[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 175 (Monday, September 12, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-22394]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: September 12, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Department of Transportation





_______________________________________________________________________



Federal Highway Administration



_______________________________________________________________________



49 CFR Chapter III



Zero Base Review of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; 
Proposed Rule
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

49 CFR Chapter III

[FHWA Docket MC-92-33]

 

Zero Base Review of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 
(FMCSRs); Critical Regulatory Issues Being Researched

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of critical regulatory issues; reopening of public 
docket; request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FHWA is providing a listing of critical regulatory issues 
to be researched under the second phase of its zero base regulatory 
review. These regulatory issues, framed as questions, resulted from a 
series of public hearings held throughout the country during late 1992 
and early 1993. The hearings were held to obtain information, views, 
opinions, and recommendations on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations (FMCSRs) from representatives of the motor carrier 
industry, the insurance industry, enforcement personnel, universities, 
and other interested parties. The FHWA will be conducting a 
comprehensive literature search to identify completed or existing 
research studies that will provide insight on these critical issues. 
The FHWA is seeking information from individuals and organizations who 
may have conducted research that addresses the issues provided in this 
notice, who know about research that has been conducted, or who can 
identify others who have completed or are in the process of completing 
research.

DATES: Information on the identification of relevant research studies 
will be collected until further notification in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Please submit the name of the research organization(s), the 
title and date of the relevant study or studies, the name of the 
principal researcher(s), etc., to FHWA Docket MC-92-33, Room 4232, HCC-
10, Office of the Chief Counsel, FHWA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20590. All information received will be available for 
examination at the above address from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., e.t., 
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those desiring 
notification of receipt of information must include a self-addressed, 
stamped postcard.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David J. Osiecki, Office of Motor 
Carrier Standards, (202) 366-4340, or Mr. Charles E. Medalen, Office of 
Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1354, Federal Highway Administration, 
Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The concept of the zero base review is to 
take a completely fresh look at the safety regulations governing the 
interstate motor carrier industry. The objective of this project is to 
improve the regulations so they: (1) Have a more dramatic positive 
effect on safety and the reduction of accidents, (2) are more easily 
understood by the industry, (3) have a greater performance orientation, 
and (4) are easier to interpret and enforce.
    The first phase of this project was initiated in 1992 when FHWA 
opened a public docket and notified all interested parties through the 
Federal Register on August 18, 1992 (57 FR 37392) that it would be 
holding a series of public hearings to obtain comments and 
recommendations for improvement of the FMCSRs. Pursuant to the August, 
1992, notice, and two subsequent notices in the Federal Register (57 FR 
53089 and 57 FR 60784), 11 public hearings and 14 focus-group sessions 
were held throughout the country. In addition, the public docket which 
opened on August 18, 1992, was subsequently closed effective April 1, 
1993, pursuant to 57 FR 60784. This initial phase of the zero base 
project was completed in September 1993, with the development of a 
final report, completed in three volumes, summarizing the 
recommendations received at the public hearings, the focus-group 
sessions, and through letters to the public docket. Many of the 
critical issues provided later in this notice are a direct result of 
information and recommendations received during Phase I. The final 
report, Zerobase Review of the FMCSRs, for Phase I is available to the 
industry and the general public through the National Technical 
Information Service in Springfield, Virginia (1-800-553-6847 or local 
703-487-4650), for a nominal fee. The access and report numbers are as 
follows for each volume: Volume I, Executive Summary PB94-100294, 
Report No. FHWA-MC-94-002; Volume II, Data Analysis PB94-100302, Report 
No. FHWA-MC-94-003; Volume III, Data Summary PB94-100310, Report No. 
FHWA-MC-94-004.
    The second phase of this project is currently underway and involves 
a literature search for existing research studies that may shed light 
on the critical regulatory issues provided later in this notice. The 
FHWA will also develop a new format and structure for the rulebook of 
the future during this phase. The second phase is scheduled for 
completion in calendar year 1996.
    The third phase of zero base, which will begin in calender year 
1996, will involve the actual writing of the new regulations. As the 
new regulations for the rulebook of the future are finalized, the FHWA 
will initiate the fourth and final phase of the project, which will 
involve drafting and disseminating non-regulatory, user-friendly guides 
for specific industries or segments of the regulated population.
    The FHWA is seeking information from the public on these critical 
regulatory issues to supplement its planned literature search effort to 
locate research data. Following are the critical regulatory issues on 
which the FHWA is seeking information:

Applicability, Administrative, and Other Requirements

1. Applicability

    a. In the definition of a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) 
established by the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984, should FHWA ask 
Congress to substitute for the term ``gross vehicle weight rating,'' 
which now defines the agency's jurisdiction, the term ``gross vehicle 
weight rating or gross vehicle weight''? [see Sec. 390.5]
    b. At what GVW or gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) should the 
commercial driver's license (CDL) regulations, alcohol and drug testing 
regulations, and the FMCSRs apply? [see Secs. 382.103, 383.3, 383.5, 
390.3 and 390.5]

2. Exemptions and Waivers

    a. Should there be exemptions?
    b. What are the minimum documented grounds to justify exemptions or 
waivers for unique operating circumstances (e.g., logging, farming, 
utilities, etc.) or localized circumstances (e.g., emergencies, etc.)? 
[see Sec. 390.3]

3. Reading Level and English Requirement

    a. At what comprehension level are the current FMCSRs written?
    b. At what comprehension level should the new regulations be 
written for better customer understanding?
    c. Is there justification to require drivers to be able to read and 
speak the English language? [see Sec. 391.11(b)(2)]

4. Aid and Abet

    a. Should FHWA ask Congress for jurisdiction over non-hazardous 
materials (HM) shippers?
    b. Should FHWA ask Congress for jurisdiction over entities such as 
non-HM shippers, insurance companies, health care professionals, etc. 
who may aid and abet violations of the FMCSRs? [see Sec. 390.13]

5. Financial Responsibility

    a. Are the current levels of financial responsibility sufficient? 
[see Secs. 387.9 and 387.33]
    b. Should additional types of motor carriage (i.e., private motor 
carriers of passengers) be required to meet the minimum levels?

6. Part 397

    Could part 397 be included in part 177? What would be the result of 
such a change?

7. Part 398

    Could it be deleted? What arguments could be made to maintain the 
requirements? What would be the result of deleting the part? [see part 
398]

8. Part 399

    Could it be deleted? What arguments could be made to maintain the 
requirements? What would be the result of deleting the part? [see part 
399]

Driver Requirements

1. Driver Fatigue

    a. What are the effects of loading and unloading on driver fatigue?
    b. What is the validity and predictive power of pre-drive fitness-
for-duty devices?
    c. What is the state-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice for 
fatigue testing/monitoring devices?
    d. What should be the preferred method to track driver fatigue that 
may ease the paperwork burden on industry, but also facilitate 
enforcement? [see Secs. 395.8 and 395.15]

2. Drug & Alcohol Testing

    Should Medical Review Officers be certified? If so, Federal, State, 
or local certification process? What should be the minimum standards? 
[see Secs. 391.85 and 391.87]

3. Medical Requirements

    a. Should health care professionals performing medical exams be 
certified to do so? If so, Federal, State, or local certification 
process? [see Sec. 391.43]
    b. Could Medical Review Boards be established to resolve conflicts 
of medical evaluations? If so, at what level, Federal, State? [see 
Sec. 391.47]
    c. Is there a need for a minimum driving age for interstate 
drivers? By industry, i.e., farmers, off-road, seasonal, etc.?
    d. In light of age discrimination laws, should there be, as a 
matter of public policy, a maximum age requirement for CMV drivers? 
[see Sec. 391.11(b)]
    e. Is it possible to establish objective minimum requirements which 
must be met for medical waivers (which can be used by non-medical 
personnel to make a determination)?

4. CDL

    a. Should there be periodic skills and knowledge retesting of 
drivers for CDL purposes? [see Sec. 383.71]
    b. What are the merits of using simulation in CDL skills testing? 
[see Sec. 383.133]
    c. Could the CDL be merged with the medical certification process 
in part 391, including the issuance of medical waivers? If so, what 
needs to be done to do it?
    d. How often should medical examinations be required? [Annually, 
every 2 years, etc.]

5. Training

    a. What level of training is necessary for a driver to be a safe 
driver in three specific areas: geographic, weather, and cargo 
(including the transportation of hazardous materials)?
    b. Is the CDL HM endorsement requirement necessary in light of the 
Research and Special Programs Administration's HM training requirement?
    [see 49 CFR 172.700]

6. Documentation

    What driver documentation should be maintained in the vehicle to 
provide adequate safety oversight by enforcement personnel?

Vehicle Requirements

1. Vehicle Performance

    a. What defective mechanical items are most frequently cited during 
accidents? Do the cited violations have a direct correlation to 
accidents? What are the best means to identify them? [see appendix G to 
the FMCSRs]
    b. Should the out-of-service criteria be placed in regulation?

2. Mechanic Training

    a. Is training for CMV mechanics/inspectors currently adequate?
    b. What level of training is appropriate? Is it appropriate to have 
required levels of mechanic training?
    c. Should there be a requirement to be certificated as a CMV 
mechanic? If so, could it be done through a knowledge and skills 
demonstration?

3. Inspection Documentation

    a. What are the benefits of using on-board computers?
    b. Should FHWA require on-board computers to record safety and 
performance data?
    c. What data should be required?
    d. What is the most appropriate method of ensuring the vehicle is 
safe both prior to use and just after use? [see Secs. 392.7 and 396.11]

4. Equipment Standards

    What is the feasibility of a safety self-diagnostic system for 
CMVs? Is prevention cost-beneficial?

5. Documentation

    What vehicle safety documentation should be maintained on the 
vehicle to provide adequate safety oversight by enforcement personnel?

Motor Carrier Requirements

1. Safety Fitness

    a. What is safety fitness? Should there be various levels?
    b. Is there a minimal acceptable level of safety fitness? [see 
Secs. 385.3, 385.5, and 385.7]
    c. Do size and weight violations have a correlation to accidents? 
Should size and weight violations be considered in the safety fitness 
determination?
    d. Should CDL violations, and other traffic violations, be 
considered in the safety fitness determination?

2. Driver and Vehicle Information

    Because there are privacy implications to information gathering on 
drivers, is there a network potential for carrier exchange of driver 
information? Could motor carriers access State motor vehicle databases 
to check driver information?

3. Documentation

    a. What documentation must be maintained by a carrier that 
indicates satisfactory safety performance?
    b. What minimum documentation must a carrier maintain to ensure 
that a driver and a vehicle is safe?

(23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48)

    Issued on: September 1, 1994.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-22394 Filed 9-9-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P