[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65696-65698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22961]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0480]


Commercial Driver's License Standards: Application for Exemption; 
CRST Expedited

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant of application for 
exemption.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to grant CRST Expedited (CRST) an 
exemption from the regulation that requires a commercial learner's 
permit (CLP) holder to be accompanied by a commercial driver's license 
(CDL) holder with the proper CDL class and endorsements, seated in the 
front seat of the vehicle while the CLP holder performs behind-the-
wheel training on public roads or highways. Under the terms and 
conditions of this exemption, a CLP holder who has documentation of 
passing the CDL skills test may drive a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) 
for CRST without being accompanied by a CDL holder in the front seat of 
the vehicle. The exemption enables CLP holders to drive as part of a 
team and have the same regulatory flexibility as CRST team drivers with 
CDLs. FMCSA has analyzed the exemption application and the public 
comments and has determined that the exemption, subject to the terms 
and conditions imposed, will achieve a level of safety that is 
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent 
such exemption.

DATES: The exemption is effective from September 23, 2016 through 
September 24, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tom Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver and 
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle 
Safety Standards; Telephone: (614) 942-6477. Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant 
exemptions from some of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. 
FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal 
Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an 
opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the application, 
including any safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must 
also provide an opportunity for public comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments, and 
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level 
of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be 
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of 
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR 
381.315(b)) with the reason for the grant or denial, and, if granted, 
the specific person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and 
the regulatory provision or provisions from which exemption is granted. 
The notice must also specify the effective period of the exemption, and 
explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be 
renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).

Request for Exemption

    CRST is one of the nation's largest transportation companies with a 
fleet of more than 4,500 CMVs. CRST seeks an exemption from 49 CFR 
383.25(a)(1) that would allow CLP holders who have successfully passed 
a CDL skills test and are thus eligible to receive a CDL, to drive a 
truck without a CDL holder being present in the front seat of the 
vehicle. CRST indicates that the CDL holder will remain in the vehicle 
at all times while the CLP holder is driving--just not in the front 
seat. This would allow a CLP holder to participate in a revenue-
producing trip back to his or her State of domicile to obtain the CDL 
document, as the CDL can only be issued by the State of domicile in 
accordance with 49 CFR part 383.
    CRST noted the trucking industry's need for qualified and well-
trained drivers to meet increasing shipping demands. CRST believes that 
49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) limits its ability to efficiently recruit, train, 
and employ new entrants to the industry. Prior to the implementation of 
section 385.25(a)(1), States routinely issued temporary CDLs to drivers 
who passed the CDL skills test. The temporary CDL allowed CRST time to 
route the new driver to his or her State of domicile to obtain the 
permanent CDL and place the new driver into an on-the-job training 
position with a driver-trainer. The driver-trainer supervised and 
observed the new driver, but was not required to be on duty and in the 
front seat at all times. Thus, the new driver became productive 
immediately, allowing more freight movement for CRST and compensation 
for the new driver.
    CRST contends that compliance with the CDL rule places them in a 
very difficult position regarding how they return CLP holders who have 
passed their skills testing to their State of domicile to obtain their 
CDL. According to CRST, the two possible courses of action in this 
scenario are simple, yet costly: (1) CRST sends CLP holders to their 
home State by public transportation to obtain the CDL and hopes the 
drivers return to CRST for employment; or (2) CRST sends CLP holders 
back to their home State as passengers on one of its trucks. Granting 
the exemption would allow the CLP holder to drive as part of a team on 
that trip, resulting in reduced costs and increased productivity.
    CRST asserts that the exemption would be consistent with the 
Agency's comments in the preamble to the final rule adopting Sec.  
383.25 that ``FMCSA does not believe that it is safe to permit 
inexperienced drivers who have not passed the CDL skills test to drive 
unaccompanied.'' (76 FR 26854, 26861 May 9, 2011). The exemption sought 
would apply only to those CRST drivers who have passed the CDL skills 
test and hold a CLP. CRST believes that the exemption would result in a 
level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level of 
safety provided under the rule. The only difference between a CLP 
holder who has passed the CDL skills test and a CDL holder is that the 
latter has received the actual CDL document from a State driver 
licensing agency.

Public Comments

    On January 5, 2016, FMCSA published notice of this application and 
requested public comment (81 FR 291). The Agency received 56 comments. 
Most of the comments opposed to the CRST request were from truck 
drivers, driver-trainers, and other individuals. These respondents do 
not believe that it is safe for a CLP holder to operate a CMV without 
the supervision of a CDL driver-trainer in the front seat of the truck.
    The Iowa Motor Truck Association (IMTA) supported the exemption 
request, commenting that if CLP holders are properly trained and 
tested, the fact that they have not yet obtained their

[[Page 65697]]

CDL credential would in no way compromise the safety of the operation. 
IMTA added that granting this exemption would enhance the productivity 
while maintaining the safety of CRST's operation. It would also give 
the applicant flexibility to allow a CLP holder who has successfully 
passed all CDL exams to operate more freely and in a way that benefits 
the driver, the carrier and the economy as a whole. According to IMTA, 
one of the issues with the current CLP rule is the fact that it's not 
always convenient to allow the CLP driver to return to their home state 
immediately after completing training and passing their CDL exam. The 
exemption would allow these drivers to join a team operation, and give 
CRST the time to get CLP holders through their State of domicile at a 
future time to complete the conversion of the CLP to a CDL. IMTA is 
confident in the safety and performance of CRST and believe that, if 
granted, these drivers would operate safely within the terms of their 
exemption.
    Opposing the exemption were three industry groups, the Advocates 
for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates), the Owner-Operator Independent 
Drivers Association (OOIDA), and the International Brotherhood of 
Teamsters (IBT).
    Advocates commented that ``FMCSA must reject the CRST application 
because it undermines existing Federal safety regulations, and will 
usurp the exclusive authority of states to determine who should be 
granted commercial driving privileges associated with the issuance of a 
CDL. The Application also fails to evaluate any potential safety risk 
to the public or address alternative means of pursuing the goal of the 
exemption. The Application appears to be an obvious attempt to increase 
company profits while ignoring the potentially significant increase in 
truck crash risk to the motoring public.''
    OOIDA believes the exemption sought by CRST is not in the interest 
of highway safety, will put OOIDA members who share the road with these 
poorly trained drivers at risk, and fails to demonstrate that an 
exemption would result in ``a level of safety that is equivalent to, or 
greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption'' 
as set forth in 49 U.S.C. 31315(b). Further, OOIDA states that CRST 
does not demonstrate that it is ``significantly burdened'' by the 
existing regulation and rather only demonstrates a desire to increase 
productivity and preserve CRST's current business practices. OOIDA 
finds the request fails to meet the applicable standards the FMCSA must 
consider and is ill-timed, considering FMCSA is currently reviewing 
entry-level driver training standards.
    In a similar vein, IBT commented, ``It is clear from CRST's 
application that it is more concerned about saving money and retaining 
the investment that it has made in the training of the driver than 
making sure that the CLP holder receives the proper mentoring and 
supervision needed for first time CLP holders while they gather their 
behind-the-wheel training. Neither the DOT nor the FMCSA should 
entertain the relaxing of important safety standards so that motor 
carriers have a better opportunity to retain drivers that they have 
trained. The idea that a driver may not return to the company that 
provided his/her training has more to do with overall pay and benefits 
that the motor carrier may be offering in the long term than the time 
or distance traveled for the CLP holder to obtain a CDL from the CLP 
holder's home state in the short term. Neither should it be a goal of 
the DOT or FMCSA to `promote greater productivity' for a motor carrier 
or allow CLP holders to `actively earn a living faster.' The 
department's goal should be safety. Finally, the IBT feels strongly 
that there is no substituting the skills test for behind-the-wheel 
training of CLP holders by experienced CDL holders in the front seat of 
the CMV.''

FMCSA Response and Decision

    The premise of respondents opposing the exemption is that CLP 
holders lack experience and are safer drivers when observed by a CDL 
driver-trainer who is on duty and in the front seat of the vehicle. The 
fact is that CLP holders who have passed the CDL skills test are 
qualified and eligible to obtain a CDL. If these CLP holders had 
obtained their training and CLPs in their State of domicile, they could 
immediately obtain their CDL at the State driver licensing agency and 
begin driving a CMV without any on-board supervision. There is no data 
showing that having a CDL holder accompany a CLP holder who has passed 
the skills test improves safety. Because these drivers have passed the 
CDL skills test, the only thing necessary to obtain the CDL is to visit 
the Department of Motor Vehicles office in their State of domicile.
    FMCSA has evaluated CRST's application for exemption and the public 
comments. The Agency believes that CRST's overall safety performance, 
as reflected in its ``satisfactory'' safety rating, will enable it to 
achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the 
level of safety achieved without the exemption (49 CFR 381.305(a)). The 
exemption is restricted to CRST's CLP holders who have documentation 
that they have passed the CDL skills test. The exemption will enable 
these drivers to operate a CMV as a team driver without requiring the 
accompanying CDL holder be on duty and in the front seat while the 
vehicle is moving.

Terms and Conditions of the Exemption

Period of the Exemption

    This exemption from the requirements of 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) is 
effective during the period of September 23, 2016 through September 24, 
2018.

Extent of the Exemption

    The exemption is contingent upon CRST maintaining USDOT 
registration, minimum levels of public liability insurance, and not 
being subject to any ``imminent hazard'' or other out-of- service (OOS) 
order issued by FMCSA. Each driver covered by the exemption must 
maintain a valid driver's license and CLP with the required 
endorsements, not be subject to any OOS order or suspension of driving 
privileges, and meet all physical qualifications required by 49 CFR 
part 391.
    This exemption from 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) will allow CRST drivers who 
hold a CLP and have successfully passed a CDL skills test, to drive a 
CMV without a CDL holder being present in the front seat of the 
vehicle. The CDL holder must remain in the vehicle at all times while 
the CLP holder is driving--just not in the front seat.

Preemption

    During the period this exemption is in effect, no State may enforce 
any law or regulation that conflicts with or is inconsistent with the 
exemption with respect to a person or entity operating under the 
exemption (49 U.S.C. 31315(d)).

FMCSA Accident Notification

    CRST must notify FMCSA within 5 business days of any accidents (as 
defined by 49 CFR 390.5) involving the operation of any of its CMVs 
while utilizing this exemption. The notification must be by email to 
[email protected], and include the following information:

a. Exemption Identifier: ``CRST''
b. Date of the accident,
c. City or town, and State, in which the accident occurred, or which is 
closest to the scene of the accident,
d. Driver's name and driver's license number,
e. Vehicle number and State license number,

[[Page 65698]]

f. Number of individuals suffering physical injury,
g. Number of fatalities,
h. The police-reported cause of the accident,
i. Whether the driver was cited for violation of any traffic laws, or 
motor carrier safety regulations, and
j. The total driving time and the total on-duty time of the CMV driver 
at the time of the accident.

Termination

    The FMCSA does not believe the CLP-holders covered by the exemption 
will experience any deterioration of their safety record. However, 
should this occur, FMCSA will take all steps necessary to protect the 
public interest, including revocation of the exemption. The FMCSA will 
immediately revoke the exemption for failure to comply with its terms 
and conditions.

    Issued on: September 12, 2016.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-22961 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P