[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 189 (Friday, September 28, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48964-48976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21289]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 383 and 384

[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0047]
RIN 2126-AB99


Military Licensing and State Commercial Driver's License 
Reciprocity

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule allows, but does not require, State Driver Licensing 
Agencies (SDLAs) to waive requirements for the commercial learner's 
permit (CLP) knowledge test for certain individuals who are, or were, 
regularly employed within the last year in a military position that 
requires, or required, the operation of a commercial motor vehicle 
(CMV). This rule includes the option for an SDLA to waive the tests 
required for a passenger carrier (P) endorsement, tank vehicle (N) 
endorsement, or hazardous material (H) endorsement, with proof of 
training and experience.

DATES: This final rule is effective November 27, 2018.
    Petitions for Reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted 
to the FMCSA Administrator no later than October 29, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Selden Fritschner, CDL Division, 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 
Washington, DC 20590-0001, by email at [email protected], or by 
telephone at (202) 366-0677. If you have questions on viewing or 
submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, by 
telephone at (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule is organized as follows:

I. Rulemaking Documents
    A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
    B. Privacy Act
II. Executive Summary
III. Abbreviations and Acronyms
IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
V. Regulatory Background
    A. Current Standards
    B. Recent Activity
    C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
VI. Discussion of Comments and Responses
    A. Endorsements, License Classes, and License Restrictions
    B. Military Occupational Specialties, Military Occupational 
Codes
    C. Time Period for Waiver
    D. Extension of the Proposal
    E. SDLA Compliance
    F. Driver Training
    G. Proof of Training and Experience
    H Converting CLP to CDL
    I. Other Comments
VII. International Impacts
VIII. Section-by-Section Analysis
    A. Section 383.23 Commercial Driver's License
    B. Section 383.77 Substitute for Knowledge and Driving Skills 
Tests for Drivers With Military CMV Experience
    C. Section 383.79 Driving Skills Testing of Out-of-State 
Students; Knowledge and Driving Skills Testing of Military Personnel
    D. Section 384.301 Substantial Compliance General Requirements
IX. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and 
Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), 
and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
    B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 
Costs)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)
    D. Assistance for Small Entities
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    F. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection of Information)
    G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
    H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
    I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
    J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
    K. Privacy
    L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
    M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
    N. E.O. 13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic 
Growth)
    O. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
    P. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical 
Standards)
    Q. Environment (NEPA)

I. Rulemaking Documents

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    For access to docket FMCSA-2017-0047 to read background documents 
and comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time, or 
to Docket Services at U.S. Department of Transportation, Room W12-140, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these 
comments without edit including any personal information the commenter 
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records 
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at 
www.transportation.gov/privacy.

II. Executive Summary

    This rule allows, but does not require, SDLAs to waive the 
knowledge test requirements and tests required for some endorsements 
with proof of experience for certain individuals who are regularly 
employed, or were regularly employed within the last year, in a 
military position requiring the operation of a vehicle that would be 
classified as a CMV pursuant to 49 CFR 383.5, if operated in a civilian 
context. This rulemaking implements part of section 5401 of the Fixing 
America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114-94).
    In combination with a recent rulemaking--Commercial Driver's 
License Requirements of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st 
Century Act (MAP-21) and the Military Commercial Driver's License Act 
of 2012 (2012 Act), published on October 13, 2016 (81 FR 70634), 
hereafter referred to as the Military CDL I Rule--this rule gives 
States the option to waive both the CDL knowledge and driving skills 
tests for certain current and former military service members who 
received training to operate CMVs during active-duty, National Guard or 
reserve service in military vehicles that are comparable to CMVs. The 
combined effect of the Military CDL I Rule and this rule will allow 
certain current or former military drivers, domiciled in participating 
States, to transition to a civilian CDL more quickly due to their armed 
forces training and experience.
    FMCSA evaluated potential costs and benefits associated with this 
rulemaking. The Agency concluded that the final rule would result in a 
10-year cost savings of $16.66 million undiscounted, $14.21 million 
discounted at 3 percent, $11.70 million discounted at 7 percent, and 
$1.67 million on an annualized basis at both 7 percent and 3 percent 
discount rates. FMCSA has determined that this final rule is a 
deregulatory action under Executive Order (E.O.) 13771.

III. Abbreviations and Acronyms

AAMVA American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
ABA American Bus Association
ATA American Trucking Associations
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CDL Commercial Driver's License
CE Categorical Exclusion
CLP Commercial Learner's Permit
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle

[[Page 48965]]

CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986
CVTA Commercial Vehicle Training Association
DMV Department of Motor Vehicles
DOL Department of Labor
DOR Department of Revenue
DOT Department of Transportation
E.O. Executive Order
ECEC Employer Costs for Employee Compensation
ELDT Entry-Level Driver Training
FAST Act Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
H Hazardous Material Endorsement
IFDA International Foodservice Distributors Association IFDA
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
Michigan Bureau of Driver and Vehicle Programs for the Michigan 
Department of State
MOS Military Occupational Specialties
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
N Tank Vehicle Endorsement
NPGA National Propane Gas Association
NSTA National School Transportation Association
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OES Occupational Employment Statistics
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OOIDA Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
Oregon Oregon Driver and Motor Vehicle Service
PGANE Propane Gas Association of New England
P Passenger Carrier Endorsement
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SDLAs State Driver Licensing Agencies
TSA Transportation Security Administration

IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    This final rule rests on the authority of the Commercial Motor 
Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA), as amended, codified at 49 U.S.C. 
chapter 313 and 49 CFR parts 382, 383, and 384. The rule also responds 
to section 5401(a) of the FAST Act [Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, 
1546, December 4, 2015]. This section requires FMCSA to modify the 
minimum testing standards of its CDL regulations to credit the training 
and knowledge received by certain current or former military drivers in 
the armed forces, including the reserve components and National Guard, 
to drive military vehicles similar to civilian CMVs [49 U.S.C. 
31305(d)(1)(C)].
    The CMVSA provides broadly that ``[t]he Secretary of Transportation 
shall prescribe regulations on minimum standards for testing and 
ensuring the fitness of an individual operating a commercial motor 
vehicle'' [49 U.S.C. 31305(a)]. In general, those regulations must 
include the following: (1) Minimum standards for knowledge and driving 
(skills) tests; (2) use of a representative vehicle to take the driving 
test; (3) minimum testing standards; and (4) working knowledge of CMV 
regulations and vehicle safety systems [49 U.S.C. 31305(a)(1)-(4)].
    Section 5401(a) of the FAST Act, as amended by section (3)(1) of 
the Jobs for Our Heroes Act (Pub. L. 115-105, 131 Stat. 2263, January 
8, 2018) added 49 U.S.C. 31305(d): ``Standards for Training and Testing 
of Operators Who Are Members of the Armed Forces, Reservists, or 
Veterans.'' Section 31305(d)(1)(A) requires the Agency to modify its 
CDL regulations to ``exempt a covered individual from all or a portion 
of a driving test if the covered individual had experience in the armed 
forces or reserve components driving vehicles similar to a commercial 
motor vehicle.'' Section 31305(d)(1)(B), as also amended by the Jobs 
for Our Heroes Act, requires FMCSA to ``ensure that a covered 
individual may apply for an exemption under subparagraph (A)--(i) while 
serving in the armed forces or reserve components; and (ii) during, at 
least, the 1-year period beginning on the date on which such individual 
separates from services in the armed forces or reserve components.'' 
The term ``reserve components'' includes the Army and Air National 
Guard, as well as the normal reserve units of all branches of the 
military service. Section 5401(c) of the FAST Act also directed the 
Agency to adopt regulations allowing certain military personnel an 
exemption from the normal CDL domicile requirement, as authorized by 
the 2012 Act and codified at 49 U.S.C. 31311(a)(12)(C). These three 
provisions were implemented by the Military CDL I Rule.
    The last element of section 5401(a), which was not addressed in the 
Military CDL I Rule, directed the Agency to ``credit the training and 
knowledge a covered individual received in the armed forces or reserve 
components driving vehicles similar to a commercial motor vehicle for 
purposes of satisfying minimum standards for training and knowledge'' 
[49 U.S.C. 31305(d)(1)(C)]. That requirement is the subject of this 
final rule. It should be noted that section 31305(d)(2)(B) originally 
defined a ``covered individual'' as someone over 21 years of age who is 
``(i) a former member of the armed forces; or (ii) a former member of 
the reserve components.'' However, section 3(3) of the Jobs for Our 
Heroes Act amended section 31305(d)(2)(B) to define a ``covered 
individual'' as someone over 21 years of age who is ``(i) a current or 
former member of the armed forces; or (ii) a current or former member 
of one of the reserve components.'' Using the broad authority of 49 
U.S.C. 31315(b), the Agency implicitly took the same position in 
granting all SDLAs the temporary option (for a 2-year period) of 
waiving the CLP knowledge test for current or former members of the 
military services, including the reserves and National Guard, who had 
completed certain formal military driver training (81 FR 74861, Oct. 
27, 2016). [See ``Knowledge Test Exemption Request'' discussion below.]
    Federal training standards for CDL drivers were adopted only 
recently. Section 32304 of MAP-21 [Pub. L. 112-141, July 6, 2012, 126 
Stat. 405, 791] required entry-level driver training (ELDT) of CDL 
applicants [49 U.S.C. 31305(c)]. That requirement was promulgated on 
December 8, 2016 [81 FR 88732]. However, the ELDT rule provides that 
``[v]eterans with military CMV experience who meet all the requirements 
and conditions of Sec.  383.77'' are not required to complete the new 
entry-level training program [49 CFR 380.603(a)(3)]. Because Sec.  
383.77 authorizes the States to exempt CDL applicants with military CMV 
experience from the driving skills test, those drivers are also exempt 
from ELDT.
    Under 49 CFR 383.77, as amended by the Military CDL I Rule, the 
Agency now provides credit for military drivers' training and knowledge 
by allowing States to exempt from the CDL driving skills test those 
employees who are or were regularly employed within the last year in a 
military position requiring the operation of a military vehicle that is 
comparable to a CMV.
    This rule implements 49 U.S.C. 31305(d)(1)(C) by giving States 
limited discretion, to exempt CDL applicants with military CMV 
experience from the knowledge test required for a CLP. This final rule 
completes the requirement of section 31305(d)(1)(C) to ``credit the 
training and knowledge a covered individual received in the armed 
forces or reserve components driving vehicles similar to a commercial 
motor vehicle for purposes of satisfying minimum standards for training 
and knowledge.''

V. Regulatory Background

A. Current Standards

Knowledge Test
    As specified in 49 CFR 383.71(a)(2)(ii), any individual applying 
for a CDL is first required to take and pass a general knowledge test, 
which

[[Page 48966]]

authorizes the issuance of a CLP. The general knowledge test must meet 
the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of part 383 for 
the commercial vehicle group that person operates or expects to 
operate.
Skills Test
    Any individual applying for a CDL is required to take and pass a 
general skills test, but only after passing the knowledge test and 
obtaining a CLP. A final rule published on May 9, 2011 [``Commercial 
Driver's License Testing and Commercial Learner's Permit Standards'' 
(76 FR 26854)] added a new 49 CFR 383.77, which allows the States to 
substitute CDL applicants' eligible military CMV experience for the 
skills test.

B. Recent Activity

Military CDL I Rule
    The Military CDL I Rule addressed the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 
31305(d)(1)(A) and (B) (81 FR 70634, Oct. 13, 2016) and allows States 
to extend the period to apply for a skills test waiver after leaving 
the military from 90 days to 1 year for an individual who is regularly 
employed or was regularly employed in a military position requiring 
operation of a CMV.
    Additionally, the Military CDL I Rule allows the SDLA in the State 
where military personnel are stationed (State of duty station) to 
coordinate with the State of domicile to expedite the processing of 
applications and administer the knowledge and skills tests for a CLP or 
CDL. The SDLA in the State of domicile could then issue the CLP or CDL 
based on tests performed by the SDLA in the State of duty station.
Knowledge Test Exemption Request
    The Missouri Department of Revenue (DOR) submitted a request for an 
exemption from the FMCSA regulation that requires any driver to pass 
the general knowledge test before being issued a CLP or CDL. The 
exemption request is available in docket FMCSA-2016-0130, at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FMCSA-2016-0130-0004. The Missouri DOR 
asked FMCSA to waive the knowledge test requirement for qualified 
veterans who participated in dedicated training through approved 
military programs. The Missouri DOR contended that qualified personnel 
who participated in such programs had already received the numerous 
hours of classroom training, practical skills, and one-on-one road 
training that are essential for safe driving. FMCSA agrees with 
Missouri DOR's reasoning and granted a 2-year exemption on October 27, 
2016 (81 FR 74861), which the Agency extended to allow all SDLAs, at 
their discretion, to waive the knowledge test requirements to qualified 
veterans, reservists, National Guard, and active-duty personnel. FMCSA 
does not have data from all of the States utilizing this exemption. 
However, since January 1, 2018, Illinois has granted more than 75 
exemptions through this program. There have been no reports of serious 
incidents about any of these drivers.

C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On June 12, 2017, FMCSA published an NPRM (82 FR 26894) that 
proposed allowing SDLAs to waive the requirements for the CLP knowledge 
tests for certain individuals who are, or were, regularly employed 
within the last year in a military position that requires, or required, 
the operation of a CMV.

VI. Discussion of Comments and Responses

    FMCSA received 17 comments on the NPRM. Of these, 15 supported the 
proposal, though some requested alterations. The rule was supported by 
the American Trucking Associations (ATA), the Owner-Operator 
Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), the American Bus Association 
(ABA), the International Foodservice Distributors Association (IFDA), 
the Propane Gas Association of New England (PGANE), the National 
Propane Gas Association (NPGA), the Commercial Vehicle Training 
Association (CVTA), the Oregon Driver and Motor Vehicle Service 
(Oregon), the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (Virginia DMV), the 
National School Transportation Association (NSTA), a motor carrier, and 
several individuals. Commenters in favor of the NPRM argued that it 
would: Build on the success of past waiver programs and recent 
complementary regulations; reduce the burden to enter the industry for 
qualified military and veterans; remove duplicative requirements and 
reduce the time to get licensed; reduce problems in recruiting 
qualified employees; establish a standard of safety equivalent to that 
of the CLP knowledge test requirement of the CDL exam; and codify 
already existing practices by individual SDLAs. Several commenters 
lauded the Agency, saying the provisions of the proposed rule ensured 
that individuals receiving a waiver would be well-qualified.
    One commenter, the Bureau of Driver and Vehicle Programs for the 
Michigan Department of State (Michigan), agreed with the need to help 
veterans, but not with a waiver of the knowledge test.
    One commenter opposed the NPRM, claiming that there is no way to 
know if someone meets the knowledge test requirements unless that 
individual takes the test.
    Several individuals commented on the licensing process, medical 
standards, and other issues outside the scope of the NPRM.

A. Endorsements, License Classes, and License Restrictions

    The NPRM did not address the question of waiving the knowledge 
tests for endorsements, nor did it discuss license classes or license 
restrictions for current service personnel or veterans.
    The ABA requested clarification on whether the proposed testing 
waiver would apply to endorsements as well, and stated that it did not 
support exemptions from the knowledge tests for endorsements.
    Citing an inconsistency between Sec. Sec.  383.79(c)(1) and 
383.111, Oregon asked whether the Agency intended to allow waivers for 
all knowledge tests or just the general CDL knowledge test. Oregon 
pointed out that allowing a waiver only of the general knowledge test 
would limit the type of license that could be issued and acknowledged 
the concern about waiving other knowledge tests.
    The NPGA and PGANE asked that the proposal be amended to allow 
SDLAs to waive the knowledge test for the H endorsement for veterans 
and military service members with applicable experience. They argued 
that this change would not reduce safety and would increase 
opportunities for service men and women. One commenter pointed out that 
military training and experience would likely exceed civilian training 
and experience, due to military concerns over the transportation of 
hazardous materials. CVTA stated that many military drivers haul 
materials that would be considered hazardous in a non-military setting, 
and that they should have access to the H endorsement via a testing 
waiver, though only for a Class A license.
    The NSTA asked that the passenger and school bus endorsements be 
waived only for drivers with applicable experience. CVTA stated that 
FMCSA should consider a restricted license for a military driver who 
operated only an automatic, not a manual, transmission.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA believes that a waiver of certain endorsement 
tests is appropriate, given that many service members operate vehicles 
and transport loads using an equivalent endorsement on a civilian CDL.
    In response to these comments, this final rule explicitly allows 
SDLAs to

[[Page 48967]]

waive the knowledge tests for H and N endorsements, and the knowledge 
and driving skills tests for the P endorsement. Several Military 
Occupational Specialties (MOS) include training that corresponds to the 
knowledge tests for H, N, and P endorsements. If applicants can 
demonstrate that they have received such training, SDLAs may waive one 
or more of these knowledge tests. FMCSA provides regulatory language 
with which SDLAs must comply to waive the testing requirements for 
these three endorsements.
    As the D.C. Circuit said in National Mining Ass'n v. Mine Safety 
and Health Admin., 116 F.3d 520 (1997), ``[a]gencies are not limited to 
adopting final rules identical to proposed rules. No further notice and 
comment is required if a regulation is a `logical outgrowth' of the 
proposed rule . . . Our cases offer no precise definition of what 
counts as a `logical outgrowth.' We ask `whether ``the purposes of 
notice and comment have been adequately served.'' ' . . . Notice was 
inadequate when `the interested parties could not reasonably have 
``anticipated the final rulemaking from the draft [rule] (internal 
citations omitted).'' ' '' Id. at 531. In this case, the purposes of 
the NPRM were more than adequately served. Many commenters not only 
anticipated the possibility that the final rule might waive the 
knowledge tests for certain endorsements, some argued that the Agency 
had overlooked that obvious implication of the proposed rule while 
others, although accepting that implication, argued that such knowledge 
tests should not be waived, at least in certain cases. The inclusion of 
three endorsement waivers in this final rule is therefore a logical 
outgrowth of the purpose and structure of the NPRM.
    No waivers of endorsements are allowed beyond the three discussed 
above because the various military services provide training equivalent 
to that required to pass the written endorsement tests only for H, N, 
and P. Additionally, because this rule is voluntary, SDLAs may decide 
not to adopt it at all, or may adopt it but decline to offer waivers 
for the H or N knowledge tests, or P knowledge or driving skills tests. 
FMCSA believes that allowing waivers for endorsement knowledge testing 
will resolve nearly all concerns expressed by commenters about the 
class of licensure, as SDLAs will be able to issue CDLs with certain 
endorsements.
    There is no need to require restricted licenses based upon the type 
of transmission installed on military vehicles, because FMCSA 
recognizes that many military vehicles are fitted with automatic 
transmissions. However, all service branches have vehicles with manual 
transmissions in their fleet inventory. Each service branch has 
documentation of drivers' training, experience, and certification in 
vehicles with manual transmissions that can be provided to the SDLA 
when the driver applies for a CDL. The same proof of experience with 
different braking systems exists, including air brakes and air over 
hydraulics. As this rule is voluntary, SDLAs are still allowed to test 
these drivers' brake and manual transmission abilities, if they wish, 
and to impose a license restriction.

B. Military Occupational Specialties, Military Occupational Codes

    The NPRM provided examples of training and certification for four 
MOS: Army--88M--Motor Transport, Operator; Air Force--2T1--Vehicle 
Operations; Marine Corps--3531--Motor Vehicle Operator; and Navy--EO--
Equipment Operator. The NPRM proposed allowing SDLAs to waive the 
knowledge test for current service members or veterans who are or were 
regularly employed in a military position requiring operation of a CMV, 
and are or were operating a vehicle representative of the CMV the 
driver applicant expects to operate after receiving a CDL, or who 
operated such a vehicle immediately preceding separation from the 
military, regardless of MOS.
    The ABA requested that a list of MOS be put into regulatory 
language or the driver's SDLA record, and suggested that it would be 
appropriate to add such a list to an appendix to the final rule, a 
website, or a new ELDT rule. The ABA stated that a driver's use of the 
waiver and potentially his or her MOS should be included in the 
driver's record for prospective employers to review and evaluate during 
pre-employment screening.
    Oregon asked for a list of specific MOS to which the knowledge test 
waivers would apply and provided a list it said should be used. Oregon 
stated that the list could be expanded in the future, but was necessary 
for SDLAs' use.
    Virginia DMV asked if the Agency's intent was to allow test waivers 
only for the MOS listed in the NPRM; if so the regulatory language 
should be amended to refer to ``a military position occupation 
specialty requiring completion of a military driver training program 
that has been approved by FMCSA and operation of a CMV.''
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA agrees with the commenters and has included 
in the regulatory language a full list of MOS that are eligible for a 
waiver of the general knowledge test.
    The list of MOS in this final rule has been expanded to include the 
following:
     88M (Army), motor transport operator.
     14T (Army), PATRIOT launching station operator.
     92F (Army), fueler.
     2T1 (Air Force), vehicle operator.
     2F0 (Air Force), fueler.
     3E2 (Air Force), pavement and construction equipment 
operator.
     3531 (Marine Corps), motor vehicle operator.
     EO (Navy), equipment operator.
    The Agency has concluded that these programs enable drivers likely 
to achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level 
that would be achieved by requiring them to pass the CLP knowledge 
test. The Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy provide specific 
training dedicated to operating heavy-duty vehicles.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Note: Heavy-duty vehicles is a generic description used in 
the military to describe vehicles that have been determined by FMCSA 
and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators to have 
weights equal to or larger than the weights that require a driver to 
hold a CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are three basic military job training classifications, with 
additional training for other types of heavy-duty specialty vehicles 
(e.g., fuel haulers, construction vehicles, and military equipment 
transport oversize/overweight [non-track vehicles]).
    The four core training programs for heavy vehicle operations, based 
on the occupational specialty code of the service member, are:
     Army--88M--Motor Transport Operator.
     Air Force--2T1--Vehicle Operations.
     Marine Corps--3531--Motor Vehicle Operator.
     Navy--EO--Equipment Operator.
Army--88M Training
    The 88M Instructor Training Manual is 142 pages long. The student 
manual--STP 55-88M14-SM-TG Soldier's Manual and Trainer's Guide 88M, 
Motor Transport Operator--is 229 pages long and includes four levels of 
training. The 6-week core curriculum of the Army 88M course contains a 
total of 221 hours of training, including:
     Lecture--32 classroom hours.
     Practical application--road driving--189 hours.
    Motor Transport Operators are responsible primarily for operating 
wheeled vehicles to transport personnel

[[Page 48968]]

and cargo. Motor Transport Operator duties include: Interior 
components/controls and indicators; basic vehicle control; driving 
vehicles over all types of roads and terrain, traveling alone or in 
convoys; braking, coupling, backing, and alley docking; adverse/
tactical driving operations; pre-trip inspections; reading load plans; 
checking oil, fuel and other fluid levels, as well as tire pressure; 
operations in automatic and manual modes; crash prevention; safety 
check procedures; basic vehicle maintenance and repairs; transporting 
hazardous materials; and keeping mileage records.
    A fueler for the Army, a driver with an Army classification of 92F, 
has completed the Army 88M course and additional training specific to 
the job of a fueler.
    A PATRIOT Launching Station Operator, a driver with an Army 
classification of 14T, has completed the Army 88M course and additional 
training specific to the both the vehicle and systems the vehicle 
transports. Total training for this MOS exceeds 264 hours.
Air Force--2T1--Vehicle Operations
    The Air Force Tractor Trailer Plan of Instruction (POI) is 226 
pages long. The minimum length of instruction for the basic school is 
84 hours, including:
     22 hours of classroom.
     62 hours of hands-on activity, both alone on a training 
pad and on the road with an instructor.
    The core curriculum is based on the material in the American 
Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) CDL Manual--2005 
edition (2014 revised). Students participating in the basic 2T1 
curriculum learn general principles in the classroom. Specialized 
training occurs at the installation using the Tractor Trailer Plan of 
Instruction. A minimum of 40 hours over-the-road time is expected on 
each vehicle/trailer type.
    Topics covered in the Air Force Vehicle Operations course include: 
Overview of training and Federal requirements; Federal motor vehicle 
safety standards; tractor/trailer design; hazards and human factors 
relative to the environment where used; safety clothing and equipment; 
driving safely; pre- and post-trip vehicle inspection; basic vehicle 
control; shifting gears; managing space and speed; driving in 
mountains, fog, winter, very hot weather, and at night; railroad 
crossings; defensive awareness to avoid hazards and emergencies; skid 
control and recovery; what to do in case of a crash; fires; staying 
alert and fit to drive; hazardous materials--rules for all commercial 
drivers; preparing, inspecting, and transporting cargo safely; 
inspecting and driving with air brakes; driving combination vehicles 
safely; and coupling and uncoupling.
    Air Force fuelers holding 2F0, and Air Force pavement and 
construction equipment operators holding 3E2, must first complete 
training for 2T1, before completing additional training specific to the 
roles of 2F0 and 3E2.
Marine Corps--3531--Motor Vehicle Operator
    The core curriculum of the Marine Corps 3531 course--TM 11240-15/3G 
contains three training areas:
     Lecture--24 classroom hours.
     Demonstration--classroom/training pad--35 hours.
     Practical application--road driving--198 hours.
    Instructional breakout includes:
     Demonstration: 35 hours.
     Guided discussion: 1.5 hours.
     Lecture: 24 hours.
     Performance examination: 62 hours.
     Practical application (individual): 198 hours.
     Knowledge examination: 7 hours.
    Classroom instruction includes lectures, demonstration, and 
practice time for the specific tasks identified. Each classroom session 
includes knowledge and performance evaluations to ensure students have 
mastered all learning objectives for the specialty proficiency. 
Training includes simulators and actual vehicle operation. Practical 
training includes on-the-road and skills operations, ground guide 
procedures, and operating a vehicle with a towed load. Students 
practice their driving and backing, with and without a trailer. 
Instructors ride with the students as they operate on approved road 
routes. Specific training areas (pads) are provided for the students to 
practice their backing skills and ground guide procedures safely.
    The Marine Corps training curriculum includes emergency procedures 
and cargo loading.
Navy--EO--Equipment Operator
    The core curriculum of the USN Heavy Vehicle Operator (Truck 
Driver) (EO) course (53-3032.00) is designed to train Navy personnel to 
operate passenger and cargo vehicles to rated capacity. They palletize, 
containerize, load and safely transport various types of cargo and 
demonstrate knowledge and skills to qualify as a driver journeyman. The 
complete program covers topics including:
     Hazardous materials transportation.
     Line haul planning.
     Manual tractor-truck operations.
     Vehicle Recovery Operations.
    The course is taught over 160 hours including 30 hours of classroom 
and 130 hours of lab (behind the wheel). Upon completion of this 
course, the Navy driver will be able to:
     Perform the duties of normal, non-combat conditions 
driving in accordance with the local State driver licensing agency's 
CDL driver handbook;
     Manage hazardous petroleum, oils and lubricants (POL) 
material required during line haul and worksite activities, to support 
normal, non-combat operations;
     Perform preventive maintenance on a non- or up-armored 
manual truck tractor with drop-neck trailer, consisting of pre-start, 
during-operations, and after-operations equipment checks, to support 
normal, non-combat operations, in accordance with local State Driver 
License Agency CDL handbooks;
     Operate vehicle controls of a non- or up-armored manual 
truck-tractor, to support normal, non-combat operations; and
     Be proficient with the components and controls of a drop-
neck trailer relative to a detached/attached gooseneck and a coupled/
uncoupled trailer.
    Other topics covered within the Navy EO training program include:
     Development and maintenance of operational records.
     Operation of high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles.
     Weight distribution and load securement.
     Loading bulk and container cargo.
     Preventive maintenance.
     Pre- and post-trip vehicle safety inspections.
    The military training programs described above are thorough and 
comprehensive, incorporating most of the elements recommended by the 
Professional Truck Driver Institute, which has been the principal 
standard-setting organization for private-sector motor carrier training 
for decades. They are entirely compatible with the requirements of 
FMCSA's ELDT rule. Although geared to heavy-duty military vehicles, 
military training is readily transferrable to a civilian context, as 
the operational characteristics of large military and civilian vehicles 
are very similar and, in some cases, identical. The Agency believes 
that exempting these drivers from the CLP knowledge test, in addition 
to the skills test, will have no adverse effect on highway safety.
    This final rule also provides for waivers involving H, N, and P 
endorsements of drivers who hold an

[[Page 48969]]

MOS listed above. Though military service members are not required to 
comply with 49 CFR, including hazardous materials training (part 172, 
subpart H), several service branches offer a training curriculum that 
meets or exceeds FMCSA testing requirements for endorsements. Proof of 
such training can be confirmed at the SDLA, for example by providing a 
copy of the U.S. Air Force motor vehicle identification card (AF 2293) 
which includes an identification of the class of vehicle operated, any 
endorsement held by the operator, and any restrictions to which he or 
she are subject. The identification card also includes a list of the 
vehicles the person is authorized to operate. Similar cards are 
authorized by the Navy and Marine Corps (both designated as OF 346), 
and Army (DA 5984). This rule is not applicable to school bus 
endorsement but, as noted above, is acceptable for the P endorsement if 
the service member verifies his/her military Passenger credential.
    FMCSA recognizes that military vehicles can carry a variety of 
hazardous materials. Military personnel who carry fuel and other types 
of hazardous materials, including powder, weapons, and ammunition, are 
trained and certified to transport these materials. FMCSA clarifies 
that service members applying for waivers from the H endorsement 
knowledge test must still undergo the Hazardous Materials Endorsement 
Threat Assessment Program through the Transportation Security 
Administration (TSA) (49 CFR part 1572). SDLAs may not issue the H 
endorsement until TSA has completed its background check and approved 
the driver.
    The Agency's ELDT final rule has a compliance date of February 7, 
2020. Under 49 CFR 383.603(a)(3) of that rule, ``[v]eterans with 
military CMV experience who meet all the requirements and conditions of 
Sec.  383.77'' are exempt from the rule's training requirements [81 FR 
88732, 88790, December 8, 2016]. Section 383.77 allows States to waive 
the skills test for certain drivers with military CMV experience. This 
final rule allows a comparable waiver of the knowledge test. However, 
this rule does not affect 49 CFR 391.31, under which motor carriers 
must require their drivers to complete a road test before operating a 
CMV, unless the carrier chooses to accept a valid CDL in lieu of the 
road test (though it may not waive the road test if the driver has an N 
endorsement) [49 CFR 391.33]. In short, employers may still require 
drivers with military CMV experience who obtain a CDL without 
completing either the skills test or the knowledge test to complete a 
road test.

C. Time Period for Waiver

    FMCSA proposed to allow States to exempt from the knowledge test 
for a CLP or CDL certain current or former military service members who 
were regularly employed in a military position requiring the operation 
of a CMV during a 1-year period immediately prior to the application. 
There would be no time limit for military personnel while on active 
duty or serving actively within a reserve component or the National 
Guard to apply for the waiver.
    The NPGA and the PGANE asked that the proposal's 1-year waiver 
period be extended to 5 years. These commenters argued that the nature 
of CMV driving does not change so rapidly that a 5-year period would 
make training obsolete, even if the applicant had not driven in the 
past year.
    Oregon thought that the time limits for the knowledge and skills 
test waivers should be identical. Oregon stated that, as proposed, the 
NPRM did not match the length of the skills test waiver.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA declines to extend the 1-year waiver period. 
This rule's intended effect is to allow qualified veterans and service 
members to waive the knowledge and skills tests simultaneously to 
obtain licensure. The Military CDL I rule used a 1-year period; FMCSA 
believes that is appropriate here as well, as the two are now 
synchronized.

D. Extension of the Proposal

    One commenter requested that the proposal be extended to non-
military personnel. Another stated that veterans should have licenses 
granted automatically, as they are driving on behalf of the U.S. 
Military.
    FMCSA Response: The application process for what might be called an 
``even exchange'' of a military truck or bus license for a civilian CDL 
was directed by the 2012 Act and section 5401 of the FAST Act. That 
process is limited explicitly to military service members with 
appropriate experience. As amended by section 5401(a), 49 U.S.C. 
31305(d)(1)(C) requires FMCSA to ``credit the training and knowledge a 
covered individual received in the armed forces or reserve components 
driving vehicles similar to a commercial motor vehicle for purposes of 
satisfying minimum standards for training and knowledge.'' Only 
individuals currently serving on active duty, including the National 
Guard and reserve components, or recently separated service men and 
women with comparable training and experience, will be eligible for a 
waiver of the knowledge test. There is no equivalent requirement to 
waive knowledge tests for non-military personnel. In any case, that 
step would take this rule far beyond its original purpose and scope.
    Federal regulations already exempt active duty military personnel 
from the need to hold a CDL when driving while on duty in a military 
vehicle on official military orders (49 CFR 383.3(c)). This final rule, 
in combination with the Military CDL I final rule, will allow States to 
make the licensing of current or former military personnel as close to 
automatic as possible. Other Federal requirements for licensure, like a 
medical examiner's certification, must be met and cannot be waived. 
However, qualified current and separated service members will now have 
significantly reduced obstacles to earning non-military licenses.

E. SDLA Compliance

    The Agency's June 12, 2017, NPRM proposed that SDLAs may waive the 
knowledge test; it would be entirely voluntary.
    The CVTA asked FMCSA to consider setting guidelines for the process 
to increase consistency between SDLAs. ABA asked how the driver's SDLA 
record will reflect whether certain tests were waived.
    Several commenters, including the two propane gas organizations, 
supported a voluntary waiver program and stated that a 3-year 
compliance date for States was appropriate.
    ATA suggested that FMCSA work with AAMVA to develop a required form 
to verify that a driver has been trained in the ELDT elements to a 
level at least equivalent to that reflected by passage of the knowledge 
exam. Oregon asked several questions regarding coordination between the 
State of duty station and the State of domicile. Oregon asked if it was 
the Agency's intention to allow a State to administer all knowledge 
tests for certain military service members not domiciled there, but to 
limit that provision to just the general knowledge test for all other 
non-domiciled applicants.
    The Virginia DMV stated that the process outlined in the proposed 
rule regarding testing for and obtaining a civilian CDL seems 
unnecessary and burdensome to the applicant because the 2012 Act 
already allows a State to issue a CDL to military personnel stationed 
but not domiciled there. The commenter called attention to the CDL rule 
prohibiting a driver from holding

[[Page 48970]]

more than one license, noting that issuance of a CDL by the State of 
domicile would invalidate any other license held by the driver, making 
it illegal for him or her to drive for a period of several days until 
the newly-issued CDL arrived. Moreover, the commenter added that the 
proposed rule did not require States that decide to participate in the 
program to change their laws, if necessary, and invalidate or destroy 
the non-CDL, even before the CDL document is delivered to the 
applicant.
    Another concern of the Virginia DMV was the requirement of 49 CFR 
383.71(b)(9) for applicants to provide a proof of citizenship or lawful 
residency in a State of domicile in cases where they do not have such 
identification. Moreover, the commenter believed that FMCSA should 
provide an exception for applicants who do not have an active 
residential or mailing address in the State of domicile and allow such 
applicants' CDL or CLP to show an address located in the State of duty 
station.
    The Virginia DMV was concerned with the provision that permits the 
State of duty station to accept an application for a CLP or CDL, 
including an application for waiver of the knowledge test or skills 
test, only if the State of duty station obtains prior approval from the 
State of domicile. The commenter wrote that ``this creates an excessive 
burden on States to go state by State in obtaining prior approval 
agreements with other States. DMV is also concerned that if a duty 
station State does not obtain prior approval from a State of domicile 
before proceeding or the duty station State misunderstands what is 
approved[,] this will result in an undue hardship on military service 
members who must rely on the duty station State to follow regulations. 
Therefore, the Virginia DMV recommends that it should be the 
applicant's responsibility to obtain written approval from the State of 
domicile prior to beginning any exams in the duty station State since 
some applicants may be ineligible for domicile accommodation, due to 
outstanding administrative requirements in the State of domicile (e.g. 
photograph, compliance, lawful presence, State residency).'' 
Furthermore, given that the NPRM would allow, but not require, States 
to waive the knowledge test, this commenter stated that permitting 
States to impose additional conditions and limitations on applicants, 
beyond those included in the proposed rule, would result in a lack of 
uniformity from State to State, creating a confusing process for 
service members to navigate.
    Lastly, Virginia DMV noted that the cost associated with complying 
with the proposed rule is neither minimal, given the need for changes 
to State law, nor would the required re-programming of information 
technology systems would be minor, as the NPRM indicated. FMCSA needs 
to address these administrative and other costs. Moreover, Virginia DMV 
said that, if it participates in the waiver program, it would not do so 
until AAMVA had developed a secure system to transmit knowledge test 
results and other documentation.
    FMCSA Response: As stated previously, States waiving knowledge 
tests under this rule are not required to coordinate their programs 
between States, although all States granting waivers must verify the 
qualifications of applicants based on various military documents, as 
specified in this rule. With respect to the CVTA comment, Sec.  
383.135(c) currently requires recording of the application for waiver 
in the driver's file. As for the comments of the propane gas 
organizations, FMCSA believes this rule should be available to States 
as soon as possible. The Agency is therefore making this final rule 
effective 60 days after publication.
    Responding to the ATA's request that FMCSA specify a form 
demonstrating the equivalence of military training with the standards 
required for ELDT, the Agency has concluded, after consultation with 
AAMVA and close examination of the military training and testing 
manuals and procedures, that training to the prescribed MOS standards 
meets or exceeds that required by the ELDT rule. The form requested by 
ATA is therefore unnecessary.
    This final rule makes no changes to the existing domicile 
requirements or any other provision of part 383. While the 2012 Act 
does allow States to issue CDLs to military personnel stationed there, 
no States have done so. The NPRM and this final rule avoid the 
possibility that CDL applicants could inadvertently lose their ``home'' 
State of domicile by accepting a CDL from the State of duty station.
    The requirement and documents needed to provide proof of 
citizenship or lawful permanent residency in Sec.  383.71(b)(9) are the 
same, whether the application is being made in the State of domicile or 
some other State. Without that proof, a CLP or CDL may not be issued. 
As for Virginia DMV's concern about the possible inability of an 
applicant to show an active mailing address in his or her ``home'' 
State to prove domicile, Sec.  383.71(b)(10) allows the use of a 
``government issued tax form'' to serve as proof. Without such a tax 
record, there is no good reason to believe an applicant's assertion of 
domicile in a State.

F. Driver Training

    The NPRM described the various military training programs and 
explained that they are thorough and comprehensive. These programs 
incorporate most of the elements recommended by the Professional Truck 
Driver Institute. Military training is entirely compatible with the 
requirements of FMCSA's ELDT rule (81 FR 88732, December 8, 2016, also 
available in docket FMCSA-2007-27748).
    ATA stated that FMCSA should verify that all military training 
programs thoroughly cover all elements required by the ELDT rule, and, 
if they do not, should work with the military branches to secure 
comparable training.
    CVTA stated that the training manuals from the Army, Navy, Air 
Force, and Marines all covered, in ``considerable detail,'' the skills 
needed under the ELDT rule.
    FMCSA Response: As stated previously, the training and testing by 
the military meet or exceed FMCSA's various training standards listed 
in appendices A through E to 49 CFR part 380 (compliance required by 
February 7, 2020) and the AAMVA testing standard specified in 49 CFR 
383.131.

G. Proof of Training and Experience

    NSTA stated that individuals seeking a waiver should ``certify and 
provide evidence'' of their training and experience, specifically for 
passenger carrier and school bus endorsements. ATA asked the Agency for 
``explicit acknowledgement'' that a driver using the waiver has the 
knowledge necessary to pass the test. ATA also said that employers may 
view the waiver as a lesser standard, and that FMCSA should provide the 
same process for checking the driver's record, experience, 
restrictions, equipment, etc., as States allow for other drivers. ATA 
expressed concern that veterans utilizing this program might be 
perceived as holding a lesser license.
    ABA requested guidance on how an employer could confirm a driver's 
service and MOS. Oregon asked how to confirm that a driver attempting 
to use this waiver had proper training and experience. Oregon also 
asked if certain MOS should be considered proof of appropriate 
training, and requested a formal definition of ``approved training.''

[[Page 48971]]

    FMCSA Response: Under this rule, drivers who hold or held such 
designations have completed ``approved training'' comparable to that 
required to pass the general knowledge test. SDLAs will be able to 
verify a driver's MOS status. As indicated above, the SDLA will be able 
to check military documents, such as AF 2293, etc. The Agency will also 
provide SDLAs with guidance and sample documents that can be used to 
verify an applicant's required training and testing in the appropriate 
vehicle. A document summarizing that guidance is currently under 
development, and will be available to SDLAs. Certification to an 
employer that a driver is qualified is not part of this rulemaking. 
Individuals who are waived from the tests will receive standard CDLs 
and be treated the same as all other CDL holders.

H. CDL Waiting Period

    ATA asked if FMCSA planned to require the usual 14-day waiting 
period between issuing these two licenses (49 CFR 383.25(e)).
    FMCSA Response: Under this rule, a State may treat military 
personnel with the appropriate MOS as though they had completed the 
knowledge test for a CLP. However, because recipients of such waivers 
are eligible immediately for a CDL, they are not issued a CLP. The 14-
day waiting period was adopted to ensure that drivers had time to 
obtain behind-the-wheel training before attempting to pass the skills 
test. However, Sec.  383.77 requires applicants with military 
experience seeking a waiver of the driving skills test to certify 
certain experience over a 2-year period prior to the application. The 
MOSs listed in this final rule demonstrate that the applicant has 
received training equivalent to that required by the ELDT rule, which 
is also sufficient to pass the general and endorsement knowledge tests. 
Under these circumstances, a 14-day waiting period would serve no 
purpose. This rule does not waive other requirements for the issuance 
of a CDL, including the medical card required of all CDL holders and 
the TSA background check for applicants for H endorsement.

I. Other Comments

    FMCSA revised 49 CFR 383.77, Substitute for driving skills tests 
for drivers with military CMV experience, and 49 CFR 383.79, Skills 
testing of out-of-State students; Knowledge and skills testing of 
military personnel, in the 2016 Military CDL I final rule. In the NPRM, 
FMCSA proposed edits to these two sections to accommodate the 
provisions related to the knowledge test.
    Virginia DMV submitted multiple comments and questions about parts 
of the FMCSRs that were not substantively modified by this rulemaking, 
reflecting misunderstandings about the NPRM. Modifications to the final 
rule in response to other comments have resolved and clarified the 
issues raised by Virginia DMV.

VII. International Impacts

    The FMCSRs, and any exceptions to the FMCSRs, apply only within the 
United States (and, in some cases, United States territories). Motor 
carriers and drivers are subject to the laws and regulations of the 
countries in which they operate unless an international agreement 
states otherwise. Drivers and carriers should be aware of the 
regulatory differences among nations.

VIII. Section-by-Section Analysis

A. Section 383.23 Commercial Driver's License

    The reference to ``written'' tests in paragraph (a)(1) is changed 
to ``knowledge'' tests and the term ``commercial motor vehicle'' is 
abbreviated as ``CMV'' to match the terminology used elsewhere in 49 
CFR part 383. The word ``skills'' is added after ``driving'' to clarify 
the type of test. No changes are made to other paragraphs in this 
section.

B. Section 383.77 Substitute for Knowledge and Driving Skills Tests for 
Drivers With Military CMV Experience

    This section is retitled as Substitute for knowledge and driving 
skills tests for drivers with military CMV experience to include 
knowledge test waivers. The existing introductory paragraph is now 
contained in new paragraph (b)(1) and the introductory text of 
paragraph (b)(2).
    FMCSA adds new paragraph (a), titled Knowledge test waivers for 
certain current or former military service members applying for a CLP 
or CDL, to outline the requirements for eligibility for knowledge test 
waivers, including paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(A) through (H) that list 
specific MOS eligible for knowledge test waivers. Existing paragraph 
(a) is now contained in new paragraph (b)(2)(ii). The language has been 
slightly modified to make it consistent with new paragraph (a).
    New paragraph (b) is titled Driving skills test waivers for certain 
current or former military service members applying for a CDL. Existing 
paragraph (b) is now contained in new paragraph (b)(2)(i).
    New paragraph (c) is titled Endorsement waivers for certain current 
or former military service members applying for a CLP or a CDL. 
Paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) contain the requirements certain 
applicants must meet for SDLAs to grant them relief from the knowledge 
and skills tests for P, and the knowledge tests for N and H. New 
paragraph (c)(4) provides the conditions and limitations that are 
placed on a waiver of the tests required for a P, N, or H endorsement.

C. Section 383.79 Driving Skills Testing of Out-of-State Students; 
Knowledge and Driving Skills Testing of Military Personnel

    The title of this section and paragraph (a) are modified to include 
the term ``driving'' before the terms ``skills.'' Other editorial 
changes are made to paragraph (a). Existing paragraph (b), Military 
service member applicants for a CLP or CDL, is removed and replaced by 
a new paragraph (b), Active duty military service members. New 
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) discuss the responsibilities of the State of 
duty station and the State of domicile, respectively.

D. Section 384.301 Substantial Compliance General Requirements

    New paragraph (l) is added to provide a compliance date for this 
rule.

IX. Regulatory Analyses

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 
13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures

    FMCSA performed an analysis of the impacts of the final rule and 
determined it is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by E.O. 
13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Accordingly, the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it under that 
Order. It is also not significant within the meaning of DOT regulatory 
policies and procedures (DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR 
11034 (Feb. 26, 1979)).
    This rule will allow, but not require, States to waive the 
requirements for the CDL knowledge tests for certain current or former 
military service members who can certify and provide evidence that they 
were regularly employed within the last year in a military position 
that requires/required the operation of a CMV. This rule will provide 
an expedited path for certain military service members to enter the 
labor market by eliminating the usual 14-day waiting period after 
passing the knowledge test for the CLP and either

[[Page 48972]]

taking the driving skills test or applying for a skills test waiver.
    FMCSA evaluated potential costs and benefits that could result from 
this rulemaking. The Agency estimates that an annual average of 2,460 
military service members will be affected by the rule, with each 
experiencing a reduction in costs related to elimination of the CDL 
knowledge test and the 14-day waiting period. As presented in Table 1, 
the final rule will result in a 10-year cost savings of $16.66 million 
undiscounted, $14.21 million discounted at 3 percent, $11.70 million 
discounted at 7 percent, and $1.67 million on an annualized basis at 7 
percent or 3 percent discount rates.
Scope and Key Inputs to the Analysis
    The Agency does not know how many military service members will 
receive CDL knowledge test waivers and uses the number of CDL skills 
test waivers issued as a proxy for the number of military service 
members who will be most likely to use the relief provided in this 
rule. In the Military CDL I final rule, FMCSA estimated that an annual 
average of 2,460 military service members were granted skills test 
waivers, and thus estimates that the same number will be granted 
knowledge test waivers as a result of this final rule. For purposes of 
this analysis, FMCSA assumed that number would remain constant in 
future years.
    The Agency evaluated changes in the opportunity cost of time for 
military service members, or drivers, using the driver wage rate to 
represent the value of the drivers' time. In the absence of the rule, 
that time would have been spent taking the CDL knowledge tests and 
waiting to procure employment as CMV drivers, time that will now be 
available to drivers for other uses, such as productive employment. The 
source for driver wages is the median hourly wage data (May 2016) from 
the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 
Occupational Employment Statistics (OES).\2\ The BLS does not publish 
data on fringe benefits for specific occupations, but it does for the 
broad industry groups in its Employer Costs for Employee Compensation 
(ECEC) release. For drivers, this analysis uses an average hourly wage 
of $25.75 and average hourly benefits of $14.49 for private industry 
workers in ``transportation and warehousing'' \3\ to estimate that 
fringe benefits are equal to 56 percent ($14.49 / $25.75) of wages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics 
(BLS). Occupational Employment Statistics (OES). National. May 2016. 
Available at: http://www.bls.gov/oes/special.requests/oesm16nat.zip 
(accessed January 16, 2018).
    \3\ U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics 
(BLS). Table 10: Employer costs per hour worked for employee 
compensation and costs as a percent of total compensation: Private 
industry workers, by industry group, September 2017. Available at: 
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf (accessed January 16, 
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA assumes that military service members are employed while they 
are waiting to obtain a CDL and uses the light truck or delivery 
service driver wage rate (industry code 53-3033) as a proxy for the 
employment opportunities available to non-CDL drivers. Per the BLS 
definition, drivers in the light truck or delivery service industry 
drive a truck or van with a capacity of less than 26,000 pounds gross 
vehicle weight and, as such, do not require a Class A or a Class B CDL. 
FMCSA uses a driver wage rate of 23 to account for non-CDL driving 
opportunities available to military service members, which is the base 
median hourly wage of $14.70 adjusted to account for fringe benefits 
($23 = $14.70 x 1.56).
    FMCSA uses the heavy tractor-trailer wage rate (industry code 53-
3032) of $31 to represent the employment opportunities available to 
military service members after they obtain their CDL. This value is the 
base median wage of $19.87, adjusted to account for fringe benefits 
($31 = $19.87 x 1.56).
Costs
    This rule will reduce driver opportunity cost by creating an 
expedited path for certain military service members to obtain their CDL 
and begin working for a motor carrier. First, the affected military 
service members will receive a waiver for the CDL knowledge tests and 
will experience a reduction in opportunity cost equal to the length of 
time they would have spent taking the CDL knowledge tests. FMCSA 
estimates that each of the 2,460 affected military service members will 
save approximately 60 minutes, or one hour, and values this time at the 
wage the driver will be earning in the absence of the CDL knowledge 
test requirement, $31. As displayed in Table 1, FMCSA estimates that 
the annual undiscounted cost savings of allowing a CDL knowledge test 
waiver are approximately $76,000 ($76,000 = 2,460 drivers x 1 hour x 
$31), and the total 10-year undiscounted cost savings are approximately 
$760,000.
    Second, because of the waiver, certain military service members 
will no longer be required to wait 14 days before obtaining their CDL 
and beginning employment for a motor carrier. Eliminating the waiting 
period could result in up to 80 hours of increased wages (two 40-hour 
work weeks). Because the military service members are estimated to be 
working and earning a wage during the waiting period, the impact of 
removing the waiting period is the difference between what they are 
earning under the baseline (estimated at $23), and what they will earn 
under the rule (estimated at 31). Thus, FMCSA quantified the impact of 
removing the waiting period at 8 per hour ($8 = $31 - $23). The 
analysis similarly estimated that this will impact 2,460 service 
members. As presented in Table 1, FMCSA estimates that the annual 
undiscounted cost savings are $1.59 million ($8 x 80 x $2,460), and the 
10-year total undiscounted cost savings are $15.90 million.
    As presented in Table 1, the total cost savings of the final rule 
are $16.66 million undiscounted, $14.21 million discounted at 3 
percent, $11.70 million discounted at 7 percent, and $1.67 million 
annualized at both a 3 percent and 7 percent discount rate.

                                                  Table 1--Summary of the Total Costs of the Final Rule
                                                                 [In millions of 2016 $]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Undiscounted                                 Discounted
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Year                                                                          Total costs    Discounted at   Discounted at
                                                                   Reduced test time  Earlier employment        \a\          3 percent       7 percent
                                                                   A = 2,460 drivers   B = 2,460 drivers       C = A + B
                                                                      x 31 x -1 hour     x 8 x -80 hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018............................................................             ($0.08)             ($1.59)         ($1.67)         ($1.62)         ($1.56)

[[Page 48973]]

 
2019............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.57)          (1.46)
2020............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.52)          (1.36)
2021............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.48)          (1.27)
2022............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.44)          (1.19)
2023............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.40)          (1.11)
2024............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.35)          (1.04)
2025............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.32)          (0.97)
2026............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.28)          (0.91)
2027............................................................              (0.08)              (1.59)          (1.67)          (1.24)          (0.85)
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              (0.76)             (15.90)         (16.66)         (14.21)         (11.70)
                                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Annualized..............................................  ..................  ..................          (1.67)          (1.67)          (1.67)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Total cost values may not equal the sum of the components due to rounding (the totals shown in this column are the rounded sum of unrounded
  components).
\b\ Values shown in parentheses are negative values (i.e., less than zero), and represent a decrease in cost or a cost savings.

Benefits
    In considering the potential impacts on safety from this rule, the 
Agency notes that affected military service members have previous 
training or experience operating a CMV, which serves as an adequate 
substitute for taking the knowledge test and holding a CLP for a 
minimum of 14 days. Therefore, the Agency anticipates that there will 
be no change in potential safety benefits associated with this rule.

B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs)

    This final rule is expected to be an E.O. 13771 deregulatory 
action. \4\ The present value of the cost savings of this rule, 
measured on an infinite time horizon at a 7 percent discount rate, are 
approximately $20.8 million. Expressed on an annualized basis, the cost 
savings are $1.5 million. These values are expressed in 2016 dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Executive Office of the President. Executive Order 13771 of 
January 30, 2017. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 
Costs. 82 FR 9339-9341. Feb. 3, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857), requires Federal 
agencies to consider the impact of their regulatory proposals on small 
entities, analyze effective alternatives that minimize small entity 
impacts, and make their analyses available for public comment. The term 
``small entities'' means small businesses and not-for-profit 
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not 
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with a 
population of less than 50,000.\5\ Accordingly, DOT policy requires an 
analysis of the impact of all regulations on small entities and 
mandates that agencies strive to lessen any adverse effects on these 
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Available 
at: https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/regulatory-flexibility-act 
(accessed December 14, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When an agency issues a rulemaking proposal, the RFA requires the 
agency to ``prepare and make available for public comment an initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis'' which will ``describe the impact of 
the proposed rule on small entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605 of 
the RFA allows an agency to certify, in lieu of preparing an analysis, 
that the proposed rulemaking is not expected to have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    FMCSA provided a factual basis and certified in the proposal that 
the rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. FMCSA did not receive comments on the factual basis or 
the proposal, and has not changed the determination in this final rule.

D. Assistance for Small Entities

    In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, FMCSA wants to assist small entities 
in understanding this final rule so that they can better evaluate its 
effects on themselves and participate in the rulemaking initiative. If 
the final rule will affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance; please consult the FMCSA point of 
contact, Selden Fritschner, listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this final rule.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal 
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and 
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small 
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these 
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small 
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call 
1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). DOT has a policy regarding the rights 
of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an explicit 
policy against retaliation for exercising these rights.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions

[[Page 48974]]

that may result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $156 
million (which is the equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for 
inflation to 2015 levels) or more in any one year. Though this final 
rule will not result in such expenditure, the Agency does discuss the 
effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection Information)

    This final rule calls for no new collection of information under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)

    A rule has implications for federalism under Section 1(a) of E.O. 
13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.''
    FMCSA has determined that this rule would not have substantial 
direct costs on or for the States, nor will it limit the policymaking 
discretion of the States. Nothing in this document preempts any State 
law or regulation. Therefore, this rule does not have sufficient 
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism 
Impact Statement.

H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This final rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 
3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, 
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)

    E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks 
and Safety Risks, requires agencies issuing ``economically 
significant'' rules, if the regulation also concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that an agency has reason to believe may 
disproportionately affect children, to include an evaluation of the 
regulation's environmental health and safety effects on children. The 
Agency determined this final rule is not economically significant. 
Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on children is required. In any 
event, the Agency does not anticipate that this regulatory action could 
in any respect present an environmental or safety risk that could 
disproportionately affect children.

J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    FMCSA reviewed this final rule in accordance with E.O. 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights, and has determined it will not effect a taking of 
private property or otherwise have taking implications.

K. Privacy

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, (5 U.S.C. 552a note) 
requires the Agency to conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of a 
regulation that will affect the privacy of individuals. Because this 
final rule does not require the collection of personally identifiable 
information (PII), the Agency is not required to conduct a PIA.
    Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note) 
requires Federal agencies to conduct a PIA for new or substantially 
changed technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates 
information in an identifiable form. No new or substantially changed 
technology would collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a 
result of this rule. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.

L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental 
consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this 
program.

M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    FMCSA has analyzed this final rule under E.O. 13211, Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined that the rule is not a 
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a 
``significant regulatory action'' likely to have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it 
does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211.

N. E.O. 13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth)

    E.O. 13783 directs executive departments and agencies to review 
existing regulations that potentially burden the development or use of 
domestically produced energy resources, and to appropriately suspend, 
revise, or rescind those that unduly burden the development of domestic 
energy resources. In accordance with E.O. 13783, DOT prepared and 
submitted a report to the Director of OMB that provides specific 
recommendations that, to the extent permitted by law, could alleviate 
or eliminate aspects of agency action that burden domestic energy 
production. This final rule has not been identified by DOT under E.O. 
13783 as potentially alleviating unnecessary burdens on domestic energy 
production.

O. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)

    This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175, 
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because 
it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

P. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical 
Standards)

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards 
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, 
through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, 
design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related 
management systems practices) are standards that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use 
technical standards. Therefore, FMCSA did not consider the use of 
voluntary consensus standards.

Q. Environment (NEPA)

    FMCSA analyzed this rule for the purpose of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
determined this action is categorically excluded from further analysis 
and documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental 
impact statement under FMCSA Order 5610.1(69 FR 9680, March 1, 2004), 
Appendix 2, paragraphs 6.s.(6) and 6.t.(2). The Categorical Exclusion 
(CE) in paragraph 6.s.(6) covers a requirement for States to give 
knowledge and skills tests to all qualified applicants for commercial 
drivers' licenses which meet the Federal standard. The CE in paragraph 
6.t.(2) covers regulations to ensure that the States comply with the 
provisions of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986, by: (2) 
Having the appropriate laws, regulations, programs, policies, 
procedures and information systems concerning the qualification and

[[Page 48975]]

licensing of persons who apply for a commercial driver's license, and 
persons who are issued a commercial driver's license. The requirements 
in this rule are covered by these CEs and the proposed action does not 
have any effect on the quality of the environment. The CE determination 
is available for inspection or copying in the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 383

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, 
Highway safety, Motor carriers.

49 CFR Part 384

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, 
Highway safety, Motor carriers.

    In consideration of the foregoing, FMCSA amends 49 CFR chapter III, 
parts 383 and 384, to read as follows:

PART 383--COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS; REQUIREMENTS AND 
PENALTIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 383 is revised 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. 1748, 1766, 1767; sec. 
1012(b) of Pub. L. 107-56; 115 Stat. 272, 297, sec. 4140 of Pub. L. 
109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1746; sec. 32934 of Pub. L. 112-141, 126 
Stat. 405, 830; secs. 5401 and 7208 of Pub. L. 114- 94, 129 Stat. 
1312, 1546, 1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.


0
2. Amend Sec.  383.23 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  383.23   Commercial driver's license.

    (a) * * *
    (1) No person shall operate a CMV unless such person has taken and 
passed knowledge and driving skills tests for a CLP or CDL that meet 
the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of this part 
for the CMV that person operates or expects to operate.
* * * * *

0
3. Revise Sec.  383.77 to read as follows:


Sec.  383.77   Substitute for knowledge and driving skills tests for 
drivers with military CMV experience.

    (a) Knowledge test waivers for certain current or former military 
service members applying for a CLP or CDL--(1) In general. For current 
or former military service members, as defined in Sec.  383.5, who meet 
the conditions and limitations set forth in paragraph (a)(2) of this 
section, a State may waive the requirements in Sec. Sec.  383.23(a)(1) 
and 383.25(a)(3) that a person must pass a knowledge test for a CLP or 
CDL.
    (2) Conditions and limitations. A current or former military 
service member applying for waiver of the knowledge test described in 
paragraph (a)(1) of this section must certify and provide evidence 
that, during the 1-year period immediately prior to the application, 
he/she:
    (i) Is or was regularly employed and designated as a:
    (A) Motor Transport Operator--88M (Army);
    (B) PATRIOT Launching Station Operator--14T (Army);
    (C) Fueler--92F (Army);
    (D) Vehicle Operator--2T1 (Air Force);
    (E) Fueler--2F0 (Air Force);
    (F) Pavement and Construction Equipment Operator--3E2 (Air Force);
    (G) Motor Vehicle Operator--3531 (Marine Corps); or
    (H) Equipment Operator--E.O. (Navy).
    (ii) Is operating a vehicle representative of the CMV type the 
driver applicant expects to operate upon separation from the military, 
or operated such a vehicle type immediately preceding separation from 
the military;
    (iii) Has not simultaneously held more than one civilian license 
(in addition to a military license);
    (iv) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
    (v) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for 
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec.  383.51(b);
    (vi) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor 
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec.  383.51(c); 
and
    (vii) Has not 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.
    (b) Driving skills test waivers for certain current or former 
military service members applying for a CDL--(1) In general. At the 
discretion of a State, the driving skills test required by Sec.  
383.23(a)(1), and 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.
    (2) Conditions and limitations. The State shall impose conditions 
and limitations to restrict the applicants from whom a State may accept 
alternative requirements for the driving skills test described in Sec.  
383.113. Such conditions must require at least the following:
    (i) An applicant must provide evidence and certify that he/she:
    (A) Is regularly employed or was regularly employed within the last 
year in a military position requiring operation of a CMV;
    (B) Was exempted from the CDL requirements in Sec.  383.3(c); and
    (C) Was operating a vehicle representative of the CMV type the 
driver applicant operates or expects to operate, for at least the 2 
years immediately preceding separation from the military.
    (ii) An applicant must certify that, during the 2-year period 
immediately prior to applying for a CDL, he/she:
    (A) Has not simultaneously held more than one civilian license (in 
addition to a military license);
    (B) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
    (C) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for 
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec.  383.51(b);
    (D) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor 
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec.  383.51(c); 
and
    (E) Has not 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 crash, and 
has no record of a crash in which he/she was at fault.
    (c) Endorsement waivers for certain current or former military 
service members applying for a CLP or a CDL--(1) Passenger. For current 
or former military service members, as defined in Sec.  383.5, who meet 
the conditions and limitations set forth in paragraph (c)(4) of this 
section, a State may waive the requirements in Sec.  383.25(a)(5)(i), 
Sec.  383.93(a) and (c)(2) that an applicant must pass a driving skills 
test and a specialized knowledge test, described in Sec.  383.117, for 
a passenger (P) endorsement.
    (2) Tank vehicle. For current or former military service members, 
as defined in Sec.  383.5, who meet the conditions and limitations set 
forth in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, a State may waive the 
requirements in Sec. Sec.  383.25(a)(5)(iii) and 383.93(a) and (c)(3) 
that an applicant must pass a specialized knowledge test, described in 
Sec.  383.119, for a tank vehicle (N) endorsement.
    (3) Hazardous materials. For current or former military service 
members, as defined in Sec.  383.5, who meet the conditions and 
limitations set forth in

[[Page 48976]]

paragraph (c)(4) of this section, a State may waive the requirements in 
Sec.  383.93(a)(1) and (c)(4) that an applicant must pass a specialized 
knowledge test, described in Sec.  383.121, for a hazardous materials 
(H) endorsement. States must continue to meet the requirements for a 
hazardous materials endorsement in subpart I of this part.
    (4) Conditions and limitations. A current or former military 
service member applying for waiver of the driving skills test or the 
specialized knowledge test for a passenger carrier endorsement, the 
knowledge test for the tank vehicle endorsement, or the knowledge test 
for the hazardous materials endorsement, must certify and provide 
evidence that, during the 1-year period immediately prior to the 
application, he/she:
    (i) Is or was regularly employed in a military position requiring 
operation of a passenger CMV, if the applicant is requesting a waiver 
of the knowledge and driving skills test for a passenger endorsement; 
operation of a tank vehicle, if the applicant is requesting a waiver of 
the knowledge test for a tank vehicle endorsement; or transportation of 
hazardous materials, if the applicant is requesting a waiver of the 
knowledge test for a hazardous materials endorsement;
    (ii) Has not simultaneously held more than one civilian license (in 
addition to a military license);
    (iii) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
    (iv) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for 
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec.  383.51(b);
    (v) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor 
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec.  383.51(c); 
and
    (vi) Has not 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 crash, and 
has no record of a crash in which he/she was at fault.

0
4. Revise Sec.  383.79 to read as follows:


Sec.  383.79   Driving skills testing of out-of-State students; 
knowledge and driving skills testing of military personnel.

    (a) CDL applicants trained out-of-State--(1) State that administers 
the driving skills test. A State may administer its driving 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 or her State of domicile). Such 
test results must be transmitted electronically directly from the 
testing State to the licensing State in a direct, efficient and secure 
manner.
    (2) The State of domicile. The State of domicile of a CDL applicant 
must accept the results of a driving 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.
    (b) Active duty military service members. An active-duty military 
service member may apply for a CLP or a CDL in the State where the 
individual is stationed but not domiciled if the requirements of this 
section are met.
    (1) Role of State of duty station. (i) Upon prior agreement with 
the State of domicile, a State where active-duty military service 
members are stationed, but not domiciled, may accept an application for 
a CLP or CDL, including an application for waiver of the knowledge test 
or driving skills test prescribed in Sec. Sec.  383.23(a)(1) and 
383.25(a)(3), from such a military service member who:
    (A) Is regularly employed or was regularly employed within the last 
year in a military position requiring operation of a CMV;
    (B) Has a valid driver's license from his or her State of domicile;
    (C) Has a valid active-duty military identification card; and
    (D) Has a current copy of either the service member's military 
leave and earnings statement, or his or her orders.
    (ii) A State where active-duty military service members are 
stationed, but not domiciled, may:
    (A) Administer the knowledge and driving skills tests to the 
military service member, as appropriate, in accordance with subparts F, 
G, and H of this part, if the State of domicile requires those tests; 
or
    (B) Waive the knowledge and driving skills tests in accordance with 
Sec.  383.77, if the State of domicile has exercised the option to 
waive those tests; and
    (C) Destroy the military service member's civilian driver's license 
on behalf of the State of domicile, unless the latter requires the 
driver's license to be surrendered to its own driver licensing agency.
    (iii) The State of duty station must transmit to the State of 
domicile by a direct, secure, and efficient electronic system the 
completed application, any supporting documents, and--if the State of 
domicile has not exercised its waiver option--the results of any 
knowledge and driving skills administered.
    (2) Role of State of domicile. Upon completion of the applicant's 
application pursuant to Sec.  383.71 and any testing administered by 
the State of duty station pursuant to Sec. Sec.  383.71 and 383.73, the 
State of domicile of the military service member applying for a CLP or 
CDL may:
    (i) Accept the completed application, any supporting documents, and 
the results of the knowledge and driving skills tests administered by 
the State of duty station (unless waived at the discretion of the State 
of domicile); and
    (ii) Issue the applicant a CLP or CDL.

PART 384--STATE COMPLIANCE WITH COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE PROGRAM

0
5. The authority citation for part 384 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502; secs. 103 
and 215 of Pub. L. 106-59, 113 Stat. 1753, 1767; sec. 32934 of Pub. 
L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 5401 and 7208 of Pub. L. 114-
94, 129 Stat. 1312, 1546, 1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.


0
6. Amend Sec.  384.301 by adding paragraph (l) to read as follows:


Sec.  384.301   Substantial compliance--general requirements.

* * * * *
    (l) A State must come into substantial compliance with the 
requirements of subpart B of this part and part 383 of this chapter in 
effect as of November 27, 2018 as soon as practicable, but, unless 
otherwise specifically provided in this part, not later than November 
27, 2021.

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87. September 25, 
2018.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-21289 Filed 9-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P