[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 143 (Tuesday, July 25, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45714-45716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-18574]



[[Page 45714]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

23 CFR Parts 1325 and 1327

[Docket No. NHTSA-00-7551]
RIN 2127-AG68


Procedures for Transition to New National Driver Register

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule announces that changes proposed in a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to NHTSA's National Driver Register (NDR) 
regulations will be adopted. These proposed changes are being adopted 
without change. Since all States now are participating in the new 
Problem Driver Pointer System (PDPS), and the transition from the old 
NDR to the new PDPS has been completed, the transition procedures 
outlined in the NPRM are no longer needed and are now removed.

DATES: This final rule becomes effective on August 24, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. William Holden, Chief, National 
Driver Register (NTS-24), 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590; telephone (202) 366-4800 or Ms. Heidi L. Coleman, Assistant 
Chief Counsel for General Law (NCC-30), 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-1834.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Driver Register (NDR) functions 
as a central, computerized index of State reports on drivers whose 
driving privileges have been denied, cancelled, suspended or revoked, 
for cause, or who have been convicted of certain serious traffic 
violations. It was designed to address the problem that arises when 
traffic law violators, after losing their license in one State, attempt 
to obtain a license in another State.
    States participate by sending to the NDR records regarding 
individuals who have been subject to covered licensing actions and 
convictions, and by querying the NDR before they issue licenses to 
applicants. In this way, States can avoid issuing licenses to persons 
whose driving records contain violations or licensing actions that 
should keep them off the road. Originally established by law in 1960 
(Pub. L. 86-660), the NDR was made a part of the Highway Safety Act of 
1966 (Pub. L. 89-564) and has been operated since that time by the 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
    The NDR Act of 1982 (Pub. L. 97-364) called for the establishment 
of an improved NDR. The new NDR system (the Problem Driver Pointer 
System, or PDPS) differs from the old NDR system in that it no longer 
maintains full substantive records on adverse actions taken against 
problem drivers. Instead, it maintains only identification data on 
problem drivers and ``points'' to the State of record where the 
substantive adverse action data can be obtained. In addition, the new 
PDPS is fully automated and enables State driver licensing officials to 
determine virtually instantly whether another State has taken an 
adverse action or convicted a driver license applicant of a serious 
traffic offense.

Part 1325--Transition Procedures

    On July 11, 1985 (50 FR 28191), NHTSA established a regulation on 
the Procedures for the Transition from the Old to the New PDPS NDR 
System (23 CFR part 1325). The regulation established procedures for 
the orderly transition from the NDR system established in Pub. L. 86-
660 as amended, to the NDR system established in Pub. L. 97-364. The 
regulation provided that its purpose was to ensure that participating 
States understood their rights and obligations during the transition 
period, which was to last until such time as all States that are 
participating in the NDR are doing so under the PDPS.

Part 1327--Procedures for Participating

    On August 20, 1991 (56 FR 41394), NHTSA established a regulation on 
the Procedures for Participating in and Receiving Data from the NDR 
PDPS (23 CFR part 1327). The regulation established procedures for 
States to participate in the NDR PDPS, and for other authorized parties 
to receive information from the NDR. It also established procedures for 
States to notify NHTSA of their intention to be bound by the 
requirements of the PDPS NDR system and for States to notify NHTSA in 
the event it becomes necessary to withdraw from participation.
    The procedures provided that only States that have been certified 
as ``participating States'' may participate in the NDR after the 
transition period ends (no later than April 30, 1995). They provided, 
however, that States that were not certified as ``participating 
States'' by April 30, 1995, that wished to continue participating in 
the NDR, could request an extension of time.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On April, 17, 1996, NHTSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) in the Federal Register, 61 FR 16729, proposing to remove the 
agency's regulation on procedures for transition to the new PDPS NDR. 
At the time the NPRM was published, all 50 States and the District of 
Columbia had notified NHTSA of their intention to be bound by the 
requirements of the PDPS NDR system. In addition, 38 States had 
completed their transition to the PDPS, and the remaining States had 
requested or been granted extensions of time. In the NPRM, the agency 
indicated that Part 1325 of 23 CFR would no longer be necessary and 
that section 1327.4 of 23 CFR would require modification once the 
transition from the old NDR system to the new system had been 
completed, and the agency proposed to make those changes. The NPRM 
provided a 45-day comment period for interested parties to present 
data, views, and arguments on the proposed action. No comments were 
received.

Current Status on Notification and NDR Participation

    At this time, all 50 States and the District of Columbia now are 
participating in the NDR under the PDPS, in accordance with Part 1327. 
Accordingly, the transition to PDPS has been completed, and the 
transition regulations no longer are needed. Part 1325 of 23 CFR is 
hereby rescinded and the amendment to 23 CFR 1327.4 is made final.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' 
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribunal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees,

[[Page 45715]]

or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; 
or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures. This rule is not considered a significant 
regulatory action under section 3(f) of the Executive Order 12866. 
Consequently, this rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office 
of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review.'' The rulemaking action also is not considered to be 
significant under the Department's Regulatory Policies and Procedures 
(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).
    Because the economic impacts of this rule are so minimal, no 
further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

Executive Order 13132

    We have analyzed this rule in accordance with Executive Order 13132 
(``Federalism''). We have determined that this rule does not have 
sufficient Federalism impacts to warrant the preparation of a 
federalism consultation.

Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or 
safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by us.
    This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not 
economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866. It also does not 
involve decisions based on health risks that disproportionately affect 
children.

Executive Order 12778

    Pursuant to Executive Order 12778, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' we 
have considered whether this rule will have any retroactive effect. 
This rule does not have any retroactive effect. A petition for 
reconsideration or other administrative proceeding will not be a 
prerequisite to an action seeking judicial review of this rule. This 
rule does not preempt the states from adopting laws or regulations on 
the same subject, except that it does preempt a state regulation that 
is in actual conflict with the federal regulation or makes compliance 
with the Federal regulation impossible or interferes with the 
implementation of the federal statute.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of 
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make 
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that 
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). 
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of 
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    I have considered the effects of this rulemaking action under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and certify that this 
proposal will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. The rule does not impose or rescind any 
requirements for anyone. The Regulatory Flexibility Act does not, 
therefore, require a regulatory flexibility analysis.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have analyzed this action for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it will not have any 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless 
the collection displays a valid OMB control number. This rule does not 
propose any new information collection requirements.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, 
benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a 
Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or 
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more 
than $100 million in any one year (adjusted for inflation with base 
year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written 
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable 
law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
if we publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative 
was not adopted.
    This rule does not impose any unfunded mandates under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. This rule does not meet the definition of 
a Federal mandate because it does not impose requirements on anyone. 
Further, it will not result in costs of $100 million or more to either 
State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the 
private sector. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of 
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier 
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of 
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center 
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may 
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document 
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects

23 CFR Part 1325

    Highway safety, Intergovernmental relations.

23 CFR Part 1327

    Highway safety, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.


    Under the authority of 49 CFR part 1.50, the Deputy Administrator 
of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration amends title 23 
of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter III, as follows:

PART 1325--[REMOVED]

    Part 1325 is removed.

[[Page 45716]]

PART 1327--PROCEDURES FOR PARTICIPATING IN AND RECEIVING 
INFORMATION FROM THE NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER PROBLEM DRIVER 
POINTER SYSTEM

    1. The authority citation for part 1327 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Pub.L. 97-364, 96 Stat. 1740, as amended (49 U.S.C. 
30301, et seq.); delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.


    2. Section 1327.4 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 1327.4  Certification, termination and reinstatement procedures.

    (a) Certification requirement. Only States that have been certified 
by NHTSA as participating States under PDPS may participate in the NDR. 
NHTSA will remove all records on file and will not accept any inquiries 
or reports from a State that has not been certified as a participating 
State.
    (b) Termination or cancellation. (1) If a State finds it necessary 
to discontinue participation, the chief driver licensing official of 
the participating State shall notify NHTSA in writing, providing the 
reason for terminating its participation.
    (2) The effective date of termination will be no less than 30 days 
after notification of termination.
    (3) NHTSA will notify any participating State that changes its 
operations such that it no longer meets statutory and regulatory 
requirements, that its certification to participate in the NDR will be 
withdrawn if it does not come back into compliance within 30 days from 
the date of notification.
    (4) If a participating State does not come back into compliance 
with statutory and regulatory requirements within the 30-day period, 
NHTSA will send a letter to the chief driver licensing official 
cancelling its certification to participate in the NDR.
    (5) NHTSA will remove all records on file and will not accept any 
inquiries or reports from a State whose participation in the NDR has 
been terminated or cancelled.
    (6) To be reinstated as a participating State after being 
terminated or cancelled, the chief driver licensing official shall 
follow the notification procedures in paragraphs (c)(1) and (3) of this 
section and must be re-certified by NHTSA as a participating State 
under PDPS, upon a determination by NHTSA that the State complies with 
the statutory and regulatory requirements for participation, in 
accordance with paragraphs (c)(2) and (4) of this section.
    (c) Reinstatement. (1) The chief driver licensing official of a 
State that wishes to be reinstated as a participating State in the NDR 
under the PDPS, shall send a letter to NHTSA certifying that the State 
wishes to be reinstated as a participating State and that it intends to 
be bound by the requirements of section 205 of the NDR Act of 1982 and 
Sec. 1327.5 of this part. It shall also describe the changes necessary 
to meet the statutory and regulatory requirements of PDPS.
    (2) Within 20 days after receipt of the State's notification, NHTSA 
will acknowledge receipt of the State's certification to be reinstated.
    (3) The chief driver licensing official of a State that has 
notified NHTSA of its intention to be reinstated as a participating 
State will, at such time as it has completed all changes necessary to 
meet the statutory and regulatory requirements of PDPS, certify this 
fact to the agency.
    (4) Upon receipt, review and approval of certification from the 
State, NHTSA will recertify the State as a participating State under 
PDPS.

    Issued on: July 18, 2000.
Rosalyn G. Millman,
Deputy Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-18574 Filed 7-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P