[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 89 (Monday, May 9, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26854-26897]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10510]
[[Page 26853]]
Vol. 76
Monday,
No. 89
May 9, 2011
Part III
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
49 CFR Parts 383, 384 and 385
Commercial Driver's License Testing and Commercial Learner's Permit
Standards; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 89 / Monday, May 9, 2011 / Rules and
Regulations
[[Page 26854]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 383, 384, and 385
[Docket No. FMCSA-2007-27659]
RIN 2126-AB02
Commercial Driver's License Testing and Commercial Learner's
Permit Standards
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the commercial driver's license (CDL) knowledge
and skills testing standards and establishes new minimum Federal
standards for States to issue the commercial learner's permit (CLP).
The rule requires that a CLP holder meet virtually the same
requirements as those for a CDL holder, meaning that a driver holding a
CLP will be subject to the same driver disqualification penalties that
apply to a CDL holder. This final rule also implements section 4019 of
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), section
4122 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), and section 703 of the
Security and Accountability For Every Port Act of 2006 (SAFE Port Act).
It will enhance safety by ensuring that only qualified drivers are
allowed to operate commercial motor vehicles on our nation's highways.
DATES: Effective date: This final rule is effective on July 8, 2011.
Compliance Date: States must be in compliance with the requirements
in subpart B of Part 384 (49 CFR part 384) by July 8, 2014.
Petitions for Reconsideration of any amendment made by this final
rule must be received on or before June 8, 2011. Any petition for
reconsideration submitted after this date will not be considered.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration should refer to Docket ID
Number FMCSA-2007-27659 or RIN 2126-AB02, and be submitted to the
Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, by any of
the following methods:
Mail to: Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (MC-A), West Building-6th Floor, Room W60-308, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Hand-Deliver: Docket Operations Unit, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building-Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
All petitions for reconsideration will be posted on the Federal
eRulemaking portal in Docket ``FMCSA-2007-27659''. This final rule and
all background documents and material related to this rule may be
viewed and copied at http://www.regulations.gov, by typing ``FMCSA-
2007-27659''. The docket may also be viewed and copied for a fee at the
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building-
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Redmond, Office of Safety
Programs, Commercial Driver's License Division, telephone (202) 366-
5014 or e-mail [email protected]. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to
4:30 p.m.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Legal Basis
II. Background
A. Summary of This Rule
B. History
III. Discussion of Comments on the NPRM
1. Strengthen Legal Presence Requirement
a. Required Forms/Documents
b. Nonresident CDL
2. Social Security Number Verification Before Issuing a CLP or
CDL
3. Surrender of CLP, CDL and Non-CDL Documents
a. Surrender of Documents
b. Mailing of Initial License
4. CDL Testing Requirements for Out-of-State Driver Training
School Students
5. State Reciprocity for CLPs
6. Minimum Uniform Standards for Issuing a CLP
a. Passing the General Knowledge Test To Obtain a CLP
b. Requiring the CLP To Be a Separate Document From the CDL or
Non-CDL
c. CLP Document Should Be Tamperproof
d. Photograph on CLP
e. Recording the CLP in CDLIS
7. Maximum Initial Validity and Renewal Periods for CLP and CDL
a. Initial Validity and Renewal Periods for a CLP
b. Initial Validity and Renewal Periods for a CDL
8. Establish a Minimum Age for CLP
9. Preconditions To Taking the CDL Skills Test
a. CLP Prerequisite for CDL
b. CLP Holder Accompanied by CDL Holder
c. Waiting Period To Take Skills Test
d. Relationship to Entry Level Driver Training Rulemaking
10. Limit Endorsements on CLP to Passenger (P) Only
11. Methods of Administering CDL TESTS
12. Update Federal Knowledge and Skills Test Standards
a. Incorporate by Reference AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System
b. Pre-Trip Inspection
c. Skills Test Banking Prohibition
d. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) Issues
e. Removal of Sec. 383.77 (Substitution of Experience for
Skills Tests)
f. Covert Monitoring of State and Third Party Skills Test
Examiners
13. New Standardized Endorsements and Restriction Codes
a. Uniform Endorsement Codes
b. Testing Drivers on Vehicles With Air Brakes, Automatic
Transmissions, and Non-Fifth Wheel Combination Vehicles
c. Automatic Transmission Restriction
d. Definition of Tank Vehicle
14. Previous Driving Offenses by CLP Holders and CLP Applicants
15. Motor Carrier Prohibitions
16. Incorporate CLP-Related Regulatory Guidance Into Regulatory
Text
17. Incorporate Safe Port Act Provisions
a. CDLs Obtained Through Fraud
b. Computer System Controls--Supervisor Involvement
c. Background Checks
d. Training Requirements for Knowledge and Skills Examiners
e. Minimum Number of Tests Conducted (Minimum Skills Tests for
Testers and Examiners)
f. Third Party Testing (Annual Inspection; Advance Scheduling of
Tests; Separation of Training and Testing Functions)
g. Third Party Bond Requirements
18. Other Issues Related to Fraud Prevention
a. Black and White Photograph
b. Check Photograph on File
c. Two Staff Members Verify Test Scores and Other Documents
19. Miscellaneous Comments
a. Applicability to Agricultural Sector
b. Relation to REAL ID
c. Domicile
d. State Compliance Issues
IV. Changes to the Proposed Rule in This Final Rule
Changes to Conform Rule With Medical Certification Final Rule
Terminology Changes Throughout
Part 383--Commercial Driver's License Standards; Requirements
and Penalties
Part 384--State Compliance With Commercial Driver's License
Program
Part 385--Safety Fitness Procedures
V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Privacy Impact Assessment
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Paperwork Reduction Act
[[Page 26855]]
National Environmental Policy Act
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
List of Subjects
The Final Rule
I. Legal Basis
This rule is based on the broad authority of the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA) (Pub. L. 99-570, Title XII, 100
Stat. 3207-170, 49 U.S.C. chapter 313); the Motor Carrier Safety Act of
1984 (MCSA) (Pub. L. 98-554, Title II, 98 Stat. 2832, 49 U.S.C. 31136);
and the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (MCA) (Chapter 498, 49 Stat. 543, 49
U.S.C. 31502). It is also based on section 4019 of the Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), section 4122 of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy
for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, at 1734, 49
U.S.C. 31302, 31308, and 31309); and section 703 of the Security and
Accountability For Every Port Act of 2006 (SAFE Port Act) (Pub. L. 109-
347, 120 Stat. 1884, at 1944).
The CMVSA required the Secretary of Transportation, after
consultation with the States, to prescribe regulations on minimum
uniform standards for the issuance of commercial driver's licenses
(CDLs) by the States and for information to be contained on each
license (49 U.S.C. 31305, 31308). The CMVSA also authorized the
Secretary to adopt regulations for a learner's permit (49 U.S.C.
31305(b)(2)). Paragraph (c) of 49 CFR 383.23 addresses the learner's
permit by ratifying the States' regulations on this subject, provided
they comply with certain Federal requirements. This final rule
establishes a Federal requirement for a commercial learner's permit
(CLP) as a pre-condition for issuing a CDL and also adopts various
other changes to enhance the CDL program.
The MCSA conferred authority to regulate drivers, motor carriers,
and commercial motor vehicles (CMVs). It required the Secretary of
Transportation to ``prescribe regulations on commercial motor vehicle
safety. The regulations shall prescribe minimum safety standards for
commercial motor vehicles. At a minimum, the regulations shall ensure
that: (1) Commercial motor vehicles are maintained, equipped, loaded,
and operated safely; (2) the responsibilities imposed on operators of
commercial motor vehicles do not impair their ability to operate the
vehicles safely; (3) the physical condition of operators of commercial
motor vehicles is adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles
safely; and (4) the operation of commercial motor vehicles does not
have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of the operators''
(49 U.S.C. 31136(a)).
This final rule, like the CDL regulations, is based in part on the
requirements of 49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(1) and (2) that CMVs be ``operated
safely'' and that ``the responsibilities imposed on [CMV drivers] do
not impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely.'' The changes
to 49 CFR part 383 of this rule will help to ensure that drivers who
operate CMVs are licensed to do so and that they do not operate CMVs
without having passed the requisite tests.
The MCA authorized the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe
requirements for the ``qualifications * * * of employees'' of for-hire
and private motor carriers (49 U.S.C. 31502(b)). This rule, like the
CDL regulations, is based in part on that authority and is intended to
enhance the qualifications of CMV drivers by ensuring that they obtain
a CLP before applying for a CDL.
Section 4019 of TEA-21 required the Department of Transportation
(DOT) to complete a review of the CDL testing system to determine if
the current CDL system is an accurate measure of an individual's
knowledge and skills as an operator of a CMV. It also authorized the
Agency to issue regulations reflecting the results of its review. This
rule includes new or enhanced requirements adopted in response to the
Agency's review.
Section 4122 of SAFETEA-LU required the DOT to prescribe
regulations on minimum uniform standards for the issuance of CLPs, as
it has already done for CDLs (49 U.S.C. 31308(2)). More specifically,
section 4122 provided that an applicant for a CLP must first pass a
knowledge test which complies with minimum standards prescribed by the
Secretary and may have only one CLP at a time; that the CLP document
must have the same information and security features as the CDL; and
that a driver's record must be created for each CLP holder in the
Commercial Driver's License Information System (CDLIS).\1\ This rule
includes each of those requirements, as explained in more detail in the
preamble to this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CDLIS is an information system that allows the exchange of
commercial driver licensing information among all the States. CDLIS
includes the databases of fifty-one licensing jurisdictions and the
CDLIS Central Site, all connected by a telecommunications network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 703(a) of the SAFE Port Act required the Secretary of
Transportation to issue regulations implementing the recommendations
contained in a memorandum issued by the DOT's Office of the Inspector
General (OIG) on June 4, 2004, concerning verification of the legal
status of commercial drivers. Section 703(b) required the Secretary, in
cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security, to issue a
regulation to implement the recommendations contained in a report
issued by the OIG on February 7, 2006 [``Oversight of the Commercial
Driver's License Program''] that set forth steps needed to improve
anti-fraud measures in the CDL program. In a 2002 CDL audit report, the
OIG recommended that FMCSA require testing protocols and performance
oriented requirements for English language proficiency. This final rule
incorporates all of the OIG's recommendations. A discussion of these
recommendations can be found in the preamble to the NPRM for this rule.
Many of the operational procedures suggested by the OIG for carrying
out the recommendations have also been adopted.
In addition to the specific legal authorities discussed above,
FMCSA is required, before prescribing regulations, to consider the
``costs and benefits'' of any proposal (49 U.S.C. 31136(c)(2)(A),
31502(d)). The Regulatory Flexibility Analysis prepared for this rule
discusses those issues more comprehensively in a separate document
filed in the docket.
II. Background
Acronyms and Terms Used in This Document
AAMVA-- American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
CDL--Commercial Driver's License
CDLIS--Commercial Driver's License Information System
CLP--Commercial Learner's Permit
CMV--Commercial Motor Vehicle
CMVSA-- Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
DHS--Department of Homeland Security
FHWA--Federal Highway Administration
FMCSA--Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
GCWR--Gross Combination Weight Rating
GVWR--Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
IBR--Incorporated by Reference
N--Tank Vehicle Endorsement
Non-CDL--Non-Commercial Driver's License
NPRM--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OIG--Office of Inspector General
P--Passenger Endorsement
PDPS--Problem Driver Pointer System
S--School Bus Endorsement
SDLA--State Driver Licensing Agency
SSA--Social Security Administration
SSN--Social Security Number
A. Summary of This Rule
FMCSA adopts the following revisions to the CDL knowledge and
skills testing standards in response to
[[Page 26856]]
the statutory mandates and OIG recommendations:
(1) Knowledge and skills testing requirements.
Successful completion of the knowledge test, currently a
prerequisite for the CDL, is required before issuance of the CLP. This
rule requires States to use driver and examiner reference materials,
State testing questions and exercises, and State testing methodologies
(herein referred to as State Testing System) that FMCSA has pre-
approved. The State Testing System must be comparable to AAMVA's 2005
CDL Test System (July 2010 Version) for knowledge and skill standards,
which FMCSA approves in this rule. It includes a prohibition on use of
foreign language interpreters in the administration of the knowledge
and skills tests, to reduce the potential for fraud.
(2) Standards for issuing CLPs and CDLs.
This rule specifically requires that each applicant obtain a CLP
and hold it for a minimum of 14 days before applying for a CDL. It
establishes a minimum age of 18 for issuance of a CLP. The CLP must be
a separate document from the CDL or non-CDL,\2\ must be tamperproof to
the extent possible, and must include the same information as the CDL.
The only endorsements allowed on the CLP are a restricted passenger (P)
endorsement, a school bus (S) endorsement, and a tank vehicle (N)
endorsement. Each State is required to create a CDLIS record for each
CLP it issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A ``non-CDL'' is any other type of motor vehicle license,
such as an automobile driver's license, a chauffeur's license, or a
motorcycle license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before issuing a CLP, the issuing State is required to perform a
check of the driver's previous driving record using both CDLIS and the
PDPS to ensure the driver is not subject to the sanctions of Sec.
383.51, based on previous motor vehicle violations. If the State
discovers that the driver is subject to such sanctions, it must refuse
to issue a CLP to the driver.
This rule strengthens the legal presence requirements and increases
the documentation required for CLP and CDL applicants to demonstrate
their legal presence in the United States. For example, SDLAs are
required to verify the applicant's SSN with the SSA. The rule also
addresses applicants who wish to attend a driver training school in a
State other than the applicant's State of domicile. States are required
to recognize CLPs issued by other States for training purposes. The
rule limits the initial and renewal periods for both CLPs and CDLs. It
clarifies under what circumstances an applicant must surrender his/her
CLP, CDL, or non-CDL. It also requires all States to use standardized
endorsement and restriction codes on CDLs.
Many of the program areas and issues dealt with in this rule are
also addressed in DHS's final rule implementing the REAL ID Act
(``Minimum Standards for Driver's Licenses and Identification Cards
Acceptable by Federal Agencies for Official Purposes,'' 73 FR 5272,
January 29, 2008, codified in 6 CFR part 37). FMCSA and DHS have
coordinated efforts to write regulations that neither overlap nor
conflict. The two agencies and the relevant statutory authority
underlying these two rules serve different purposes. Although in some
limited instances FMCSA has incorporated similar or identical
requirements into this final rule, it does not adopt REAL ID or
incorporate it by reference either wholly or in part.
(3) Measures for prevention of fraud.
This rule includes requirements to improve the ability of States to
detect and prevent fraudulent testing and licensing activity in the CDL
program. These measures include the following:
Requiring verification of social security numbers.
Requiring CLP and CDL applicants to prove legal presence
in the United States.
Requiring that a digitized photo of the driver be
preserved by the State driver licensing agency.
Requiring computer system controls to allow overrides by
supervisory personnel only.
Requiring background checks and formal training for all
test examiners.
Requiring the establishment of oversight systems for all
examiners and testers (including third parties).
Disallowing the use of language interpreters for the
knowledge and skills tests.
In addition, amendments to part 384 require these items to be
reviewed whenever FMCSA conducts a CDL compliance review of a State
program. States found in substantial non-compliance with these fraud
control measures, as well as the other requirements of part 384, may be
subject to the loss of Federal-aid highway funds.
(4) Other regulatory changes.
The rule specifically prohibits a motor carrier from using a driver
who does not hold a current and appropriate CLP or CDL to operate a CMV
and from using a driver to operate a vehicle in violation of the
restrictions on the CLP or CDL. It also incorporates into the
regulations current FMCSA guidance related to issues addressed by this
rulemaking (currently available on the Internet at ``Guidance for
Regulations,'' at http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrguide.asp?section_type=G). Finally, this
rule includes minor editorial corrections and updates.
B. History
The CDL program was established by the CMVSA of 1986. Parts 383 and
384 of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, implement the CMVSA
requirements. The CMVSA prohibits any person who does not hold a valid
CDL or learner's permit issued by his/her State of domicile from
operating a CMV that requires a driver with a CDL. The prohibition
further affects driver training activities by limiting trainees to
their State of domicile to (1) receive training and behind-the-wheel
experience, and (2) take the knowledge and skills tests necessary to be
issued a CDL. This has caused problems because commercial driver
training facilities and the type of training needed are not equally
available in all States.
To address this and other issues, such as a lack of uniformity in
the duration of learner's permits, associated driver history
recordkeeping, and test reciprocity among States, the FHWA published an
NPRM on August 22, 1990 (55 FR 34478). (In the discussion below, the
responsible agency is referred to as the FMCSA, regardless of whether
the action described occurred before or after the transfer of
responsibility from FHWA to FMCSA in January 2000.)
Since the 1990 NPRM, major changes have occurred in the CDL program
through legislation, other rulemakings, regulatory guidance, and policy
decisions. For example, in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks, and because issuance of CDLs to unqualified persons and
persons with false identities significantly complicated detection and
prevention of fraud, Congress and FMCSA expanded the scope of the CDL
program to include issues related to fraud and security. All of these
major changes made the 1990 proposal obsolete. Thus, FMCSA withdrew the
1990 NPRM on February 23, 2006 (71 FR 42741). FMCSA issued a new NPRM
on April 9, 2008 (73 FR 19282) to address these issues and establish
regulatory changes to implement section 4019 of TEA-21, section 4122 of
SAFETEA-LU, and section 703 of the SAFE Port Act.
III. Discussion of Comments on the NPRM
On April 9, 2008 FMCSA published an NPRM (73 FR 19282) to revise
the
[[Page 26857]]
standards for CDL testing and to require new standards for a CLP.
Comments were initially due by June 9, 2008. However, in response to
several requests, FMCSA extended the comment period until July 9, 2008
(73 FR 32520). In response to the NPRM, FMCSA received 103 comments.
Commenters included representatives from Federal, State, and local
government and enforcement agencies, industry, trade associations,
advocacy groups, driver trainers, commercial motor vehicle drivers,
individuals and national associations representing various
transportation interests. Table 1 presents a commenter name and
abbreviation list.
Table 1--List of Commenters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of commenter Abbreviated name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advocates for Highway and Auto Advocates.
Safety.
Alabama Department of Public Alabama.
Safety.
American Moving and Storage AMSA.
Association.
Arkansas Department of Finance Arkansas.
and Administration.
U.S. Department of the Army...... Army.
American Trucking Associations... ATA.
B-J School Buses, Inc............ B-J School Bus.
California Department of Motor California.
Vehicles.
C.R. England, Inc................ CR England.
CRST Van Expedited, Inc.......... CRST.
California Trucking Association.. CTA.
Commercial Vehicle Training CVTA.
Association, Inc.
Delaware Department of Delaware.
Transportation, DMV.
Driver Holdings, LLC............. Driver Holdings.
Elgin Community College.......... Elgin CC.
Farris Brothers, Inc............. Farris Bros.
Florence School District One..... Florence S-D.
Florida Dept of Highway Safety Florida.
and Motor Vehicles.
Georgia Department of Driver Georgia.
Services.
Idaho Department of Motor Idaho.
Vehicles.
Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical IFCA.
Assoc.
Driver Services Dept--Illinois Illinois.
Office of the Secretary of State.
Indiana Association of Rural Indiana Rural Electrics.
Electric Cooperatives.
International Union of Operating IUOE.
Engineers National Training Fund.
Joint School District 2, Joint School District.
Idaho 2.
John Wood Community College...... Wood CC.
Louisiana Office of Motor Louisiana.
Vehicles.
Michigan Department of State..... Michigan.
Minnesota Department of Public Minnesota.
Safety.
Missouri Department of Revenue & Missouri.
Missouri State Highway Patrol;
Missouri Department of
Transportation.
National Automobile Dealers NADA.
Association.
Nebraska Agri-Business NE Agri-Business.
Association.
Nebraska Department of Motor Nebraska.
Vehicles.
New York DMV Motor Carrier Bureau New York.
North Dakota Department of North Dakota.
Transportation.
National School Transportation NSTA.
Association.
Ohio State Highway Patrol........ Ohio.
Oklahoma Department of Public Oklahoma.
Safety.
Owner-Operator Independent OOIDA.
Drivers Association, Inc.
Oregon DMV....................... Oregon.
Pennsylvania Department of Pennsylvania.
Transportation.
Schneider National, Inc.......... Schneider.
South Carolina DMV............... South Carolina.
South Dakota Driver Licensing South Dakota.
Program.
Truckload Carriers Association... TCA.
Tennessee Department of Safety... Tennessee.
Texas Dept of Public Safety...... Texas.
Commonwealth of Virginia DMV..... Virginia.
Washington State Dept of Washington.
Licensing.
Wisconsin Dept of Transportation. Wisconsin.
Winkle Bus Company............... Winkle.
Wyoming Joint Transportation, Wyoming.
Highways & Military Affairs
Committee.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule responds to the comments received on the 17 issues
addressed in the NPRM preamble. The 18th section addresses issues
related to fraud prevention and the 19th section addresses
miscellaneous comments not specifically associated with any of the 17
original issues or fraud prevention.
1. Strengthen Legal Presence Requirement
a. Required Forms/Documents
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.71 to include a list of
acceptable documents to prove citizenship or legal presence.
Comments. Advocates, CRST, Elgin CC and the State of Tennessee
supported the proposed change. DHS recommended either using the list of
acceptable documents for establishing lawful status, which it published
as a part of the REAL ID rule, or adopting REAL ID's method for
verifying lawful
[[Page 26858]]
status. Michigan supported harmonizing requirements with REAL ID.
FMCSA Response. The final rule adopts the appropriate documents
from the most recent list that DHS adopted for proof of citizenship or
legal presence under REAL ID. (See 73 FR 5272; January 29, 2008.) Use
of this list will ensure greater compatibility with DHS programs
including REAL ID.
b. Nonresident CDL
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. Sec. 383.5, 383.23, 383.71 and 383.73
to reinforce ``State of domicile,'' as previously defined in the
regulations, by specifying that a State may only issue a CLP or CDL to
an applicant who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Under
the proposal, applicants domiciled either in a foreign country other
than those granted reciprocity by the Administrator, or in a State that
had its CDL program decertified may be issued a Nonresident CLP or CDL.
Comments. DHS objected to the term ``Nonresident'' because it is
used differently for immigration purposes and could cause confusion.
Under their current systems, Florida and New York already issue
licenses to drivers who would qualify for Nonresident CLPs and CDLs
under the proposed rule, but object to the change on the grounds that
it would be burdensome to create a new category of license. Virginia
does not currently issue CDLs to drivers domiciled in foreign countries
and is opposed to expending resources to create this new category of
license. Tennessee objected to Nonresident CLPs and CDLs without
explanation.
FMCSA Response. The final rule changes the term ``Nonresident'' to
``Non-domiciled'' for both CLPs and CDLs. This change will provide
greater consistency with FMCSA's authorizing statute, which bases
jurisdictional authority to issue CDLs on domicile, not residency. In
addition, the change to ``Non-domiciled'' will avoid confusion and
eliminate any actual or perceived conflicts with DHS' immigration
programs. Other than the change to ``Non-domiciled,'' the rule remains
as proposed in the final rule.
2. Social Security Number Verification Before Issuing a CLP or CDL
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.73(g) to require States to verify
certain identifying information (e.g., name, date of birth, and SSN)
submitted on the license application with the information on file with
the SSA. The States would be prohibited from issuing, renewing,
upgrading, or transferring a CDL if the information in the SSA database
does not match applicant-provided data. FMCSA proposed that the SSN
verification would only have to be performed once for each CLP or CDL
applicant if a notation is placed on the driver record that the
verification was done and the results matched information provided by
the applicant.
Comments. Georgia, Michigan, NADA, AMSA, and a community college
support the proposal. Minnesota commented that the proposal may not
consistently protect against or identify those applicants presenting
false identities and that the process is burdensome and cost
prohibitive. CRST supports the proposal only if the States are capable
of managing the process without delays. Farris Bros. expressed concerns
about privacy and information security. New York requested an exemption
to this provision when an applicant presents a letter confirming the
applicant has resolved a problem with a name or date of birth not
matching the information in the SSA database.
FMCSA Response. The SSN verification requirement remains as
proposed in the NPRM. FMCSA views this requirement as a basic yet
critical fraud prevention measure. FMCSA disagrees that this
requirement is burdensome. Approximately 45 States currently conduct
SSN verification for CDL applicants. Furthermore, verification is
neither a lengthy process nor expensive (approximately $.025 for batch
and $.03 for online transactions). FMCSA declines to adopt New York's
exemption request. Verifying directly with the SSA that an applicant's
name, date of birth and SSN all match after a discrepancy has been
resolved is necessary to prevent fraud.
3. Surrender Of CLP, CDL and Non-CDL Documents
a. Surrender of Documents
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. Sec. 383.71, 383.73 and 384.211 and
adding Sec. 383.25 to expand the current CLP and CDL surrender
requirements to include any transaction where a CLP is being upgraded
or a CDL is being initially issued, upgraded, or transferred.
Comments. Florida and a community college support the proposal.
Advocates supports the proposal but states that the language is
ambiguous as to whether it is mandatory or optional. Georgia commented
that 49 CFR 384.211 requires CDL applicants to surrender all previously
issued CDLs and, therefore, it already complies with the proposed rule.
Delaware commented that the proposal is unnecessary because an
applicant's identity can be verified through other documents and
electronic systems. New York commented that since it does not issue
over-the-counter documents, applicants could be without any photo
identification until the new or replaced CLP or CDL arrives in the
mail. New York suggested perforating instead of surrendering documents.
Michigan suggested that the Agency adopt a standardized document
invalidation process such as clipping the corner of the prior document.
Minnesota complained that finding a vendor to perforate old documents
with the word ``VOID'' would be expensive.
FMCSA Response. The surrender requirement is mandatory and remains
as proposed. FMCSA disagrees that it is unnecessary to surrender prior
documents. The surrender requirement is necessary to prevent fraud in
the form of a driver holding more than one CDL document. Moreover, the
rules recognize that not all States issue CDL documents over-the-
counter and include an alternative standardized document invalidation
process. As proposed in the NPRM, FMCSA is incorporating its guidance
on stewardship requirements for surrendered documents into the final
rule. As a result, the final rule provides for an alternative to
surrender: Perforating old documents with the word ``VOID.''
b. Mailing of Initial License
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.73 to require that States may
only issue an initial CDL or CLP by mailing it to the address a driver
provided on his/her application form.
Comments. South Dakota opposed issuing CLPs by mail because States
with over-the-counter procedures would have to develop special
procedures. Florida claimed that the benefits associated with this
change do not justify the costs required to establish a mailing system.
North Dakota and Oklahoma argued that the proof of domicile requirement
renders the mailing requirement unnecessary. Oklahoma further
complained that forcing States to adopt central issuance would be
costly. Tennessee questioned whether FMCSA is in fact requiring all
States to change to a central issuance system. Georgia commented that
if mailing is required, then States should be able to issue interim
temporary CDLs over-the-counter. Illinois stated that unless the States
are permitted to choose between mailing and implementing an address
verification program, FMCSA is essentially mandating that the State
adopt central issuance. Michigan does not believe that its practice of
issuing CDLs and CLPs
[[Page 26859]]
over-the-counter contributes to fraud. ATA, Driver Holdings and CR
England complained that mailing will cause unnecessary delays for CLP
holders entering driving schools. ATA further noted that DHS does not
require mailing in the REAL ID rules.
FMCSA Response. FMCSA has removed the requirement that States issue
initial CLPs and CDLs by mail. This change is consistent with DHS's
REAL ID rules and provides States with more flexibility, without a
demonstrated reduction in fraud prevention, because, presumably, the
same documents that are presented to prove domicile are used to verify
mailing addresses. In addition, this change will prevent delays in
applicants receiving CDLs and CLPs and will reduce the States' cost of
compliance.
4. CDL Testing Requirements for Out-of-State Driver Training School
Students
FMCSA proposed to add Sec. 383.79 to provide that a person who
holds a CLP would be able to take the CDL skills test outside of his/
her State of domicile. The testing State would then send the skills
test results to the State of domicile. The State of domicile would
accept the results of the skills test and, if the applicant passed,
would issue a CDL.
Comments. Advocates and an individual driver supported this
proposal because reciprocity would increase national uniformity. NADA
and AMSA also supported the concept of reciprocity. However, this
proposal generated significant negative comments. CVTA commented that
lack of uniform State testing standards would promote shopping for a
State with the lowest testing standards. It also commented that many
States do not grant reciprocity for CDLs, instead requiring even
experienced drivers to retest. ATA, CVTA and CTA preferred temporary
nonresident CDLs as an alternative. These associations, a number of
carriers, a driver trainer and an individual driver commented that the
proposed rule would require costly and time-consuming travel as well as
delays to starting company-administered training and employment.
Several trainers praised Illinois's high standards and objected to any
rule that would inhibit the State's ability to do what it deemed
necessary.
All of the State agencies that submitted comments had issues with
the proposal. The principal complaint was that the individual States
would lose control over the integrity of the testing process. States
that employ stringent anti-fraud measures in the testing process object
to being required to accept results from States that are relatively
lax. States that had previous experience with testing fraud were
particularly opposed. Texas commented that the proposal had the
potential for a significant increase in fraud because the State that
issued the CDL would have no recourse against testers outside its
jurisdiction. Several States suggested that FMCSA change the
requirement to permit, but not require, reciprocity. Several States
also complained that the proposed rule would increase costs in terms of
program, procedure and training changes. A number of States had
specific concerns about the electronic transmission of information
between States and the costs associated with implementing an electronic
system.
FMCSA Response. After careful consideration of these comments,
FMCSA has determined that the final rule will remain as proposed.
States are required to accept the results of a skills test administered
to an applicant by any other State. FMCSA is confident that the
upgraded skills test and anti-fraud standards required and implemented
by this rule will improve and standardize both skills testing and fraud
prevention, creating more uniformity across all States' CDL programs.
In addition, FMCSA believes that the new rule will help reduce
barriers to entry into the driver labor market. Under current law and
regulations, a driver may only obtain a CDL or CLP from his/her State
of domicile. The new rule will facilitate driver training for
applicants unable to train in the State of domicile. In addition,
training schools often provide applicants with use of a truck for
testing purposes. For many applicants, this is the only feasible option
for testing. If applicants are required to return to their States of
domicile for testing, they would have to secure use of a truck, obtain
insurance and/or incur the cost of renting a truck simply to take the
test. For many this is logistically or financially prohibitive.
The travel costs raised by carriers in their comments are not
related to the proposed rule change. Currently, many States do not
enforce the requirement that only the State of domicile may issue a CDL
or CLP. As a result, drivers are avoiding the travel costs associated
with the return to the State of domicile by obtaining CDLs from States
other than their States of domicile, in violation of federal statute
and FMCSA's rules. With or without the rule change, these costs exist.
It does not appear unreasonable to require a driver applicant to return
to his/her State of domicile because this is where, by definition, he/
she makes his/her permanent home and is the jurisdiction to which he/
she intends to return.
FMCSA leaves it to the States to determine what secure electronic
method of transmitting test scores works best for them. At least one
State currently has an electronic database that can be used for the
transmission of test results between States. Other States may prefer to
use more basic methods of electronic transmission such as e-mail.
5. State Reciprocity for CLPs
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 384.214 to allow a person to obtain a
CLP from his/her jurisdiction of licensure and then engage in CMV
driver training located in whole or part in any State, similar to the
reciprocity States grant other States' CDL holders who travel across
State lines.
Comments. South Carolina, Michigan, Advocates, NADA, CTA and two
carriers support CLP reciprocity. CTA and a carrier commented that CLP
reciprocity would reduce training and licensing costs and increase
flexibility, but also suggested that States be able to issue temporary
CLPs to driver-trainees domiciled in other States. OOIDA supports the
proposed rule so long as it does not create an additional burden on the
States or compromise the one driver/one license/one record principle.
FMCSA Response. The final rule will remain as proposed: States will
be required to grant reciprocity to CLPs issued in other States. This
will permit a CLP holder to train in States other than his/her State of
domicile. FMCSA believes that issuing temporary CLPs to driver-trainees
domiciled out-of-State would violate the one driver/one license/one
record principle.
6. Minimum Uniform Standards for Issuing a CLP
a. Passing the General Knowledge Test To Obtain a CLP
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25 and amending Sec. Sec.
383.71 and 383.73 to require that every applicant successfully complete
the CDL knowledge test before being issued a CLP. A driver who holds a
valid non-CDL in his/her State of domicile would obtain a CLP from the
State of domicile upon successful completion of a general CDL knowledge
test.
Comments. Advocates, two associations, two driver-trainers, a
carrier and five States generally supported this proposal.
FMCSA Response. The final rule will remain as proposed with the
following clarification: A driver holding a valid CDL who seeks an
upgrade for which a skills test is required must also pass the
[[Page 26860]]
appropriate knowledge test prior to obtaining a CLP. This is consistent
with the new Sec. 383.25(d) which requires a CDL holder seeking an
upgrade to his/her CDL to obtain a CLP if the upgrade requires a skills
test.
b. Requiring the CLP To Be a Separate Document From the CDL or Non-CDL
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25 and amending Sec. Sec.
383.151 and 383.153 to require that the CLP be a separate document from
either the CDL or the non-CDL; contain the words ``Commercial Learner's
Permit'' or ``CLP'' displayed prominently; and include a statement that
it is not valid for driving a CMV unless presented with the underlying
CDL or non-CDL.
Comments. Advocates strongly supports the proposal. New York and
Alabama commented that there is not enough room for the proposed
language on the CLP. Tennessee commented that a two-part license would
cause problems with tracking expiration dates, software upgrades and
law enforcement officials having to review two documents. Georgia
commented that the proposal may not be compatible with REAL ID because
a driver may only hold one REAL ID-compliant identification document.
Texas suggested having CLP holders surrender their underlying non-CDL
documents and requiring States to issue one integrated document that
would serve as both a CLP and non-CDL. Washington supports the proposal
but notes that it will require changes to its document issuing process.
FMCSA Response. The requirement remains as proposed--that the CLP
be a separate document from the underlying license. This rule is not
inconsistent with REAL ID because the license and the CLP are not two
separate licenses; they are two parts of the same license. As a result,
the CLP is not valid unless presented with the underlying license.
Furthermore, the two documents share the same driver's license or
record number. FMCSA believes that one integrated document would create
problems since the CLP and non-CDL would likely have different
expiration dates. Tracking expiration dates on separate documents
should not present a significant problem because most States appear to
do this under the current system. The standard language is necessary so
that all parties checking the license (law enforcement, etc.)
understand the purpose and limitations of the CLP.
c. CLP Document Should Be Tamperproof
In accordance with section 4122 of SAFETEA-LU, FMCSA proposed
amending Sec. Sec. 383.153 and 383.155 to require that CLP documents
be tamperproof and that the content of the CLP documents be the same as
the content of the CDL documents.
Comments. Georgia and Florida support the proposal. Delaware
commented that tamperproofing is expensive and that it is not necessary
because the CLP is only used for a short period of time. Michigan
described its current system, which pairs a secure underlying license
with a paper CLP, as more than adequate and does not believe it is
cost-effective to expend resources to tamperproof a temporary document.
FMCSA Response. The tamperproofing requirement, which Congress
required in SAFETEA-LU, remains as proposed.
d. Photograph on CLP
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.153 and adding new Sec. 384.227
to require that States include a color photograph or digitized color
image of the driver on CLPs.
Comments. Advocates asked FMCSA to provide data or information
showing that a photograph or digitized image will substantially deter
fraud. Pennsylvania and Michigan do not currently require a photograph
on the CLP and object on the grounds that the change would be
burdensome. Michigan argued that a photograph on the CLP would be
unnecessary if the underlying CDL or non-CDL has a photograph. DHS
objected to having a State issue two photograph IDs to a single person,
stating that it would violate the one driver/one license/one record
principle.
FMCSA Response. After studying these comments and further
considering the risk of fraud, FMCSA has decided not only to remove the
requirement for a color photo on the CLP document, but also to prohibit
a photo on the CLP document. FMCSA has determined that eliminating the
photo makes the CLP more secure. Otherwise, a State would be issuing a
single person two State-issued photo IDs and someone other than the
record holder could present the CLP document as a photo ID to establish
identity or for other purposes. This change also complies with the
spirit and intent of one driver/one license principle: Drivers will not
be issued more than one photo ID. The CLP is a two-part license
comprised of the CLP document and the underlying CDL or non-CDL
together, and the CLP document must be presented with the underlying
CDL or non-CDL to be valid. The CLP document will have the same
driver's license number as the underlying CDL or non-CDL as well as
language stating the two-part nature of the document, making this
relationship clear.
e. Recording the CLP in CDLIS
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. Sec. 383.71, 383.73(h), 384.205,
384.206, 284.207, and 384.225 to require States to create a CDLIS
record for a CLP and to require States to post all CLP transactions to
CDLIS.
Comments. Advocates, Tennessee and Georgia supported the proposal,
as did South Carolina, which already complies with the proposal.
Delaware objected to the requirement because of additional costs. CTA
generally supported the idea behind the proposal but noted that it
would be burdensome to the States. Arkansas commented that the proposal
would require it to perform CDLIS checks before issuing a CLP, which
would result in longer lines and additional expense.
FMCSA Response. The rule's provisions requiring recording the CLP
in CDLIS, which Congress required in SAFETEA-LU, remain as proposed.
7. Maximum Initial Validity and Renewal Periods for CLP and CDL
a. Initial Validity and Renewal Periods for a CLP
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25 to require that States make
the initial CLP valid for 180 days and that they may renew it for an
additional 90 days without requiring the CLP holder to retake the
general and endorsement knowledge tests.
Comments. NADA and CRST supported the proposal. Florida supported
the proposal as long as it does not allow unlimited re-issuance of CLPs
where applicants continue to pass the knowledge tests. Michigan
requested clarification as to whether an applicant would have to take
the knowledge test again to reset the cycle. California, New York,
Virginia and the Army commented that the initial period was too short.
Oregon, Illinois, Georgia and Wood CC suggested a one-year, initial
non-renewable period. Minnesota specifically recommended a 9-month
validity period. Advocates and CR England suggested a 90-day initial
period with a 90-day renewal period. South Dakota, Georgia and Elgin CC
commented that the renewal period was too short. Idaho and Washington
supported a 6-month renewal period. The Florence S-D recommended two 6-
month renewal periods. Wisconsin complained that the validity cycle was
too short. South Carolina objected because it would require a change to
existing systems.
[[Page 26861]]
FMCSA Response. The FMCSA is making no change to the initial CLP
validity period of 180 days but is changing the final rule to allow the
CLP to be renewed for an additional 180 days (instead of 90 days)
without requiring the CLP holder to retake the general and/or
endorsement knowledge tests. This will give CLP holders more time to
train and take the CDL skills test, and is generally in line with the
majority of the comments, which recommend some combination of initial
validity and renewal periods to a maximum of one year. Also, the longer
validity period will ease the burden on DMV resources. The number of
times a State permits re-issuance of a CLP after an applicant passes
the knowledge test is not addressed in this rulemaking and is left to
the States' discretion.
b. Initial Validity and Renewal Periods for a CDL
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.73 to establish maximum initial
and renewal periods of 8 years for CDLs.
Comments. ATA, AMSA and CRST support this provision. Advocates
opposed it on the basis that this period will increase the potential
for unsafe drivers to evade detection and magnify the possibility of
fraud and the amount of time that fraudulent CDL actions can continue
undetected. Missouri commented that because CDL drivers must be
medically examined and certified every two years, the disparity between
the duration of the CDL and the medical examination could prove to be
cumbersome for SDLAs, if the medical certification is ultimately linked
to CDL issuance. Georgia and Michigan support the proposal, but
suggested that the final rule incorporate REAL ID by reference. Texas
recommended that the term be for five years so it matches the CDL
expiration date to the TSA Hazardous Materials Endorsement background
check requirement.
FMCSA Response. The requirement for maximum issuance and renewal
periods of 8 years remains in the final rule. Some commenters
misunderstood the proposal: Under the new rule 8 years is the maximum,
but States are free to set shorter validity periods. This will affect
only a small number of States that currently permit validity periods
longer than 8 years. Finally, although FMCSA declines to adopt REAL ID
by reference wholly or in part, this provision is consistent with
maximum validity periods required by REAL ID.
8. Establish a Minimum Age for CLP
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.71(a) to require that a CLP
holder be at least 18 years old, the minimum age to operate a CMV in
intrastate commerce. The Agency also proposed to apply the exceptions
and exemptions from the age requirements for interstate commerce,
granted in Sec. Sec. 390.3(f) and 391.2 and subpart G of part 391, to
the issuance of a CLP.
Comments. ATA and two carriers, a citizen, a driver and a driver
trainer supported the proposal. Six States commented that they are
already in compliance with the proposed rule. AMSA endorsed the
proposal, saying it would help enforce the current age limit on driving
of CMVs. Advocates and the Transportation Defense Lawyers Network were
concerned that allowing CLPs for driver as young as 18 when they could
not drive in interstate commerce until the age of 21 would be used to
justify lowering the age of interstate CDL driving. TCA urged FMCSA to
develop an experimental program to determine the feasibility of using
drivers 18 to 20 years old in interstate commerce. California and
Illinois commented that the rule will create hardship in the
agricultural community.
FMCSA Response. The proposed requirement remains in the final rule.
In the NPRM, FMCSA only proposed setting the minimum age for CLPs at
18. Lowering the minimum age for CDLs is beyond the scope of this
rulemaking. For a discussion of the rule's applicability to the
agricultural community, please see Section 19.a. below (Applicability
to agricultural sector).
9. Preconditions to Taking the CDL Skills Test
a. CLP Prerequisite for CDL
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25(d) to require that obtaining
a CLP is a precondition to the issuance or upgrade of a CDL.
Comments. Idaho suggested that there should be an exclusion for
drivers seeking upgrades or who have previously held CDLs. Delaware
recommended that this requirement apply only to those who have never
held a CDL. Florida did not oppose the requirement, but commented that
it may adversely affect school districts and other organizations from
hiring new people. New York and Wisconsin commented that this
requirement would entail modifications to State systems. A carrier
commented that CLPs are unnecessary, without further explanation.
FMCSA Response. FMCSA has modified the final rule to state that,
with respect to upgrades, a CLP is a precondition to the issuance only
if the upgrade requires a skills test (as opposed to a knowledge test).
Where skills testing is a part of the licensing process, FMCSA believes
it is important for drivers to have the opportunity to practice on the
public roads in a CMV under the supervision of an experienced driver.
FMCSA believes that a CLP is an important document to distinguish
between CDL holders and driver-trainees who must be accompanied by CDL
holders.
b. CLP Holder Accompanied by CDL Holder
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25(a) to require that the CLP
holder be accompanied by the holder of a valid CDL with the proper CDL
group and endorsement.
Comments. Wisconsin opposes this requirement and commented that
permitting unaccompanied CLP holders can facilitate driver training.
Advocates does not believe that having a CDL holder accompany a CLP
holder provides sufficient assurances of safety because no standards
exist for the accompanying CDL holder's driving skills, qualifications
or length of time he/she has had his/her CDL.
FMCSA Response. The final rule remains as proposed. Safety
considerations outweigh convenience during driver training. FMCSA does
not believe that it is safe to permit inexperienced drivers who have
not yet passed the CDL skills test to drive unaccompanied. Because
qualifications of the accompanying CDL holder were not addressed in the
NPRM, they are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
c. Waiting Period To Take Skills Test
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25(e) to require that the CLP
holder is not eligible to take the CDL skills test within 30 days of
issuance of the CLP.
Comments. Tennessee, Georgia, Michigan and Advocates supported the
30-day waiting period. Twenty-one commenters opposed the 30-day waiting
period. ATA and CVTA argued that the 30-day waiting period penalizes
driver-trainees who successfully complete their training less than a
month after obtaining their CLPs. ATA, NE Agri-Business, and NSTA
commented that delaying the skills testing also means that driver
training graduates will be forced to postpone their employment and
subsequent ability to begin earning wages. It also will be costly for
employers, who must either pay the drivers they have trained for not
working while they wait to be licensed or risk losing them to another
industry. NE Agri-Business and CVTA argued
[[Page 26862]]
FMCSA offered no empirical evidence that trainees are better drivers or
are better prepared for the skills test after 30 days' practice.
Schneider recommended that FMCSA change the waiting period to 14 days,
to avoid skills degradation between training and testing. The Joint
School District recommended a waiting period of 10 days between taking
the written exam and the skills test. Several commenters opposed the
30-day waiting period because classroom training is usually before a
student applies for the CLP and, based on the hours in the proposed
entry level training rule, the behind the wheel training will take no
more than two weeks.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA has amended the provision in the final rule
to grant eligibility to take the CDL skills test 14 days after
obtaining a CLP. FMCSA understands that some CLP holders may acquire
driving skills more quickly than others. Regardless, FMCSA encourages
CLP holders to train for as long as necessary to gain sufficient CDL
driving skills. However, those who feel ready are eligible, but not
required, to take the skills test 14 days after obtaining the CLP.
FMCSA does not believe this will compromise safety because only
qualified drivers will be able to pass the skills tests given in
accordance with the enhanced standards mandated elsewhere in this rule.
d. Relationship to Entry Level Driver Training Rulemaking
On December 17, 2007, FMCSA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking addressing Entry Level Driver Training. This proposed rule
would require both classroom and behind-the-wheel training for drivers
seeking a CDL for the first time.
Comments. Commenters requested clarification about the relationship
between this rule and the Entry-Level Driver Training rule.
FMCSA Response. The final rule for Entry Level Driver Training is
still under development. While these are separate rules, FMCSA will
ensure that any future requirements for driver training are completely
compatible with the requirements of this rule.
10. Limit Endorsements on CLP to Passenger (P) Only
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 383.25 and amending Sec. 383.93 to
require that CLP holders not be eligible for any endorsement other than
the passenger (P) endorsement.
Comments. Advocates and CRST support the proposal. A number of
entities supported a prohibition on hazardous material endorsements on
CLPs but objected to prohibiting other endorsements. Six associations
commented that the proposed limit on CLP endorsements would cause
delays in providing employees necessary tanker, hazardous material, and
school bus training, and would compound the problems the industry has
in hiring and keeping full-time CDL employees. CVTA and ATA stated that
this prohibition would create problems for drivers who wish to add an
endorsement to their license as well as the motor carriers that employ
them. They further commented that it would require a costly, time-
consuming, two-stage training process and could have an unintended
consequence of shifting endorsement training away from more
standardized means of instruction such as at driver training schools. A
driver trainer commented that the limit on CLP endorsements would make
training very difficult. Schneider commented that in its experience,
training CLP holders with tanker endorsements produces safer drivers.
CR England asked FMCSA to clarify that the prohibition against a CLP
driver carrying passengers does not apply to ``trainers, trainees and
Federal/State Auditors/Inspectors.'' California commented that drivers
should be able to train on the type of vehicle they will eventually be
driving. Georgia supports additional endorsements so that drivers could
get more behind-the-wheel training. New York, Oregon, and a school
district recommended permitting a tanker endorsement. Illinois wants
more flexibility in allowing training on tankers and double/triple
trailers. Two driver trainers objected to prohibiting training on
vehicles requiring endorsements because it sets up a two-step training
process. One driver trainer suggested permitting CLP holders to obtain
knowledge test endorsements, but that they should not be valid until
the driver obtains a full CDL. A number of States had concerns about
school bus drivers not being able to train on school buses without an
endorsement. New York expressed concern about not having the school bus
(S) endorsement on the CLP. The State said the presence of the S
endorsement would be proof of the applicant passing the knowledge test
before taking the skills test.
FMCSA Response. The final rule includes the following in addition
to maintaining the P endorsement FMCSA originally proposed:
A CLP holder may obtain a school bus (S) endorsement with a no-
passenger restriction. This change promotes consistency because the P
and the S endorsements both require knowledge and skills testing. Also,
it is logical to permit an S endorsement because it will provide proof
that the CLP holder passed the S endorsement knowledge test before
taking the S endorsement skills test. The final rule clarifies that the
no-passenger restriction on the P and S endorsements does not apply to
instructors, examiners, other trainees or Federal/State auditors/
inspectors.
A CLP holder may also obtain a tank vehicle (N) endorsement with
the restriction that the tanker must be empty and must have been purged
if it previously contained hazardous materials. An N endorsement on the
CLP with an ``empty'' restriction balances safety concerns with
industry needs to train drivers on the type of vehicles they will
eventually be driving, but does not allow them to train under cargo-
laden conditions until they have learned the basics of operating the
vehicle. By limiting endorsements on the CLP, FMCSA intends for drivers
to learn how to operate a CMV safely before taking on more dangerous
operations requiring higher skill levels. It is permissible to take the
knowledge test for endorsements at the same time as the knowledge test
for the CLP, however, the driver must obtain a CDL before driving
vehicles requiring endorsements (other than those set forth above).
11. Methods of Administering CDL Tests
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.133 to prohibit the use of
interpreters during the administration of the knowledge and skills
tests, and to require that applicants be able to understand and respond
to verbal commands in English by the skills test examiner.
Comments. South Carolina, New York, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama,
Michigan, Texas, ATA, Advocates, CVTA, CR England, Elgin CC, Driver
Holdings, three individuals and two drivers all support the proposal.
OOIDA commented that understanding basic commands in English does not
sufficiently demonstrate proficiency. Washington requested that FMCSA
clarify whether the definition of ``interpreter'' includes bilingual
testers and whether the NPRM proposed that skills testing be conducted
in English only. Florida opposed that portion of the proposal that
requires that the skills test be given in English only. Although it
already prohibits the use of interpreters during skills tests, it
permits examiners to interact with applicants in other languages.
FMCSA Response. FMCSA has modified the final rule to make clear
that examiners may interact with applicants only in English during the
skills test. The OIG's 2002 report on
[[Page 26863]]
improving CDL testing and standards noted that some States permit
bilingual testers to test in languages other than English, while other
States do not permit this practice. Under the final rule this practice
is prohibited; bilingual or multilingual examiners are not permitted to
test in languages other than English. This clarification is consistent
with 49 CFR 391.11(b)(2), which requires drivers to have certain
minimum English language skills and will promote national uniformity in
testing standards. It is worth noting that Sec. 391.11(b)(2) is
currently under Agency review. If the Agency makes changes to Sec.
391.11(b)(2), it may also propose corresponding changes to Sec.
383.133.
12. Update Federal Knowledge and Skills Test Standards
Some modifications to part 383, subparts G and H, were proposed to
match the knowledge and skills test standards set forth in the AAMVA
2005 CDL Test System.
Comments. CRST, Advocates, Indiana Rural Electrics, and AMSA were
generally supportive of the rule's changes to Federal standards for CDL
knowledge and skills testing. AMSA stated that its support was based on
the fact that substantial input was taken from those in the affected
industry and that the rule would promote uniformity across States.
a. Incorporate by Reference AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System
FMCSA proposed to add new Sec. 383.9 to incorporate the AAMVA 2005
CDL Test System by reference into the Federal regulations for CDL
knowledge and skills standards.
Comments. NADA, Florida, Georgia and New York support adopting the
2005 CDL Test System. Georgia and Florida stated that they have already
adopted the 2005 CDL Test System. Missouri supported the rule change
but suggested that States be able to use paper versions of the tests to
accommodate those testing sites that are not computerized. Oregon
commented that although the new test system is good, it has limitations
and flaws and that AAMVA has been slow to correct errors and issue
updates. Oregon further commented on proposed Sec. 383.133(b)(2)(i),
which would require the total difficulty level of questions used in
each version of a knowledge test to fall within a set range, by asking
that AAMVA and FMCSA reconsider the way difficulty levels are used and
remove reference to them. Oregon and Idaho both commented that the
States should be given limited flexibility to deviate from the Test
System. Minnesota suggested that the rule establish the AAMVA Test
System as a minimum standard and that FMCSA allow States to alter the
test as long as they satisfy this minimum. TCA objected to the new test
system on the basis that endorsement of a single test was not
necessarily in the interest of highway safety. Virginia, Illinois,
California and Nebraska all expressed concern that the new standards
would require expansion or reconfiguration of skills testing areas. New
York expressed concern that it would not be able to test the required
maneuvers in urban areas such as New York City. A community college
expressed concern that not all existing testing centers could conform
to the new standards, creating an economic hardship on applicants
through increased travel costs. South Carolina commented that
compliance with the computer generated test requirements would require
significant IT solutions and substantial cost.
FMCSA Response. In the final rule, FMCSA does not incorporate by
reference the AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System, because doing so would have
allowed examinees access to sensitive testing information. As a result,
proposed Sec. 383.9 is not included in the final rule. The final rule
requires States to use an FMCSA pre-approved State Testing System that
meets the minimum requirements established in this rule and that is
comparable to the AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System (July 2010 version), which
FMCSA approves in this rule. FMCSA will provide all State Driver
Licensing Agencies with a copy of the Test System prior to the
effective date of this rule. The July 2010 version contains minor, non-
substantive revisions to the original (December 2005) version. FMCSA
does not believe that the new test standards will be burdensome to the
States. In fact, by the end of 2009, approximately 50 percent of States
had adopted the 2005 CDL Test System. The 2005 CDL Test System,
unmodified, is the appropriate standard to use because it has been
rigorously pilot-tested and evaluated for validity and consistency.
States concerned about the challenges of automating the generation
of multiple versions of the knowledge test may consider relying on
vendors who will make appropriate software available. Even though
automated generation is the preferred method, States may nonetheless
prepare the tests manually using the algorithm required by the
standards.
Although the testing standards for the skills test were upgraded to
make performance of off-road maneuvers harder, States do not have to
build new sites to test all of the maneuvers. The 2005 CDL Test System
provides more flexibility to States in choosing driving skill
components than previous versions. Instead they can choose the skills
and maneuvers in the testing standards that are appropriate for their
current sites, rendering significant reconfiguration or expansion of
skills testing sites unnecessary.
States using AAMVA's 2005 CDL Test System (Version July 2010)
without modification do not need pre-approval from FMCSA. States
seeking pre-approval to use other State Test Systems (including any
modification to AAMVA's 2005 CDL Test System (Version July 2010)), must
submit a request for approval to FMCSA's CDL Division.
b. Pre-Trip Inspection
In addition, modifications to part 383, subparts G and H, were
proposed to make the entire pre-trip inspection (not just the air brake
inspection) part of the skills testing standard, rather than the
knowledge testing standard as it is currently.
Comments. South Carolina supported making the pre-trip inspection
part of the skills testing. Texas and Nebraska opposed making the pre-
trip inspection part of the skills testing. Texas commented that
administering the pre-trip inspection as a knowledge exam will not
reduce safety. Nebraska commented that changing the pre-trip inspection
back to a skills test would add 45 minutes to each skills test, thus
increasing costs to the State.
FMCSA Response. The pre-trip inspection will remain in the final
rule as part of the skills test. The AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System
includes the pre-trip inspection as part of the skills test because it
is important to demonstrate the applicant's ability to inspect the
vehicle for any defects. This should not be a burden to the States,
because they now have the option of randomly administering one of three
partial pre-trip inspection test options to the applicants, which will
reduce the time needed to administer the pre-trip inspection as part of
the skills test.
c. Skills Test Banking Prohibition
Modifications to part 383, subparts G and H, were proposed to
prohibit the banking of parts of the skills test (for example, an
applicant who passes the pre-trip and off-road maneuvers, but fails the
on-road part of test must retake all three parts of the skills test).
Comments. North Dakota supported the proposal to prohibit banking.
New York said that it does not currently allow banking. However, most
[[Page 26864]]
commenters who addressed ``test banking'' were opposed to the proposed
prohibition of this practice. They either stated that FMCSA had not
explained the intended safety benefits of the provision or asserted
that there would be no safety benefits. Specifically, twelve State
agencies objected to this change, arguing that it would lengthen the
amount of time it takes to re-test a driver who fails the exam but has
passed some portions of the test. States also commented that greater
resources will have to be dedicated to skills testing drivers if
banking is prohibited due to the increased length of time needed to re-
test drivers who fail. Four associations, three carriers and four
driver trainers expressed similar concerns. States also commented that
the prohibition would increase administrative costs by making it
difficult to schedule tests efficiently; requiring greater effort for
examining personnel; requiring changes to testing systems, forms and
process; and requiring staff retraining.
FMCSA Response. After careful consideration of the many comments,
FMCSA has decided to eliminate the proposed banking prohibition. FMCSA
has introduced a number of new rules in this proceeding designed to
improve the quality of CDL testing. Considering the number of negative
comments and concerns about increased costs, the Agency has determined
that, at this time, the safety benefits derived from this particular
section do not justify States' anticipated costs of compliance. States
remain, however, free to prohibit this practice. FMCSA has simply
decided not to mandate that States prohibit banking.
d. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) Issues
Modifications to part 383, subparts G and H, were proposed to adopt
the expanded definition of CMV in section 4011(a) of TEA-21 to include
both ``gross vehicle weight rating and gross vehicle weight,''
``whichever is greater'' and ``gross combination weight rating and
gross combination weight,'' ``whichever is greater.''
Comments. Idaho commented that the expanded definition of CMV in
section 4011(a) of TEA-21 combines overweight vehicle issues with CDL
classifications. Illinois stated that it allows a person legally to
register a vehicle for a greater amount than the manufacturer's GVWR/
GCWR (the GVWR/GCWR of a vehicle is less than 26,001 pounds, but the
plate displayed on the vehicle covers a weight more than 26,000
pounds).
FMCSA Response. The proposed expanded definition of CMV remains in
the final rule. The expanded definition of CMV in section 4011(a) of
TEA-21 was not intended to allow overweight vehicles with a GVWR/GCWR
of less than 26,001 pounds to be used as a representative vehicle for
the purpose of taking a CDL skills test. The intent of including the
actual gross vehicle weight and the gross combination weight in the
expanded definition of CMV is to allow roadside enforcement against
drivers who do not have a CDL, but are operating vehicles with an
actual weight of more than 26,000 pounds. Therefore, the expanded
definition of CMV is to be used for roadside enforcement, but only the
GVWR and GCWR must be used for skills testing in order to maintain the
representative vehicle concept.
Allowing a person to register a vehicle for a greater amount than
the manufacturer's GVWR/GCWR does not affect the expanded definition of
CMV. Registered weight has never been a valid way of determining a
representative vehicle.
e. Removal of Sec. 383.77 (Substitution of Experience for Skills
Tests)
Modifications to part 383, subparts G and H, were proposed to
eliminate Sec. 383.77, because the substitute for a driving skills
test was intended only for the initial testing cycle prior to April 1,
1992.
Comments. Several commenters, including New York, Florida, CTA, ATA
and the Army complained that the proposed change would preclude States
from granting the CDL skills test waivers to drivers with military CMV
experience. ATA further stated that it is currently working with the
Department of Defense to align the military's licensing standards more
closely with commercial standards but is concerned that the proposed
change would adversely affect the future ability of military CMV
drivers to transition to a commercial setting. ATA and New York
recommended keeping the CDL skills test waiver for holders of military
driver's licenses with CMV experience.
FMCSA Response. The final rule amends Sec. 383.77 to limit the
substitution of experience for the skills test to eligible drivers with
military CMV experience. The skills test waiver provision in Sec.
383.77 was promulgated in 1988 as a temporary ``grandfathering''
transition measure when FMCSA first adopted CDL regulations. Although
this provision has been associated with fraudulent activities,
including the falsification of documents to prove that the applicant
has the experience and clean driving record necessary to qualify for
the waiver, FMCSA believes this provision serves an important function
for military personnel returning to the civilian work force. Limiting
this provision to drivers who have military CMV experience should
significantly reduce the fraudulent activities associated with this
provision. Regardless, FMCSA continues to encourage military units to
train their recruits as CMV drivers and have them obtain State-issued
CDLs while still in active duty status to minimize any adverse effect
on their future ability to transition to the civilian workforce. FMCSA
will continue to work with the armed services to identify other ways to
facilitate military drivers getting CDLs.
f. Covert Monitoring of State and Third Party Skills Test Examiners
Modifications to part 383, subparts G and H, were also proposed to
adopt the OIG recommendation to require covert monitoring of State and
third party skills test examiners.
Comments. Missouri supported the proposal and recommended that
federal funding be made available for implementation. Driver Holdings
supported the proposal so long as the objective is to detect fraud, not
mistakes or errors in judgment. Michigan complained that the proposal
would increase State employees' work load significantly. Virginia
commented that unannounced or covert monitoring is logistically
difficult and burdensome--without advance notice, the necessary or
appropriate people or documentation may not be available. The Army
wants to have its CDL program certified in the future, and does not
believe that covert monitoring can be conducted under current military
installation and security requirements. South Carolina commented that
it currently engages in covert monitoring of State employees. North
Dakota does not think it should have to engage in covert monitoring of
its own employees. Florida commented that the proposals are generally
consistent with its programs, but that it finds announced visits more
efficient than unannounced visits because, with the latter, key
personnel can be unavailable. CTA commented that retesting a sample of
drivers previously tested by a third party is burdensome. Several
States object to all the monitoring being required and want funding
from FMCSA.
FMCSA Response. As proposed, covert monitoring of State and third
party skills test examiners will remain in the final rule. In addition
to the covert and overt monitoring of State and third party skills test
examiners required at Sec. 384.229(b), Sec. 383.75(a)(5) requires
States to perform one of the
[[Page 26865]]
three alternative skills test exercises (covert test taking, co-
scoring, and retesting) on third party examiners. FMCSA has determined
that increased monitoring of State and third party skills test
examiners' records and administration of skills tests, using both
covert and overt methods, is an important part of both fraud prevention
and quality control. Fraud prevention and quality control are, in turn,
critical to achieving the goal of national uniformity in testing
standards. Furthermore, the Agency adopts these monitoring requirements
in accordance with the OIG's recommendation in its 2002 Report that it
require covert monitoring of State and third party skills test
examiners. FMCSA does not believe that these requirements are
unreasonably burdensome. Although States may experience some
inconveniences in the short term as they adjust their programs, FMCSA's
goal is to improve the quality of testing standards over the long-term.
13. New Standardized Endorsements and Restriction Codes
a. Uniform Endorsement Codes
FMCSA proposed to amend Sec. 383.153 to include uniform codes for
all endorsements and restrictions on CDLs.
Comments. Tennessee, Georgia, NADA, two carriers and a trainer
supported the proposal. Wisconsin stated that this change would require
legislation and a reconfiguration of the DMV's driver license data
processing system. Virginia commented that it would require
modifications to the DMV's automated system and was concerned it would
require immediate reissuance of all CDLs. Delaware stated that this
would be burdensome and commented that if a phased approach is
acceptable to the FMCSA (change the license upon renewal), there will
be some CDL holders who have the new endorsements and restrictions and
others who have the old ones. If not, the DMV will have difficulty
handling the volume of customers who would be required, within a
limited time-frame, to have their licenses changed. Florida commented
that the adoption of the new codes would be prohibitively expensive and
that several of the proposed standard restriction codes are already in
use for other purposes, while some of the proposed restrictions are
represented by other codes. Florida and Minnesota suggested that the
rule require CDLs to display explanations for the codes. New York
commented that it would have to change its codes and that it would be
burdensome. North Dakota and Illinois found the wording of the
restrictions confusing in that some are restrictions and others are
endorsements. Pennsylvania commented that current regulations are
adequate. Michigan opposed the new codes because of the cost of
implementation. Texas supported the proposal generally, but suggested
that FMCSA establish a working group consisting of representatives from
all States and jurisdictions, including AAMVA, to review this proposal
and make a final recommendation on standardizing these codes to
minimize the impact all States.
FMCSA Response. The proposed changes remain in the final rule with
minor modifications to clarify that the L, Z, E, O, M and N codes are
restrictions, not endorsements. These comments demonstrate the need for
standardizing the codes: States are using many inconsistent codes and
have not, in many cases, followed the existing codes assigned by AAMVA.
It is essential to have the new standardized codes on the licenses so
that law enforcement officials across State lines can determine whether
drivers have proper qualifications. FMCSA will not require CDLs with
old codes to be reissued; the new codes will be used when the license
is next renewed or reissued. FMCSA recognizes that during the
transition period, law enforcement officials may encounter multiple
sets of endorsement and restriction codes. However, this is no
different than what is currently happening when CDL holders cross State
lines. In the long term, the rule will correct this problem and promote
national uniformity. An Agency outreach campaign to coincide with
implementation should alleviate many of the States' concerns about the
transition to the new codes.
FMCSA disagrees that standardizing restriction codes will be
prohibitively expensive. This rule does not require States to add
endorsements or restrictions to their database or license. It only
requires them to standardize the letter codes associated with the
endorsements or restrictions they currently use. Thus, in some cases,
States will have to replace one letter with another on the CDL license
and in their SDLA data code. However, this is primarily a computer
programming change limited to reassigning letter codes and should not
result in the need to redesign CDL documents significantly. While the
States will be required to adopt three new restriction codes, the
majority of the mandated restriction codes in this final rule are the
existing standardized national restriction codes that AAMVA adopted
many years ago. These standardized codes were created by AAMVA so
States would have uniform codes if they needed to use them as part of
their licensing program. For those States that currently enforce these
restrictions, but chose to use non-standardized codes, there will be a
short-term burden in converting to the standardized codes. In the long
run, it will benefit the CDL program by having all States use
standardized codes for national restrictions.
b. Testing Drivers on Vehicles With Air Brakes, Automatic
Transmissions, and Non-Fifth Wheel Combination Vehicles
FMCSA proposed to amend the Federal restrictions at Sec. Sec.
383.5, 383.93, 383.95, and 383.153 for applicants who use a vehicle in
the skills test that is equipped with (1) an automatic transmission;
(2) air over hydraulic brakes; or (3) a trailer with a non-fifth wheel
(pintle hook) connection. All three restrictions would be assigned
standardized restriction codes, along with a standardized code for the
current air brake restriction.
Comments. Florida and South Carolina support the proposal.
Pennsylvania questioned whether current CDL holders who do not have the
new restrictions or endorsements would be grandfathered. Idaho
commented that the new restrictions are unnecessary, costly and
burdensome on the driver and was concerned about there being enough
room on the CDL for the increasing number of restrictions. Oregon
supported the automatic transmission restriction but, with respect to
the other new restrictions, believes that regulatory objectives would
be better served by establishing standard restrictions for small Class
A CMVs. A carrier asked whether it would have to bring several trucks
to the tests to gain all of the needed endorsements.
FMCSA Response. The proposed new standardized endorsements and
restrictions remain unchanged in the final rule. A CDL applicant will
be licensed with restrictions based on the type of vehicle and
equipment he/she uses for the skills test. FMCSA believes that it is an
important safety objective to require applicants to demonstrate their
ability to operate the vehicles and equipment covered by this section
prior to licensure.
Beginning 3 years after the effective date of this final rule,
current CLP and CDL holders who do not have the standardized
endorsement and restriction codes, and applicants for a CLP or CDL, are
to be issued CLPs and CDLs with the standardized codes upon initial
issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer.
[[Page 26866]]
Current CDL holders will not be required to be retested to
determine whether they need any of the new restrictions for no full air
brakes, no manual transmission and no tractor-trailer. They are, in
effect, grandfathered from this requirement. These new restrictions
only apply to CDL applicants who take skills tests beginning 3 years
after the effective date of this final rule (even if those applicants
previously held a CDL before the new restrictions went into effect).
c. Automatic Transmission Restriction
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. Sec. 383.95 and 383.153 to require a
restriction on applicants who use a vehicle in the skills test that is
equipped with an automatic transmission.
Comments. Florida, Oregon and South Carolina support the proposal.
CRST generally supports the entire standardized endorsement proposal.
However, Idaho commented that the automatic transmission restriction
was unnecessary, costly and burdensome and that employers are in the
best position to determine a driver's proficiency on manual
transmissions. Farris Brothers does not think the restriction is
necessary. North Dakota found the proposed language confusing.
FMCSA Response. To clarify how the automatic transmission
restriction will be applied, the final rule includes a definition for
``manual transmission'' in Sec. 383.5. This definition will clarify
what constitutes a manual transmission and promote national uniformity
in the application of this restriction. It will promote highway safety
by only allowing qualified drivers to operate CMVs with manual
transmissions. A CDL holder with the automatic transmission restriction
is restricted from driving any class CMV with a manual transmission.
d. Definition of Tank Vehicle
FMCSA proposed to amend Sec. 383.5 to set an aggregate rated
capacity threshold of 1,000 or more gallons for all tanks (permanent
and portable) before a driver would need a tank endorsement.
Comments. Advocates strongly opposed this change. It commented that
FMCSA did not adequately justify this change, indicating that it
believed that this change would exempt CMV operators from the tank
endorsement requirement when transporting certain hazardous materials
of less than 1,000 gallons. Oregon supports the change for tank
vehicles, but suggested changing the threshold to 500 gallons. CVSA
supports the change for tank vehicles and the clarification that the
tank capacity threshold for needing a tank vehicle endorsement should
be the aggregate capacity of tanks being transported.
FMCSA Response. While the proposed amendment setting a 1,000 gallon
aggregate capacity threshold will remain in the final rule, there is
also a need to retain a minimum individual rated tank capacity for the
purpose of determining the aggregate capacity of the vehicle carrying
multiple tanks. In the current definition of tank vehicle, reference is
made to cargo tanks and portable tanks as defined in 49 CFR 171. Both
of these types of tanks are defined as ``bulk packaging'' which is
further defined in part 171 as having a capacity greater than 119
gallons. Therefore, only tanks being transported with a rated capacity
greater than 119 gallons will be considered for the purpose of
determining the aggregate capacity threshold for needing a tank vehicle
endorsement,
The requirement for an endorsement for tank vehicles designed to
transport 1,000 gallons or more is separate from the hazardous
materials requirements. This rule does not affect any pre-existing
hazardous material restrictions that might apply.
14. Previous Driving Offenses by CLP Holders and CLP Applicants
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. Sec. 383.5; 383.51; 383.71; and
383.73 to subject a CLP holder and CLP applicant to the same
disqualification requirements as a CDL holder and CDL applicant.
Comments. Michigan, Georgia, Texas, Advocates, ATA, AMSA and a
training school commented that they had no objection. Texas also
suggested that the proposed rule add drug offenses and certain felonies
committed by CDL holders in non-CMVs to the list of offenses for which
the States must disqualify persons from operating CMVs, as well as
impose a lifetime disqualification for persons convicted of an offense
under 8 U.S.C. 1323 and 1324 related to the transportation of
undocumented aliens. Although not opposed to the basic requirements of
the proposed regulations, Tennessee requested clarification of several
issues. Tennessee asked specifically if a person with disqualifying
offenses in his/her history would be able to obtain a CLP, or if he/she
would be required to serve out the disqualification prior to training
on a CMV. Delaware stated that the Agency should not force States to
take action on a driver before he/she has full CDL privileges and that
a driver should be removed from CDLIS if he/she does not convert the
CLP to a CDL. Oregon commented that full implementation will require
statutory revision, administrative rule revision and numerous
procedural revisions, and will place additional stress on limited
programming resources that are already fully dedicated to projects to
comply with current and projected Federal regulations. Oregon also
questions whether CDLIS is capable of handling the CLP holder
information. Idaho opposed not permitting CLP holders to train during
the disqualification period. California commented that it would be
difficult to impose disqualifications on CLP holders. California
currently has no reliable method of determining whether a driver cited
for offenses on a non-CDL is a CLP holder for purposes of
disqualification. The State would have to undertake major programming
changes to its citation and conviction procedures to accommodate the
rule change. New York commented that it already disqualifies CLP
holders for certain non-CMV violations, but that implementing the
proposed rule would require legislative changes. CVTA opposes the rule
change because various States treat moving violations involving a non-
CDL license in different ways, and the rules for license suspensions
vary. CVTA also commented that the rule would impose a retrospective
evaluation of CLP applicants' records that is not consistent with the
manner in which SDLAs handle licensing actions. CRST commented that
States would not be willing to assume the additional responsibility of
performing background checks.
FMCSA Response. The proposed CLP disqualification provisions remain
in the final rule. CLP holders and applicants, like CDL holders and
applicants, are authorized to drive on public roads. FMCSA believes
that this rule implements an important safety objective that justifies
changes to existing State programs. FMCSA does not believe that CLP
holders and applicants, who generally have less driving experience,
should be subjected to lower standards than the generally more
experienced CDL holders and applicants. As for the issue raised by
Tennessee, the answer is that a person disqualified from operating
either a non-CMV or a CMV at the time he/she applies for a CLP would be
required to serve out that disqualification period before receiving a
CLP. Because the CLP is a two-part license, the underlying non-CDL or
CDL must be valid at the time the CLP is issued and remain valid in
order for the CLP to be valid. With regard to Delaware's comment, a
driver with an expired CLP that is not converted to a CDL can be
removed from CDLIS if there are no convictions
[[Page 26867]]
for a disqualifying offense under 49 CFR 383.51. If there are
disqualifying convictions, the rules for retaining these convictions
must be followed before removal of the driver from CDLIS.
The purpose of this rule is simply to extend the pre-existing list
of CDL disqualification offenses to CLP holders. Because the NPRM did
not contemplate expanding the list of disqualifying offenses, such
measures are beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
15. Motor Carrier Prohibitions
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.37 and appendix B to part 385 to
include a specific prohibition against motor carriers using drivers who
do not have a current CLP or CDL or who do not have a CDL with the
proper class or endorsements, or using a driver to operate a CMV in
violation of a restriction on the driver's CDL.
Comments. Georgia, Michigan, Advocates, CRST, NADA and a community
college supported the proposal. AMSA, ATA and CR England opposed the
assessment of an ``acute violation'' under the Safety Rating Process
for violations of proposed Sec. 383.37 unless the Agency takes into
account the number of such violations as compared against the number of
drivers in a fleet. Otherwise, larger carriers could be unfairly
penalized on a proportional or violation-per-driver basis. CR England
and CTA commented that the Agency should implement a program to notify
a motor carrier when a license has been suspended, downgraded, or
otherwise adjusted.
FMCSA Response. The proposed changes remain in the final rule.
Motor carriers of all sizes bear the same responsibility for ensuring
that all drivers are qualified to operate CMVs. Even one unlicensed or
disqualified driver on the roads can present a serious risk to safety.
Carriers are in the best position to determine that their own drivers
are properly licensed. Implementation of a central database for
monitoring and notifying carriers of status changes to CDL holders is
beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
16. Incorporate CLP-Related Regulatory Guidance Into Regulatory Text
FMCSA proposed codifying regulatory guidance related to this
rulemaking and eliminating regulatory guidance made obsolete by the
changes in this rulemaking. This includes regulatory guidance under
Sec. 383.23 (CLP), questions 1, 2, and 4; part 383, Subparts G and H,
all questions (knowledge and skills testing); and Sec. 383.153,
questions 1-7 (CLP and CDL documents). FMCSA proposed to amend
Sec. Sec. 383.25, 383.73, 383.77, 383.95, 383.113, 383.131, 383.133
and 383.153.
Comments. Elgin CC supports the proposal. Michigan and Georgia
support the proposal so long as the Agency gives opportunity for
comment. Advocates complained that there was not adequate explanation
of why certain interpretations were slated for either incorporation
into the rule text or deletion.
FMCSA Response. The regulatory guidance proposed to be eliminated
as obsolete in the NPRM will be eliminated without change in the final
rule. In the NPRM, the Agency proposed a number of rule changes and
solicited public comment. The regulatory guidance that will be codified
in the final rule was explained as part of the rule changes in the
NPRM. When these changes are implemented, some previously issued
interpretive statements will no longer be appropriate because (a) they
will repeat what is newly incorporated in the regulatory text, or (b)
the new rules will create changes to the CDL program that render the
old guidance inaccurate. Thus, having already given notice and
opportunity for comment on the substantive issues as a part of this
rulemaking proceeding as well as identifying the interpretive
statements that would be affected by the rule, the Agency does not
believe that further notice or opportunity for comment on rescinding
redundant or obsolete guidance is necessary.
The Agency inadvertently omitted from the NPRM additional
regulatory guidance that will be rendered redundant and obsolete by the
final rule. That guidance includes the following interpretations:
Question 11, interpreting Sec. 383.73 and Questions 2 and 3,
interpreting Sec. 383.95. In the NPRM, the Agency proposed
incorporating the substance of Question 11, interpreting Sec. 383.73
into Sec. 383.73(i), but inadvertently omitted it from the list of
interpretations that would be rendered redundant by this rule. In
addition, the Agency proposed changes to Sec. 383.95 that render
questions 2 and 3 obsolete, but inadvertently omitted that guidance
from the list of interpretations that would be eliminated as obsolete.
To avoid any confusion, the Agency will eliminate these interpretations
in addition to those identified in the NPRM.
17. Incorporate Safe Port Act Provisions
In response to the requirements of the SAFE Port Act, FMCSA
proposed to amend Sec. Sec. 383.73 and 383.75, and to add Sec. Sec.
384.227, 384.228, and 384.229.
a. CDLs Obtained Through Fraud
FMCSA proposed in Sec. 383.73(k) that States be required to cancel
or revoke a CDL if the holder has been convicted of fraud related to
the CDL application or testing process. In addition, where States
receive credible information that a CLP or CDL holder is suspected, but
not convicted, of fraud related to the issuance of his/her CLP or CDL,
the State must require the driver to be re-tested within 30 days.
Comments. Oregon commented that the term ``suspend'' is more
appropriate than ``cancel or revoke.'' California commented that the
term ``cancellation'' was not sufficiently punitive where fraud is
suspected. California also commented that each State should have the
flexibility to investigate suspected fraud according to the
circumstances and that the 30-day re-testing time frame was overly
restrictive. Illinois requested a definition of ``fraud,''
``convicted'' and ``credible information.'' Michigan requested that the
rule be revised so that States must act within 30 days of notification
of a conviction of fraud.
FMCSA Response. In the final rule, FMCSA will remove the terms
``cancel'' and ``revoke'' and replace them with ``disqualify.'' This
change is consistent with other parts of the rule: part 383 defines
``disqualification'' to include, among other things, the suspension,
revocation or cancellation of a CLP or CDL. FMCSA believes that this
change will give States the flexibility to manage their programs within
the parameters of their existing rules.
In addition, instead of requiring that States re-test drivers
suspected of fraud within 30 days, the final rule will require the CLP
or CDL holder, within 30 days of being notified to re-test, to make an
appointment for and take the test at the next available appointment or
testing time. This will give States as well as drivers more flexibility
to schedule re-testing. New Sec. 383.73(k)(1) requires States to
``have policies in effect which result * * * in the disqualification of
the CLP or CDL of a person who has been convicted of fraud * * *'' The
new rules require States to develop policies, but do not specify that
the disqualification take place within 30 days of the conviction.
Finally, FMCSA declines to create a special definition of ``fraud,''
``convicted'' or ``credible information.''
b. Computer System Controls--Supervisor Involvement
FMCSA proposed to amend Sec. 383.73(m) to require that only
supervisory level personnel may continue the CDL or CLP issuance
[[Page 26868]]
process when driver record checks return suspect results.
Comments. Idaho commented that this requirement is a burden on
management staff, and that there is no guarantee that fraud or errors
would be eliminated. Oregon commented that implementation would present
significant programming challenges and costs. Oregon also commented
that supervisory personnel may not always be available and that this
proposal exceeds the intent of the OIG's 2006 Report. Wisconsin
commented that, under its current system, its non-supervisory employees
are well-trained on how to handle suspect results. Nebraska commented
that it has fifteen one-person exam offices and 81 multiple-person
offices that do not have full-time supervisory personnel on site full-
time. Michigan currently has a two-tiered process that sends all
suspect results to a separate group of subject matter experts located
in a separate facility, but noted that they are not, technically,
supervisory staff. Although Michigan supports the concept of the
proposed amendment, it believes that its current system achieves the
intended objective.
FMCSA Response. In the final rule, FMCSA renumbers this section to
be Sec. 383.73(n)(2). In addition, in response to comments, FMCSA
changes this section to require each State to demonstrate that it has a
plan to prevent and detect fraud when a driver record check returns
suspect results. FMCSA takes fraud prevention and detection seriously
and the intent behind the proposed change was for all States to improve
their standards for fraud prevention and detection. However, FMCSA
recognizes that many States have developed anti-fraud measures tailored
to their own systems and that they may combat fraud as well as or
better than the proposed change. This change allows States more
flexibility in implementing improved anti-fraud measures.
c. Background Checks
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 384.228 to require background
checks on all State and third party CDL examiners.
Comments. Florida commented that this would increase costs without
corresponding benefit. Oregon questioned whether the proposed rule
applied to both skills and knowledge test examiners. If it applies to
both, Oregon commented, this would increase costs. Wisconsin commented
that it ``fails'' examiners with felony convictions only within the
past four years, not ten years as proposed in the rule. Delaware
opposes background checks of staff members with long, credible
histories of government service and requested a grandfathering
provision. Missouri questioned whether the proposal requires a
nationwide or a State-wide background check. For the former, Missouri
commented that States may vary in the way they define felony and
fraudulent activity convictions. Missouri further requested special
consideration for employees who report their convictions in a timely
manner. Alabama requested information on what constitutes failure of a
background check. Illinois questioned whether the background check is
required to be a fingerprint- or a name-based check and commented that
a fingerprint-based check should be considered sufficient. Minnesota
currently conducts background checks at the time of hiring and
requested that the costs of administering the rule be evaluated.
Michigan requested an exemption if the state has a criminal history
monitoring system that provides the regulatory agencies with the
desired information on a more timely basis.
FMCSA Response. The proposed background check requirement will
remain in the final rule. This requirement applies to all test
examiners, including both skills and knowledge test examiners. It also
leaves the criteria and methods for the criminal background check to
the States' discretion, so long as they include the minimum criteria
set forth at Sec. 384.228(j)(2). However, as Sec. 383.228(j) clearly
contemplates decertifying examiners who fail the test, it does not
create any exemption for current examiners. Similarly, the rule
prohibits certification (and requires decertification) of examiners
with any conviction involving fraudulent activities or any felony
conviction within the past ten years. Since no exception is made for
convictions received out-of-State, States are required to conduct
nationwide criminal background checks. Finally, this rule sets minimum
standards for background checks. States are free to implement systems
that provide criminal background checks on a continuing or more
frequent basis than required under this rule.
As stated above, FMCSA takes fraud prevention and detection
seriously. At approximately $60 per background check, FMCSA
acknowledges that these changes may impose additional financial
requirements on the States in the short term. However, these changes
are important to the implementation of uniform national standards
proposed in this rulemaking docket.
d. Training Requirements for Knowledge and Skills Examiners
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 384.228 to require mandatory
training standards for all CDL knowledge and skills test examiners.
Comments. Oregon strongly opposes requiring knowledge examiners to
undergo the proposed training standards. Missouri commented that
knowledge and skills examiners require different training and requested
federal funding to cover costs. Oregon, Missouri and IUOE noted that
proposed Sec. 384.228(d) requires refresher training every four years,
but proposed Sec. 384.228(h)(1) appears to require it annually. IUOE
also commented that the training standards could cause significant
delays in the administration of CDL examinations. Florida commented
that refresher training every four years would increase both the costs
and the complexity of administering the CDL program without a
corresponding benefit. California supports strengthening the
certification and training requirements, but feels the proposed rules
are overly prescriptive. New York suggested requiring refresher
training every two years instead of annually. Alabama asked the Agency
to clarify how many hours of training are required. Michigan generally
opposes the requirement and commented that States should be free to set
their own standards. B-J School Buses opposes the requirement as
unnecessary.
FMCSA Response. In the final rule, FMCSA establishes separate
training standards for CDL knowledge test examiners and skills test
examiners. Examiners that only administer standardized knowledge tests
do not need extensive CDL skills test training. The previously proposed
paragraphs (b)(1), (2), and (4) through (6) of Sec. 384.228, have been
redesignated as Sec. 384.228(d), which now applies to skills test
examiners. The previously proposed paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of
Sec. 384.228, have been redesignated as Sec. 384.228(c), which now
applies to examiners who administer the knowledge test only. This
change will allow for a more efficient allocation of State resources.
In addition, FMCSA has corrected the discrepancy between proposed
Sec. Sec. 384.228(d) and 384.228(h)(1) by amending Sec. 383.228(f) to
reflect that refresher training is required once every four years.
A number of changes in this rule are intended to promote national
uniformity. In order to achieve that goal, all States must achieve
consistent standards. Ensuring the continued qualifications of
knowledge and skills
[[Page 26869]]
test examiners is a critical part of achieving uniform national
standards. Although certain States may experience some additional
burdens in the short-term, FMCSA's goal is to improve the quality of
testing standards over the long-term.
e. Minimum Number of Tests Conducted (Minimum Skills Tests for Testers
and Examiners)
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 384.228 to require that each
company (tester) with a contract to perform third party testing would
be decertified if it did not conduct at least 50 skills test
examinations per calendar year and that each individual examiner's
authority would be revoked if he/she did not conduct at least 10 skills
test examinations per year.
Comments. Michigan agrees that testers and examiners should be
required to conduct a minimum number of tests per year, but thinks that
each State should be able to set its own standards. Ten States
commented that the proposed requirement would be very difficult to
achieve, potentially putting third party testers out of business and
increasing the burden on State testers. Most of the 10 States recognize
the need to maintain skills, but do not support these minimum
requirements. Oregon, Oklahoma and Minnesota objected to annual
examination minimums for testers, but do not object to minimums for
individual examiners. Wisconsin comments that its examiners are
currently required to perform at least 12 tests per year, but that many
testers cannot meet the 50-test minimum. South Carolina objected to the
10-test minimum because it has an annual evaluation system for
examiners to make sure examiners maintain skills. Nebraska commented
that a significant number of its testers and examiners would not be
able to meet the minimums. Florida prefers its own system which
requires a minimum of one test for testers and six for examiners.
California objected to the focus on quantitative as opposed to
qualitative qualifications. Missouri, three school districts, one
school bus company and NTSA were concerned that the proposed rule would
affect school districts or school bus contractors that test only their
own employees. IUOE complained that the proposed rule does not take
into account the diversity of circumstances across regions and
industries.
FMCSA Response. After considering these comments, FMCSA has made
the following changes to the final rule: (a) Examiners who do not meet
the 10-test minimum must either take refresher training or have a State
examiner ride along to observe the third party examiner administer a
skills test in order to maintain certification; and (b) the 50 tests
per year minimum for testers is eliminated. The final rule will thus
focus on the examiners' skills, which is the intent of the rule, and
will not penalize small third party testers. It also provides an
alternative for small, rural or in-house examiners who conduct fewer
than 10 tests per year.
f. Third Party Testing (Annual Inspection; Advance Scheduling of Tests;
Separation of Training and Testing Functions)
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.75 to require States to conduct
an annual on-site inspection of each third party test site and to
require that each third party tester submit a weekly schedule of skills
test appointments no later than the last business day of the prior
week.
Comments. Schneider generally supports the proposed rule. With
respect to the annual inspection requirement, Oregon and Michigan
objected to an annual inspection of every site at which third party
testers administer skills tests, saying that this would be burdensome.
Five States commented on the submission of weekly schedules. All
had concerns over the additional administrative and logistical burden
that this requirement would create. Oregon, California, two carriers,
two associations and an advocacy group all objected to the requirement
that third party testers submit their schedules to the State a week in
advance, on the grounds that it does not provide sufficient flexibility
for scheduling. Minnesota commented that the proposed requirement is
not compatible with the existing system, would interfere with its
ability to plan its testing schedule efficiently and would require
administrative rules for implementation. Nebraska commented that many
drivers cannot schedule their tests a week in advance and that the
proposed rule would place a burden on state examiners, shifting
applicants away from third party testers. Florida complained that it
would increase its administrative burden unnecessarily because it
already has an effective fraud detection program and does not need any
advance notice of test scheduling.
Oregon and OOIDA recommended prohibiting third party testers (for
example, commercial driver training schools) from testing CDL
applicants trained by that tester.
FMCSA Response. In consideration of these comments, FMCSA has made
the following changes to the final rule:
Each third party tester (not testing site) is required to be
inspected once every two years. Annual inspection of every testing site
would be impractical and overly burdensome because many third party
testers administer skills tests at a variety of different sites. Also,
some third party testers may not have tests scheduled regularly
throughout the year, making it difficult to schedule annual
inspections.
Each third party tester must submit a schedule of CDL skills test
appointments no later than two business days in advance of
administering the test. Many testing sites do not have their weekly
schedules fixed by the end of the prior week, so a two-business-day
notification will give third party testers more flexibility in
scheduling tests.
Third party skills examiners are prohibited from administering
skills tests to applicants they skill-train. A conflict of interest may
arise when a trainer at a commercial training school is also a State-
certified skills test examiner. In order to reduce both the opportunity
for fraud and unintended bias in skills testing, the rule prohibits
third party skills testers from administering skills tests to
applicants their training school skill-trains. However, FMCSA has
provided an exception to this prohibition when the nearest alternative
third party tester or State skills testing facility is over 50 miles
from the training school.
g. Third Party Bond Requirements
FMCSA proposed to amend Sec. 383.75 to require that third party
testers maintain bonds in an amount sufficient to pay for re-testing
drivers in the event the examiners are involved in fraudulent
activities related to skills testing.
Comments. South Carolina commented that it evaluates its third
party testers extensively, and that the additional bond requirement may
drive participants from the program. Florida currently has a bond
requirement that covers reimbursement to the State and to individual
drivers and is concerned that the language of the rule restricts it
from reimbursing individual drivers. California recommended that the
regulations provide an exemption from the bond requirement for
governmental or quasi-government agencies such as public utilities and
transit authorities that participate in a State's third party testing
program. Illinois commented that the bond requirement would be
burdensome in the current economic environment and may cause a
reduction
[[Page 26870]]
in the number of third parties that participate in its program. IUOE
opposes the requirement and commented that FMCSA has not provided any
evidence that fraud is a problem in third party testing.
FMCSA Response. The bond requirement remains as proposed in the
final rule. FMCSA is aware of a number of third party testers whose
examiners have been engaging in fraudulent activities. As a result, a
number of CDL holders were required to be re-tested, causing States and
individuals to incur additional expenses. The bond requirement will
provide States and individuals an opportunity to recoup these expenses.
This requirement does not prohibit States from providing for recovery
of costs for individual drivers. Finally, if a tester is properly
characterized as a third party examiner, as opposed to a State
examiner, this requirement applies nevertheless.
18. Other Issues Related to Fraud Prevention
a. Black and White Photograph
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.153 and adding new Sec. 384.227
to require that the photograph or digitized image that is placed on the
CDL and now recorded as a part of the driver history continue to be
captured in color.
Comments. Virginia wants to use black and white laser engraved
technology and claims it is equally as secure or more secure than color
photographs or digital images.
FMCSA Response. The final rule permits black and white laser
engraved images in addition to color photographs and digital images.
Today's black and white laser engraved technology is just as secure
against alteration as color photography or digital images, and perhaps
more secure. Further, in the REAL ID rule published on January 29,
2008, DHS approved black and white laser engraved technology as an
alternative to color photographs. FMCSA has already acknowledged the
acceptability of black and white laser engraved images by granting
Virginia a two-year exemption from the prohibition on using black and
white laser engraved images on March 9, 2009, and by permitting it to
use such photos in lieu of color photographs on CDLs.
b. Check Photograph on File
FMCSA proposed adding new Sec. 384.227 to require that States
record the digital color image or photograph that is captured as a part
of the application process and include it as a part of the driver
history. FMCSA also proposed that States be required to check the
photograph or digital image they must maintain on file for every CDL or
CLP holder against the applicant in person whenever the CDL or CLP is
renewed, upgraded or transferred and when a duplicate is issued.
Comments. Missouri commented that retaining a digital photo of
every CLP and CDL applicant could result in increased costs. California
objected to comparing the applicant's photo to the person because it
would require the applicant to appear in person at the field office and
would eliminate the option of processing a CDL renewal application by
mail or Internet.
FMCSA Response. FMCSA has decided that the final rule will require
States to check the photograph on file against the applicant in person
only when the applicant appears in person. This will allow for
processing by mail, and will lessen the burden of compliance on the
States. The final rule will include the requirement that a digital
color image or photograph or black and white laser engraved photograph
be kept on file. FMCSA believes that this is an important measure to
combat fraud. However, in accordance with Sec. 383.153(b)(1) of the
final rule, which prohibits States from placing a photo or other image
on the CLP, States will not be required to capture a photograph,
digital image or other representation of the applicant during the CLP
application process. Instead, States are required to check the
photograph or digital image on record against the CLP applicant when
he/she appears in person. To the extent that there is no photograph or
digital image on record to make sure the person on the license and the
applicant are the same, States are to check the photograph or image on
the base-license against the CLP applicant when he/she appears in
person.
c. Two Staff Members Verify Test Scores and Other Documents
FMCSA proposed amending Sec. 383.73(m) to require that two DMV
staff members verify CLP and CDL applicants' test scores and completed
application forms and documents to prove legal presence.
Comments. Delaware, Nebraska, North Dakota, Tennessee, Texas,
Washington, Wisconsin and South Dakota all made similar comments
complaining that the proposed change would be time-consuming and
expensive and would disrupt current licensing systems in remote areas,
resulting in closures of SDLA offices or other inconveniences for
States and drivers. Texas also commented that FMCSA should give States
the discretion to conduct documentation reviews either before or after
issuance of the license. Michigan complained that the proposal was
vague and unmanageable, without further explanation. Farris Brothers
expressed concern about the impact of the proposed rule on rural
communities.
FMCSA Response. In the final rule the FMCSA has provided an
exception for DMV offices with only one staff member on duty. In such
cases the documents must be verified by a supervisor before issuance
or, when the supervisor is not available, copies must be made of the
documents used to prove legal presence and domicile for a supervisor to
verify along with the completed application form within one business
day of issuance of a CLP or CDL. This change will provide protection
against the risk of applicants presenting fraudulent documents, without
affecting States' ability to maintain one-person satellite DMV offices
to serve applicants in remote locations. This provision may involve
some costs to States by increasing the amount of time and resources
required to process CDLs. The requirement does not mean that two SDLA
employees must each go through the entire CDL issuance process for a
particular driver-applicant. For example, one person might review the
legal presence and other documentation the driver presents, while a
second SDLA employee would conduct the required driving record check
for driving violations, take the applicant's photograph and issue the
license. This splitting of driver processing may take additional time,
but it will not double either the time or effort needed to issue a CDL.
19. Miscellaneous Comments
a. Applicability to Agricultural Sector
Comments. Several commenters raised questions about the rule's
applicability to the agricultural segment of the industry. Five
agricultural entities asked for an agricultural exemption from the
rule.
FMCSA Response. Many agricultural operations are exempt from the
current CDL regulations, as well as the proposed rule. This rule does
not affect any of these current agricultural exemptions. The request by
farm suppliers for exemption from all CDL rules is beyond the scope of
the NPRM.
b. Relation to REAL ID
Comments. New York commented that it has not decided whether to
implement REAL ID and objects to any requirement that would force the
State to do so through its CDL program.
[[Page 26871]]
California, Pennsylvania and Missouri commented that if FMCSA adopted
REAL ID as a standard for the CDL program, it would essentially convert
a voluntary Federal program into a mandatory one. Texas commented that
if FMCSA ties its CDL rules to REAL ID, States that decide not to adopt
REAL ID will refuse to comply with CDL rules. Conversely, Michigan
encourages FMCSA to link the two rules.
FMCSA Response. FMCSA expressly declines to require States to adopt
REAL ID in whole or in part. However, FMCSA has taken care not to
implement any rules that conflict with REAL ID. Where FMCSA has
implemented certain elements of the CDL program that contain provisions
similar or identical to those of REAL ID, it does so on an independent
basis driven by safety considerations, congressional mandate, OIG
recommendations and general principles of fraud prevention.
c. Domicile
Comments. A number of commenters objected to FMCSA's use of the
State of domicile as the only jurisdiction for licensure. Many
suggested amending this requirement to permit licensure in the State of
residency.
FMCSA Response. Congress mandated that the State of licensure for
CDLs be the State of domicile. As this is a statutory requirement,
FMCSA does not have the authority to make the requested changes.
d. State Compliance Issues
Comments. ATA commented that States may not have the resources to
implement the new requirements of this rule in addition to others FMCSA
has indicated it will promulgate such as the Medical Certification as
Part of the CDL and Entry Level Driver Training. ATA opposes
implementation of this rule until FMCSA can demonstrate that the States
are consistently showing substantial compliance with the pre-existing
CDL program rules. Rather than adoption of new rules, ATA suggests that
the Agency should focus on enforcement actions against non-compliant
States under existing CDL rules.
FMCSA Response. FMCSA disagrees with ATA's position. The creation
of a uniform, national CDL program is an important safety objective
that is designed to facilitate improved safety performance and reduce
instances of fraud. Many of these program features are mandated by
Congress, recommended by the OIG or both. FMCSA believes that
implementation of these rules in conjunction with improved enforcement
activities will greatly enhance the effectiveness of the CDL program.
IV. Changes to the Proposed Rule in This Final Rule
This final rule makes the following changes to the NPRM, consistent
with the discussion of public comments in this preamble, and as further
explained below.
Changes To Conform Rule With Medical Certification Final Rule
The NPRM for this final rule was published on April 9, 2008 (73 FR
18272). On December 1, 2008, FMCSA published a final rule to
incorporate certain medical certification requirements into the CDL
process (73 FR 73096). The medical certification final rule made
changes to many of the CFR sections that are affected by this final
rule. Therefore the rule language that was proposed has been updated to
include those amendments made on December 1, 2008, so that today's
amendments make changes to the current rule language. The sections that
were updated for this purpose are Sec. Sec. 383.71, 383.73, 384.206,
384.225, 384.226, and 384.301.
Terminology Changes Throughout
The final rule removes the terms ``suspension,'' ``cancellation,''
and ``revocation,'' in reference to CDLs and CLPs, and replaces them
with the term ``disqualification.'' See ``CDLs obtained through fraud''
in the discussion of comments above for an explanation of this change.
The final rule replaces ``nonresident'' CDLs and CLPs with ``Non-
domiciled'' CDLs and CLPs in accordance with the definition change at
Sec. 383.5. See ``Nonresident CDL'' in the discussion of comments
above for an explanation of this change.
The final rule abbreviates ``commercial driver's license'' with CDL
and ``commercial learner's permit'' with CLP where appropriate.
Part 383--Commercial Driver's License Standards; Requirements and
Penalties
Section 383.5. The final rule changes the proposed rule by adding a
definition for ``manual transmission'' and by changing ``nonresident
CLP or CDL'' to ``Non-domiciled CLP or CDL.'' See ``Automatic
transmission restriction,'' ``Definition of tank vehicle,'' and
``Nonresident CDL'' in the discussion of comments above for an
explanation of these changes.
Section 383.9. The final rule does not adopt this section. See
``Incorporate by reference AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System'' in the
discussion of comments above for an explanation of this change.
Section 383.23. The final rule changes paragraph (a) to clarify
that the driving tests in question are for a CLP or CDL.
Section 383.25. The final rule changes paragraph (a)(5) by adding
subparagraphs (i)-(iv) to allow for a school bus (S) endorsement or a
tank vehicle (N) endorsement, under certain circumstances. These
subparagraphs also clarify that test examiners, other trainees, or the
CDL holder accompanying the CLP holder are not considered passengers
with respect to the prohibition of a CLP holder operating a CMV
carrying passengers. See ``10. LIMIT ENDORSEMENTS ON CLP TO PASSENGER
(P) ONLY'' in the discussion of comments above for an explanation of
these changes. Paragraph (d) is changed to clarify that a CDL holder
seeking an upgrade of his/her CDL needs a CLP only if the upgrade
requires a skills test. See ``CLP prerequisite for CDL'' in the
discussion of comments above for an explanation of this change.
Table 2 in Section 383.51(c). Our review of the 2008 NPRM (73 FR
19282, 19303), revealed that we made an inadvertent omission with
respect to Table 2 to Sec. 383.51, in two instances. The headings for
columns 2 and 4 should conclude with the phrase: ``, if the conviction
results in the revocation, cancellation, or suspension of the CLP or
CDL holder's license or non-CMV driving privileges,'' as they do in the
current regulations. This does not create any changes to Sec.
383.51(c), Table 2, and merely corrects a typographical error made in
the NPRM. As background information, FMCSA published a final rule that
implemented the sanctions containing the phrase on January 29, 2003 (68
FR 4394).
Section 383.71. The final rule changes paragraph (a)(8) to reflect
the addition of S and N to the list of endorsements available to CLP
holders. Changes to paragraph (b)(9), Table 1, reflect the updated list
of documents that are acceptable to show legal status for a CDL or CLP.
See ``Required forms/documents'' in the discussion of comments above
for an explanation of this change. The final rule changes paragraph
(b)(10) to require the applicant to present two documents, instead of
one, to establish domicile. Paragraph (f) is changed to clarify that
requirements for obtaining Non-domiciled CDLs also apply to Non-
domiciled CLPs. Subparagraph (f)(2)(i) sets forth the updated list of
documents that are acceptable to show legal status for a Non-domiciled
CDL or CLP.
[[Page 26872]]
Section 383.73. The final rule changes paragraph (a)(3) to extend a
CLP's renewal period to 180 days. For an explanation of this change,
see ``Initial validity and renewal periods for a CLP'' in the
discussion of comments above. Changes to paragraph (a)(4) reflect the
addition of S and N to the list of endorsements available to CLP
holders. The addition of paragraph (c)(9) makes clear that the initial
validity period of any CDL transferred from another jurisdiction must
also be limited to eight years. The addition of paragraph (e)(9) makes
clear that the initial validity period of any CDL that is upgraded is
limited to eight years. Paragraph (f) is changed to clarify that
requirements for issuing Non-domiciled CDLs also apply to Non-domiciled
CLPs. Changes to paragraph (h)(1) remove the requirement that the State
must mail a CDL or CLP to an applicant. See ``Mailing of initial
license'' in the discussion of comments above for an explanation of
this change. Changes to paragraph (k)(2) remove the requirement that
the State must re-test a suspect driver within 30 days of notifying the
driver, and replace it with a requirement that, within 30 days of
notification, the driver make an appointment for re-testing for the
next available appointment. See ``CDLs obtained through fraud'' in the
discussion of comments above for an explanation of this change. Changes
to paragraph (m) provide an exception to the rule that two persons
check and verify all documents. See ``Two staff members verify test
scores and other documents'' in the discussion of comments above for an
explanation of this change.
Section 383.75. The final rule changes paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(5)
to provide that States must conduct inspections and oversight of third
party testers and examiners once every 2 years, instead of annually.
Changes to paragraph (a)(7) specify that a third party skills tester
that is also a driver training school may not administer skills tests
to applicants who were trained by that training school. An exception is
provided when the nearest alternative third party tester or State
skills testing facility is over 50 miles from the training school.
Changes to paragraph (a)(8)(ii) clarify its application to skills test
examiners. Changes to paragraph (a)(8)(viii) require that third party
testers must submit a schedule of upcoming CDL skills test appointments
to the State at least two business days before each test, instead of a
week in advance. See ``Third party testing (annual inspection; advance
scheduling of tests; separation of training and testing functions)'' in
the discussion of comments above for an explanation of these changes.
The final rule changes eliminate paragraph (c)(1), removing the
requirement that each third party tester must conduct at least 50
skills tests per calendar year. Changes to paragraph (c)(2) provide an
alternative for skills test examiners who cannot meet the requirement
to conduct at least 10 skills test examinations per year. See ``Minimum
number of tests conducted (minimum skills tests for testers and
examiners)'' in the discussion of comments above for an explanation of
these changes.
Section 383.93. The final rule changes paragraph (a) to allow for
the school bus (S) and tank vehicle (N) endorsements. See ``10. LIMIT
ENDORSEMENTS ON CLP TO PASSENGER (P) ONLY'' in the discussion of
comments above for an explanation of these changes.
Section 383.95. The final rule changes paragraph (c)(2) to reflect
the definition of ``manual transmission'' added to Sec. 383.5. See
``Automatic transmission restriction'' in the discussion of comments
above for an explanation of this change. Paragraph (g) is removed
because it duplicates text that appears in Sec. 383.25(a)(5).
Section 383.131. The final rule changes paragraphs (a) and (b) to
require States to use an FMCSA pre-approved State Testing System. To be
approved by FMCSA, the State Testing System must be comparable to
AAMVA's ``2005 CDL Test System (July 2010 Version),'' which FMCSA
approves in this rule and will provide to all State Driver Licensing
Agencies. Paragraph (c) is moved from this section to Sec. 383.135(c).
Section 383.133. The final rule changes paragraph (b) to require
the States to use a pool of test questions, pre-approved by FMCSA, to
develop knowledge tests for each vehicle group and endorsement. The
pool of questions must be comparable to those in AAMVA's ``2005 CDL
Test System (July 2010 Version) 2005 Test Item Summary Forms,'' which
FMCSA approves in this rule and will provide to all State Driver
Licensing Agencies. Changes to paragraph (c)(5) clarify that examiners
may interact with applicants only in English during the skills test.
See ``11. METHODS OF ADMINISTERING CDL TESTS'' in the discussion of
comments above for an explanation of this change. Changes to paragraph
(c)(6) concern the provision in the proposed rule that prohibits the
practice of banking skills test scores. See ``Skills test banking
prohibition'' in the discussion of comments above for an explanation of
this change. New subparagraph (c)(6)(iii) specifies that an applicant
may only bank test scores during the initial validity period of the
CLP. Paragraph (d) is removed because it duplicates Sec. 383.113(c).
Section 383.135. The final rule changes paragraph (b)(2) to reflect
the changes in Sec. 383.131(a) and (b). Paragraph (c) is moved from
Sec. 383.131(c).
Section 383.153. The final rule changes paragraph (a)(4) to allow
States to use black and white engraved photographs on a CDL, as well as
color photographs or images. See ``Black and white photograph'' in the
discussion of comments above for an explanation of this change. Changes
to paragraph (a)(10) clarify the new restriction codes. See ``Uniform
endorsement codes'' in the discussion of comments above for an
explanation of this change. Proposed subparagraph (a)(10)(viii), which
is related to exceptions to the CDL and CLP rules is removed because it
duplicates text added in accordance with the Medical Certification
rule. New subparagraph (a)(10)(viii) adds code V for medical variance.
The final rule reverses proposed paragraph (b) by forbidding the
inclusion of a photograph or image of the driver on the CLP, instead of
requiring the CLP to include this. See ``No photograph on CLP '' in the
discussion of comments above for an explanation of this change. Changes
to paragraph (b)(viii) reflect the changes to the endorsements and
restrictions applicable to CLPs that are established elsewhere in the
final rule.
Part 384--State Compliance With Commercial Driver's License Program
Section 384.201. The final rule provides State Driver Licensing
Agencies contact information to obtain a copy of the FMCSA-approved
AAMVA 2005 CDL Test System (Version July 2010).
Section 384.217. The final rule clarifies that disqualification
offenses are applicable to CLP as well as CDL holders.
Section 384.227. The final rule changes paragraph (a) to permit
States to use black and white engraved photographs, as well as color
photographs or images, for recording the information. Changes to
paragraph (b) require States to check the photograph or image whenever
the CLP or CDL is renewed, upgraded, or transferred, or when a
duplicate is issued, only when the applicant appears in person. See
``Black and white photograph'' and ``Check photograph on file'' in the
discussion of comments above for an explanation of these changes.
Section 384.228. The final rule changes this section to split the
training requirements into separate standards for
[[Page 26873]]
knowledge test examiners and skills test examiners. See ``Training
requirements for knowledge and skills examiners'' in the discussion of
comments above for an explanation of this change.
Section 384.229. The final rule changes paragraph (a) to require
unannounced on-site inspections once every two years instead of
annually. For testers and examiners who are granted the training and
skills testing exception under section 383.75(a)(7), the inspections
will be annual. The covert and overt monitoring of these excepted
testers and examiners in paragraph (b) will be annual. This provision
is included to help reduce the opportunity for fraud.
Part 385--Safety Fitness Procedures
The proposals for part 385 are adopted without change in the final
rule.
V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The final rule regulatory evaluation estimates the benefits and
costs associated with revisions to the Agency's CDL knowledge and
skills testing standards. This section of the preamble summarizes the
findings of that analysis. For full details the reader is referred to
the Regulatory Evaluation contained in the docket. The measures
incorporated into this rule are intended to reduce fraud, improve
safety, and facilitate entrance into the CMV driver occupation. Many of
the provisions of this rule impose minimal costs on the States or
industry members, either because many States are already complying with
the requirements contained in this rule, or because the requirements
have minimal impact on the SDLA or industry operations or procedures.
We estimate the following provisions to be of minimal significance:
Strengthening the legal presence requirements; Social Security number
verification; surrender of the CLP, CDL, and non-CDL documents;
establishing maximum issuance and renewal periods for the CLP and CDL;
establishing a minimum age for CLP; limiting endorsements on the CLP to
passenger, school bus, or tanker only; implementing new standardized
endorsement and restriction codes; implementing motor carrier
prohibitions; and incorporating regulatory guidance into text. The
other provisions in this rule have greater cost implications and
include: Minimum standards for issuing a CLP; previous driving offenses
by a CLP holder; requirements for out-of-State CDL testing; reciprocal
State recognition of CLPs; updating Federal knowledge and skills test
standards; and incorporating the SAFE Port Act provisions.
Many of the requirements implemented by this rule impact the States
by requiring extra steps to process CLPs and CDLs. These include:
Recording CLPs on CDLIS and making the CLP a tamperproof document
(under minimum uniform standards for issuing CLPs); checking for
previous driving offenses by CLP/CDL holders (which would require an
additional search of PDPS records); and implementing one provision of
the SAFE Port Act requirements that involves the processing of CDLs and
CLPs. We estimate that these provisions, taken together, will add 10
minutes to the amount of time it takes a State to process a license
document. It will cost an additional $1.40 per CLP for tamperproofing,
plus an additional $1 cost for each CLP placed on CDLIS that is not
eventually converted into a CDL. This $1 fee is an annual per-record
fee charged by the AAMVA for maintaining the CDLIS. Taking all of these
costs together, the estimated cost of these provisions is $2.97 million
annually.
FMCSA estimates that those provisions of the SAFE Port Act which
require training programs and covert monitoring of skills test
examiners will result in additional costs to the States. We estimate
that the annual cost of these training requirements vary between $1.35
million to $1.74 million.
Table 1 below presents the total cost of these provisions over 10
years. In addition to the cost of specific provisions contained in this
rule, we budgeted $400,000 per State for the IT system development and
upgrades that are needed to comply with these requirements. These costs
are presented in the IT Upgrades row. Years 6-10 mimic years 2-5 with
respect to cost, and are therefore aggregated in one column. As can be
seen, the discounted total cost of these provisions varies between
$13.2 and $35.3 million per year. The 10 year cost of this rule is
estimated at $156.5 million, or $122.9 million discounted at 7 percent.
Table 1--Costs of Rule
[In thousands]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Years 6--10 Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CDL Processing............................................... $2,965 $2,965 $2,965 $2,965 $2,965 $14,827 $29,654
Skills Test Training......................................... 1,740 0 0 0 1,354 1,354 4,448
Driver Travel and Lost Wages................................. 10,200 10,200 10,200 10,200 10,200 51,000 102,000
IT Upgrades.................................................. 20,400 0 0 0 0 0 20,400
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................... 35,306 13,165 13,165 13,165 14,519 67,181 156,502
Total, 7 percent discount................................ 35,306 12,304 11,499 10,747 11,077 41,970 122,902
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety Benefits
Although it is difficult to fully quantify the safety benefits of
this rule, the Agency believes that reducing fraud in the CDL system
will improve safety on public roads. We estimated monetized safety
benefits of the rule at the NPRM stage. Although some commenters
expressed doubt that the provisions of the rule would in fact reduce
fraud, no commenters took issue with our assertion that drivers who
obtain CDLs fraudulently are likely to pose a public safety risk when
compared to drivers who legitimately pass the CDL skills test. Drivers
who obtain CDLs fraudulently either lack the skills or knowledge to
pass the CDL skills or knowledge test, or have some other reason (such
as plans to engage in criminal activity) for concealing their true
identity. The Agency believes that drivers who have fraudulently
obtained CDLs are significantly more dangerous to the public than those
who obtain CDLs properly. Fraudulent CDL holders have failed to
demonstrate that they can control their vehicle properly, and hence
pose an increased safety risk. We have estimated that the annual
discounted safety benefits of this rule vary approximately between
$10.5-$57.2 million. Total 10 year net benefits are approximately
$267.8 million.
[[Page 26874]]
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Federal agencies to take
small businesses' particular concerns into account when developing,
writing, publicizing, promulgating and enforcing regulations. To
achieve this, the Act requires that agencies detail how they have met
these concerns, by including a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA),
which includes the following five elements:
(1) A succinct statement of the need for and objectives of the
rule;
(2) A summary of the significant issues raised during public
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a
summary of the Agency's assessment of such issues, and a statement of
any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments;
(3) A description and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the rule applies;
(4) A description of the reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which are subject to the requirements and the
type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or
record;
(5) A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impacts on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted
in the final rule, and the reasons for rejecting each of the other
significant alternatives.
A discussion of these requirements follows.
(1) A succinct statement of the need for and objectives of the
rule.
This action is being taken in response to OIG recommendations for
preventing fraud in the CDL system. In at least one case, a driver who
obtained a CDL fraudulently has been involved in a fatal crash. The
SAFE Ports Act requires the Agency to adopt the OIG recommendations for
combating fraud in the CDL system, and this rule fulfills that mandate.
In addition, the current domicile requirement poses a potential barrier
to entry to the CMV driver occupation. The changes in this rule enable
drivers to choose the most convenient, cost-effective training option
available to them regardless of whether it is in their State of
domicile.
The objectives of this rule are to improve public safety by
preventing fraud in the CLP/CDL licensing system, to standardize
testing and CLP and CDL issuance across the States, and to facilitate
the ability of drivers to seek the most convenient, cost effective
training, thereby facilitating entry into the CMV driver occupation.
This rulemaking is based on the broad authority of the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA) (Title XII of Pub. L. 99-570, 100
Stat. 3207-170, codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 313), the Motor Carrier
Safety Act of 1984 (MCSA) (Title II of Pub. L. 98-554, 98 Stat. 2832,
codified at 49 U.S.C. 31136), and the safety provisions of the Motor
Carrier Act of 1935 (MCA) (Chapter 498, 49 Stat. 543, codified at 49
U.S.C. 31502). It is also based on the specific directives of section
4122 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat.
1144, at 1734, codified at 49 U.S.C. 31302, 31308, and 31309), and
section 703 of the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act of
2006 (SAFE Port Act) (Pub. L. 109-347, 120 Stat. 1884, at 1944).
(2) A summary of the significant issues raised during public
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a
summary of the Agency's assessment of such issues, and a statement of
any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments.
The Agency did not receive any comments on the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis.
(3) A description and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of
small entities to which the rule applies.
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), FMCSA considered the effects of this regulatory action on small
entities, as defined by the U.S. Small Business Administration's
(SBA's) Office of Size Standards.
SBA regulations (13 CFR part 121) require Federal agencies to
analyze the impact of proposed and final rules on small entities. The
regulations define a ``small entity'' in the motor carrier industry by
average annual receipts, which are currently set at $25.5 million per
firm. FMCSA has used data on revenue generated per power unit to
determine that a carrier with approximately 145 power units would
exceed the small business revenue level set by the SBA. Ninety-nine
percent of motor carriers have fewer than 145 power units, and
therefore could be expected to fall under the SBA's definition of a
small business for this industry, with annual receipts of less than
$25.5 million.
A recent (June 2010) data query of the Agency's MCMIS database
indicates a total of approximately 498,465 active interstate motor
carriers. This number includes both for-hire and private carriers, and
includes some intrastate drivers as well as interstate drivers, because
some interstate motor carriers conduct intrastate operations, and
employ both types of drivers. For the purposes of this analysis, we
rounded this figure up to the nearest 5,000, to thus 500,000 active
motor carriers. A lack of activity is defined as carriers that have not
had a crash, roadside vehicle or driver inspection, or compliance
review, or have not updated their MCS-150 form in the past three years.
Approximately 99 percent of these carriers are estimated to be small
businesses as defined by the SBA, or approximately 495,000 currently
active motor carriers (500,000 x 0.99 = 495,000).
While this rule applies to drivers and does not affect motor
carriers directly, owner-operators would be directly affected by the
new driver licensing requirements because in these businesses the owner
and driver are the same person. As a result, any regulations that
affect the driver affect the small business owner as well. According to
Professor Lafontaine of the University of Michigan, there are
approximately 300,000 owner-operators currently in business in the
U.S.\3\ In a recent report for the ATA, Global Insight estimated a
similar number of owner-operators.\4\ As of May 2008, our MCMIS
database shows approximately 340,000 owner-operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Francine Lafontaine, Incentive Contracting in Practice: A
Detailed Look at Owner Operator Leases in the US Truckload Trucking
Industry, Working Paper, June 2000, available at: http://webuser.bus.umich.edu/Departments/BusEcon/research/workingpapers.html#lafontaine.
\4\ Global Insight, The U.S. Truck Driver Shortage: Analysis and
Forecasts, Prepared for ATA, May 2005, available at http://www.truckline.com/NR/rdonlyres/E2E789CF-F308-463F-8831-0F7E283A0218/0/ATADriverShortageStudy05.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency believes that all owner-operators would qualify as small
businesses under the SBA's definition. This rule would therefore apply
to approximately 340,000 owner-operator firms. These firms would have
to supply more extensive proof of legal presence under this rule, but
otherwise would not be affected greatly by additional reporting or
recordkeeping requirements. This extra documentation would require
extra time spent at SDLAs every time a driver sought a new license or
permit, license transfer, or upgrade. In the regulatory evaluation, the
opportunity cost of this time was estimated to be $18.62 per hour per
driver. It is estimated that approximately 10 extra minutes would
[[Page 26875]]
be required to obtain a CDL, and that the value of this extra time
would therefore be $3.10 per driver obtaining a CDL ($18.62 x 10/60 =
$3.10). Given that few owner-operators would have to obtain a CDL in
any particular year, and the low cost involved, this rule has been
deemed by the Agency not to have a significant impact on small trucking
companies.
Third party skills test examiners would also be affected by this
rule. These examiners would undergo periodic covert monitoring, but
assuming they are administering the skills test properly, this
monitoring would be costless to them. In addition, the employees who
conduct skills testing may have to participate in additional training
in order to remain eligible to conduct skills test examinations. The
Agency estimates that there are approximately 1,200 third party skills
testing organizations currently in operation in the U.S. Most of these
skills testing organizations are also motor carriers, educational
institutions, or municipalities that train their own drivers. For most
skills-testers, the revenue generated by offering skills testing is a
small portion of the total revenue generated by the business.
Information on these organizations is difficult to obtain, but the
Agency is aware that some are affiliated with larger motor carriers.
Others would qualify as small businesses, but the Agency is currently
unsure of how many might fall into the small business category. We
estimate that at least half, or 600, skills testing organizations are
small businesses. These organizations would have to bear the cost of
enhanced training of the examiners they employ. These costs were
estimated in the Regulatory Impact Analysis at $200 per examiner per
day of training, at an average of one-half day of training every year.
The cost to these entities would therefore be approximately $100 per
year per skills test examiner employed. The Agency believes that each
skills test examiner organization would have between 1 and 2 skills
test examiners. This rule would therefore cost the 600 affected
entities a maximum of $90,000 per year (600 entities x 1.5 skills test
examiners x $100 = $90,000 per year), or $150 per year per entity.
Given these costs, the Agency does not believe that this rule has a
significant impact on a substantial number of small businesses.
(4) A description of the reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which are subject to the requirements and the
type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or
record.
This rule requires drivers to present their social security number,
one proof of citizenship or legal presence, and a proof of current
address to their SDLA when applying for a new CLP, CDL or a CDL
transfer or upgrade. The Agency believes that most U.S. citizens
possess these documents and will be able to provide them to the SDLA.
No specialized skills are required to obtain these documents or present
them to an SDLA agent. We therefore do not believe that this rule poses
an undue recordkeeping burden on small businesses in the motor carrier
industry.
Third party test examiners must, under current regulations,
transmit to SDLAs the results of the skills tests they have conducted,
including both information identifying the driver-applicant and the
examiner who conducted the test. This rule will require examiners to
obtain periodic training on conducting the skills test. The third party
testing organizations will have to maintain records of their examiners'
participation in this mandatory training. The Agency believes that
keeping these records will be a minimal burden on skills test
examiners.
(5) A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impacts on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy and legal reasons for selecting the alternative adopted
in the final rule, and the reasons for rejecting each of the other
significant alternatives.
The agency has taken all steps it deems practical to minimize the
impact of this rule on both large and small entities. The impacts of
this rule on various entities, and attempts to mitigate them, are
described in full in the rule preamble and the regulatory analysis. The
Agency has, among other steps, reduced the third party skills tester
monitoring proposed in the NPRM, and has chosen the alternative that
imposes the smallest barrier, given statutory limitations, for entry
into the motor carrier industry or CMV operator occupation. All of the
alternatives considered in this rule would have similar impacts on
small skills test examiners. This rule does not impact motor carriers
directly, so it has no disproportional impact on smaller businesses in
that industry.
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), FMCSA has considered the effects of this proposed regulatory
action on small entities and determined that this final rule does not
have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, as
defined by the SBA's Office of Size Standards. As described above, this
rule not have a direct impact on motor carriers, unless those motor
carriers also operate as third party testers. The requirements
primarily affect States, drivers--during the CDL application and
testing process--before they are employed by motor carriers, and third
party CDL skills testers. Most carriers that operate driver training
schools and conduct third party testing would be too large to qualify
as small businesses. In addition, the requirements on third party
skills testers are fairly minimal and require primarily that skills
test examiners undergo periodic training to stay up to date on their
knowledge of the CDL skills test. The costs of these requirements are
estimated to be approximately $150 per year per skills test examiner.
In order for this amount to exceed one percent of the revenue of a
skills testing organization, the gross revenue for the firm would have
to be less than $15,000. Although we do not have revenue figures for
third party testers, we are confident that most of these organizations
would have revenues exceeding this amount, and that impacts on these
entities would therefore not be substantial.
The other affected entities are drivers. Drivers however are
affected prior to being employed in the industry, and therefore,
impacts on them are, by and large, not impacts on motor carriers and
hence not impacts on small entities. The one possible exception to this
rule might be a prospective owner-operator, but most owner-operators
have experience in the industry working for a larger carrier prior to
purchasing their own truck and engaging in business for themselves. The
instances of newly trained and tested drivers becoming owner-operators,
before gaining industry experience, are very rare. As a result, this
rule does not have direct impacts on small entities in the motor
carrier industry. For these reasons, the Agency does not believe that
this rule would have a substantial impact on a substantial number of
small entities in the motor carrier industry.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act requires new Federal regulations
to be accompanied by an analysis of their fiscal impacts on State,
local, and tribal governments and on private industry. Although the
attached regulatory evaluation provides much of this information, it
will be summarized here, with an emphasis on effects on State
[[Page 26876]]
and local governments, since this final rule does not have any major
effects on private industry. Many of the provisions in this final rule
affect the States, but the size of this impact is small. The total
annual cost of the rule is estimated to vary between approximately $13
million and $35 million, undiscounted. These costs are imposed
primarily upon the States, which bear the increased cost of processing
driver's licenses, training and monitoring skills test examiners, and
implementing any changes to computer systems required to implement
these changes.
The quantified benefits of this rule are the reduced cost to public
safety and society due to avoidance of crashes that would otherwise
occur. These benefits accrue primarily to active CDL licensed drivers,
motor carriers and their insurers, and other users of the nation's
public highways. These benefits have been estimated to grow annually
from approximately $10 million in the first year to $57 million in the
10th year (undiscounted). These benefits outweigh the costs to the
States. Although we cannot quantify them, we expect that facilitation
of access to training schools and testing will yield benefits to the
industry and prospective drivers.
Given the modest cost of this rule, the Agency finds that it will
not have a significant impact on the States because this rule will not
impose an unfunded Federal mandate, as defined by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532, et seq.), that would result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $140.8 million (as adjusted by DOT
Guidance, April 28, 2010, to reflect inflation) or more in any one
year.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This action meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
FMCSA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. We have determined that this rulemaking does not concern an
environmental risk to health or safety that may disproportionately
affect children.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
FMCSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' and has determined
that it does not have federalism implications.
The Federalism Order applies to ``policies that have federalism
implications,'' which it defines as regulations and other actions that
have ``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.''
Sec. 1(a). The key concept here is ``substantial direct effects on the
States.'' Sec. 3(b) of the Federalism Order provides that ``[n]ational
action limiting the policymaking discretion of the States shall be
taken only where there is constitutional and statutory authority for
the action and the national activity is appropriate in light of the
presence of a problem of national significance.''
The rule amends the commercial driver's license (CDL) program
authorized by the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (49
U.S.C. chapter 313). States have been issuing CDLs in accordance with
Federal standards for well over a decade. The CDL program does not have
preemptive effect. It is voluntary; States may withdraw at any time,
although doing so will result in the loss of certain Federal-aid
highway funds pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 31314. Because this rule makes only
small, though numerous, incremental changes to the requirements already
imposed on participating States, FMCSA has determined that it does not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the Federal and State governments, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Nonetheless, FMCSA recognizes that this rule has an impact on the
States and their commercial driver licensing operations. Most
significantly, it requires all participating States to implement a CLP
and prohibit the issuance of a CDL unless the applicant has first
obtained a CLP and held it for a minimum of 14 days. The Agency hopes
drivers will use this interval to obtain formal training. States also
are required to use a State Testing System pre-approved by FMCSA to
administer knowledge and skills tests. To be approved by FMCSA, the
State Testing System must be comparable to AAMVA's ``2005 CDL Test
System (July 2010 Version),'' which FMCSA approves in this rule and
will provide to all State Driver Licensing Agencies. Over the years,
FMCSA and the States have identified CDL program deficiencies that need
to be addressed. The OIG has focused attention on measures to prevent
licensing fraud. Measures to address these issues, and others included
in this rule, improve the effectiveness of the CDL program, but also
require participating States to change their programs in a variety of
ways. By letter dated October 31, 2007, the Agency notified the
National Governor's Association (NGA) that it was developing these
proposals to provide State and local governments the opportunity to
raise Federalism issues during the comment period for the NPRM. The NGA
did not file comments in this docket. No Federalism issues were
otherwise brought to the Agency's attention during the comment period.
Privacy Impact Assessment
Section 522 of the FY 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act, enacted
December 8, 2004, (Note to 5 U.S.C. 552a) requires the Agency to
conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of a regulation that will
affect the privacy of individuals. This rulemaking requires new minimum
Federal standards for States to issue CLPs as a pre-condition for a
CDL. It requires that an applicant for a CLP must first pass a
knowledge test which complies with prescribed minimum standards and may
have only one CLP at a time. It further requires that the data on each
CLP holder must be added to the driver's record in CDLIS. Therefore,
the information will be held to the same level of security as other
information contained in CDLIS.
Although each State is required to create a CDLIS record for each
CLP it issues, the Privacy Act applies only to Federal agencies and any
non-Federal agency which receives records contained in a system of
records from a Federal agency for use in a matching program. The CDLIS
records, however, are not transferred from FMCSA to the States; they
are created and maintained by the States. FMCSA has determined this
rule would not result in a new or revised Privacy Act System of Records
for FMCSA.
[[Page 26877]]
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do
not apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. This rulemaking will
affect a currently-approved information collection covered by the OMB
Control No. 2126-0011 titled, ``Commercial Driver Licensing and Test
Standards.'' The currently approved information collection has an
annual burden of 1,391,456 hours and will expire on May 31, 2012.
This action updates and provides more uniform procedures for
ensuring that the applicant has the appropriate knowledge and skills to
operate a commercial motor vehicle. It also establishes the minimum
information that must be on the CLP document and the electronic
driver's record in CDLIS, makes it a tamperproof document, and
establishes maximum issuance and renewal periods for the CLP and CDL.
The FMCSA believes this rule will result in a significant increase in
the annual burden hours for this information collection.
The following table summarizes the annual information collection
burden hours for current and future information collection activities
for the first 3 years of implementation of the new requirements and for
the 4th and subsequent years of maintaining the CDL program with the
new requirements. The increase in annual burden hours for the first 3
years of 25,216 hours is due to knowledge and skills test examiner
training and certification. The increase in annual burden hours of
595,348 hours for the 4th and subsequent years is due to a combination
of activities, including the full implementation of the merging of the
medical certification and CDL processes (211,910 hours) and the
implementation of the new requirements for CDL testing and the issuance
of CLPs (383,438 hours). A detailed analysis of the annual burden hour
changes for each information collection activity can be found in the
Supporting Statement of OMB Control Number 2126-0011.
Current and Future Information Collection Burdens
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future annual
Future annual burden hours for
Current and future information collection activities for Currently burden hours for 4th and
states and CDL drivers approved annual first 3 years subsequent years
burden hours (program change) (program
change)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State to obtain and record the medical certificate 0 0 * 205,333
information..............................................
State recording of medical certification status........... 0 0 * 3,984
State to verify the medical certification status of all 0 0 * 2,593
interstate CDL drivers...................................
Driver to notify employer of convictions/disqualifications 640,000 640,000 640,000
Driver to complete previous employment paperwork.......... 403,200 403,200 403,200
States to complete compliance certification documents..... 1,632 1,632 1,632
State to complete compliance review documents............. 2,400 2,400 2,400
Data/document checks and CDLIS recordkeeping.............. 212,224 212,224 582,285
Drivers to complete the CDL application................... 48,000 48,000 56,486
CDL tests recordkeeping................................... 84,000 84,000 77,910
Knowledge and skills test examiner certification.......... 0 25,216 7,658
Skills test examiner monitoring and auditing.............. 0 0 28,539
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Burden Hours.................................... 1,391,456 1,416,672 2,012,020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * See currently approved (May 13, 2009) Information Collection Supporting Statement.
National Environmental Policy Act
The FMCSA analyzed this rulemaking for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
determined under its environmental procedures Order 5610.1, published
March 1, 2004 in the Federal Register (69 FR 9680), that this action is
categorically excluded (CE) under Paragraph 4.s of the Order from
further environmental documentation. That CE relates to establishing
regulations and actions taken pursuant to these regulations concerning
requirements for drivers to have a single commercial motor vehicle
driver's license. In addition, the Agency believes that the action
includes no extraordinary circumstances that will have any effect on
the quality of the environment. Thus, the action does not require an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
The FMCSA has also analyzed this rule under the Clean Air Act, as
amended (CAA), section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), and
implementing regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection
Agency. Approval of this action is exempt from the CAA's general
conformity requirement since it involves rulemaking and policy
development and issuance.
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
The FMCSA has analyzed this action under Executive Order 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 Executive Order because it
will not be economically significant and will not be likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 383
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Incorporation by reference, Motor carriers.
49 CFR Part 384
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Motor carriers.
[[Page 26878]]
49 CFR Part 385
Highway safety, Highways and roads, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle
safety, Safety fitness procedures.
The Final Rule
Accordingly, FMCSA amends parts 383, 384, and 385 of title 49 of
the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 383--COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS; REQUIREMENTS AND
PENALTIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 383 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502;
secs. 214 and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1766, 1767; sec.
1012(b) of Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 397; sec. 4140 of Pub. L. 109-
59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1726; and 49 CFR 1.73.
0
2. Amend Sec. 383.5 by:
0
a. Removing the definitions for nonresident CDL and serious traffic
violation;
0
b. Revising the definitions for commercial driver's license (CDL),
commercial motor vehicle (CMV), disqualification, driver applicant,
endorsement, imminent hazard, tank vehicle, and United States; and
0
c. Adding new definitions for CDL driver, non-CDL, commercial learner's
permit (CLP), manual transmission, non-domiciled CLP or Non-domiciled
CDL, third party skills test examiner, and third party tester .
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 383.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
CDL driver means a person holding a CDL or a person required to
hold a CDL.
* * * * *
Commercial driver's license (CDL) means a license issued to an
individual by a State or other jurisdiction of domicile, in accordance
with the standards contained in this part, which authorizes the
individual to operate a class of a commercial motor vehicle.
* * * * *
Commercial learner's permit (CLP) means a permit issued to an
individual by a State or other jurisdiction of domicile, in accordance
with the standards contained in this part, which, when carried with a
valid driver's license issued by the same State or jurisdiction,
authorizes the individual to operate a class of a commercial motor
vehicle when accompanied by a holder of a valid CDL for purposes of
behind-the-wheel training. When issued to a CDL holder, a CLP serves as
authorization for accompanied behind-the-wheel training in a CMV for
which the holder's current CDL is not valid.
Commercial motor vehicle (CMV) means a motor vehicle or combination
of motor vehicles used in commerce to transport passengers or property
if the motor vehicle--
(1) Has a gross combination weight rating or gross combination
weight of 11,794 kilograms or more (26,001 pounds or more), whichever
is greater, inclusive of a towed unit(s) with a gross vehicle weight
rating or gross vehicle weight of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000
pounds), whichever is greater; or
(2) Has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of
11,794 or more kilograms (26,001 pounds or more), whichever is greater;
or
(3) Is designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the
driver; or
(4) Is of any size and is used in the transportation of hazardous
materials as defined in this section.
* * * * *
Disqualification means any of the following three actions:
(1) The suspension, revocation, or cancellation of a CLP or CDL by
the State or jurisdiction of issuance.
(2) Any withdrawal of a person's privileges to drive a CMV by a
State or other jurisdiction as the result of a violation of State or
local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than
parking, vehicle weight or vehicle defect violations).
(3) A determination by the FMCSA that a person is not qualified to
operate a commercial motor vehicle under part 391 of this subchapter.
Driver applicant means an individual who applies to a State or
other jurisdiction to obtain, transfer, upgrade, or renew a CDL or to
obtain or renew a CLP.
* * * * *
Endorsement means an authorization to an individual's CLP or CDL
required to permit the individual to operate certain types of
commercial motor vehicles.
* * * * *
Imminent hazard means the existence of a condition relating to
hazardous material that presents a substantial likelihood that death,
serious illness, severe personal injury, or a substantial endangerment
to health, property, or the environment may occur before the reasonably
foreseeable completion date of a formal proceeding begun to lessen the
risk of that death, illness, injury or endangerment.
Manual transmission (also known as a stick shift, stick, straight
drive or standard transmission) means a transmission utilizing a
driver-operated clutch that is activated by a pedal or lever and a
gear-shift mechanism operated either by hand or foot. All other
transmissions, whether semi-automatic or automatic, will be considered
automatic for the purposes of the standardized restriction code.
* * * * *
Non-CDL means any other type of motor vehicle license, such as an
automobile driver's license, a chauffeur's license, or a motorcycle
license.
Non-domiciled CLP or Non-domiciled CDL means a CLP or CDL,
respectively, issued by a State or other jurisdiction under either of
the following two conditions:
(1) To an individual domiciled in a foreign country meeting the
requirements of Sec. 383.23(b)(1).
(2) To an individual domiciled in another State meeting the
requirements of Sec. 383.23(b)(2).
* * * * *
Tank vehicle means any commercial motor vehicle that is designed to
transport any liquid or gaseous materials within a tank or tanks having
an individual rated capacity of more than 119 gallons and an aggregate
rated capacity of 1,000 gallons or more that is either permanently or
temporarily attached to the vehicle or the chassis. A commercial motor
vehicle transporting an empty storage container tank, not designed for
transportation, with a rated capacity of 1,000 gallons or more that is
temporarily attached to a flatbed trailer is not considered a tank
vehicle.
* * * * *
Third party skills test examiner means a person employed by a third
party tester who is authorized by the State to administer the CDL
skills tests specified in subparts G and H of this part.
Third party tester means a person (including, but not limited to,
another State, a motor carrier, a private driver training facility or
other private institution, or a department, agency or instrumentality
of a local government) authorized by the State to employ skills test
examiners to administer the CDL skills tests specified in subparts G
and H of this part.
United States means the 50 States and the District of Columbia.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec. 383.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.23 Commercial driver's license.
(a) General rule. (1) No person shall operate a commercial motor
vehicle unless such person has taken and passed written and driving
tests for a
[[Page 26879]]
CLP or CDL that meet the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G,
and H of this part for the commercial motor vehicle that person
operates or expects to operate.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person
may legally operate a CMV unless such person possesses a CDL which
meets the standards contained in subpart J of this part, issued by his/
her State or jurisdiction of domicile.
(b) Exception. (1) If a CMV operator is not domiciled in a foreign
jurisdiction that the Administrator has determined tests drivers and
issues CDLs in accordance with, or under standards similar to, the
standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of this part,\1\ the person
may obtain a Non-domiciled CLP or Non-domiciled CDL from a State that
does comply with the testing and licensing standards contained in such
subparts F, G, and H of this part, so long as that person meets the
requirements of Sec. 383.71(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Effective December 29, 1988, the Administrator determined
that commercial driver's licenses issued by Canadian Provinces and
Territories in conformity with the Canadian National Safety Code are
in accordance with the standards of this part. Effective November
21, 1991, the Administrator determined that the new Licencias
Federales de Conductor issued by the United Mexican States are in
accordance with the standards of this part. Therefore, under the
single license provision of Sec. 383.21, a driver holding a
commercial driver's license issued under the Canadian National
Safety Code or a new Licencia Federal de Conductor issued by Mexico
is prohibited from obtaining a non-domiciled CDL, or any other type
of driver's license, from a State or other jurisdiction in the
United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) If an individual is domiciled in a State while that State is
prohibited from issuing CDLs in accordance with Sec. 384.405 of this
subchapter, that individual is eligible to obtain a Non-domiciled CLP
or Non-domiciled CDL from any State that elects to issue a Non-
domiciled CDL and which complies with the testing and licensing
standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of this part, so long as
that person meets the requirements of Sec. 383.71(f).
(3) If an individual possesses a CLP, as defined in Sec. 383.5,
the individual is authorized to operate a class of CMV as provided by
the CLP in accordance with Sec. 383.25.
0
4. Add Sec. 383.25 to subpart B to read as follows:
Sec. 383.25 Commercial learner's permit (CLP).
(a) A CLP is considered a valid CDL for purposes of behind-the-
wheel training on public roads or highways, if all of the following
minimum conditions are met:
(1) The CLP holder is at all times accompanied by the holder of a
valid CDL who has the proper CDL group and endorsement(s) necessary to
operate the CMV. The CDL holder must at all times be physically present
in the front seat of the vehicle next to the CLP holder or, in the case
of a passenger vehicle, directly behind or in the first row behind the
driver and must have the CLP holder under observation and direct
supervision.
(2) The CLP holder holds a valid driver's license issued by the
same jurisdiction that issued the CLP.
(3) The CLP holder must have taken and passed a general knowledge
test that meets the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G, and H
of this part for the commercial motor vehicle that person operates or
expects to operate.
(4) The CLP holder must be 18 years of age or older.
(5) Endorsements:
(i) A CLP holder with a passenger (P) endorsement must have taken
and passed the P endorsement knowledge test. A CLP holder with a P
endorsement is prohibited from operating a CMV carrying passengers,
other than Federal/State auditors and inspectors, test examiners, other
trainees, and the CDL holder accompanying the CLP holder as prescribed
by paragraph (a)(1) of this section. The P endorsement must be class
specific.
(ii) A CLP holder with a school bus (S) endorsement must have taken
and passed the S endorsement knowledge test. A CLP holder with an S
endorsement is prohibited from operating a school bus with passengers
other than Federal/State auditors and inspectors, test examiners, other
trainees, and the CDL holder accompanying the CLP holder as prescribed
by paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(iii) A CLP holder with a tank vehicle (N) endorsement must have
taken and passed the N endorsement knowledge test. A CLP holder with an
N endorsement may only operate an empty tank vehicle and is prohibited
from operating any tank vehicle that previously contained hazardous
materials that has not been purged of any residue.
(iv) All other Federal endorsements are prohibited on a CLP.
(6) The CLP holder does not operate a commercial motor vehicle
transporting hazardous materials as defined in Sec. 383.5.
(b) The CLP must be a separate document from the CDL or non-CDL.
(c) The CLP must be valid for no more than 180 days from the date
of issuance. The State may renew the CLP for an additional 180 days
without requiring the CLP holder to retake the general and endorsement
knowledge tests.
(d) The issuance of a CLP is a precondition to the initial issuance
of a CDL. The issuance of a CLP is also a precondition to the upgrade
of a CDL if the upgrade requires a skills test.
(e) The CLP holder is not eligible to take the CDL skills test in
the first 14 days after initial issuance of the CLP.
0
5. Revise Sec. 383.37 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.37 Employer responsibilities.
No employer may knowingly allow, require, permit, or authorize a
driver to operate a CMV in the United States in any of the following
circumstances:
(a) During any period in which the driver does not have a current
CLP or CDL or does not have a CLP or CDL with the proper class or
endorsements. An employer may not use a driver to operate a CMV who
violates any restriction on the driver's CLP or CDL.
(b) During any period in which the driver has a CLP or CDL
disqualified by a State, has lost the right to operate a CMV in a
State, or has been disqualified from operating a CMV.
(c) During any period in which the driver has more than one CLP or
CDL.
(d) During any period in which the driver, or the CMV he/she is
driving, or the motor carrier operation, is subject to an out-of-
service order.
(e) In violation of a Federal, State, or local law or regulation
pertaining to railroad-highway grade crossings.
0
6. In Sec. 383.51:
0
a. Revise paragraph (a);
0
b. Revise paragraph (b) introductory text and the column headings for
Table 1;
0
c. Revise paragraph (c) introductory text and the column headings for
Table 2;
0
d. Revise paragraph (d) introductory text and the column headings for
Table 3; and
0
e. Revise paragraph (e) introductory text and the column headings for
Table 4.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 383.51 Disqualification of drivers.
(a) General. (1) A person required to have a CLP or CDL who is
disqualified must not drive a CMV.
(2) An employer must not knowingly allow, require, permit, or
authorize a driver who is disqualified to drive a CMV.
(3) A holder of a CLP or CDL is subject to disqualification
sanctions designated in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, if the
holder drives a CMV or non-CMV and is convicted of the violations
listed in those paragraphs.
(4) Determining first and subsequent violations. For purposes of
determining
[[Page 26880]]
first and subsequent violations of the offenses specified in this
subpart, each conviction for any offense listed in Tables 1 through 4
to this section resulting from a separate incident, whether committed
in a CMV or non-CMV, must be counted.
(5) The disqualification period must be in addition to any other
previous periods of disqualification.
(6) Reinstatement after lifetime disqualification. A State may
reinstate any driver disqualified for life for offenses described in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (8) of this section (Table 1 to Sec. 383.51)
after 10 years, if that person has voluntarily entered and successfully
completed an appropriate rehabilitation program approved by the State.
Any person who has been reinstated in accordance with this provision
and who is subsequently convicted of a disqualifying offense described
in paragraphs (b)(1) through (8) of this section (Table 1 to Sec.
383.51) must not be reinstated.
(b) Disqualification for major offenses. Table 1 to Sec. 383.51
contains a list of the offenses and periods for which a person who is
required to have a CLP or CDL is disqualified, depending upon the type
of vehicle the driver is operating at the time of the violation, as
follows:
Table 1 to Sec. 383.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a driver For a first For a first For a first For a second For a second
operates a motor conviction or conviction or conviction or conviction or conviction or
vehicle and is refusal to be refusal to be refusal to be refusal to be refusal to be
convicted of: tested while tested while tested while tested in a tested in a
operating a CMV, operating a non- operating a CMV separate separate
a person CMV, a CLP or transporting incident of any incident of any
required to have CDL holder must hazardous combination of combination of
a CLP or CDL and be disqualified materials offenses in this offenses in this
a CLP or CDL from operating a required to be Table while Table while
holder must be CMV for * * * placarded under operating a CMV, operating a non-
disqualified the Hazardous a person CMV, a CLP or
from operating a Materials required to have CDL holder must
CMV for * * * Regulations (49 a CLP or CDL and be disqualified
CFR part 172, a CLP or CDL from operating a
subpart F), a holder must be CMV for * * *
person required disqualified
to have a CLP or from operating a
CDL and a CLP or CMV for * * *
CDL holder must
be disqualified
from operating a
CMV for * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(c) Disqualification for serious traffic violations. Table 2 to
Sec. 383.51 contains a list of the offenses and the periods for which
a person who is required to have a CLP or CDL is disqualified,
depending upon the type of vehicle the driver is operating at the time
of the violation, as follows:
Table 2 to Sec. 383.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the driver For a second For a second For a third or For a third or
operates a motor conviction of any conviction of any subsequent subsequent
vehicle and is combination of combination of conviction of any conviction of any
convicted of: offenses in this offenses in this combination of combination of
Table in a separate Table in a separate offenses in this offenses in this
incident within a 3- incident within a 3- Table in a separate Table in a separate
year period while year period while incident within a 3- incident within a 3-
operating a CMV, a operating a non-CMV, year period while year period while
person required to a CLP or CDL holder operating a CMV, a operating a non-
have a CLP or CDL must be disqualified person required to CMV, a CLP or CDL
and a CLP or CDL from operating a have a CLP or CDL holder must be
holder must be CMV, if the and a CLP or CDL disqualified from
disqualified from conviction results holder must be operating a CMV, if
operating a CMV for in the revocation, disqualified from the conviction
* * * cancellation, or operating a CMV for results in the
suspension of the * * * revocation,
CLP or CDL holder's cancellation, or
license or non-CMV suspension of the
driving privileges, CLP or CDL holder's
for * * * license or non-CMV
driving privileges,
for * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(d) Disqualification for railroad-highway grade crossing offenses.
Table 3 to Sec. 383.51 contains a list of the offenses and the periods
for which a person who is required to have a CLP or CDL is
disqualified, when the driver is operating a CMV at the time of the
violation, as follows:
[[Page 26881]]
Table 3 to Sec. 383.51
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the driver is For a first For a second For a third or
convicted of conviction a conviction of subsequent
operating a CMV person required any combination conviction of
in violation of to have a CLP or of offenses in any combination
a Federal, State CDL and a CLP or this Table in a of offenses in
or local law CDL holder must separate this Table in a
because * * * be disqualified incident within separate
from operating a a 3-year incident within
CMV for * * * period, a a 3-year
person required period, a
to have a CLP person required
or CDL and a to have a CLP
CLP or CDL or CDL and a
holder must be CLP or CDL
disqualified holder must be
from operating disqualified
a CMV for * * * from operating
a CMV for * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) Disqualification for violating out-of-service orders. Table 4
to Sec. 383.51 contains a list of the offenses and periods for which a
person who is required to have a CLP or CDL is disqualified when the
driver is operating a CMV at the time of the violation, as follows:
Table 4 to Sec. 383.51
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the driver For a first For a second For a third or
operates a CMV conviction while conviction in a subsequent
and is convicted operating a CMV, separate conviction in a
of * * * a person incident within separate
required to have a 10-year incident within
a CLP or CDL and period while a 10-year
a CLP or CDL operating a period while
holder must be CMV, a person operating a
disqualified required to CMV, a person
from operating a have a CLP or required to
CMV for * * * CDL and a CLP have a CLP or
or CDL holder CDL and a CLP
must be or CDL holder
disqualified must be
from operating disqualified
a CMV for * * * from operating
a CMV for * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
7. Revise Sec. 383.71 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.71 Driver application and certification procedures.
(a) Commercial Learner's Permit. Prior to obtaining a CLP, a person
must meet the following requirements:
(1) Commercial learner's permit applications submitted prior to
July 8, 2014. CLPs issued prior to July 8, 2014 for limited time
periods according to State requirements, shall be considered valid
commercial drivers' licenses for purposes of behind-the-wheel training
on public roads or highways, if the following minimum conditions are
met:
(i) The learner's permit holder is at all times accompanied by the
holder of a valid CDL;
(ii) He/she either holds a valid automobile driver's license, or
has passed such vision, sign/symbol, and knowledge tests as the State
issuing the learner's permit ordinarily administers to applicants for
automotive drivers' licenses; and
(iii) He/she does not operate a commercial motor vehicle
transporting hazardous materials as defined in Sec. 383.5.
(2) Commercial learner's permit applications submitted on or after
July 8, 2014. Any person applying for a CLP on or after July 8, 2014
must meet the following conditions:
(i) The person must be 18 years of age or older and provide proof
of his/her age.
(ii) The person must have taken and passed a general knowledge test
that meets the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of
this part for the commercial motor vehicle group that person operates
or expects to operate.
(iii) The person must certify that he/she is not subject to any
disqualification under Sec. 383.51, or any license disqualification
under State law, and that he/she does not have a driver's license from
more than one State or jurisdiction.
(iv) The person must provide to the State of issuance the
information required to be included on the CLP as specified in subpart
J of this part.
(v) The person must provide to the State proof of citizenship or
lawful permanent residency as specified in Table 1 of this section or
obtain a Non-domiciled CLP as specified in paragraph (f) of this
section.
(vi) The person must provide proof that the State to which
application is made is his/her State of domicile, as the term is
defined in Sec. 383.5. Acceptable proof of domicile is a document with
the person's name and residential address within the State, such as a
government issued tax form.
(vii) The person must provide the names of all States where the
applicant has been licensed to drive any type of motor vehicle during
the previous 10 years.
(viii) A person seeking a passenger (P), school bus (S) or tank
vehicle (N) endorsement must have taken and passed the endorsement
knowledge test for the specific endorsement.
(ix) The person must provide the State the certification contained
in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(b) Initial Commercial Driver's License. Prior to obtaining a CDL,
a person must meet all of the following requirements:
(1)(i) Initial Commercial Driver's License applications submitted
prior to January 30, 2012. Any person applying for a CDL prior to
January 30, 2012, must meet the requirements set forth in paragraphs
(b)(2) through (10) of this section, and make the following applicable
certification in paragraph (b)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section:
(A) A person who operates or expects to operate in interstate or
foreign commerce, or is otherwise subject to 49 CFR part 391, must
certify that he/she meets the qualification requirements contained in
part 391 of this title; or
(B) A person who operates or expects to operate in interstate
commerce, but is not subject to part 391 due to an exception under
Sec. 390.3(f) or an exemption under Sec. 391.2, must certify that he/
she is not subject to part 391.
(C) A person who operates or expects to operate entirely in
intrastate commerce and is not subject to part 391, is subject to State
driver qualification requirements and must certify that he/she is not
subject to part 391.
(ii) Initial Commercial Driver's License applications submitted on
or after January 30, 2012. Any person applying for a CDL on or after
January 30, 2012, must meet the requirements set forth in paragraphs
(b)(2) through (10), and (h) of this section, and make one of the
following applicable certifications in paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A), (B),
(C), or (D) of this section:
[[Page 26882]]
(A) Non-excepted interstate. A person must certify that he/she
operates or expects to operate in interstate commerce, is both subject
to and meets the qualification requirements under 49 CFR part 391, and
is required to obtain a medical examiner's certificate by Sec. 391.45
of this chapter;
(B) Excepted interstate. A person must certify that he/she operates
or expects to operate in interstate commerce, but engages exclusively
in transportation or operations excepted under 49 CFR 390.3(f), 391.2,
391.68, or 398.3 from all or parts of the qualification requirements of
49 CFR part 391, and is therefore not required to obtain a medical
examiner's certificate by 49 CFR 391.45 of this chapter;
(C) Non-excepted intrastate. A person must certify that he/she
operates only in intrastate commerce and therefore is subject to State
driver qualification requirements; or
(D) Excepted intrastate. A person must certify that he/she operates
in intrastate commerce, but engages exclusively in transportation or
operations excepted from all or parts of the State driver qualification
requirements.
(2) The person must pass a driving or skills test in accordance
with the standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of this part taken
in a motor vehicle that is representative of the type of motor vehicle
the person operates or expects to operate; or provide evidence that he/
she has successfully passed a driving test administered by an
authorized third party.
(3) The person must certify that the motor vehicle in which the
person takes the driving skills test is representative of the type of
motor vehicle that person operates or expects to operate.
(4) The person must provide the State the information required to
be included on the CDL as specified in subpart J of this part.
(5) The person must certify that he/she is not subject to any
disqualification under Sec. 383.51, or any license disqualification
under State law, and that he/she does not have a driver's license from
more than one State or jurisdiction.
(6) The person must surrender his/her non-CDL driver's licenses and
CLP to the State.
(7) The person must provide the names of all States where he/she
has previously been licensed to drive any type of motor vehicle during
the previous 10 years.
(8) If the person is applying for a hazardous materials
endorsement, he/she must comply with Transportation Security
Administration requirements codified in 49 CFR part 1572. A lawful
permanent resident of the United States requesting a hazardous
materials endorsement must additionally provide his/her U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Alien registration number.
(9) The person must provide proof of citizenship or lawful
permanent residency as specified in Table 1 of this section, or be
registered under paragraph (f) of this section.
Table 1 to Sec. 383.71--List of Acceptable Proofs of Citizenship or
Lawful Permanent Residency
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status Proof of status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Citizen................. Valid, unexpired U.S. Passport.
Certified copy of a birth
certificate filed with a State Office of
Vital Statistics or equivalent agency in
the individual's State of birth, Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa or the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.
Consular Report of Birth Abroad
(CRBA) issued by the U.S. Department of
State.
Certificate of Naturalization
issued by the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security (DHS).
Certificate of Citizenship
issued by DHS.
Lawful Permanent Resident.... Valid, unexpired Permanent
Resident Card, issued by USCIS or INS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(10) The person must provide proof that the State to which
application is made is his/her State of domicile, as the term is
defined in Sec. 383.5. Acceptable proof of domicile is a document with
the person's name and residential address within the State, such as a
government issued tax form.
(c) License transfer. When applying to transfer a CDL from one
State of domicile to a new State of domicile, an applicant must apply
for a CDL from the new State of domicile within no more than 30 days
after establishing his/her new domicile. The applicant must:
(1) Provide to the new State of domicile the certifications
contained in paragraphs (b)(1) and (5) of this section;
(2) Provide to the new State of domicile updated information as
specified in subpart J of this part;
(3) If the applicant wishes to retain a hazardous materials
endorsement, he/she must comply with the requirements specified in
paragraph (b)(8) of this section and State requirements as specified in
Sec. 383.73(c)(4);
(4) Surrender the CDL from the old State of domicile to the new
State of domicile; and
(5) Provide the names of all States where the applicant has
previously been licensed to drive any type of motor vehicle during the
previous 10 years.
(6) Provide to the State proof of citizenship or lawful permanent
residency as specified in Table 1 of this section, or be registered
under paragraph (f) of this section.
(7) Provide proof to the State that this is his/her State of
domicile, as the term is defined in Sec. 383.5. Acceptable proof of
domicile is a document with the person's name and residential address
within the State, such as a government issued tax form.
(d) License renewal. When applying for a renewal of a CDL, all
applicants must:
(1) Provide to the State certifications contained in paragraphs
(b)(1) and (5) of this section;
(2) Provide to the State updated information as specified in
subpart J of this part; and
(3) If a person wishes to retain a hazardous materials endorsement,
he/she must comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (b)(8)
of this section and pass the test specified in Sec. 383.121 for such
endorsement.
(4) Provide the names of all States where the applicant has
previously been licensed to drive any type of motor vehicle during the
previous 10 years.
(5) Provide to the State proof of citizenship or lawful permanent
residency as specified in Table 1 of this section, or be registered
under paragraph (f) of this section.
(6) Provide proof to the State that this is his/her State of
domicile, as the term is defined in Sec. 383.5. Acceptable proof of
domicile is a document, such as a government issued tax form, with the
person's name and residential address within the State.
(e) License upgrades. When applying for a CDL or an endorsement
[[Page 26883]]
authorizing the operation of a CMV not covered by the current CDL, all
applicants must:
(1) Provide the certifications specified in paragraph (b) of this
section;
(2) Pass all the knowledge tests in accordance with the standards
contained in subparts F, G, and H of this part and all the skills tests
specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section for the new vehicle group
and/or different endorsements;
(3) Comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (b)(8) of
this section to obtain a hazardous materials endorsement; and
(4) Surrender the previous CDL.
(f) Non-domiciled CLP and CDL. (1) A person must obtain a Non-
domiciled CLP or CDL:
(i) If the applicant is domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, as
defined in Sec. 383.5, and the Administrator has not determined that
the commercial motor vehicle operator testing and licensing standards
of that jurisdiction meet the standards contained in subparts G and H
of this part.
(ii) If the applicant is domiciled in a State that is prohibited
from issuing CLPs and CDLs in accordance with Sec. 384.405 of this
subchapter. That person is eligible to obtain a Non-domiciled CLP or
CDL from any State that elects to issue a Non-domiciled CLP or CDL and
that complies with the testing and licensing standards contained in
subparts F, G, and H of this part.
(2) An applicant for a Non-domiciled CLP and CDL must do both of
the following:
(i) Complete the requirements to obtain a CLP contained in
paragraph (a) of this section or a CDL contained in paragraph (b) of
this section. Exception: An applicant domiciled in a foreign
jurisdiction must provide an unexpired employment authorization
document (EAD) issued by USCIS or an unexpired foreign passport
accompanied by an approved I-94 form documenting the applicant's most
recent admittance into the United States. No proof of domicile is
required.
(ii) After receipt of the Non-domiciled CLP or CDL, and for as long
as it is valid, notify the State which issued the Non-domiciled CLP or
CDL of any adverse action taken by any jurisdiction or governmental
agency, foreign or domestic, against his/her driving privileges. Such
adverse actions include, but are not be limited to, license
disqualification or disqualification from operating a commercial motor
vehicle for the convictions described in Sec. 383.51. Notifications
must be made within the time periods specified in Sec. 383.33.
(3) An applicant for a Non-domiciled CLP or CDL is not required to
surrender his/her foreign license.
(g) Existing CLP and CDL Holder's Self-Certification. Every person
who holds a CLP or CDL must provide to the State on or after January
30, 2012, but not later than January 30, 2014, the certification
contained in Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii).
(h) Medical Certification Documentation Required by the State. An
applicant or CLP or CDL holder who certifies to non-excepted,
interstate driving operations according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A)
must comply with applicable requirements in paragraphs (h)(1) through
(3) of this section:
(1) New CLP and CDL applicants. After January 30, 2012, a new CLP
or CDL applicant who certifies that he/she will operate CMVs in non-
excepted, interstate commerce must provide the State with an original
or copy (as required by the State) of a medical examiner's certificate
prepared by a medical examiner, as defined in Sec. 390.5 of this
chapter, and the State will post a certification status of
``certified'' on the Commercial Driver's License Information System
(CDLIS) driver record for the driver;
(2) Existing CLP and CDL holders. By January 30, 2014, provide the
State with an original or copy (as required by the State) of a current
medical examiner's certificate prepared by a medical examiner, as
defined in 49 CFR 390.5, and the State will post a certification status
of ``certified'' on CDLIS driver record for the driver. If the non-
excepted, interstate CLP or CDL holder fails to provide the State with
a current medical examiner's certificate, the State will post a
certification status of ``not-certified'' in the CDLIS driver record
for the driver, and initiate a CLP or CDL downgrade following State
procedures in accordance with section 383.73(j)(4); and
(3) Maintaining the medical certification status of ``certified.''
In order to maintain a medical certification status of ``certified,''
after January 30, 2012, a CLP or CDL holder who certifies that he/she
will operate CMVs in non-excepted, interstate commerce must provide the
State with an original or copy (as required by the State) of each
subsequently issued medical examiner's certificate.
0
8. Revise Sec. 383.72 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.72 Implied consent to alcohol testing.
Any person who holds a CLP or CDL or is required to hold a CLP or
CDL is considered to have consented to such testing as is required by
any State or jurisdiction in the enforcement of Sec. Sec. 383.51(b),
Table 1, item (4) and 392.5(a)(2) of this subchapter. Consent is
implied by driving a commercial motor vehicle.
0
9. Revise Sec. 383.73 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.73 State procedures.
(a) Commercial Learner's Permit. (1) Prior to July 8, 2014. When
issuing a CLP to a person prior to July 8, 2014, a State must meet the
requirements in Sec. 383.71(a)(1):
(2) On or after July 8, 2014. Prior to issuing a CLP to a person on
or after July 8, 2014, a State must:
(i) Require the applicant to make the certifications, pass the
tests, and provide the information as described in Sec. 383.71(a)(2);
(ii) Initiate and complete a check of the applicant's driving
record as described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(iii) Make a CLP valid for no more than 180 days from the date of
issuance and provide for renewal of a CLP for no more than an
additional 180 days without the CLP holder having to retake the general
and endorsement knowledge tests;
(iv) Allow only a group-specific passenger (P) and school bus (S)
endorsement and tank vehicle (N) endorsement on a CLP, provided the
applicant has taken and passed the knowledge test for the specified
endorsement. All other Federal endorsements are prohibited on a CLP;
and
(v) Complete the Social Security Number verification required by
paragraph (g) of this section.
(vi) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(a)(2)(vi).
(vii) Beginning January 30, 2012, for drivers who certified their
type of driving according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) (non-excepted
interstate) and, if the CLP applicant submits a current medical
examiner's certificate, date-stamp the medical examiner's certificate,
and post all required information from the medical examiner's
certificate to the CDLIS driver record in accordance with paragraph (o)
of this section.
(b) Initial CDL. Prior to issuing a CDL to a person, a State must:
(1) Require the driver applicant to certify, pass tests, and
provide information as described in Sec. 383.71(b);
(2) Check that the vehicle in which the applicant takes his/her
test is
[[Page 26884]]
representative of the vehicle group the applicant has certified that
he/she operates or expects to operate;
(3) Initiate and complete a check of the applicant's driving record
to ensure that the person is not subject to any disqualification under
Sec. 383.51, or any license disqualification under State law, and that
the person does not have a driver's license from more than one State or
jurisdiction. The record check must include, but is not limited to, the
following:
(i) A check of the applicant's driving record as maintained by his/
her current State of licensure, if any;
(ii) A check with the CDLIS to determine whether the driver
applicant already has been issued a CDL, whether the applicant's
license has been disqualified, or if the applicant has been
disqualified from operating a commercial motor vehicle;
(iii) A check with the Problem Driver Pointer System (PDPS) to
determine whether the driver applicant has:
(A) Been disqualified from operating a motor vehicle (other than a
commercial motor vehicle);
(B) Had a license (other than CDL) disqualified for cause in the 3-
year period ending on the date of application; or
(C) Been convicted of any offenses contained in 49 U.S.C.
30304(a)(3);
(iv) A request for the applicant's complete driving record from all
States where the applicant was previously licensed over the last 10
years to drive any type of motor vehicle. Exception: A State is only
required to make the request for the complete driving record specified
in this paragraph for initial issuance of a CLP, transfer of CDL from
another State or for drivers renewing a CDL for the first time after
September 30, 2002, provided a notation is made on the driver's record
confirming that the driver record check required by this paragraph has
been made and noting the date it was done;
(v) Beginning January 30, 2012, a check that the medical
certification status of a driver that self-certified according to Sec.
383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) of this chapter (non-excepted interstate) is
``certified;''
(4) Require the driver applicant to surrender his/her non-CDL
driver's license and CLP;
(5) Beginning January 30, 2012, for drivers who certified their
type of driving according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) (non-excepted
interstate) and, if the CDL driver submits a current medical examiner's
certificate, date-stamp the medical examiner's certificate, and post
all required information from the medical examiner's certificate to the
CDLIS driver record in accordance with paragraph (o) of this section.
(6) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10). Exception: A State is only required to check the proof
of citizenship or legal presence specified in this paragraph for
initial issuance of a CLP or Non-domiciled CDL, transfer of CDL from
another State or for drivers renewing a CDL or Non-domiciled CDL for
the first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or legal
presence check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done;
(7) If not previously done, complete the Social Security Number
verification required by paragraph (g) of this section;
(8) For persons applying for a hazardous materials endorsement,
require compliance with the standards for such endorsement specified in
Sec. Sec. 383.71(b)(8) and 383.141; and
(9) Make the CDL valid for no more than 8 years from the date of
issuance.
(c) License transfers. Prior to issuing a CDL to a person who has a
CDL from another State, a State must:
(1) Require the driver applicant to make the certifications
contained in Sec. 383.71(b)(1) and (5);
(2) Complete a check of the driver applicant's record as contained
in paragraph (b)(3) of this section;
(3) Request and receive updates of information specified in subpart
J of this part;
(4) If such applicant wishes to retain a hazardous materials
endorsement, require compliance with standards for such endorsement
specified in Sec. Sec. 383.71(b)(8) and 383.141 and ensure that the
driver has, within the 2 years preceding the transfer, either:
(i) Passed the test for such endorsement specified in Sec.
383.121; or
(ii) Successfully completed a hazardous materials test or training
that is given by a third party and that is deemed by the State to
substantially cover the same knowledge base as that described in Sec.
383.121;
(5) If not previously done, complete the Social Security Number
verification required by paragraph (g) of this section;
(6) Require the applicant to surrender the CDL issued by the
applicant's previous State of domicile;
(7) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10). Exception: A State is only required to check the proof
of citizenship or legal presence specified in this paragraph for
initial issuance of a CLP or Non-domiciled CDL, transfer of CDL from
another State or for drivers renewing a CDL or Non-domiciled CDL for
the first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or legal
presence check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done;
(8) Beginning January 30, 2012, verify from the CDLIS driver record
that the medical certification status of driver is ``certified'' for
those who certified according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A). Exception:
A driver who certified according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) that he/
she plans to operate in non-excepted interstate commerce may present a
current medical examiner's certificate issued prior to January 30,
2012. The medical examiner's certificate provided by the driver must be
posted to the CDLIS driver record in accordance with paragraph (o) of
this section and:
(9) Make the CDL valid for no more than 8 years from the date of
issuance.
(d) License Renewals. Prior to renewing any CDL a State must:
(1) Require the driver applicant to make the certifications
contained in Sec. 383.71(b);
(2) Complete a check of the driver applicant's record as contained
in paragraph (b)(3) of this section;
(3) Request and receive updates of information specified in subpart
J of this part;
(4) If such applicant wishes to retain a hazardous materials
endorsement, require the driver to pass the test specified in Sec.
383.121 and comply with the standards specified in Sec. Sec.
383.71(b)(8) and 383.141 for such endorsement;
(5) If not previously done, complete the Social Security Number
verification required by paragraph (g) of this section;
(6) Make the renewal of the CDL valid for no more than 8 years from
the date of issuance;
(7) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10); and
(8) Beginning January 30, 2012, verify from the CDLIS driver record
that the medical certification status is ``certified'' for drivers who
self-certified according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A). Exception: A
driver who certified according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) may present
a current medical examiner's certificate issued prior to January 30,
2012. The medical examiner's certificate provided
[[Page 26885]]
by the driver must be posted to the CDLIS driver record in accordance
with paragraph (o) of this section.
(e) License upgrades. Prior to issuing an upgrade of a CDL, a State
must:
(1) Require such driver applicant to provide certifications, pass
tests, and meet applicable hazardous materials standards specified in
Sec. 383.71(e);
(2) Complete a check of the driver applicant's record as described
in paragraph (b)(3) of this section;
(3) If not previously done, complete the Social Security Number
verification required by paragraph (g) of this section;
(4) Require the driver applicant to surrender his/her previous CDL;
(5) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10);
(6) Beginning January 30, 2012, verify from the CDLIS driver record
that the medical certification status is ``certified'' for drivers who
self-certified according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A). Exception: A
driver who certified according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) may present
a current medical examiner's certificate issued prior to January 30,
2012. The medical examiner's certificate provided by the driver must be
posted to the CDLIS driver record in accordance with paragraph (o) of
this section and:
(7) Make the CDL valid for no more than 8 years from the date of
issuance.
(f) Non-domiciled CLP and CDL. (1) A State may only issue a Non-
domiciled CLP or CDL to a person who meets one of the circumstances
described in Sec. 383.71(f)(1).
(2) State procedures for the issuance of a non-domiciled CLP and
CDL, for any modifications thereto, and for notifications to the CDLIS
must at a minimum be identical to those pertaining to any other CLP or
CDL, with the following exceptions:
(i) If the applicant is requesting a transfer of his/her Non-
domiciled CDL, the State must obtain the Non-domiciled CDL currently
held by the applicant and issued by another State;
(ii) The State must add the word ``non-domiciled'' to the face of
the CLP or CDL, in accordance with Sec. 383.153(b); and
(iii) The State must have established, prior to issuing any Non-
domiciled CLP or CDL, the practical capability of disqualifying the
holder of any Non-domiciled CLP or CDL, by withdrawing or disqualifying
his/her Non-domiciled CLP or CDL as if the Non-domiciled CLP or CDL
were a CLP or CDL issued to a person domiciled in the State.
(3) The State must require compliance with the standards for
providing proof of legal presence specified in Sec. 383.71(b)(9) and
Sec. 383.71(f)(2)(i).
(g) Social Security Number verification. (1) Prior to issuing a CLP
or a CDL to a person the State must verify the name, date of birth, and
Social Security Number provided by the applicant with the information
on file with the Social Security Administration. The State is
prohibited from issuing, renewing, upgrading, or transferring a CLP or
CDL if the Social Security Administration database does not match the
applicant-provided data.
(2) Exception. A State is only required to perform the Social
Security Number verification specified in this paragraph for initial
issuance of a CLP, transfer of CDL from another State or for drivers
renewing a CDL for the first time after July 8, 2011 who have not
previously had their Social Security Number information verified,
provided a notation is made on the driver's record confirming that the
verification required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done.
(h) License issuance. After the State has completed the procedures
described in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section, as applicable,
it may issue a CLP or CDL to the driver applicant. The State must
notify the operator of the CDLIS of such issuance, transfer, renewal,
or upgrade within the 10-day period beginning on the date of license
issuance.
(i) Surrender procedure. A State may return a surrendered license
to a driver after physically marking it so that it cannot be mistaken
for a valid document. Simply punching a hole in the expiration date of
the document is insufficient. A document perforated with the word
``VOID'' is considered invalidated.
(j) Penalties for false information. If a State determines, in its
check of an applicant's license status and record prior to issuing a
CLP or CDL, or at any time after the CLP or CDL is issued, that the
applicant has falsified information contained in subpart J of this
part, in any of the certifications required in Sec. 383.71(b) or (g),
or in any of the documents required to be submitted by Sec. 383.71(h),
the State must at a minimum disqualify the person's CLP or CDL or his/
her pending application, or disqualify the person from operating a
commercial motor vehicle for a period of at least 60 consecutive days.
(k) Drivers convicted of fraud related to the testing and issuance
of a CLP or CDL. (1) The State must have policies in effect that
result, at a minimum, in the disqualification of the CLP or CDL of a
person who has been convicted of fraud related to the issuance of that
CLP or CDL. The application of a person so convicted who seeks to
renew, transfer, or upgrade the fraudulently obtained CLP or CDL must
also, at a minimum, be disqualified. The State must record any such
withdrawal in the person's driving record. The person may not reapply
for a new CDL for at least 1 year.
(2) If a State receives credible information that a CLP- or CDL-
holder is suspected, but has not been convicted, of fraud related to
the issuance of his/her CLP or CDL, the State must require the driver
to re-take the skills and/or knowledge tests. Within 30 days of
receiving notification from the State that re-testing is necessary, the
affected CLP- or CDL-holder must make an appointment or otherwise
schedule to take the next available test. If the CLP- or CDL-holder
fails to make an appointment within 30 days, the State must disqualify
his/her CLP or CDL. If the driver fails either the knowledge or skills
test or does not take the test, the State must disqualify his/her CLP
or CDL. Once a CLP- or CDL-holder's CLP or CDL has been disqualified,
he/she must reapply for a CLP or CDL under State procedures applicable
to all CLP and CDL applicants.
(l) Reciprocity. A State must allow any person who has a valid CLP,
CDL, Non-domiciled CLP, or Non-domiciled CDL and who is not
disqualified from operating a CMV, to operate a CMV in the State.
(m) Document verification. The State must require at least two
persons within the driver licensing agency to check and verify all
documents involved in the licensing process for the initial issuance,
renewal, upgrade, or transfer of a CLP or CDL. The documents being
checked and verified must include, at a minimum, those provided by the
applicant to prove legal presence and domicile, the information filled
out on the application form, and knowledge and skills test scores.
Exception: For offices with only one staff member, the documents must
be checked and verified by a supervisor before issuance or, when a
supervisor is not available, copies must be made of the documents used
to prove legal presence and domicile and a supervisor must verify the
documents and the filled out application form and test scores within
one business day of issuance of the CLP or CDL.
(n) Computer system controls. The State must establish computer
system controls that will:
[[Page 26886]]
(1) Prevent the issuance of an initial, renewed, upgraded, or
transferred CLP or CDL when the results of transactions indicate the
applicant is unqualified. These controls, at a minimum, must be
established for the following transactions: State, CDLIS, and PDPS
driver record checks; Social Security Number verification; and
knowledge and skills test scores verification.
(2) Suspend the issuance process whenever State, CDLIS, and/or PDPS
driver record checks return suspect results. The State must demonstrate
that it has a system to detect and prevent fraud when a driver record
check returns suspect results. At a minimum, the system must ensure
that:
(i) The results are not connected to a violation of any State or
local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than
parking, vehicle weight, or vehicle defect violations);
(ii) The name of the persons performing the record check and
authorizing the issuance, and the justification for the authorization
are documented by the State; and
(iii) The person performing the record check and the person
authorizing the issuance are not the same.
(o) Medical recordkeeping. (1) Status of CDL holder. Beginning
January 30, 2012, for each operator of a commercial motor vehicle
required to have a CLP or CDL, the current licensing State must:
(i) Post the driver's self-certification of type of driving under
Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii),
(ii) Retain the original or a copy of the medical certificate of
any driver required to provide documentation of physical qualification
for 3 years beyond the date the certificate was issued, and
(iii) Post the information from the medical examiner's certificate
within 10 calendar days to the CDLIS driver record, including:
(A) Medical examiner's name;
(B) Medical examiner's telephone number;
(C) Date of medical examiner's certificate issuance;
(D) Medical examiner's license number and the State that issued it;
(E) Medical examiner's National Registry identification number (if
the National Registry of Medical Examiners, mandated by 49 U.S.C.
31149(d), requires one);
(F) The indicator of medical certification status, i.e.,
``certified'' or ``not-certified'';
(G) Expiration date of the medical examiner's certificate;
(H) Existence of any medical variance on the medical certificate,
such as an exemption, Skill Performance Evaluation (SPE) certification,
or grandfather provisions;
(I) Any restrictions (e.g., corrective lenses, hearing aid,
required to have possession of an exemption letter or SPE certificate
while on-duty, etc.); and
(J) Date the medical examiner's certificate information was posted
to the CDLIS driver record.
(2) Status update. Beginning January 30, 2012, the State must,
within 10 calendar days of the driver's medical certification status
expiring or a medical variance expiring or being rescinded, update the
medical certification status of that driver as ``not-certified.''
(3) Variance update. Beginning January 30, 2012, within 10 calendar
days of receiving information from FMCSA regarding issuance or renewal
of a medical variance for a driver, the State must update the CDLIS
driver record to include the medical variance information provided by
FMCSA.
(4) Downgrade. (i) Beginning January 30, 2012, if a driver's
medical certification or medical variance expires, or FMCSA notifies
the State that a medical variance was removed or rescinded, the State
must:
(A) Notify the CLP or CDL holder of his/her CLP or CDL ``not-
certified'' medical certification status and that the CMV privileges
will be removed from the CLP or CDL unless the driver submits a current
medical certificate and/or medical variance, or changes his/her self-
certification to driving only in excepted or intrastate commerce (if
permitted by the State);
(B) Initiate established State procedures for downgrading the CLP
or CDL. The CLP or CDL downgrade must be completed and recorded within
60 days of the driver's medical certification status becoming ``not-
certified'' to operate a CMV.
(ii) Beginning January 30, 2014, if a driver fails to provide the
State with the certification contained in Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii), or a
current medical examiner's certificate if the driver self-certifies
according to Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) that he/she is operating in non-
excepted interstate commerce as required by Sec. 383.71(h), the State
must mark that CDLIS driver record as ``not-certified'' and initiate a
CLP or CDL downgrade following State procedures in accordance with
paragraph (o)(4)(i)(B) of this section.
(5) FMCSA Medical Programs is designated as the keeper of the list
of State contacts for receiving medical variance information from
FMCSA. Beginning January 30, 2012, States are responsible for insuring
their medical variance contact information is always up-to-date with
FMCSA's Medical Programs.
0
10. Revise Sec. 383.75 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.75 Third party testing.
(a) Third party tests. A State may authorize a third party tester
to administer the skills tests as specified in subparts G and H of this
part, if the following conditions are met:
(1) The skills tests given by the third party are the same as those
that would otherwise be given by the State using the same version of
the skills tests, the same written instructions for test applicants,
and the same scoring sheets as those prescribed in subparts G and H of
this part;
(2) The State must conduct an on-site inspection of each third
party tester at least once every 2 years, with a focus on examiners
with irregular results such as unusually high or low pass/fail rates;
(3) The State must issue the third party tester a CDL skills
testing certificate upon the execution of a third party skills testing
agreement.
(4) The State must issue each third party CDL skills test examiner
a skills testing certificate upon successful completion of a formal
skills test examiner training course prescribed in Sec. 384.228.
(5) The State must, at least once every 2 years, do one of the
following for each third party examiner:
(i) Have State employees covertly take the tests administered by
the third party as if the State employee were a test applicant;
(ii) Have State employees co-score along with the third party
examiner during CDL skills tests to compare pass/fail results; or
(iii) Re-test a sample of drivers who were examined by the third
party to compare pass/fail results;
(6) The State must take prompt and appropriate remedial action
against a third party tester that fails to comply with State or Federal
standards for the CDL testing program, or with any other terms of the
third party contract;
(7) A skills tester that is also a driver training school is
prohibited from administering a skills test to an applicant who was
trained by that training school. Exception: When the nearest
alternative third party tester or State skills testing facility is over
50 miles from the training school, the SDLA may allow the training
school to skills test the applicant it trained provided the individual
skills test examiner did not train the applicant; and
(8) The State has an agreement with the third party containing, at
a minimum, provisions that:
(i) Allow the FMCSA, or its representative, and the State to
conduct
[[Page 26887]]
random examinations, inspections, and audits of its records,
facilities, and operations without prior notice;
(ii) Require that all third party skills test examiners meet the
qualification and training standards of Sec. 384.228;
(iii) Allow the State to do any of the following:
(A) Have State employees covertly take the tests administered by
the third party as if the State employee were a test applicant;
(B) Have State employees co-score along with the third party
examiner during CDL skills tests to compare pass/fail results; or
(C) Have the State re-test a sample of drivers who were examined by
the third party;
(iv) Reserve unto the State the right to take prompt and
appropriate remedial action against a third party tester that fails to
comply with State or Federal standards for the CDL testing program, or
with any other terms of the third party contract;
(v) Require the third party tester to initiate and maintain a bond
in an amount determined by the State to be sufficient to pay for re-
testing drivers in the event that the third party or one or more of its
examiners is involved in fraudulent activities related to conducting
skills testing for applicants for a CDL.
(vi) Require the third party tester to use only CDL skills
examiners who have successfully completed a formal CDL skills test
examiner training course as prescribed by the State and have been
certified by the State as a CDL skills examiner qualified to administer
CDL skills tests;
(vii) Require the third party tester to use designated road test
routes that have been approved by the State;
(viii) Require the third party tester to submit a schedule of CDL
skills testing appointments to the State no later than two business
days prior to each test; and
(ix) Require the third party tester to maintain copies of the
following records at its principal place of business:
(A) A copy of the State certificate authorizing the third party
tester to administer a CDL skills testing program for the classes and
types of commercial motor vehicles listed;
(B) A copy of each third party examiner's State certificate
authorizing the third party examiner to administer CDL skills tests for
the classes and types of commercial motor vehicles listed;
(C) A copy of the current third party agreement;
(D) A copy of each completed CDL skills test scoring sheet for the
current year and the past two calendar years;
(E) A copy of the third party tester's State-approved road test
route(s); and
(F) A copy of each third party examiner's training record.
(b) Proof of testing by a third party. The third party tester must
notify the State driver licensing agency through secure electronic
means when a driver applicant passes skills tests administered by the
third party tester.
(c) Minimum number of tests conducted.
The State must revoke the skills testing certification of any
examiner who does not conduct skills test examinations of at least 10
different applicants per calendar year. Exception: Examiners who do not
meet the 10-test minimum must either take the refresher training
specified in Sec. 384.228 of this chapter or have a State examiner
ride along to observe the third party examiner successfully administer
at least one skills test.
0
11. Revise Sec. 383.77 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.77 Substitute for driving skills tests for drivers with
military CMV experience.
At the discretion of a State, the driving skills test as specified
in Sec. 383.113 may be waived for a CMV driver with military CMV
experience who is currently licensed at the time of his/her application
for a CDL, and substituted with an applicant's driving record in
combination with certain driving experience. The State shall impose
conditions and limitations to restrict the applicants from whom a State
may accept alternative requirements for the skills test described in
Sec. 383.113. Such conditions must require at least the following:
(a) An applicant must certify that, during the two-year period
immediately prior to applying for a CDL, he/she:
(1) Has not had more than one license (except for a military
license);
(2) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
(3) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec. 383.51(b);
(4) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec. 383.51(c);
and
(5) Has not had had any conviction for a violation of military,
State or local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other
than a parking violation) arising in connection with any traffic
accident, and has no record of an accident in which he/she was at
fault; and
(b) An applicant must provide evidence and certify that he/she:
(1) Is regularly employed or was regularly employed within the last
90 days in a military position requiring operation of a CMV;
(2) Was exempted from the CDL requirements in Sec. 383.3(c); and
(3) Was operating a vehicle representative of the CMV the driver
applicant operates or expects to operate, for at least the 2 years
immediately preceding discharge from the military.
0
12. Add Sec. 383.79 to subpart E to read as follows:
Sec. 383.79 Skills testing of out-of-State students.
(a) A State may administer its skills test, in accordance with
subparts F, G, and H of this part, to a person who has taken training
in that State and is to be licensed in another United States
jurisdiction (i.e., his/her State of domicile). Such test results must
be transmitted electronically directly from the testing State to the
licensing State in an efficient and secure manner.
(b) The State of domicile of a CDL applicant must accept the
results of a skills test administered to the applicant by any other
State, in accordance with subparts F, G, and H of this part, in
fulfillment of the applicant's testing requirements under Sec. 383.71,
and the State's test administration requirements under Sec. 383.73.
0
13. Amend Sec. 383.93 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 383.93 Endorsements.
(a) General. (1) In addition to passing the knowledge and skills
tests described in subpart G of this part, all persons who operate or
expect to operate the type(s) of motor vehicles described in paragraph
(b) of this section must pass specialized tests to obtain each
endorsement. The State shall issue CDL endorsements only to drivers who
successfully complete the tests.
(2) The only endorsements allowed on a CLP are the following:
(i) Passenger (P);
(ii) School bus (S); and
(iii) Tank vehicle (N).
(3) The State must use the codes listed in Sec. 383.153 when
placing endorsements on a CLP or CDL.
* * * * *
0
14. Revise Sec. 383.95 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.95 Restrictions.
(a) Air brake. (1) If an applicant either fails the air brake
component of the knowledge test, or performs the skills test in a
vehicle not equipped with air brakes, the State must indicate on the
CLP or CDL, if issued, that the person is restricted from operating a
CMV equipped with any type of air brakes.
(2) For the purposes of the skills test and the restriction, air
brakes include
[[Page 26888]]
any braking system operating fully or partially on the air brake
principle.
(b) Full air brake. (1) If an applicant performs the skills test in
a vehicle equipped with air over hydraulic brakes, the State must
indicate on the CDL, if issued, that the person is restricted from
operating a CMV equipped with any braking system operating fully on the
air brake principle.
(2) For the purposes of the skills test and the restriction, air
over hydraulic brakes includes any braking system operating partially
on the air brake and partially on the hydraulic brake principle.
(c) Manual transmission. (1) If an applicant performs the skills
test in a vehicle equipped with an automatic transmission, the State
must indicate on the CDL, if issued, that the person is restricted from
operating a CMV equipped with a manual transmission.
(2) For the purposes of the skills test and the restriction, an
automatic transmission includes any transmission other than a manual
transmission as defined in Sec. 383.5.
(d) Tractor-trailer. If an applicant performs the skills test in a
combination vehicle for a Group A CDL with the power unit and towed
unit connected with a pintle hook or other non-fifth wheel connection,
the State must indicate on the CDL, if issued, that the person is
restricted from operating a tractor-trailer combination connected by a
fifth wheel that requires a Group A CDL.
(e) Group A passenger vehicle. If an applicant applying for a
passenger endorsement performs the skills test in a passenger vehicle
requiring a Group B CDL, the State must indicate on the CDL, if issued,
that the person is restricted from operating a passenger vehicle
requiring a Group A CDL.
(f) Group A and B passenger vehicle. If an applicant applying for a
passenger endorsement performs the skills test in a passenger vehicle
requiring a Group C CDL, the State must indicate on the CDL, if issued,
that the person is restricted from operating a passenger vehicle
requiring a Group A or B CDL.
(g) Medical Variance Restrictions. If the State is notified
according to Sec. 383.73(o)(3) that the driver has been issued a
medical variance, the State must indicate the existence of such a
medical variance on the CDLIS driver record and the CDL document, if
issued, using the restriction code ``V'' to indicate there is
information about a medical variance on the CDLIS driver record. Note:
In accordance with the agreement between Canada and the United States
(see footnote to Sec. 391.41 of this chapter), drivers with a medical
variance restriction code on their CDL are restricted from operating a
CMV in the other country.
0
15. Revise Sec. 383.110 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.110 General requirement.
All drivers of CMVs must have the knowledge and skills necessary to
operate a CMV safely as contained in this subpart. The specific types
of items that a State must include in the knowledge and skills tests
that it administers to CDL applicants are included in this subpart.
0
16. Revise Sec. 383.111 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.111 Required knowledge.
(a) All CMV operators must have knowledge of the following 20
general areas:
(1) Safe operations regulations. Driver-related elements of the
regulations contained in parts 391, 392, 393, 395, 396, and 397 of this
subchapter, such as:
(i) Motor vehicle inspection, repair, and maintenance requirements;
(ii) Procedures for safe vehicle operations;
(iii) The effects of fatigue, poor vision, hearing impairment, and
general health upon safe commercial motor vehicle operation;
(iv) The types of motor vehicles and cargoes subject to the
requirements contained in part 397 of this subchapter; and
(v) The effects of alcohol and drug use upon safe commercial motor
vehicle operations.
(2) Safe vehicle control systems. The purpose and function of the
controls and instruments commonly found on CMVs.
(3) CMV safety control systems. (i) Proper use of the motor
vehicle's safety system, including lights, horns, side and rear-view
mirrors, proper mirror adjustments, fire extinguishers, symptoms of
improper operation revealed through instruments, motor vehicle
operation characteristics, and diagnosing malfunctions.
(ii) CMV drivers must have knowledge of the correct procedures
needed to use these safety systems in an emergency situation, e.g.,
skids and loss of brakes.
(4) Basic control. The proper procedures for performing various
basic maneuvers, including:
(i) Starting, warming up, and shutting down the engine;
(ii) Putting the vehicle in motion and stopping;
(iii) Backing in a straight line; and
(iv) Turning the vehicle, e.g., basic rules, off tracking, right/
left turns and right curves.
(5) Shifting. The basic shifting rules and terms for common
transmissions, including:
(i) Key elements of shifting, e.g., controls, when to shift, and
double clutching;
(ii) Shift patterns and procedures; and
(iii) Consequences of improper shifting.
(6) Backing. The procedures and rules for various backing
maneuvers, including:
(i) Backing principles and rules; and
(ii) Basic backing maneuvers, e.g., straight-line backing, and
backing on a curved path.
(7) Visual search. The importance of proper visual search, and
proper visual search methods, including:
(i) Seeing ahead and to the sides;
(ii) Use of mirrors; and
(iii) Seeing to the rear.
(8) Communication. The principles and procedures for proper
communications and the hazards of failure to signal properly,
including:
(i) Signaling intent, e.g., signaling when changing direction in
traffic;
(ii) Communicating presence, e.g., using horn or lights to signal
presence; and
(iii) Misuse of communications.
(9) Speed management. The importance of understanding the effects
of speed, including:
(i) Speed and stopping distance;
(ii) Speed and surface conditions;
(iii) Speed and the shape of the road;
(iv) Speed and visibility; and
(v) Speed and traffic flow.
(10) Space management. The procedures and techniques for
controlling the space around the vehicle, including:
(i) The importance of space management;
(ii) Space cushions, e.g., controlling space ahead/to the rear;
(iii) Space to the sides; and
(iv) Space for traffic gaps.
(11) Night operation. Preparations and procedures for night
driving, including:
(i) Night driving factors, e.g., driver factors (vision, glare,
fatigue, inexperience);
(ii) Roadway factors (low illumination, variation in illumination,
unfamiliarity with roads, other road users, especially drivers
exhibiting erratic or improper driving); and
(iii) Vehicle factors (headlights, auxiliary lights, turn signals,
windshields and mirrors).
(12) Extreme driving conditions. The basic information on operating
in
[[Page 26889]]
extreme driving conditions and the hazards encountered in such
conditions, including:
(i) Bad weather, e.g., snow, ice, sleet, high wind;
(ii) Hot weather; and
(iii) Mountain driving.
(13) Hazard perceptions. The basic information on hazard perception
and clues for recognition of hazards, including:
(i) Road characteristics; and
(ii) Road user activities.
(14) Emergency maneuvers. The basic information concerning when and
how to make emergency maneuvers, including:
(i) Evasive steering;
(ii) Emergency stop;
(iii) Off road recovery;
(iv) Brake failure; and
(v) Blowouts.
(15) Skid control and recovery. The information on the causes and
major types of skids, as well as the procedures for recovering from
skids.
(16) Relationship of cargo to vehicle control. The principles and
procedures for the proper handling of cargo, including:
(i) Consequences of improperly secured cargo, drivers'
responsibilities, and Federal/State and local regulations;
(ii) Principles of weight distribution; and
(iii) Principles and methods of cargo securement.
(17) Vehicle inspections. The objectives and proper procedures for
performing vehicle safety inspections, as follows:
(i) The importance of periodic inspection and repair to vehicle
safety.
(ii) The effect of undiscovered malfunctions upon safety.
(iii) What safety-related parts to look for when inspecting
vehicles, e.g., fluid leaks, interference with visibility, bad tires,
wheel and rim defects, braking system defects, steering system defects,
suspension system defects, exhaust system defects, coupling system
defects, and cargo problems.
(iv) Pre-trip/enroute/post-trip inspection procedures.
(v) Reporting findings.
(18) Hazardous materials. Knowledge of the following:
(i) What constitutes hazardous material requiring an endorsement to
transport;
(ii) Classes of hazardous materials;
(iii) Labeling/placarding requirements; and
(iv) Need for specialized training as a prerequisite to receiving
the endorsement and transporting hazardous cargoes.
(19) Mountain driving. Practices that are important when driving
upgrade and downgrade, including:
(i) Selecting a safe speed;
(ii) Selecting the right gear; and
(iii) Proper braking techniques.
(20) Fatigue and awareness. Practices that are important to staying
alert and safe while driving, including;
(i) Being prepared to drive;
(ii) What to do when driving to avoid fatigue;
(iii) What to do when sleepy while driving; and
(iv) What to do when becoming ill while driving.
(b) Air brakes. All CMV drivers operating vehicles equipped with
air brakes must have knowledge of the following 7 areas:
(1) General air brake system nomenclature;
(2) The dangers of contaminated air supply (dirt, moisture, and
oil);
(3) Implications of severed or disconnected air lines between the
power unit and the trailer(s);
(4) Implications of low air pressure readings;
(5) Procedures to conduct safe and accurate pre-trip inspections,
including knowledge about:
(i) Automatic fail-safe devices;
(ii) System monitoring devices; and
(iii) Low pressure warning alarms.
(6) Procedures for conducting en route and post-trip inspections of
air-actuated brake systems, including:
(i) Ability to detect defects that may cause the system to fail;
(ii) Tests that indicate the amount of air loss from the braking
system within a specified period, with and without the engine running;
and
(iii) Tests that indicate the pressure levels at which the low air
pressure warning devices and the tractor protection valve should
activate.
(7) General operating practices and procedures, including:
(i) Proper braking techniques;
(ii) Antilock brakes;
(iii) Emergency stops; and
(iv) Parking brake.
(c) Combination vehicles. All CMV drivers operating combination
vehicles must have knowledge of the following 3 areas:
(1) Coupling and uncoupling--The procedures for proper coupling and
uncoupling a tractor to a semi-trailer;
(2) Vehicle inspection--The objectives and proper procedures that
are unique for performing vehicle safety inspections on combination
vehicles; and
(3) General operating practices and procedures, including:
(i) Safely operating combination vehicles; and
(ii) Air brakes.
0
17. Revise Sec. 383.113 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.113 Required skills.
(a) Pre-trip vehicle inspection skills. Applicants for a CDL must
possess the following basic pre-trip vehicle inspection skills for the
vehicle class that the driver operates or expects to operate:
(1) All test vehicles. Applicants must be able to identify each
safety-related part on the vehicle and explain what needs to be
inspected to ensure a safe operating condition of each part, including:
(i) Engine compartment;
(ii) Cab/engine start;
(iii) Steering;
(iv) Suspension;
(v) Brakes;
(vi) Wheels;
(vii) Side of vehicle;
(viii) Rear of vehicle; and
(ix) Special features of tractor trailer, school bus, or coach/
transit bus, if this type of vehicle is being used for the test.
(2) Air brake equipped test vehicles. Applicants must demonstrate
the following skills with respect to inspection and operation of air
brakes:
(i) Locate and verbally identify air brake operating controls and
monitoring devices;
(ii) Determine the motor vehicle's brake system condition for
proper adjustments and that air system connections between motor
vehicles have been properly made and secured;
(iii) Inspect the low pressure warning device(s) to ensure that
they will activate in emergency situations;
(iv) With the engine running, make sure that the system maintains
an adequate supply of compressed air;
(v) Determine that required minimum air pressure build up time is
within acceptable limits and that required alarms and emergency devices
automatically deactivate at the proper pressure level; and
(vi) Operationally check the brake system for proper performance.
(b) Basic vehicle control skills. All applicants for a CDL must
possess and demonstrate the following basic motor vehicle control
skills for the vehicle class that the driver operates or expects to
operate:
(1) Ability to start, warm up, and shut down the engine;
(2) Ability to put the motor vehicle in motion and accelerate
smoothly, forward and backward;
(3) Ability to bring the motor vehicle to a smooth stop;
(4) Ability to back the motor vehicle in a straight line, and check
path and clearance while backing;
[[Page 26890]]
(5) Ability to position the motor vehicle to negotiate safely and
then make left and right turns;
(6) Ability to shift as required and select appropriate gear for
speed and highway conditions; and
(7) Ability to back along a curved path.
(c) Safe on-road driving skills. All applicants for a CDL must
possess and demonstrate the following safe on-road driving skills for
their vehicle class:
(1) Ability to use proper visual search methods;
(2) Ability to signal appropriately when changing direction in
traffic;
(3) Ability to adjust speed to the configuration and condition of
the roadway, weather and visibility conditions, traffic conditions, and
motor vehicle, cargo and driver conditions;
(4) Ability to choose a safe gap for changing lanes, passing other
vehicles, as well as for crossing or entering traffic;
(5) Ability to position the motor vehicle correctly before and
during a turn to prevent other vehicles from passing on the wrong side,
as well as to prevent problems caused by off-tracking;
(6) Ability to maintain a safe following distance depending on the
condition of the road, visibility, and vehicle weight;
(7) Ability to adjust operation of the motor vehicle to prevailing
weather conditions including speed selection, braking, direction
changes, and following distance to maintain control; and
(8) Ability to observe the road and the behavior of other motor
vehicles, particularly before changing speed and direction.
(d) Test area. Skills tests shall be conducted in on-street
conditions or under a combination of on-street and off-street
conditions.
(e) Simulation technology. A State may utilize simulators to
perform skills testing, but under no circumstances as a substitute for
the required testing in on-street conditions.
0
18. Revise Sec. 383.115 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.115 Requirements for double/triple trailers endorsement.
In order to obtain a double/triple trailers endorsement each
applicant must have knowledge covering:
(a) Procedures for assembly and hookup of the units;
(b) Proper placement of heaviest trailer;
(c) Handling and stability characteristics including off-tracking,
response to steering, sensory feedback, braking, oscillatory sway,
rollover in steady turns, and yaw stability in steady turns;
(d) Potential problems in traffic operations, including problems
the motor vehicle creates for other motorists due to slower speeds on
steep grades, longer passing times, possibility for blocking entry of
other motor vehicles on freeways, splash and spray impacts, aerodynamic
buffeting, view blockages, and lateral placement; and
(e) Operating practices and procedures not otherwise specified.
0
19. Revise Sec. 383.117 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.117 Requirements for passenger endorsement.
An applicant for the passenger endorsement must satisfy both of the
following additional knowledge and skills test requirements.
(a) Knowledge test. All applicants for the passenger endorsement
must have knowledge covering the following topics:
(1) Proper procedures for loading/unloading passengers;
(2) Proper use of emergency exits, including push-out windows;
(3) Proper responses to such emergency situations as fires and
unruly passengers;
(4) Proper procedures at railroad-highway grade crossings and
drawbridges;
(5) Proper braking procedures; and
(6) Operating practices and procedures not otherwise specified.
(b) Skills test. To obtain a passenger endorsement applicable to a
specific vehicle class, an applicant must take his/her skills test in a
passenger vehicle satisfying the requirements of that vehicle group as
defined in Sec. 383.91.
0
20. Revise Sec. 383.119 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.119 Requirements for tank vehicle endorsement.
In order to obtain a tank vehicle endorsement, each applicant must
have knowledge covering the following:
(a) Causes, prevention, and effects of cargo surge on motor vehicle
handling;
(b) Proper braking procedures for the motor vehicle when it is
empty, full, and partially full;
(c) Differences in handling of baffled/compartmented tank interiors
versus non-baffled motor vehicles;
(d) Differences in tank vehicle type and construction;
(e) Differences in cargo surge for liquids of varying product
densities;
(f) Effects of road grade and curvature on motor vehicle handling
with filled, half-filled, and empty tanks;
(g) Proper use of emergency systems;
(h) For drivers of DOT specification tank vehicles, retest and
marking requirements; and
(i) Operating practices and procedures not otherwise specified.
0
21. Revise Sec. 383.121 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.121 Requirements for hazardous materials endorsement.
In order to obtain a hazardous materials endorsement, each
applicant must have such knowledge as is required of a driver of a
hazardous materials laden vehicle, from information contained in 49 CFR
parts 171, 172, 173, 177, 178, and 397, on the following:
(a) Hazardous materials regulations including:
(1) Hazardous materials table;
(2) Shipping paper requirements;
(3) Marking;
(4) Labeling;
(5) Placarding requirements;
(6) Hazardous materials packaging;
(7) Hazardous materials definitions and preparation;
(8) Other regulated material (e.g., ORM-D);
(9) Reporting hazardous materials accidents; and
(10) Tunnels and railroad crossings.
(b) Hazardous materials handling including:
(1) Forbidden materials and packages;
(2) Loading and unloading materials;
(3) Cargo segregation;
(4) Passenger carrying buses and hazardous materials;
(5) Attendance of motor vehicles;
(6) Parking;
(7) Routes;
(8) Cargo tanks; and
(9) ``Safe havens.''
(c) Operation of emergency equipment including:
(1) Use of equipment to protect the public;
(2) Special precautions for equipment to be used in fires;
(3) Special precautions for use of emergency equipment when loading
or unloading a hazardous materials laden motor vehicle; and
(4) Use of emergency equipment for tank vehicles.
(d) Emergency response procedures including:
(1) Special care and precautions for different types of accidents;
(2) Special precautions for driving near a fire and carrying
hazardous materials, and smoking and carrying hazardous materials;
(3) Emergency procedures; and
(4) Existence of special requirements for transporting Class 1.1
and 1.2 explosives.
[[Page 26891]]
(e) Operating practices and procedures not otherwise specified.
0
22. Revise Sec. 383.123 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.123 Requirements for a school bus endorsement.
(a) An applicant for the school bus endorsement must satisfy the
following three requirements:
(1) Qualify for passenger vehicle endorsement. Pass the knowledge
and skills test for obtaining a passenger vehicle endorsement.
(2) Knowledge test. Must have knowledge covering the following
topics:
(i) Loading and unloading children, including the safe operation of
stop signal devices, external mirror systems, flashing lights, and
other warning and passenger safety devices required for school buses by
State or Federal law or regulation.
(ii) Emergency exits and procedures for safely evacuating
passengers in an emergency.
(iii) State and Federal laws and regulations related to safely
traversing railroad-highway grade crossings; and
(iv) Operating practices and procedures not otherwise specified.
(3) Skills test. Must take a driving skills test in a school bus of
the same vehicle group (see Sec. 383.91(a)) as the school bus
applicant will drive.
(b) Exception. Knowledge and skills tests administered before
September 30, 2002 and approved by FMCSA as meeting the requirements of
this section, meet the requirements of paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of
this section.
Appendix to Subpart G of Part 383 [Removed]
0
23. Remove the appendix to subpart G.
0
24. Revise Sec. 383.131 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.131 Test manuals.
(a) Driver information manual. (1) A State must provide an FMCSA
pre-approved driver information manual to a CLP or CDL applicant. The
manual must be comparable to the American Association of Motor Vehicle
Administrators' (AAMVA's) ``2005 CDL Test System (July 2010 Version)
Model Commercial Driver Manual'', which FMCSA has approved and provides
to all State Driver Licensing Agencies. The driver information manual
must include:
(i) Information on how to obtain a CDL and endorsements;
(ii) Information on the requirements described in Sec. 383.71, the
implied consent to alcohol testing described in Sec. 383.72, the
procedures and penalties contained in Sec. 383.51(b) to which a CLP or
CDL holder is exposed for refusal to comply with such alcohol testing,
State procedures described in Sec. 383.73, and other appropriate
driver information contained in subpart E of this part;
(iii) Information on vehicle groups and endorsements as specified
in subpart F of this part;
(iv) The substance of the knowledge and skills that drivers must
have, as outlined in subpart G of this part for the different vehicle
groups and endorsements; and
(v) Details of testing procedures, including the purpose of the
tests, how to respond, and directions for taking the tests.
(2) A State may include any additional State-specific information
related to the CDL testing and licensing process.
(b) Examiner information manual. (1) A State must provide an FMCSA
pre-approved examiner information manual that conforms to model
requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)(i-xi) of this section to all
knowledge and skills test examiners. To be pre-approved by FMCSA, the
examiner information manual must be comparable to AAMVA's ``2005 CDL
Test System (July 2010 Version) Model CDL Examiner's Manual,'' which
FMCSA has approved and provides to all State Driver Licensing Agencies.
The examiner information manual must include:
(i) Information on driver application procedures contained in Sec.
383.71, State procedures described in Sec. 383.73, and other
appropriate driver information contained in subpart E of this part;
(ii) Details on information that must be given to the applicant;
(iii) Details on how to conduct the knowledge and skills tests;
(iv) Scoring procedures and minimum passing scores for the
knowledge and skills tests;
(v) Information for selecting driving test routes for the skills
tests;
(vi) List of the skills to be tested;
(vii) Instructions on where and how the skills will be tested;
(viii) How performance of the skills will be scored;
(ix) Causes for automatic failure of skills tests;
(x) Standardized scoring sheets for the skills tests; and
(xi) Standardized driving instructions for the applicants.
(2) A State may include any additional State-specific information
related to the CDL testing process.
0
25. Revise Sec. 383.133 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.133 Test methods.
(a) All tests must be constructed in such a way as to determine if
the applicant possesses the required knowledge and skills contained in
subpart G of this part for the type of motor vehicle or endorsement the
applicant wishes to obtain.
(b) Knowledge tests:
(1) States must use the FMCSA pre-approved pool of test questions
to develop knowledge tests for each vehicle group and endorsement. The
pool of questions must be comparable to those in AAMVA's ``2005 CDL
Test System (July 2010 Version) 2005 Test Item Summary Forms,'' which
FMCSA has approved and provides to all State Driver Licensing Agencies.
(2) The State method of generating knowledge tests must conform to
the requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section
and be pre-approved by FMCSA. The State method of generating knowledge
tests must be comparable to the requirements outlined in AAMVA's ``2005
CDL Test System (July 2010 Version) 2005 Requirements Document For Use
In Developing Computer-Generated Multiple-Choice CDL Knowledge Tests'',
which FMCSA has approved and provides to all State Driver Licensing
Agencies to develop knowledge tests for each vehicle group and
endorsement. These requirements include:
(i) The total difficulty level of the questions used in each
version of a test must fall within a set range;
(ii) Twenty-five percent of the questions on a test must be new
questions that were not contained in the previous version of the test;
(iii) Identical questions from the previous version of the test
must be in a different location on the test and the three possible
responses to the questions must be in a different order; and
(iv) Each test must contain a set number of questions with a
prescribed number of questions from each of the knowledge areas.
(3) Each knowledge test must be valid and reliable so as to ensure
that driver applicants possess the knowledge required under Sec.
383.111. The knowledge tests may be administered in written form,
verbally, or in automated format and can be administered in a foreign
language, provided no interpreter is used in administering the test.
(4) A State must use a different version of the test when an
applicant retakes a previously failed test.
(c) Skills tests:
(1) A State must develop, administer and score the skills tests
based solely on
[[Page 26892]]
the information and standards contained in the driver and examiner
manuals referred to in Sec. 383.131(a) and (b).
(2) A State must use the standardized scores and instructions for
administering the tests contained in the examiner manual referred to in
Sec. 383.131(b).
(3) An applicant must complete the skills tests in a representative
vehicle to ensure that the applicant possess the skills required under
Sec. 383.113. In determining whether the vehicle is a representative
vehicle for the skills test and the group of CDL for which the
applicant is applying, the vehicle's gross vehicle weight rating or
gross combination weight rating must be used, not the vehicle's actual
gross vehicle weight or gross combination weight.
(4) Skills tests must be conducted in on-street conditions or under
a combination of on-street and off-street conditions.
(5) Interpreters are prohibited during the administration of skills
tests. Applicants must be able to understand and respond to verbal
commands and instructions in English by a skills test examiner. Neither
the applicant nor the examiner may communicate in a language other than
English during the skills test.
(6) The skills test must be administered and successfully completed
in the following order: Pre-trip inspection, basic vehicle control
skills, on-road skills. If an applicant fails one segment of the skills
test:
(i) The applicant cannot continue to the next segment of the test;
and
(ii) Scores for the passed segments of the test are only valid
during initial issuance of the CLP. If the CLP is renewed, all three
segments of the skills test must be retaken.
(d) Passing scores for the knowledge and skills tests must meet the
standards contained in Sec. 383.135.
0
26. Revise Sec. 383.135 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.135 Passing knowledge and skills tests.
(a) Knowledge tests. (1) To achieve a passing score on each of the
knowledge tests, a driver applicant must correctly answer at least 80
percent of the questions.
(2) If a driver applicant who fails the air brake portion of the
knowledge test (scores less than 80 percent correct) is issued a CLP or
CDL, an air brake restriction must be indicated on the CLP or CDL as
required in Sec. 383.95(a).
(3) A driver applicant who fails the combination vehicle portion of
the knowledge test (scores less than 80 percent correct) must not be
issued a Group A CLP or CDL.
(b) Skills Tests. (1) To achieve a passing score on each segment of
the skills test, the driver applicant must demonstrate that he/she can
successfully perform all of the skills listed in Sec. 383.113 and
attain the scores listed in Appendix A of the examiner manual referred
to in Sec. 383.131(b) for the type of vehicle being used in the test.
(2) A driver applicant who does not obey traffic laws, causes an
accident during the test, or commits any other offense listed as a
reason for automatic failure in the standards contained in the driver
and examiner manuals referred to in Sec. Sec. 383.131(a) and (b), must
automatically fail the test.
(3) If a driver applicant who performs the skills test in a vehicle
not equipped with any type of air brake system is issued a CDL, an air
brake restriction must be indicated on the license as required in Sec.
383.95(a).
(4) If a driver applicant who performs the skills test in a vehicle
equipped with air over hydraulic brakes is issued a CDL, a full air
brake restriction must be indicated on the license as required in Sec.
383.95(b).
(5) If a driver applicant who performs the skills test in a vehicle
equipped with an automatic transmission is issued a CDL, a manual
transmission restriction must be indicated on the license as required
in Sec. 383.95(c).
(6) If a driver applicant who performs the skills test in a
combination vehicle requiring a Group A CDL equipped with any non-fifth
wheel connection is issued a CDL, a tractor-trailer restriction must be
indicated on the license as required in Sec. 383.95(d).
(7) If a driver applicant wants to remove any of the restrictions
in paragraphs (b)(3) through (5) of this section, the applicant does
not have to retake the complete skills test. The State may administer a
modified skills test that demonstrates that the applicant can safely
and effectively operate the vehicle's full air brakes, air over
hydraulic brakes, and/or manual transmission. In addition, to remove
the air brake or full air brake restriction, the applicant must
successfully perform the air brake pre-trip inspection and pass the air
brake knowledge test.
(8) If a driver applicant wants to remove the tractor-trailer
restriction in paragraph (b)(6) of this section, the applicant must
retake all three skills tests in a representative tractor-trailer.
(c) State recordkeeping. States must record and retain the
knowledge and skills test scores of tests taken by driver applicants.
The test scores must either be made part of the driver history record
or be linked to the driver history record in a separate file.
0
27. Revise the heading for subpart J to read as follows:
Subpart J--Commercial Learner's Permit and Commercial Driver's
License Documents
* * * * *
0
28. Revise Sec. 383.151 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.151 General.
(a) The CDL must be a document that is easy to recognize as a CDL.
(b) The CLP must be a separate document from the CDL or non-CDL.
(c) At a minimum, the CDL and the CLP must contain the information
specified in Sec. 383.153.
0
29. Revise Sec. 383.153 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.153 Information on the CLP and CDL documents and
applications.
(a) Commercial Driver's License. All CDLs must contain all of the
following information:
(1) The prominent statement that the license is a ``Commercial
Driver's License'' or ``CDL,'' except as specified in paragraph (c) of
this section.
(2) The full name, signature, and mailing or residential address in
the licensing State of the person to whom such license is issued.
(3) Physical and other information to identify and describe such
person including date of birth (month, day, and year), sex, and height.
(4) Color photograph, digitized color image, or black and white
laser engraved photograph of the driver. The State may issue a
temporary CDL without a photo or image, if it is valid for no more than
60 days.
(5) The driver's State license number.
(6) The name of the State which issued the license.
(7) The date of issuance and the date of expiration of the license.
(8) The group or groups of commercial motor vehicle(s) that the
driver is authorized to operate, indicated as follows:
(i) A for Combination Vehicle;
(ii) B for Heavy Straight Vehicle; and
(iii) C for Small Vehicle.
(9) The endorsement(s) for which the driver has qualified, if any,
indicated as follows:
(i) T for double/triple trailers;
(ii) P for passenger;
(iii) N for tank vehicle;
(iv) H for hazardous materials;
(v) X for a combination of tank vehicle and hazardous materials
endorsements;
[[Page 26893]]
(vi) S for school bus; and
(vii) At the discretion of the State, additional codes for
additional groupings of endorsements, as long as each such
discretionary code is fully explained on the front or back of the CDL
document.
(10) The restriction(s) placed on the driver from operating certain
equipment or vehicles, if any, indicated as follows:
(i) L for No Air brake equipped CMV;
(ii) Z for No Full air brake equipped CMV;
(iii) E for No Manual transmission equipped CMV;
(iv) O for No Tractor-trailer CMV;
(v) M for No Class A passenger vehicle;
(vi) N for No Class A and B passenger vehicle;
(vii) K for Intrastate only;
(viii) V for medical variance; and
(ix) At the discretion of the State, additional codes for
additional restrictions, as long as each such restriction code is fully
explained on the front or back of the CDL document.
(b) Commercial Learner's Permit. (1) A CLP must not contain a
photograph, digitized image or other visual representation of the
driver.
(2) All CLPs must contain all of the following information:
(i) The prominent statement that the permit is a ``Commercial
Learner's Permit'' or ``CLP,'' except as specified in paragraph (c) of
this section, and that it is invalid unless accompanied by the
underlying driver's license issued by the same jurisdiction.
(ii) The full name, signature, and mailing or residential address
in the permitting State of the person to whom the permit is issued.
(iii) Physical and other information to identify and describe such
person including date of birth (month, day, and year), sex, and height.
(iv) The driver's State license number.
(v) The name of the State which issued the permit.
(vi) The date of issuance and the date of expiration of the permit.
(vii) The group or groups of commercial motor vehicle(s) that the
driver is authorized to operate, indicated as follows:
(A) A for Combination Vehicle;
(B) B for Heavy Straight Vehicle; and
(C) C for Small Vehicle.
(viii) The endorsement(s) for which the driver has qualified, if
any, indicated as follows:
(A) P for passenger endorsement. A CLP holder with a P endorsement
is prohibited from operating a CMV carrying passengers, other than
Federal/State auditors and inspectors, test examiners, other trainees,
and the CDL holder accompanying the CLP holder as prescribed by Sec.
CFR 383.25(a)(1) of this part;
(B) S for school bus endorsement. A CLP holder with an S
endorsement is prohibited from operating a school bus with passengers
other than Federal/State auditors and inspectors, test examiners, other
trainees, and the CDL holder accompanying the CLP holder as prescribed
by Sec. 383.25(a)(1) of this part; and
(C) N for tank vehicle endorsement. A CLP holder with an N
endorsement may only operate an empty tank vehicle and is prohibited
from operating any tank vehicle that previously contained hazardous
materials that has not been purged of any residue.
(ix) The restriction(s) placed on the driver, if any, indicated as
follows:
(A) P for No passengers in CMV bus;
(B) X for No cargo in CMV tank vehicle;
(C) L for No Air brake equipped CMV;
(D) V for medical variance;
(E) M for No Class A passenger vehicle;
(F) N for No Class A and B passenger vehicle;
(G) K for Intrastate only.
(H) Any additional jurisdictional restrictions that apply to the
CLP driving privilege.
(c) If the CLP or CDL is a Non-domiciled CLP or CDL, it must
contain the prominent statement that the license or permit is a ``Non-
domiciled Commercial Driver's License,'' ``Non-domiciled CDL,'' ``Non-
domiciled Commercial Learner's Permit,'' or ``Non-domiciled CLP,'' as
appropriate. The word ``Non-domiciled'' must be conspicuously and
unmistakably displayed, but may be noncontiguous with the words
``Commercial Driver's License,'' ``CDL,'' ``Commercial Learner's
Permit,'' or ``CLP.''
(d) If the State has issued the applicant an air brake restriction
as specified in Sec. 383.95, that restriction must be indicated on the
CLP or CDL.
(e) Except in the case of a Non-domiciled CLP or CDL holder who is
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction:
(1) A driver applicant must provide his/her Social Security Number
on the application of a CLP or CDL.
(2) The State must provide the Social Security Number to the CDLIS.
(3) The State must not display the Social Security Number on the
CLP or CDL.
(f) The State may issue a multipart CDL provided that:
(1) Each document is explicitly tied to the other document(s) and
to a single driver's record.
(2) The multipart license document includes all of the data
elements specified in this section.
(f) Current CDL holders are not required to be retested to
determine whether they need any of the new restrictions for no full air
brakes, no manual transmission and no tractor-trailer. These new
restrictions only apply to CDL applicants who take skills tests on or
after July 8, 2014 (including those applicants who previously held a
CDL before the new restrictions went into effect).
(g) On or after July 8, 2014 current CLP and CDL holders who do not
have the standardized endorsement and restriction codes and applicants
for a CLP or CDL are to be issued CLPs and CDLs with the standardized
codes upon initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer.
0
30. Revise Sec. 383.155 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.155 Tamperproofing requirements.
States must make the CLP and CDL tamperproof to the maximum extent
practicable. At a minimum, a State must use the same tamperproof method
used for noncommercial drivers' licenses.
PART 384--STATE COMPLIANCE WITH COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE PROGRAM
0
31. The authority citation for part 384 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502; secs. 103
and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1753, 1767; and 49 CFR 1.73.
0
32. Amend Sec. 384.105(b) by revising the definition of issue and
issuance to read as follows:
Sec. 384.105 Definitions.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Issue and issuance mean initial issuance, transfer, renewal, or
upgrade of a CLP or CDL and Non-domiciled CLP or CDL, as described in
Sec. 383.73 of this subchapter.
* * * * *
0
33. Revise Sec. 384.201 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.201 Testing program.
(a) The State shall adopt and administer a program for testing and
ensuring the fitness of persons to operate commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) in accordance with the minimum Federal standards contained in
part 383 of this title.
(b) To obtain a copy of FMCSA pre-approved State Testing System
referenced in Sec. Sec. 383.131, 383.133 and
[[Page 26894]]
383.135, State Driver Licensing Agencies may contact: FMCSA, CDL
Division, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington DC 20590.
0
34. Revise Sec. 384.204 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.204 CLP or CDL issuance and information.
(a) General rule. The State shall authorize a person to operate a
CMV only by issuance of a CLP or CDL, unless an exception in Sec.
383.3(c) or (d) applies, which contains, at a minimum, the information
specified in part 383, subpart J, of this subchapter.
(b) Exceptions--(1) Training. The State may authorize a person who
does not hold a CDL valid for the type of vehicle in which training
occurs to undergo behind-the-wheel training in a CMV only by means of a
CLP issued and used in accordance with Sec. 383.25 of this subchapter.
(2) Confiscation of CLP or CDL pending enforcement. A State may
allow a CLP or CDL holder whose CLP or CDL is held in trust by that
State or any other State in the course of enforcement of the motor
vehicle traffic code, but who has not been convicted of a disqualifying
offense under Sec. 383.51 of this subchapter based on such
enforcement, to drive a CMV while holding a dated receipt for such CLP
or CDL.
0
35. Revise Sec. 384.205 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.205 CDLIS information.
Before issuing a CLP or a CDL to any person, the State must, within
the period of time specified in Sec. 384.232, perform the check of the
Commercial Driver's License Information System (CDLIS) in accordance
with Sec. 383.73(b)(3)(ii) of this subchapter, and, based on that
information, issue the license or, in the case of adverse information,
promptly implement the disqualifications, licensing limitations,
denials, and/or penalties that are called for in any applicable
section(s) of this subpart.
0
36. Revise Sec. 384.206 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.206 State record checks.
(a) Issuing State's records. (1) Before issuing, renewing,
upgrading, or transferring a CLP or CDL to any person, the driver's
State of record must, within the period of time specified in Sec.
384.232, check its own driver records as follows:
(i) The driver record of the person in accordance with Sec.
383.73(b)(3)(i) of this chapter; and
(ii) For a driver who certifies that his/her type of driving is
non-excepted, interstate commerce according to Sec.
383.71(b)(1)(ii)(A) of this chapter, the medical certification status
information on the person's CDLIS driver record.
(2) Based on the findings of its own State record check, the State
of record must do one of the following as appropriate:
(i) Issue, renew, upgrade, or transfer the applicant's CLP or CDL;
(ii) In the event the State obtains adverse information regarding
the applicant, promptly implement the disqualifications, licensing
limitations, denials, or penalties that are called for in any
applicable section(s) of this subpart; or
(iii) In the event there is no information regarding the driver's
self-certification for driving type required by Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii),
or for a driver who is required by Sec. 383.71(h) to be ``certified,''
if the medical certification status of the individual is ``non-
certified,'' the State must deny the CDL action requested by the
applicant and initiate a downgrade of the CDL, if required by Sec.
383.73(j)(4) of this chapter.
(b) Other States' records. (1) Before the initial or transfer
issuance of a CLP or CDL to a person, and before renewing or upgrading
a CLP or CDL held by any person, the issuing State must:
(i) Require the applicant to provide the names of all States where
the applicant has previously been licensed to operate any type of motor
vehicle during the previous 10 years.
(ii) Within the time period specified in Sec. 384.232, request the
complete driver record from all States where the applicant was licensed
within the previous 10 years to operate any type of motor vehicle.
(2) States receiving a request for the driver record of a person
currently or previously licensed by the State must provide the
information within 30 days.
(3) Based on the findings of the other State record checks, the
issuing State must, in the case of adverse information regarding the
applicant, promptly implement the disqualifications, licensing
limitations, denials, or penalties that are called for in any
applicable section(s) of this subpart.
0
37. Amend Sec. 384.207 by revising the introductory text and paragraph
(a) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.207 Notification of licensing.
Within the period defined in Sec. 383.73(h) of this subchapter,
the State must:
(a) Notify the operator of the CDLIS of each CLP or CDL issuance;
* * * * *
0
38. Amend Sec. 384.208 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.208 Notification of disqualification.
(a) No later than 10 days after disqualifying a CLP or CDL holder
licensed by another State, or disqualifying an out-of-State CLP or CDL
holder's privilege to operate a commercial motor vehicle for at least
60 days, the State must notify the State that issued the license of the
disqualification.
* * * * *
0
39. Amend Sec. 384.209 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.209 Notification of traffic violations.
(a) Required notification with respect to CLP or CDL holders.
Whenever a person who holds a CLP or CDL from another State is
convicted of a violation of any State or local law relating to motor
vehicle traffic control (other than parking, vehicle weight or vehicle
defect violations), in any type of vehicle, the licensing entity of the
State in which the conviction occurs must notify the licensing entity
in the State where the driver is licensed of this conviction within the
time period established in paragraph (c) of this section.
* * * * *
0
40. Revise Sec. 384.210 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.210 Limitation on licensing.
A State must not knowingly issue a CLP, a CDL, or a commercial
special license or permit (including a provisional or temporary
license) permitting a person to drive a CMV during a period in which:
(a) A person is disqualified from operating a CMV, as
disqualification is defined in Sec. 383.5 of this subchapter, or under
the provisions of Sec. 383.73(j) or Sec. 384.231(b)(2) of this
subchapter;
(b) The CLP or CDL holder's noncommercial driving privilege has
been disqualified; or
(c) Any type of driver's license held by such person is
disqualified by the State where the driver is licensed for any State or
local law related to motor vehicle traffic control (other than parking,
vehicle weight or vehicle defect violations).
0
41. Revise Sec. 384.211 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.211 Surrender of old licenses.
The State may not initially issue, upgrade, or transfer a CDL to a
person unless such person first surrenders any previously issued
driver's license and CLP.
0
42. Revise Sec. 384.212 to read as follows:
[[Page 26895]]
Sec. 384.212 Domicile requirement.
(a) The State may issue CDLs or CLPs only to persons for whom the
State is the State of domicile as defined in Sec. 383.5 of this
subchapter; except that the State may issue a Non-domiciled CLP or CDL
under the conditions specified in Sec. Sec. 383.23(b), 383.71(f), and
383.73(f) of this subchapter.
(b) The State must require any person holding a CLP or CDL issued
by another State to apply for a transfer CLP or CDL from the State
within 30 days after establishing domicile in the State, as specified
in Sec. 383.71(c) of this subchapter.
0
43. Revise Sec. 384.214 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.214 Reciprocity.
The State must allow any person to operate a CMV in the State who
is not disqualified from operating a CMV and who holds a CLP or CDL
that is--
(a) Issued to him or her by his/her State or jurisdiction of
domicile in accordance with part 383 of this subchapter;
(b) Not disqualified; and
(c) Valid, under the terms of part 383, subpart F, of this
subchapter, for the type of vehicle being driven.
0
44. Revise Sec. 384.217 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.217 Drug offenses.
The State must disqualify from operating a CMV for life any person
who is convicted, as defined in Sec. 383.5 of this subchapter, in any
State or jurisdiction of a first offense of using a CMV (or, in the
case of a CLP or CDL holder, a CMV or a non-CMV) in the commission of a
felony described in item (9) of Table 1 to Sec. 383.51 of this
subchapter. The State shall not apply the special rule in Sec.
384.216(b) to lifetime disqualifications imposed for controlled
substance felonies as detailed in item (9) of Table 1 to Sec. 383.51
of this subchapter.
0
45. Revise Sec. 384.220 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.220 Problem Driver Pointer System information.
Before issuing a CLP or CDL to any person, the State must, within
the period of time specified in Sec. 384.232, perform the check of the
Problem Driver Pointer System in accordance with Sec.
383.73(b)(3)(iii) of this subchapter, and, based on that information,
promptly implement the disqualifications, licensing limitations, and/or
penalties that are called for in any applicable section(s) of this
subpart.
0
46. Amend Sec. 384.225 by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 384.225 CDLIS driver recordkeeping.
* * * * *
(a) CLP or CDL holder. Post and maintain as part of the CDLIS
driver record:
(1) All convictions, disqualifications and other licensing actions
for violations of any State or local law relating to motor vehicle
traffic control (other than parking, vehicle weight, or vehicle defect
violations) committed in any type of vehicle.
(2) The following medical certification status information:
(i) Driver self-certification for the type of driving operations
provided in accordance with Sec. 383.71(b)(1)(ii) of this chapter, and
(ii) Information from medical certification recordkeeping in
accordance with Sec. 383.73(o) of this chapter.
(b) A person required to have a CLP or CDL. Record and maintain as
part of the CDLIS driver record all convictions, disqualifications and
other licensing actions for violations of any State or local law
relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than parking, vehicle
weight, or vehicle defect violations) committed while the driver was
operating a CMV.
* * * * *
0
47. Revise Sec. 384.226 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.226 Prohibition on masking convictions.
The State must not mask, defer imposition of judgment, or allow an
individual to enter into a diversion program that would prevent a CLP
or CDL holder's conviction for any violation, in any type of motor
vehicle, of a State or local traffic control law (other than parking,
vehicle weight, or vehicle defect violations) from appearing on the
CDLIS driver record, whether the driver was convicted for an offense
committed in the State where the driver is licensed or another State.
0
48. Add Sec. 384.227 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.227 Record of digital image or photograph.
The State must:
(a) Record the digital color image or photograph or black and white
laser engraved photograph that is captured as part of the application
process and placed on the licensing document of every person who is
issued a CDL, as required under Sec. 383.153. The digital color image
or photograph or black and white laser engraved photograph must either
be made part of the driver history or be linked to the driver history
in a separate file.
(b) Check the digital color image or photograph or black and white
laser engraved photograph on record whenever the CDL applicant or
holder appears in person to renew, upgrade, or transfer a CDL and when
a duplicate CDL is issued.
(c) Check the digital color image or photograph or black and white
laser engraved photograph on record whenever the CLP applicant or
holder appears in person to renew, upgrade, or transfer a CLP and when
a duplicate CLP is issued. If no digital color image or photograph or
black and white laser engraved photograph exists on record, the State
must check the photograph or image on the base-license presented with
the CLP application.
0
49. Add Sec. 384.228 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.228 Examiner training and record checks.
For all State and third party CDL test examiners, the State must
meet the following 10 requirements:
(a) Establish examiner training standards for initial and refresher
training that provides CDL test examiners with a fundamental
understanding of the objectives of the CDL testing program, and with
all of the knowledge and skills necessary to serve as a CDL test
examiner and assist jurisdictions in meeting the Federal CDL testing
requirements.
(b) Require all State knowledge and skills test examiners to
successfully complete a formal CDL test examiner training course and
examination before certifying them to administer CDL knowledge and
skills tests.
(c) The training course for CDL knowledge test examiners must cover
at least the following three units of instruction:
(1) Introduction to CDL Licensing System:
(i) The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986.
(ii) Drivers covered by CDL program.
(iii) CDL vehicle classification.
(iv) CDL endorsements and restrictions.
(2) Overview of the CDL tests:
(i) CDL test, classifications, and endorsements.
(ii) Different examinations.
(iii) Representative vehicles.
(iv) Validity and reliability.
(v) Test maintenance.
(3) Knowledge tests:
(i) General knowledge tests.
(ii) Specialized knowledge tests.
(iii) Selecting the appropriate tests and test forms.
(iv) Knowledge test administration.
(d) The training course for CDL skills test examiners must cover at
least the following five units of instruction:
[[Page 26896]]
(1) Introduction to CDL Licensing System:
(i) The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986.
(ii) Drivers covered by CDL program.
(iii) CDL vehicle classification.
(iv) CDL endorsements and restrictions.
(2) Overview of the CDL tests:
(i) CDL test, classifications, and endorsements.
(ii) Different examinations.
(iii) Representative vehicles.
(iv) Validity and reliability.
(v) Test maintenance.
(3) Vehicle inspection test:
(i) Test overview.
(ii) Description of safety rules.
(iii) Test scoring procedures.
(iv) Scoring standards.
(v) Calculating final score.
(4) Basic control skills testing:
(i) Setting up the basic control skills course.
(ii) Description of safety rules.
(iii) General scoring procedures.
(iv) Administering the test.
(v) Calculating the score.
(5) Road test:
(i) Setting up the road test.
(ii) Required maneuvers.
(iii) Administering the road test.
(iv) Calculating the score.
(e) Require all third party skills test examiners to successfully
complete a formal CDL test examiner training course and examination
before certifying them to administer CDL skills tests. The training
course must cover at least the five units of instruction in paragraph
(d) of this section.
(f) Require State and third party CDL test examiners to
successfully complete a refresher training course and examination every
four years to maintain their CDL test examiner certification. The
refresher training course must cover at least the following:
(1) For CDL knowledge test examiners, the three units of training
described in paragraph (c) of this section.
(2) For CDL skills test examiners, the five units of training
described in paragraph (d) of this section.
(3) Any State specific material and information related to
administering CDL knowledge and skills tests.
(4) Any new Federal CDL regulations, updates to administering the
tests, and new safety related equipment on the vehicles.
(g) Complete nationwide criminal background check of all skills
test examiners prior to certifying them to administer CDL skills tests.
(h) Complete annual nationwide criminal background check of all
test examiners.
(i) Maintain a record of the results of the criminal background
check and CDL examiner test training and certification of all CDL test
examiners.
(j) Rescind the certification to administer CDL tests of all test
examiners who:
(1) Do not successfully complete the required refresher training
every four years; or
(2) Do not pass annual nationwide criminal background checks.
Criteria for not passing the criminal background check must include at
least the following:
(i) Any felony conviction within the last 10 years; or
(ii) Any conviction involving fraudulent activities.
(k) The six units of training described in paragraphs (c) and (d)
of this section may be supplemented with State-specific material and
information related to administering CDL knowledge and skills tests.
0
50. Add Sec. 384.229 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.229 Skills test examiner auditing and monitoring.
To ensure the integrity of the CDL skills testing program, the
State must:
(a) At least once every 2 years, conduct unannounced, on-site
inspections of third party testers' and examiners' records, including
comparison of the CDL skills test results of applicants who are issued
CDLs with the CDL scoring sheets that are maintained in the third party
testers' files. For third party testers and examiners who were granted
the training and skills testing exception under section 383.75(a)(7),
the record checks must be performed at least once every year;
(b) At least once every two years, conduct covert and overt
monitoring of examinations performed by State and third party CDL
skills test examiners. For third party testers and examiners who were
granted the training and skills testing exception under Sec.
383.75(a)(7), the covert and overt monitoring must be performed at
least once every year;
(c) Establish and maintain a database to track pass/fail rates of
applicants tested by each State and third party CDL skills test
examiner, in order to focus covert and overt monitoring on examiners
who have unusually high pass or failure rates;
(d) Establish and maintain a database of all third party testers
and examiners, which at a minimum tracks the dates and results of
audits and monitoring actions by the State, the dates third party
testers were certified by the State, and name and identification number
of each third party CDL skills test examiner;
(e) Establish and maintain a database of all State CDL skills
examiners, which at a minimum tracks the dates and results of
monitoring action by the State, and the name and identification number
of each State CDL skills examiner; and
(f) Establish and maintain a database that tracks skills tests
administered by each State and third party CDL skills test examiner's
name and identification number.
0
51. Amend Sec. 384.231 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.231 Satisfaction of State disqualification requirement.
* * * * *
(b) Required action--(1) CLP or CDL holders. A State must satisfy
the requirement of this subpart that the State disqualify a person who
holds a CLP or a CDL by, at a minimum, disqualifying the person's CLP
or CDL for the applicable period of disqualification.
(2) A person required to have a CLP or CDL. A State must satisfy
the requirement of this subpart that the State disqualify a person
required to have a CLP or CDL who is convicted of an offense or
offenses necessitating disqualification under Sec. 383.51 of this
subchapter. At a minimum, the State must implement the limitation on
licensing provisions of Sec. 384.210 and the timing and recordkeeping
requirements of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section so as to prevent
such a person from legally obtaining a CLP or CDL from any State during
the applicable disqualification period(s) specified in this subpart.
* * * * *
0
52. Amend Sec. 384.301 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.301 Substantial compliance--general requirements.
* * * * *
(e) A State must come into substantial compliance with the
requirements of subpart B of this part in effect as of July 8, 2011 as
soon as practical but, unless otherwise specifically provided in this
part, not later than July 8, 2014.
0
53. Revise Sec. 384.405 to read as follows:
Sec. 384.405 Decertification of State CDL program.
(a) Prohibition on CLP or CDL transactions. The Administrator may
prohibit a State found to be in substantial noncompliance from
performing any of the following CLP or CDL transactions:
(1) Initial issuance.
[[Page 26897]]
(2) Renewal.
(3) Transfer.
(4) Upgrade.
(b) Conditions considered in making decertification determination.
The Administrator will consider, but is not limited to, the following
five conditions in determining whether the CDL program of a State in
substantial noncompliance should be decertified:
(1) The State computer system does not check the Commercial
Driver's License Information System (CDLIS) and/or National Driver
Registry Problem Driver Pointer System (PDPS) as required by Sec.
383.73 of this subchapter when issuing, renewing, transferring, or
upgrading a CLP or CDL.
(2) The State does not disqualify drivers convicted of
disqualifying offenses in commercial motor vehicles.
(3) The State does not transmit convictions for out-of-State
drivers to the State where the driver is licensed.
(4) The State does not properly administer knowledge and/or skills
tests to CLP or CDL applicants or drivers.
(5) The State fails to submit a corrective action plan for a
substantial compliance deficiency or fails to implement a corrective
action plan within the agreed time frame.
(c) Standard for considering deficiencies. The deficiencies
described in paragraph (b) of this section must affect a substantial
number of either CLP and CDL applicants or drivers.
(d) Decertification: Preliminary determination. If the
Administrator finds that a State is in substantial noncompliance with
subpart B of this part, as indicated by the factors specified in
paragraph (b) of this section, among other things, the FMCSA will
inform the State that it has made a preliminary determination of
noncompliance and that the State's CDL program may therefore be
decertified. Any response from the State, including factual or legal
arguments or a plan to correct the noncompliance, must be submitted
within 30 calendar days after receipt of the preliminary determination.
(e) Decertification: Final determination. If, after considering all
material submitted by the State in response to the FMCSA preliminary
determination, the Administrator decides that substantial noncompliance
exists, which warrants decertification of the CDL program, he/she will
issue a decertification order prohibiting the State from issuing CLPs
and CDLs until such time as the Administrator determines that the
condition(s) causing the decertification has (have) been corrected.
(f) Recertification of a State. The Governor of the decertified
State or his/her designated representative must submit a certification
and documentation that the condition causing the decertification has
been corrected. If the FMCSA determines that the condition causing the
decertification has been satisfactorily corrected, the Administrator
will issue a recertification order, including any conditions that must
be met in order to begin issuing CLPs and CDLs in the State.
(g) State's right to judicial review. Any State aggrieved by an
adverse decision under this section may seek judicial review under 5
U.S.C. Chapter 7.
(h) Validity of previously issued CLPs or CDLs. A CLP or CDL issued
by a State prior to the date the State is prohibited from issuing CLPs
or CDLs in accordance with provisions of paragraph (a) of this section,
will remain valid until its stated expiration date.
PART 385--SAFETY FITNESS PROCEDURES
0
54. The authority citation for part 385 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, 504, 521(b), 5105(e), 5109, 5113,
13901-13905, 31136, 31144, 31148, and 31502; Sec. 350 of Pub. L.
107-87; and 49 CFR 1.73.
0
55. Amend appendix B, section VII, List of Acute and Critical
Regulations, by redesignating the entries for Sec. Sec. 383.37(a) and
383.37(b) as Sec. Sec. 383.37(b) and 383.37(c) and adding a new entry
for Sec. 383.37(a) to read as follows:
Appendix B to Part 385--Explanation of Safety Rating Process
* * * * *
VII. List of Acute and Critical Regulations.
* * * * *
Sec. 383.37(a) Knowingly allowing, requiring, permitting, or
authorizing an employee who does not have a current CLP or CDL, who
does not have a CLP or CDL with the proper class or endorsements, or
who operates a CMV in violation of any restriction on the CLP or CDL
to operate a CMV (acute).
* * * * *
Issued on: March 28, 2011.
Anne S. Ferro,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-10510 Filed 5-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P