and
public road) training, but the training
instructor must cover all topics set forth
in the BTW curriculum. BTW training
must be conducted in a CMV for which
a Class A CDL is required. The
instructor must determine and
document that each driver-trainee has
demonstrated proficiency in all
elements of the BTW curriculum, unless
otherwise noted. Consistent with the
definitions of BTW range training and
BTW public road training in § 380.605,
a simulation device cannot be used to
conduct such training or to demonstrate
proficiency. Training instructors must
document the total number of clock

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

8041

hours each driver-trainee spends to
complete the BTW curriculum. The
Class A curriculum must, at a
minimum, include the following:
*
*
*
*
*

secondary controls including those
required for steering, accelerating,
shifting, braking systems (e.g., ABS,
hydraulic, air), as applicable, and
parking.

teach driver-trainees the Federal rules
governing the proper use of seat belt
assemblies (§ 392.16).

Theory Instruction Upgrade
Curriculum

Unit BA1.1.3
Inspections

Section BA1.1

This unit must teach the drivertrainees to conduct pre-trip and posttrip inspections as specified in §§ 392.7
and 396.11, including appropriate
inspection locations. Instruction must
also be provided on en route vehicle
inspections.

This unit must teach driver-trainees to
visually search the road for potential
hazards and critical objects, including
instruction on recognizing distracted
pedestrians or distracted drivers.

Basic Operation

This section must cover the
interaction between driver-trainees and
the CMV. Driver-trainees will receive
instruction in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) and will
be introduced to the basic CMV
instruments and controls. Training
providers will teach driver-trainees the
basic operating characteristics of a CMV.
This section must also teach drivertrainees how to properly perform
vehicle inspections, control the motion
of CMVs under various road and traffic
conditions, employ shifting and backing
techniques, and properly couple and
uncouple combination vehicles. Drivertrainees must familiarize themselves
with the basic operating characteristics
of a CMV.
Unit BA1.1.1

Orientation

This unit must introduce drivertrainees to the combination vehicle
driver training curriculum and the
components of a combination vehicle.
The training providers must teach the
safety fundamentals, essential
regulatory requirements (e.g., overview
of FMCSRs and Hazardous Materials
Regulations), and driver-trainees’
responsibilities not directly related to
CMV driving, such as proper cargo
securement. This unit must also cover
the ramifications, including driver
disqualification provisions and fines, for
non-compliance with parts 380, 382,
383, and 390 through 399 of the
FMCSRs. This unit must also include an
overview of the applicability of State
and local laws relating to the safe
operation of the CMV, stopping at weigh
stations/scales, hazard awareness of
vehicle size and weight limitations, low
clearance areas (e.g., CMV height
restrictions), and bridge formulas.
Unit BA1.1.2
Dashboard

Control Systems/

This unit must introduce drivertrainees to vehicle instruments,
controls, and safety components. The
training providers must teach drivertrainees to read gauges and instruments
correctly and the proper use of vehicle
safety components, including safety
belts and mirrors. The training
providers must teach driver-trainees to
identify, locate, and explain the
function of each of the primary and

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

Pre- and Post-Trip

Unit BA1.1.4

Basic Control

This unit must introduce basic
vehicular control and handling as it
applies to combination vehicles. This
unit must include instruction
addressing basic combination vehicle
controls in areas such as executing
sharp left and right turns, centering the
vehicle, maneuvering in restricted areas,
and entering and exiting the interstate
or controlled access highway.
Unit BA1.1.5 Shifting/Operating
Transmissions
This unit must introduce shifting
patterns and procedures to drivertrainees to prepare them to safely and
competently perform basic shifting
maneuvers. This unit must include
training driver-trainees to execute up
and down shifting techniques on multispeed dual range transmissions, if
appropriate. The training providers
must teach the importance of increased
vehicle control and improved fuel
economy achieved by utilizing proper
shifting techniques.
Unit BA1.1.6

Backing and Docking

This unit must teach driver-trainees to
back and dock the combination vehicle
safely. This unit must cover ‘‘Get Out
and Look’’ (GOAL), evaluation of
backing/loading facilities, knowledge of
backing set ups, as well as instruction
in how to back with the use of spotters.
Unit BA1.1.7
Uncoupling

Coupling and

This unit must provide instruction for
driver-trainees to develop the skills
necessary to conduct the procedures for
safe coupling and uncoupling of
combination vehicle units, as
applicable.
Section BA1.2
Procedures

Safe Operating

This section must teach the practices
required for safe operation of the
combination vehicle on the highway
under various road, weather, and traffic
conditions. The training providers must

PO 00000

Frm 00063

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Unit BA1.2.1

Unit BA1.2.2

Visual Search

Communication

This unit must instruct driver-trainees
on how to communicate their intentions
to other road users. Driver-trainees must
be instructed in techniques for different
types of communication on the road,
including proper use of headlights, turn
signals, four-way flashers, and horns.
This unit must cover instruction in
proper utilization of eye contact
techniques with other drivers,
bicyclists, and pedestrians.
Unit BA1.2.3

Distracted Driving

This unit must instruct driver-trainees
in FMCSRs related to distracted driving
and other key driver distraction driving
issues, including improper cell phone
use, texting, and use of in-cab
technology (e.g., §§ 392.80 and 392.82).
This instruction will include training in
the following aspects: visual attention
(keeping eyes on the road); manual
control (keeping hands on the wheel);
and cognitive awareness (keeping mind
on the task and safe operation of the
CMV).
Unit BA1.2.4

Speed Management

This unit must teach driver-trainees
how to manage speed effectively in
response to various road, weather, and
traffic conditions. The instruction must
include methods for calibrating safe
following distances taking into account
CMV braking distances under an array
of conditions including traffic, weather,
and CMV weight and length.
Unit BA1.2.5

Space Management

This unit must teach driver-trainees
about the importance of managing the
space surrounding the vehicle under
various traffic and road conditions.
Unit BA1.2.6

Night Operation

This unit must instruct driver-trainees
in the factors affecting the safe operation
of CMVs at night and in darkness.
Additionally, driver-trainees must be
instructed in changes in vision,
communications, speed space
management, and proper use of lights,
as needed, to deal with the special
problems night driving presents.

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1

8042

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 6, 2019 / Rules and Regulations

Unit BA1.2.7 Extreme Driving
Conditions
This unit must teach driver-trainees
about the specific problems presented
by extreme driving conditions. The
training provider will emphasize the
factors affecting the operation of CMVs
in cold, hot, and inclement weather and
on steep grades and sharp curves. The
training provider must teach proper tire
chaining procedures.
Section BA1.3 Advanced Operating
Practices
This section must introduce higherlevel skills that can be acquired only
after the more fundamental skills and
knowledge taught in the prior two
sections have been mastered. The
training providers must teach drivertrainees about the advanced skills
necessary to recognize potential hazards
and must teach the driver-trainees the
procedures needed to handle a CMV
when faced with a hazard.
Unit BA1.3.1 Hazard Perception
The unit must teach driver-trainees to
recognize potential hazards in the
driving environment in order to reduce
the severity of the hazard and neutralize
possible emergency situations. The
training providers must teach drivertrainees to identify road conditions and
other road users that are a potential
threat to the safety of the combination
vehicle and suggest appropriate
adjustments. The instruction must
emphasize hazard recognition, visual
search, adequate surveillance, and
response to possible emergencyproducing situations encountered by
CMV drivers in various traffic
situations. The training providers must
teach driver-trainees to recognize
potential dangers and the safety
procedures that must be utilized while
driving in construction/work zones.
Unit BA1.3.2 Skid Control/Recovery,
Jackknifing, and Other Emergencies
This unit must teach the causes of
skidding and jackknifing and techniques
for avoiding and recovering from them.
The training providers must teach the
importance of maintaining directional
control and bringing the CMV to a stop
in the shortest possible distance while
operating over a slippery surface. This
unit must provide instruction in
appropriate responses when faced with
CMV emergencies. This instruction
must include evasive steering,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:28 Mar 05, 2019

Jkt 247001

emergency braking, and off-road
recovery, as well as the proper response
to brake failures, tire blowouts,
hydroplaning, and rollovers. The
instruction must include a review of
unsafe acts and the role the acts play in
producing or worsening hazardous
situations.
Unit BA1.3.3 Railroad-Highway Grade
Crossings
This unit must teach driver-trainees to
recognize potential dangers and the
appropriate safety procedures to utilize
at railroad (RR)-highway grade
crossings. This instruction must include
an overview of various Federal/State RR
grade crossing regulations, RR grade
crossing environments, obstructed view
conditions, clearance around the tracks,
and rail signs and signals. The training
providers must instruct driver-trainees
that railroads have personnel available
(‘‘Emergency Notification Systems’’) to
receive notification of any information
relating to an unsafe condition at the
RR-highway grade crossing or a disabled
vehicle or other obstruction blocking a
railroad track at the RR-highway grade
crossing.
Section BA1.4 Vehicle Systems and
Reporting Malfunctions
This section must provide entry-level
driver-trainees with sufficient
knowledge of the combination vehicle
and its systems and subsystems to
ensure that they understand and respect
their role in vehicle inspection,
operation, and maintenance and the
impact of those factors upon highway
safety and operational efficiency.
Unit BA1.4.1 Identification and
Diagnosis of Malfunctions
This unit must teach driver-trainees to
identify major combination vehicle
systems. The goal is to explain their
function and how to check all key
vehicle systems, (e.g., engine, engine
exhaust auxiliary systems, brakes, drive
train, coupling systems, and
suspension) to ensure their safe
operation. Driver-trainees must be
provided with a detailed description of
each system, its importance to safe and
efficient operation, and what is needed
to keep the system in good operating
condition.
Unit BA1.4.2 Roadside Inspections
This unit must instruct driver-trainees
on what to expect during a standard

PO 00000

Frm 00064

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 9990

roadside inspection conducted by
authorized personnel. The training
providers must teach driver-trainees on
what vehicle and driver violations are
classified as out-of-service (OOS),
including the ramifications and
penalties for operating a CMV when
subject to an OOS order as defined in
section 390.5.
Unit BA1.4.3

Maintenance

This unit must introduce drivertrainees to the basic servicing and
checking procedures for various engine
and vehicle components and to help
develop their ability to perform
preventive maintenance and simple
emergency repairs.
Section BA1.5

Non-Driving Activities

This section must teach drivertrainees the activities that do not
involve actually operating the CMV.
Unit BA1.5.1 Hours of Service
Requirements
This unit must teach driver-trainees to
understand that there are different
hours-of-service (HOS) requirements
applicable to different industries. The
training providers must teach drivertrainees all applicable HOS regulatory
requirements. The training providers
must teach driver-trainees to complete a
Driver’s Daily Log (electronic and
paper), timesheet, and logbook recap, as
appropriate. The training providers
must teach driver-trainees the
consequences (safety, legal, and
personal) of violating the HOS
regulations, including the fines and
penalties imposed for these types of
violations.
Unit BA1.5.2
Awareness

Fatigue and Wellness

This unit must teach driver-trainees
about the issues and consequences of
chronic and acute driver fatigue and the
importance of staying alert. The training
providers must teach driver-trainees
wellness and basic health maintenance
information that affect a driver’s ability
to safely operate a CMV.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.87 on February 14, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019–04044 Filed 3–5–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P

E:\FR\FM\06MRR1.SGM

06MRR1