[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 117 (Monday, June 17, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51266-51276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-13192]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 367

[Docket No. FMCSA-2023-0268]
RIN 2126-AC67


Fees for the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the regulations governing the annual registration 
fees that participating States collect from motor carriers, motor 
private carriers of property, brokers, freight forwarders, and leasing 
companies for the Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) Plan and Agreement 
for the 2025 registration year and subsequent registration years. 
Following a reduction in fees of an average of 37.3 percent over the 
two prior years, the fees for the 2025 registration year will be 
increased above the fees for the 2024 registration year by an average 
of 25 percent overall, with varying increases between $9 and $9,000 per 
entity, depending on the applicable fee bracket. The final rule is 
based upon a recommendation from the UCR Plan.

DATES: Effective date: July 17, 2024.
    Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted 
to the FMCSA Administrator no later than July 17, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kenneth Riddle, Director, Office 
of Registration and Safety Information, FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue 
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, [email protected]. If you have 
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Dockets 
Operations at (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FMCSA organizes this final rule as follows:

I. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
II. Executive Summary
    A. Purpose and Summary of the Regulatory Action
    B. Costs and Benefits
III. Abbreviations
IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments
    A. Proposed Rulemaking
    B. Comments and Responses
    C. Final Rule
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Regulatory Analyses
    A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563 
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), E.O. 14094 
(Modernizing Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures
    B. Congressional Review Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Assistance for Small Entities
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    F. Paperwork Reduction Act
    G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
    H. Privacy
    I. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
    J. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

I. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    To view any documents mentioned as being available in the docket, 
go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2023-0268/document and 
choose the document to review. To view comments, click this final rule, 
then click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the 
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations 
at U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help 
you, please call (202) 366-9317 or (202) 366-9826 before visiting 
Dockets Operations.

II. Executive Summary

A. Purpose and Summary of the Regulatory Action

    Under 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) 14504a, the UCR Plan and the 
41 States participating in the UCR Agreement collect fees from motor 
carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight 
forwarders, and leasing companies. The UCR Plan and Agreement are 
administered by a 15-member board of directors (UCR Plan Board), which 
is comprised of 14 members appointed from the participating States and 
the industry, and the Deputy Administrator of FMCSA, who is a statutory 
member.

[[Page 51267]]

Revenues collected are allocated to the participating States and the 
UCR Plan.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 14504a(d)(7)(A)(ii) and (f)(1)(E)(i), 
the UCR Plan provides fee adjustment recommendations to the Secretary 
of Transportation (Secretary) when revenue collections result in a 
shortfall or surplus from the amount authorized by statute. If the 
required payments to the States and the cost of administering the UCR 
Plan exceed the amount in the depository, the UCR Plan must collect 
additional fees in subsequent years to cover the shortfall (49 U.S.C. 
14504a(f)(1)(E)(i)). If there are excess funds after payments to the 
States and for administrative costs, they are retained in the UCR 
Plan's depository, and fees in subsequent fee years must be reduced as 
required by 49 U.S.C. 14504a(h)(4). These two distinct statutory 
provisions are recognized in the fee adjustment recommended by the UCR 
Plan and adopted in this final rule to increase, by an average of 25 
percent, the annual registration fees established pursuant to the UCR 
Agreement for the 2025 registration year and subsequent years.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The UCR Plan Board's recommendation (Sept. 2023 Fee 
Recommendation) was transmitted on Sept. 27, 2023, and is available 
in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Costs and Benefits

    The changes in this final rule increase the fees paid by motor 
carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight 
forwarders, and leasing companies to the UCR Plan and the participating 
States. These fees are considered by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) Circular A-4, Regulatory Analysis, as transfer payments, 
not costs. Transfer payments are payments from one group to another 
that do not affect total resources available to society. Therefore, 
transfers are not considered in the monetization of societal costs and 
benefits of rulemakings. Despite the classification of fees as transfer 
payments, the Agency acknowledges that motor carriers, motor private 
carriers of property, brokers, freight forwarders, and leasing 
companies will incur a greater burden as a result of this fee increase.

III. Abbreviations

ACH Automated Clearing House
CE Categorical Exclusion
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DOT Department of Transportation
E.O. Executive Order
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FR Federal Register
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NPGA National Propane Gas Association
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PIA Privacy Impact Assessment
PTA Privacy Threshold Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBA Small Business Administration
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SBTC Small Business in Transportation Coalition
Secretary Secretary of Transportation
UCR Unified Carrier Registration
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
U.S.C. United States Code

IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    This rulemaking adjusts the annual UCR registration fees, as 
authorized by 49 U.S.C. 14504a. Section 14504a provides that the 
revenues collected from the fees should not exceed the maximum annual 
revenue entitlements distributed to the 41 participating States plus 
the amount established for administrative costs associated with the UCR 
Plan and Agreement. The UCR Agreement is an interstate agreement (as so 
defined in 49 U.S.C. 14504a(a)(8)) entered into by 41 participating 
States in accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 14504a(e)(1) and 
(2). The statute provides for the UCR Plan to ask the Secretary to make 
an adjustment within a reasonable range when the annual revenues are 
insufficient to provide the revenues to which the participating States 
are entitled (49 U.S.C. 14504a(f)(1)(E)(i)).
    In addition, 49 U.S.C. 14504a(h)(4) states that any excess funds 
from previous registration years held by the UCR Plan in its 
depository, after distribution to the States and for payment of 
administrative costs, shall be retained and the fees charged shall be 
reduced by the Secretary accordingly.
    The UCR Plan must also obtain DOT approval to revise the total 
revenue to be collected, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 14504a(d)(7). 
However, no changes in the revenue allocations to the participating 
States were recommended by the UCR Plan in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 
14504a(g)(4) and therefore, no changes have been authorized by this 
rulemaking.
    The Secretary also has broad rulemaking authority in 49 U.S.C. 
13301(a) to carry out 49 U.S.C. 14504a, which is part of 49 U.S.C. 
subtitle IV, part B. Authority to administer these statutory provisions 
has been delegated to the FMCSA Administrator by 49 CFR 1.87(a)(2) and 
(7).
    The two revised and new sections in this final rule work in concert 
to adjust the applicability of an existing requirement and impose a new 
requirement and are therefore not severable. This is so because if the 
increased fees for 2025 in new 49 CFR 367.50 were to be set aside, then 
the existing fee levels in 49 CFR 367.40 must remain in effect to 
provide funds to allow the participating States to receive their 
statutory revenue entitlements during 2025. While the 2024 fees would 
not be sufficient to fully cover the 2025 State statutory entitlements 
and administrative costs, that revenue would be necessary to provide at 
least some portion of the statutory entitlements due to participating 
States.

V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments

A. Proposed Rulemaking

    On January 9, 2024, FMCSA published in the Federal Register an NPRM 
titled ``Fees for the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement'' 
(89 FR 1053; see also Docket No. FMCSA-2023-0268). The NPRM proposed 
amending regulations for the annual registration fees States collect 
from motor carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, 
freight forwarders, and leasing companies for the UCR Plan and 
Agreement for the 2025 registration year and subsequent registration 
years. The fees for the 2025 registration year were proposed to be 
increased from the fees for 2024 by approximately 25 percent overall, 
with varying increases between $9 and $9,000 per entity, depending on 
the applicable fee bracket. The fee increases will produce revenues of 
$13 million that will enable the UCR Plan to provide the funds for the 
State revenue entitlements by covering the shortfalls in revenues 
resulting from decreases in the fees the prior two registration years, 
which averaged 37.3 percent.\2\ The proposal was based upon a 
recommendation from the UCR Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The full calculation of the UCR Plan's fee adjustment 
indicating shortage in collections is available in the docket for 
this rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FMCSA-2023-0268-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Comments and Responses

    FMCSA requested public comments concerning the NPRM for 30 days 
ending February 8, 2024. By that date, 66 unique comments were 
received. Three comments were submitted by trade associations: the 
National Owner Operators Association; the National Propane Gas 
Association (NPGA), and the Small Business in Transportation Coalition 
(SBTC). Two comments were erroneously added to the docket and were 
withdrawn, as they addressed issues pertaining to a different

[[Page 51268]]

rulemaking. Sixty small motor carriers and individuals (many of them 
anonymous) submitted comments. The UCR Plan submitted a comment 
responding to the issues raised by the comments of SBTC.
General Questions
    Comments: Many commenters posed questions about the UCR fee, its 
purpose, and rationale behind the increase. For instance, an anonymous 
commenter claimed that the NPRM and supporting documents published in 
the docket ``do not explain to what end the money is used'' beyond the 
fact that the UCR's allocated reserves have been depleted. The 
commenter further noted that the structure of decreasing and increasing 
fees, or ``see-sawing of the tax,'' as the commenter described, is not 
very clear. Another commenter suggested there should be a maximum 
percentage change in the fee that the UCR Plan can implement.
    FMCSA Response: UCR fees are used by participating States for motor 
carrier safety programs and enforcement, or the administration of the 
UCR Plan and UCR agreement (49 U.S.C. 14504a(e)(1)(B)). When each of 
the participating States joined the UCR Agreement, the statute required 
them to submit to FMCSA a State plan that, among other matters, 
demonstrates that an amount at least equal to the revenue derived by 
the State from the UCR agreement shall be used for those motor carrier 
safety programs and enforcement, or the administration of the UCR Plan 
and UCR agreement (49 U.S.C. 14504a(e)(1)(B)). The statute also gives 
primacy to the need to set the fees at a level that ensures that each 
of the participating States receive the revenues to which they are 
entitled (49 U.S.C. 14504a(f)(1)(E)(i) and (g)(4)). The adjustment in 
the fees to be paid to the UCR Plan for distribution to the 
participating States is necessary to accomplish this statutory 
objective.
    FMCSA believes this upward adjustment is within a reasonable range, 
in accordance with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 14504a(e)(1) and (2). 
This adjustment to the 2025 registration year provides the required $13 
million in revenue allocations to the participating States and the UCR 
Plan. Any amount short of these adjustments would impede proper 
operations of motor carrier safety programs, enforcement, or the 
administration of the UCR Plan and UCR agreement. The Agency notes the 
rare occurrence of this upward adjustment, which has only previously 
occurred once, over a decade ago. This upward adjustment, an 
approximately 25 percent increase, follows two years of reductions in 
fees affecting the 2023 and 2024 registration years, averaging a 37.3 
percent decrease in fees, as well as steady, unmodified collections 
from 2010 to 2017. The Agency believes this recalibration of fees is 
reasonable and in accordance with the structure of, and obligations 
created by, the statute.
Timing of the Fee Increase
    Comments: Many commenters viewed the increase in fees as 
unwarranted and unexpected, and explained the UCR Plan should be 
adjusting its own budget and spending instead. An anonymous commenter 
expressed confusion over the increase, claiming that the fees were 
intended to be eliminated ``after full reciprocity.'' A different 
anonymous commenter connected this increase to the UCR Plan's poor 
budgeting, while another suggested the UCR Plan's spending should be 
cut instead.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA disagrees with the commenters' statements 
that the fee increase was unwarranted, unpredictable, and sudden. In a 
previous rulemaking published in March 2023 (and finalized in June 
2023),\3\ FMCSA stated it anticipated the UCR Plan would recommend an 
upward adjustment in the fees for the 2025 registration year to comply 
with the statutory provisions discussed herein. By statute, the UCR fee 
is authorized for annual adjustment by FMCSA, either to increase or 
decrease the fee to ensure adequate funds to provide participating 
States with their revenue entitlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 88 FR 40719 (June 22, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA also disagrees that the UCR Plan has not been operating 
within its budget. To FMCSA's knowledge, the UCR Plan has operated 
within its approved budget and in recent years has steadily decreased 
registration fees. In fact, this is the first upward adjustment since 
2010. The UCR Plan's approved allocation for the costs of 
administration of the Plan and Agreement over the last several years 
decreased from $5 million per year and is now at $4.25 million. For 
these reasons, FMCSA declines to modify the final rule in response to 
the commenters' suggested changes.
    Finally, the commenter who stated that the registration fees would 
be removed ``after full reciprocity,'' did not provide sufficient 
information for FMCSA to understand or provide a response on this 
issue. In any event, removal of the fees would require Congress to 
amend the statute.
Delaying or Reconsidering the Fee Increase
    Comments: Twenty-eight commenters either objected to the increase 
altogether, expressed criticism towards this proposal, or asked FMCSA 
to reconsider it. Among those objecting to the increase altogether, six 
commenters described the UCR fee and the proposed percentage increase 
as ``unnecessary, unjustified, frivolous, and unethical,'' while others 
called it ``fraudulent, unconstitutional, and discriminatory.''
    An anonymous commenter questioned the motives behind the UCR fees, 
stating that the purpose for the increase is to create a ``slush fund'' 
for FMCSA. Some other commenters asked the Agency to reconsider the 
proposal to issue the increase until truckers' compensation is 
increased. One commenter recognized that, while raising fees may be 
necessary, the percentage is too high, making the increase ``difficult 
to absorb.'' An anonymous commenter suggested looking into fee 
decreases instead.
    FMCSA response: FMCSA appreciates the concerns and frustrations 
expressed by commenters opposed to the fee increase being adopted. The 
purpose of this fee increase is to cover the $13 million shortfall in 
the statutorily-required funding, because in 2025 making the required 
distributions to the States and providing for the cost of administering 
the plan and will exceed the revenues expected under the current fee 
levels. Although FMCSA must approve the fee levels for each 
registration year, FMCSA does not collect these fees and the money does 
not go into the Agency's budget. Rather, the fees are collected and 
administered by the UCR Plan. In past years, as required by the 
statute, these fees were decreased because of excess collections and in 
effect returned to the industry.
    Despite this increase, the proposed fees are still lower than those 
that were in effect in registration years 2019 through 2022.\4\ For 
instance, carriers in the smallest fee bracket (i.e., carriers with two 
vehicles or fewer), brokers, and leasing companies paid a fee of $62 in 
the 2019 registration year and $68 in the 2020 registration year, which 
is significantly higher than the proposed fee for 2025 of $46, even 
before accounting for inflation. Similarly, the fee for carriers in the 
highest fee bracket (i.e., carriers with 1,001 vehicles or more) in 
2019 was $59,689, rising to $66,072 in 2020. Again, the fee proposed 
for the 2025 registration year, $44,836, is well below those previous 
amounts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ To provide more clarity, FMCSA has provided a table 
outlining the changes in the UCR Plan fees starting in 2010. The 
table is available in the docket for this rulemaking.

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

[[Page 51269]]

    The commenter who contended that the increase was discriminatory 
provided no evidence of specific incidents of discrimination or any 
other information to support this claim, and based on all the available 
information, FMCSA disagrees that it targets or discriminates against 
any registrant. The percentage increase is evenly applied across six 
fee brackets that correspond to a motor carrier's fleet size, as 
permitted by statute and regulation.
    For the reasons described above, and because of the statutory 
requirement to secure revenue entitlements to the participating States, 
FMCSA declines to delay the fee increase or modify the percentage of 
the fee increase, as this would result in the revenues falling short of 
meeting the statutory requirement.
Reconsidering the UCR Plan's Fee Calculation Methods
    Comments: In its public comment, NPGA stated that the ``2025 Fee 
Schedule Proposal'' document published in the docket does not provide 
sufficient data for proper review. They noted that the UCR Plan has 
used two different methods of calculating fees: one relying on the 
minimum of the monthly collections over the past three authorized 
closed registration years, and the other on the ``average'' method for 
the 2023 and 2024 registration years. NPGA suggested returning to the 
``average'' method, which resulted in surplus collections in previous 
years, or a ``different intermediate method,'' rather than the minimum 
method, as proposed in the UCR Plan's recommendation. NPGA also 
requested an analysis demonstrating that FMCSA is ``right-sizing'' 
costs.
    FMCSA Response: NPGA's comment concerns the method used to estimate 
the amount of additional revenues the UCR Plan will receive during the 
last several months of the fee collection period for registration year 
2023, which are August 2023 to December 2024. As stated in the fee 
recommendation submitted by the UCR Plan,\5\ until its 2023 fee 
recommendation, the UCR Board had made fee collection projections for 
the remaining collection period based on the minimum monthly 
collections for the same period during the past three closed 
registration years. According to the UCR Plan, this method consistently 
resulted in an underestimation of projected collections. The UCR Plan 
Board therefore decided to project collections using an average method 
in its recommendations for the 2023 and 2024 registration years. 
However, the average method resulted in an overestimation of projected 
collections compared to actual collections for the 2023 registration 
year. Further, the UCR Board's analysis of the most recent registration 
years results indicated an increased risk of overestimation of 
projected collections using the average method. Therefore, the UCR 
Board voted at its July 27, 2023, meeting to return to the minimum 
method of projected collections in the fee recommendations for the 2025 
registration year and future years.\6\ In its fee recommendation, the 
UCR Plan estimated using this method that it will receive an additional 
$5.26 million in fee revenue for registration year 2023 between August 
2023 and December 2024. This amount is added to the actual amounts 
collected until July 2023, to produce a total revenue collection for 
registration year 2023 of $92.9 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/FMCSA-2023-0268-0002 
(accessed Mar. 1, 2024).
    \6\ The minutes of the UCR Plan Board's July 27, 2023, meeting 
are available at https://prod-public-ucr-docs-board-minutes.s3.amazonaws.com/27Jul23%20Board%20Minutes.pdf (accessed 
Mar. 1, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA believes that this return to the minimum method of estimating 
future collections as part of its fee recommendation is reasonable. The 
Agency has no reason to question the UCR Plan's assessment that this 
method would avoid increased risk of overestimation of projected 
collections. A detailed calculation of the revenue estimate (including 
a projection using the minimum method) is also available in the docket 
for this rulemaking.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ https://www.regulations.gov/document/FMCSA-2023-0268-0003 
(accessed Mar. 1, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Small Business Concerns
    Comments: A group of 21 individual commenters, including several 
small owner-operators, expressed concerns about the effect of the fee 
increase on the ability for small businesses to continue operating. 
They explained that ``mom and pop'' businesses are already struggling 
to keep their doors open and this increase would exacerbate their 
struggles. To further illustrate their concerns, several commenters 
explained that other costs have increased, including maintenance, 
insurance, fuel, and other registration fees, while their rates and 
income have proportionally decreased. An individual commenter also 
expressed concerns over the longevity of small businesses, adding that 
this increase would contribute to the trucker shortage issue in the 
country, causing disruptions in the supply chain.
    FMCSA response: Even for small carriers, the fee increase will 
amount to a minimal percentage of each carrier's income. Those in the 
smallest bracket (1-2 vehicles) will pay $9 more for an annual 
registration in 2025 than in 2024, and those in the next bracket (3-5 
vehicles) will pay $27 more. Due to the structure of the fee brackets, 
when spread across a carrier's fleet the annual increase ranges from 
approximately $9 per vehicle for a motor carrier with the fewest number 
of vehicles in its fee bracket (for example, an owner-operator in the 
smallest fee bracket registering a single vehicle or a motor carrier in 
the largest fee bracket registering 1,001 vehicles). On the other hand, 
the increase ranges to less than $1 per vehicle on average for carriers 
at the upper bounds of a bracket (for instance, a carrier in the next-
to-largest fee bracket registering 999 vehicles). Regardless of the 
size of a carrier, this fee increase will likely represent, and be 
offset by, a very small percentage of annual revenue, and as such is 
not expected to impact the viability and longevity of motor carriers' 
operations.
    As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq., RFA), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA),\8\ FMCSA has considered the effects of 
the regulatory action approved in this final rule on small businesses 
and other small entities and to minimize any significant economic 
impact. The analysis for this consideration is set out below in the 
Regulatory Analysis in section VIII.C. Based on this analysis, FMCSA 
has concluded and is certifying that this final rule would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, 
because the fee increase is less than one percent of the revenues or 
costs of small motor carriers and other small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Increase Is Not Beneficial to Consumers
    Comments: While many commenters expressed the opinion that this 
rulemaking is not beneficial to the trucker or motor carrier, others 
drew attention to how the rulemaking would affect the consumer. Eight 
individuals explained the fee increase would subsequently trickle down 
to the consumer whose purchasing power may be affected. An anonymous 
commenter added that the solution to offset the increase by passing the 
increase down to the consumer is unreasonable as the increase will 
affect everyone (carriers and consumers). The commenter added

[[Page 51270]]

``as a one-truck owner, I don't `transfer' this amount to anyone. I 
have to pay it.'' An individual commenter added that although ``this 
increase is not a major rule, it will increase the cost of products and 
services.''
    FMCSA response: While FMCSA recognizes that any fee adjustment may 
affect the cost of doing business, the increase in this rule is 
statutorily mandated. Moreover, while many commenters are concerned 
about the percentage increase (of 25 percent) to the annual 
registration fees, the actual dollar amount of the increase is unlikely 
to cause significant downstream effects. As discussed above, the fees 
would range from a maximum of $9 per vehicle registered on average to 
less than $1 per vehicle registered on average, depending on the motor 
carrier's fee bracket and the relative size of each carrier's fleet 
within that bracket. Thus, the cost passed along to consumers is 
expected to be minimal, amounting in most cases to a few cents per 
load.
Negative Effect on the Economy
    Comments: Besides the commenters' concerns over the effect of the 
increase on the carriers and consumers, others stated that the current 
economic climate cannot support this type of fee adjustment. Three 
commenters added that this rulemaking would affect the economy as a 
whole. One commenter stated that the proposal was an attempt to 
``cripple the economy and increase inflation.''
    FMCSA response: As described above, while the percentage increase 
may appear high to some commenters, the amount of the increase is 
unlikely to have a material effect on the economy. When viewed on a 
per-vehicle basis, the increases do have a greater impact on carriers 
at the lower end of each fee bracket than on those at the higher end. 
However, the UCR registration fee for 2025 will be, at most, be 
approximately $9 more than the prior year for each vehicle in a 
carrier's fleet on average if the carrier is among the smallest in its 
respective fee bracket. The increase would be far less on a per-vehicle 
basis for carriers in the middle or upper range of their fee bracket. 
Therefore, as long as a carrier's annual average revenue per vehicle is 
at least $900, the increase would have an overall impact of less than 1 
percent of the carrier's average annual revenue. Moreover, the fees 
under this rule are still less than the fees charged in recent 
years.\9\ The historically low fees in the last UCR fee rule 
(establishing 2024 fees) were required to address excess revenues; but 
returning the fees to an upward adjusted amount is not reasonably 
expected to impact inflation or the larger economy. FMCSA also 
reiterates that the increase is not discretionary; rather, the UCR fee 
adjustments are made pursuant to a statutory mandate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See footnote 2 linking to the UCR Plan's full calculation 
indicating shortage in collections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The National Owner Operators Association's Opposition to the Fee 
Increase
    Comments: The National Owner Operators Association stated that the 
``UCR fee is a duplicative tax'' which should be eliminated, indicating 
this rulemaking is proof of ``taxation without representation.'' They 
added that FMCSA should revisit its budget and issue a refund for any 
existing surplus to businesses the Agency regulates.
    FMCSA Response: As discussed above, the fees collected by the UCR 
Plan (none of which are paid or otherwise go to FMCSA) are mandated by 
a statute enacted by Congress that has been in effect since 2005. Any 
change or elimination of the program would require further action by 
Congress.
SBTC's Comment Objecting to the Fee Increase
    Comments: SBTC objected to the fee increase proposal and questioned 
the legal authority of the UCR Plan to invest motor carrier fee money 
due to the States. In addition, SBTC contended that the earnings from 
the reserve accounts should be applied to reduce the 25 percent fee 
increase or by using the UCR's reserve funds to offset the fee 
increase, leaving the 2024 fees in effect for 2025, or significantly 
reducing the proposed increase amount. SBTC also contended that the 
convenience fee charged by the UCR Plan when registrants use a credit 
card or an automated clearing house (ACH) transaction to pay 
registration fees should be borne by the UCR Plan. An individual motor 
carrier commenter supported SBTC's recommendation that the UCR Board 
find an alternative revenue source to offset the increase, which would 
not require the carriers to pay more.
1. The UCR Plan's Authority To Establish Reserve Funds
    SBTC commented that the UCR Plan has invested its funds in various 
investment accounts for the purposes of creating reserves, which SBTC 
characterized as ``slush funds.'' SBTC added that it found no 
directive, statutory authority, or regulatory permission for the UCR 
Plan to engage in such activities for their self-enrichment. In 
response to SBTC's comments, the UCR Plan submitted a detailed response 
setting out its authority under the statute to administer the UCR Plan 
and Agreement, including the responsibility to provide funds to 
recognize the timing of revenue receipts, and for use in case of 
revenue shortfalls or similar circumstances. These additional funds are 
intended to sustain the UCR Plan's operations. The UCR Plan also added 
that, in a previous rulemaking, FMCSA had ``recognized the prudence and 
appropriateness of the reserve funds.'' \10\ Moreover, the UCR Plan 
explained its responsibility to provide for its consistent and 
continuous operation, which partly entails providing sufficient reserve 
funds. It stressed the importance for such reserve funds to be 
available for use in emergencies, as they sustain the financial 
operations of the UCR Plan and explained that the availability of 
reserve funds is prudent, appropriate, and consistent with the UCR 
Plan's statutory obligation to administer the UCR Plan and Agreement. 
The UCR Plan also explained in depth how, contrary to SBTC's 
assertions, the interest earned by the reserve accounts was already 
being used to provide funds either for the revenue allocations for the 
participating States or to pay a small portion of the Plan's 
administrative costs, thus reducing the amount of additional revenues 
required from the recommended adjustment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 87 FR 53680, 53686 (Sept. 1, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA Response: The issue SBTC raised was considered and addressed 
by FMCSA in a previous final rule adopting fees for registration year 
2023.\11\ After thorough consideration, FMCSA recognized the prudence 
and appropriateness of these reserve funds, finding that ensuring the 
availability of reserve funds to meet possible contingencies is an 
appropriate action for the UCR Plan Board to take in implementing the 
statute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The UCR Agreement is an interstate agreement with the purpose of 
coordinating the registration and collection of fees and information 
from motor carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, 
freight forwarders, and leasing companies, whose commercial vehicles 
are engaged in interstate commerce. The Board of Directors of the UCR 
Plan is tasked by statute with administering the UCR Agreement.\12\ 
This responsibility

[[Page 51271]]

requires the UCR Plan Board to provide for the consistent and 
continuous operation of the UCR Plan. Part of fulfilling that 
responsibility entails providing sufficient reserve funds to enable the 
UCR Plan and its National Registration System to operate without 
interruption in the unanticipated event of a significant unbudgeted 
increase in operating expenses and/or decrease in operating revenues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 49 U.S.C. sections 14504a(a)(8), 14504a(a)(9), and 
(d)(2)(B). The last paragraph of the statute states that the board 
of directors shall provide for the administration of the unified 
carrier registration agreement. See also 12 Percent Logistics, Inc. 
v. Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board, No. 17-cv-02000 (APM), 
2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17160 at *4 (D.D.C. Feb. 4, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An example of the need for reserve funds arises from a provision of 
the statute that states that revenues collected may not be used to pay 
administrative costs until all the participating States have received 
all their revenue entitlements (49 U.S.C. 14504a(h)(3)(B)). As a legal 
matter, during a registration year, none of the funds collected can be 
used for current operations of the UCR Plan in administering the UCR 
Agreement until all the distributions from current revenues from fees 
have been made from the depository to the States that have not received 
their full revenue entitlements. As a result of complying with this 
statutory requirement, at the beginning of each year's operations, the 
Plan is not receiving any funds budgeted for the administration of the 
UCR Agreement and cannot carry out its statutory obligations unless 
funds are available and held elsewhere. If there is then a revenue 
shortfall during the registration year, the reserve fund can be used to 
continue the administration of the UCR Agreement.
    As explained in its comment, the UCR Plan maintains four investment 
accounts containing reserve funds dedicated for specific operational 
purposes in order to ensure continuity. These reserve funds are a 
portion of the unrestricted net assets of the UCR Plan that are 
available for use in emergencies to sustain financial operations. In 
the UCR Plan Board's view, ensuring the availability of reserve funds 
to meet possible contingencies is a prudent and appropriate action to 
take in implementing the UCR Act and is consistent with the UCR Plan 
Board's statutory obligation to administer the UCR Plan Agreement. This 
explanation conforms with FMCSA's reading of the statutory provisions 
discussed above and the important necessity of having reserve funds 
available in order to ensure payment of statutory entitlements to the 
participating States and carry out the administrative obligations of 
the UCR Plan.
    For these reasons, and the additional reasons set out in the final 
rule establishing the 2023 fees (see 87 FR at 53685-86), the UCR Plan 
has authority under the statute to establish and maintain the reserve 
funds at issue.
2. The Use of Interest Earnings
    Comments: SBTC made and repeated several different comments 
regarding the UCR Plan's use of interest earnings from the reserve 
funds and other accounts the Plan has established. SBTC contended that 
the UCR Plan has benefitted from financial gain from the ``questionable 
practice of investing and possibly risking motor carriers' fees due to 
the States.'' It also contended that the investment proceeds should be 
passed on to the States and FMCSA should credit the industry by 
offsetting the 25 percent fee increase. SBTC added that revenues should 
not be ``permanently and indefinitely retained'' beyond recovering 
administrative expenses ``through bona fide lawful rulemaking.''
    In response to SBTC's comments, the UCR Plan stated that it 
intentionally maintains ``physically separate accounts'' for State-owed 
funds (used to provide revenue for distribution to the 41 participating 
States), administrative funds, and reserve funds. Funds in these 
accounts are invested in separate investment vehicles in accordance 
with the Plan's adopted Investment Policy.
    The UCR Plan stated that all interest earnings on State-owed funds 
are distributed to the 41 participating States, and interest earnings 
from State-owed funds have not been used as administrative funds, nor 
added to the reserve funds. Both administrative and reserve funds 
remain in their respective accounts and are not distributed to the 41 
States. Interest earnings from these two accounts are not included in 
the UCR fee calculation at this time. But the UCR Plan explained that 
once the reserve funds are fully funded, which they anticipate will 
occur by the end of calendar year 2024, any excess administrative funds 
and interest from that fund will be used to reduce the Board's request 
to FMCSA for administrative funds in the next operating year.
    FMCSA Response: In summary, interest earned on the accounts holding 
State-owed funds are already added to the fee revenues in that account 
and then distributed to the States. Those interest earnings are not 
retained by the UCR Plan but are used to reduce the amount of fee 
revenues needed to make the required distributions to the participating 
States. SBTC's characterization of these interest earnings as a ``slush 
fund'' for the benefit of the UCR Plan and not the participating States 
is inaccurate.
    Interest earned in the administrative fund is used for 
administrative costs and is not retained by the UCR Plan. The interest 
earnings also reduce the amount of fee revenue required to pay the 
administrative costs of operating the UCR Agreement and the Plan. The 
statute expressly authorizes the use of fee revenues for such purpose, 
once all the required distributions have been made to the participating 
States (49 U.S.C. 14504a(h)(3)(B)). The amount for administrative costs 
for registration year 2025 included in the total revenue required from 
fees is $4.25 million out of the total of $112.0 million, or 3.79 
percent.
3. Using Interest Earnings To Level Off 2025 Registration Fees
    Comments: SBTC commented that FMCSA should consider the UCR Plan 
revenue generated from investments and review whether the revenue 
generated in previous years and from investments is sufficient to 
relieve the increase in the 2025 registration year. The UCR Plan 
responded that the excess State-owed funds from the 2023 year were 
included in the calculation of the recommended fee for the 2025 
registration year. The UCR Plan also clarified that the interest 
generated by the investments amounted to $311,000, representing only a 
small fraction of the $112 million fee revenue target for 2025. Since 
the inclusion of the $311,000 in the 2025 fee calculations would not 
have changed the fee assessment for carriers in the smallest fee 
bracket and would have reduced the fee assessed for the largest 
carriers by only $130, the UCR Plan stated it made the decision to 
include the $311,000 generated during 2023 in the 2026 registration 
year fee calculation.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA finds reasonable the UCR Plan's explanation 
that interest earnings on the reserve funds are already taken into 
account in determining the proposed fees for 2025 and subsequent years. 
This is currently the case for interest earned on the funds held for 
distribution to the States, which will be applied to the 2026 
registration year to adjust the fee revenues needed to ensure that the 
participating States receive their statutory revenue entitlements. When 
the remaining reserve funds are fully funded, interest earned on those 
accounts will also be accounted for in the fee recommendations. FMCSA 
finds it reasonable for the UCR Plan to fully fund its reserves prior 
to distributing the interest earned on those accounts, thereby not 
using the interest earnings

[[Page 51272]]

to provide an additional offset to the revenues to be provided by the 
fees for registration year 2025. FMCSA further finds it reasonable for 
the UCR Plan to account for interest earned on the administrative funds 
account by reducing its request for administrative funds in future 
years, once the reserve accounts are fully funded.
4. Convenience Fees for Credit Card and ACH Payments
    Comments: SBTC raised a separate issue regarding the UCR Plan's 
practice of passing on to registrants the convenience fees charged by 
banks when a registrant uses a credit card or ACH transaction to pay 
the annual registration fees. SBTC characterizes such transaction fees 
as ``surcharges.'' SBTC claims that this practice is not authorized by 
FMCSA. It also claims that the UCR Plan retains this revenue, invests 
it, and retains the investment income, and states that those 
convenience fees should be paid out of the UCR Plan's administrative 
allowance authorized by FMCSA.
    In response to SBTC's claims, the UCR Plan explained that when a 
registrant chooses to use a credit card or ACH transaction to pay the 
annual registration fee, this is accompanied by a convenience fee, not 
a surcharge, ``to defray a portion of the costs to the UCR that 
accompany the use of an electronic payment method by the motor 
carrier.'' Furthermore, the UCR Plan noted that paying UCR registration 
fees using a credit card or an ACH transaction is a voluntary decision 
the motor carrier or registrant makes, which could be avoided by using 
a check or money order.
    The UCR Plan explained that the convenience fee generated from a 
credit card payment is calculated differently than the fee for an ACH 
payment, as the former is a percentage of the annual registration fee 
and the latter is a fixed amount. Since the UCR plan cannot accurately 
project how many motor carriers or other registrants will choose to pay 
the annual registration fee using a credit card versus ACH transaction, 
including the convenience fees as part of the UCR Plan's annual 
operating budget risks overcharges to the motor carrier or registrant 
if the UCR Plan overestimates the costs, and financial shortfalls for 
the UCR Plan if the UCR Plan underestimates the costs.
    Second, the UCR Plan explained that including an estimate of the 
cost of providing for electronic payments by motor carriers and other 
registrants in the administrative fund request would force one group of 
registrants to subsidize another group of registrants. The UCR Plan 
noted this would be unfair to registrants that complete payment using 
money orders or checks--methods which do not include a convenience fee, 
unlike credit card and ACH payment methods. The UCR Plan concluded 
that, due to the factors explained in its response, the fairest and 
most accurate way to cover the cost of using an electronic payment 
method is charging the convenience fee separately to those who chose to 
utilize that option.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA accepts the UCR Plan's handling of 
convenience fees for credit card and ACH transactions to pay fees. The 
UCR Plan has shown that it would be difficult to accurately estimate 
the amount of such convenience fees and, moreover, that it would be an 
unfair burden on registrants that chose not to use credit cards or ACH 
transactions.
5. Request for Issuance of Guidance on the UCR Plan's Investment of 
Funds
    Comments: SBTC also requested in its comment that FMCSA issue 
guidance on whether the UCR Plan is authorized under law or regulation 
to invest motor carrier fees and under what risk-level circumstances 
they may do so.
    The UCR Plan clarified in response that all reserve funds are 
invested according to the Board-approved UCR investment policy, 
available by link on the UCR Plan website Policies and Procedures 
page.\13\ The UCR Plan further noted that the Board has set ``prudent 
guidelines designed to provide an appropriate risk-adjusted rate of 
return on all UCR assets.'' It also referred to the response to SBTC's 
comment for detailed discussion of the UCR Plan's authority to 
establish reserve funds, the importance of maintaining them, to what 
end interest earnings are used, and how the interest earnings are 
recognized in the recommended registration fees (discussed above in the 
section entitled ``The Use of Interest Earnings'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Available on the internet at https://plan.ucr.gov/policies-procedures/ (accessed Mar. 4, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA response: FMCSA has reviewed and considered both SBTC's and 
the UCR Plan's comments in this rulemaking, including the UCR Plan's 
investment policy, in determining the appropriateness of the proposed 
fee increase. Issues raised include the UCR Plan's use of investment 
funds and alternatives to the upward adjustment suggested by SBTC and 
others. Based on the comments other and information submitted to the 
docket, FMCSA finds the actions of the UCR Plan reasonable and 
adequately supportive of the proposed rule. Requests for additional 
Agency action, including issuance of guidance on appropriate UCR fee 
investments, are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
Out of Scope Comments
    Comments: FMCSA received a few additional comments concerning 
issues beyond the scope of the proposed rule. Some comments related to 
the need for regulations on broker transparency, safe parking, speed 
limits on interstate highways, among other topics which the commenters 
identified as more beneficial to the industry.
    FMCSA response: FMCSA appreciates the commenters for raising these 
issues, and for stressing their importance. However, as they do not 
pertain to this rulemaking, FMCSA has not taken these comments into 
consideration or modified the final rule based upon these comments.

C. Final Rule

    FMCSA appreciates the commenters' feedback regarding this 
rulemaking and has taken all within-scope comments into consideration. 
For the UCR Plan to secure both the funds for required distribution of 
statutory entitlements to all participating States and the funds for 
administration of the UCR Agreement, the UCR Plan must generate 
sufficient revenue, which can only be accomplished by a fee increase, 
as permitted, and required, by the UCR statute. The upward adjustment 
in fees for the 2025 registration year will provide an additional $13 
million to meet the overall statutory revenue requirement of $112 
million. The UCR statute provides for the UCR Plan to request an 
adjustment in the fees, within a reasonable range, by the Secretary 
when the fees will be insufficient to provide the annual revenue 
entitlements to which the participating States are entitled (49 U.S.C. 
14504a(f)(1)(E)(i)).
    FMCSA also notes that in a final rule published in 2023, the Agency 
had anticipated adjusting the fees for the 2025 registration year, 
after receiving the necessary recommendation from the UCR Plan, as the 
previous excess collections would be largely utilized.\14\ In addition, 
this is the first upward adjustment since 2010, following two years of 
fee decreases, which, combined, resulted in an average 37.3 percent fee 
reduction, and no adjustments from 2010 to 2017. The fee levels for the 
2025 registration year are still less than the fees that were in effect 
from 2019 to

[[Page 51273]]

2022. For those reasons, FMCSA finalizes the proposed increase without 
modification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See 88 FR 40719 at 40720 (June 22, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Section-by-Section Analysis

    FMCSA revises 49 CFR 367.40 (which was adopted in the 2023 final 
rule) so that the fees apply to registration year 2024 only. A new 
Sec.  367.50 establishes new increased fees applicable beginning in 
registration year 2025, based on the recommendation submitted by the 
UCR Plan in its September 2023 Fee Recommendation. The fees in new 
Sec.  367.50 will remain in effect for subsequent registration years 
after 2025 unless revised by a future rulemaking.
    FMCSA also removes 49 CFR 367.20, which set the fees for 2020, 
2021, and 2022, as those fee amounts will not be necessary.

VII. Regulatory Analyses

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 
13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), E.O. 14094 
(Modernizing Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and 
Procedures

    FMCSA has considered the impact of this final rule under E.O. 12866 
(58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning and Review, E.O. 13563 
(76 FR 3821, Jan. 21, 2011), Improving Regulation and Regulatory 
Review, E.O. 14094 (88 FR 29179, Apr. 11, 2023) Modernizing Regulatory 
Review, and DOT's regulatory policies and procedures. The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, as stated in section 3(f) of E.O. 
12866, as supplemented by E.O. 13563 and amended by E.O. 14094, does 
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 
6(a)(3) of that order. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed it under that 
E.O.
    The final rule increases the registration fees paid by motor 
carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight 
forwarders, and leasing companies, which fund both the administration 
of the UCR Plan and Agreement and the statutory entitlements to the 
participating States. Therefore, under this rule, these entities face 
increased costs in the form of increased fees. However, while each 
motor carrier or other entity will incur an increased burden, fees are 
considered by OMB Circular A-4, Regulatory Analysis, as transfer 
payments, not costs. Transfer payments are payments from one group to 
another that do not affect total resources available to society. By 
definition, transfers are not considered in the monetization of 
societal costs and benefits of rulemakings. In this case, increased 
fees to motor carriers are equivalent to revenue to participating 
States. Nevertheless, the Agency acknowledges that motor carriers, 
motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight forwarders, and 
leasing companies will incur greater costs. The details of the amount 
of increase to the annual UCR fee for each fee bracket, are included in 
the discussion above in Section VI.
    This rulemaking will establish increases in the annual registration 
fees for the UCR Plan and Agreement. The entities affected by this rule 
are the participating States, motor carriers, motor private carriers of 
property, brokers, freight forwarders, and leasing companies. Because 
the State UCR revenue entitlements will remain unchanged, the 
participating States will not be impacted by this rule. The primary 
impact of this rule will be an increase in fees paid by individual 
motor carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight 
forwarders, and leasing companies. The increase in fees for the 2025 
registration year from the 2024 registration year fees (approved on 
June 22, 2023 (88 FR 40179)) will be an average of 25 percent, ranging 
from $9 to $9,000 per entity, depending on the number of vehicles owned 
or operated by the affected entities.

B. Congressional Review Act

    This rule is not a major rule as defined under the Congressional 
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ A major rule means any rule that OMB finds has resulted in 
or is likely to result in (a) an annual effect on the economy of 
$100 million or more; (b) a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, geographic regions, Federal, 
State, or local government agencies; or (c) significant adverse 
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, 
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to 
compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export 
markets (5 U.S.C. 802(4)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., RFA), as 
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA),\16\ requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of 
the regulatory action on small business and other small entities and to 
minimize any significant economic impact. The term small entities 
includes small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000 (5 
U.S.C. 601(6)). 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 businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rulemaking will directly affect the participating States, 
motor carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, freight 
forwarders, and leasing companies. Under the standards of the RFA, as 
amended by SBREFA, the participating States are not small entities. 
States are not considered small entities because they do not meet the 
definition of a small entity in section 601 of the RFA. Specifically, 
States are not considered small governmental jurisdictions under 
section 601(5) of the RFA, both because State government is not 
included among the various levels of government listed in section 
601(5), and because, even if this were the case, no State or the 
District of Columbia has a population of less than 50,000, which is the 
criterion by which a governmental jurisdiction is considered small 
under section 601(5) of the RFA.
    The Small Business Administration's (SBA's) size standard for a 
small entity (13 CFR 121.201) differs by industry code. The entities 
affected by this rule fall into many different industry codes. In order 
to determine if this rule will have an impact on a significant number 
of small entities, FMCSA examined the 2012 and 2017 Economic Census 
data for two different North American Industry Classification System 
(NAICS) industries: Truck Transportation (subsector 484) and Transit 
and Ground Transportation (subsector 485).
    As shown in the table below, the SBA size standards for the 
national industries under the Truck Transportation and Transit and 
Ground Transportation subsectors range from $19.0 million to $43.0 
million in revenue per year. To determine the percentage of firms that 
have revenue at or below SBA's thresholds within each of the NAICS 
national industries, FMCSA examined data from the 2017 Economic 
Census.\17\ In instances where 2017 data were suppressed, the Agency 
imputed 2017 levels using data from the 2012 Economic Census.\18\ 
Boundaries

[[Page 51274]]

for the revenue categories used in the Economic Census do not exactly 
coincide with the SBA thresholds. Instead, the SBA threshold generally 
falls between two different revenue categories. However, FMCSA was able 
to make reasonable estimates as to the percentage of small entities 
within each NAICS code.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ U.S. Census Bureau. 2017 Economic Census. Table 
EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM--Selected Sectors: Employment Size of Firms for 
the U.S.: 2017. Available at: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/economic-census/naics-sector-48-49.html (accessed Dec. 5, 
2023).
    \18\ U.S. Census Bureau. 2012 Economic Census. Table 
EC1248SSSZ4--Transportation and Warehousing: Subject Series--Estab & 
Firm Size: Summary Statistics by Revenue Size of Firms for the U.S.: 
2012 Available at: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2012/econ/census/transportation-warehousing.html (accessed Dec. 5, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The percentages of small entities with annual revenue less than the 
SBA's threshold ranged from 96.3 percent to 100 percent. Specifically, 
approximately 96.3 percent of Specialized Freight (except Used Goods) 
Trucking, Long Distance (484230) firms had annual revenue less than the 
SBA's revenue threshold of $34.0 million and will be considered small 
entities. FMCSA estimates 100 percent of firms in the Mixed Mode 
Transit Systems (485111) national industry had annual revenue less than 
$29.0 million and will be considered small entities. The table below 
shows the complete estimates of the number of small entities within the 
national industries that may be affected by this rule.

                                 Table 3--Estimates of Number of Small Entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     SBA size
      NAICS code              Description           standard in    Total number      Number of    Percent of all
                                                     millions        of firms     small entities       firms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
484110...............  General Freight Trucking,           $34.0          22,066          21,950            99.5
                        Local.
484121...............  General Freight Trucking,            34.0          23,557          23,045            97.8
                        Long Distance, Truckload.
484122...............  General Freight Trucking,            43.0           3,138           3,050            97.2
                        Long Distance, Less Than
                        Truckload.
484210...............  Used Household and Office            34.0           6,097           6,041            99.1
                        Goods Moving.
484220...............  Specialized Freight                  34.0          22,797          22,631            99.3
                        (except Used Goods)
                        Trucking, Local.
484230...............  Specialized Freight                  34.0           7,310           7,042            96.3
                        (except Used Goods)
                        Trucking, Long Distance.
485111...............  Mixed Mode Transit                   29.0              25              25           100.0
                        Systems.
485113...............  Bus and Other Motor                  32.5             318             308            96.9
                        Vehicle Transit Systems.
485210...............  Interurban and Rural Bus             32.0             309             302            97.7
                        Transportation.
485320...............  Limousine Service........            19.0           3,706           3,694            99.7
485410...............  School and Employee Bus              30.0           2,279           2,226            97.7
                        Transportation.
485510...............  Charter Bus Industry.....            19.0           1,031           1,013            98.3
485991...............  Special Needs                        19.0           2,592           2,567            99.1
                        Transportation.
485999...............  All Other Transit and                19.0           1,071           1,059            98.9
                        Ground Passenger
                        Transportation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, while FMCSA has determined that this rulemaking will 
impact a substantial number of small entities, it has also determined 
that the rulemaking will not have a significant impact on them. The 
effect of this rulemaking will be to increase the annual registration 
fee that motor carriers, motor private carriers of property, brokers, 
freight forwarders, and leasing companies are currently required to 
pay. The increase will be 25 percent on average, $9 to $9,000 per 
entity, depending on the number of vehicles owned and/or operated by 
the affected entities.
    While the RFA does not define a threshold for determining whether a 
specific regulation results in a significant impact, the SBA, in 
guidance to government agencies, provides some objective measures of 
significance that the agencies can consider using. One measure that 
could be used to illustrate a significant impact is labor costs; 
specifically, whether the cost of the regulation exceeds 1 percent of 
the average annual revenues of small entities in the sector. Given that 
entities owning between 0 and 2 commercial motor vehicles would 
experience an increase of $9, a small entity would need to have average 
annual revenue of less than $900 to experience an impact greater than 1 
percent of average annual revenue. This is an average annual revenue 
that is smaller than will be required for a firm to support one 
employee. The increased fee amount and impact on revenue increase 
linearly depending on the applicable fee bracket.
    Consequently, I certify that the proposed action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Assistance for Small Entities

    In accordance with section 213(a) of SBREFA, FMCSA wants to assist 
small entities in understanding this final rule so 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 
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Small businesses 
may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce or 
otherwise determine compliance with Federal regulations to SBA's Small 
Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman (Office of 
the National Ombudsman, see https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/oversight-advocacy/office-national-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, UMRA) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. The Act addresses actions that may result in the 
expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector of $192 million (which is the value equivalent 
of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation to 2022 levels) or more 
in any 1 year. Though this final rule will not result in such an 
expenditure, and the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply as a 
result, the Agency discusses the effects of this rule elsewhere in this 
preamble.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

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

[[Page 51275]]

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 will not have substantial 
direct costs on or for States, nor will it limit the policymaking 
discretion of 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. Privacy

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005,\19\ requires the Agency 
to assess the privacy impact of a regulation that will affect the 
privacy of individuals. This rule will not require the collection of 
personally identifiable information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Public Law 108-447, 118 Stat. 2809, 3268, note following 5 
U.S.C. 552a (Dec. 4, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) applies only to Federal agencies 
and any non-Federal agency that receives records contained in a system 
of records from a Federal agency for use in a matching program.
    The E-Government Act of 2002,\20\ requires Federal agencies to 
conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for new or substantially 
changed technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates 
information in an identifiable form. No new or substantially changed 
technology will collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a 
result of this rule. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Public Law 107-347, sec. 208, 116 Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 
17, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Agency submitted a Privacy Threshold Assessment 
(PTA) to evaluate the risks and effects the proposed rulemaking might 
have on collecting, storing, and sharing personally identifiable 
information. The PTA was adjudicated by DOT's Chief Privacy Officer on 
April 17, 2024.

I. 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 does 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.

J. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    FMCSA analyzed this rule pursuant to 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), Appendix 2, paragraph 6.h. The categorical 
exclusion (CE) in paragraph 6.h. covers regulations and actions taken 
pursuant to regulation implementing procedures to collect fees that 
will be charged for motor carrier registrations. The proposed 
requirements in this rule are covered by this CE.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 367

    Intergovernmental relations, Motor carriers, Brokers, Freight 
Forwarders.

    Accordingly, FMCSA proposes to amend Title 49 CFR, subtitle B, 
chapter III, part 367 as follows:

PART 367--STANDARDS FOR REGISTRATION WITH STATES

0
1. The authority citation for part 367 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 13301, 14504a; and 49 CFR 1.87.


Sec.  367.20  [Removed and reserved]

0
2. Remove and reserve Sec.  367.20.

0
3. Revise Sec.  367.40 to read as follows:


Sec.  367.40  Fees under the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and 
Agreement for Registration Year 2024.

[[Page 51276]]



 Table 1 to Sec.   367.40--Fees Under the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement for Registration Year
                                                      2024
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fee per entity
                                             Number of commercial motor     for exempt or non-
                                            vehicles owned or operated by      exempt motor      Fee per entity
                 Bracket                     exempt or non-exempt motor       carrier, motor     for broker or
                                           carrier, motor private carrier,   private carrier,   leasing company
                                                or freight forwarder            or freight
                                                                                forwarder
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B1......................................  0-2.............................                $37                $37
B2......................................  3-5.............................                111  .................
B3......................................  6-20............................                221  .................
B4......................................  21-100..........................                769  .................
B5......................................  101-1,000.......................              3,670  .................
B6......................................  1,001 and above.................             35,836  .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
4. Add Sec.  367.50 to read as follows:


Sec.  367.50  Fees Under the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and 
Agreement for Registration Years Beginning in 2025 and Each Subsequent 
Registration Year Thereafter.

 Table 1 to Sec.   367.50--Fees Under the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement for Registration Years
                       Beginning in 2025 and Each Subsequent Registration Year Thereafter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fee per entity
                                             Number of commercial motor       for exempt or
                                            vehicles owned or operated by    non-exempt motor    Fee per entity
                 Bracket                     exempt or  non-exempt motor      carrier, motor     for broker or
                                           carrier, motor private carrier,   private carrier,   leasing company
                                                or freight forwarder            or freight
                                                                                forwarder
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B1......................................  0-2.............................                $46                $46
B2......................................  3-5.............................                138  .................
B3......................................  6-20............................                276  .................
B4......................................  21-100..........................                963  .................
B5......................................  101-1,000.......................              4,592  .................
B6......................................  1,001 and above.................             44,836  .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Sue Lawless,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024-13192 Filed 6-14-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P