[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 103 (Friday, May 30, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22914-22919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-09716]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 392
[Docket No. FMCSA-2021-0050]
RIN 2126-AC39
Railroad Grade Crossings; Stopping Required: Exception for
Railroad Grade Crossing Equipped With Active Warning Device Not in
Activated State
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).
[[Page 22915]]
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA proposes to amend the regulations related to driving a
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) at railroad grade crossings. Currently,
drivers of certain CMVs (e.g., buses transporting passengers and CMVs
transporting certain hazardous materials) are required to stop before
crossing a railroad track unless an exception applies, such as when the
crossing is controlled by a functioning highway traffic signal
transmitting a green indication. The Agency proposes to add a similar
exception for a railroad grade crossing equipped with an active warning
device that is not in an activated state (e.g., flashing lights or
crossing gates down, indicating the arrival of a train).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 29, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2021-0050 using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2021-0050/document. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Dockets Operations, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Dockets Operations, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building,
Ground Floor, 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.
Fax: (202) 493-2251.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Melissa Williams, Hazardous
Materials Division, Office of Enforcement and Compliance, Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC
20590-0001, (202) 366-4163, [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 NPRM as follows:
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
A. Submitting Comments
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
C. Privacy
D. Comments on the Information Collection
II. Abbreviations
III. Legal Basis
IV. Background
V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking
VI. International Impacts
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
C. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Assistance for Small Entities
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
I. Privacy
J. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
K. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
L. Rulemaking Summary
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
NPRM (FMCSA-2021-0050), indicate the specific section of this document
to which your comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion
or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or
by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an
email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
To submit your comment online, go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2021-0050/document, click on this NPRM, click ``Comment,''
and type your comment into the text box on the following screen.
If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing.
FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure.
If your comments responsive to the NPRM contain commercial or financial
information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually
treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to the NPRM, it is
important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI.
Please mark each page of your submission that constitutes CBI as
``PROPIN'' to indicate it contains proprietary information. FMCSA will
treat such marked submissions as confidential under the Freedom of
Information Act, and they will not be placed in the public docket of
the NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Brian Dahlin,
Chief, Regulatory Evaluation Division, Office of Policy, FMCSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 or via email at
[email protected]. At this time, you need not send a duplicate
hardcopy of your electronic CBI submissions to FMCSA headquarters. Any
comments FMCSA receives not specifically designated as CBI will be
placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.
B. Viewing Comments and Documents
To view any documents mentioned as being available in the docket,
go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2021-0050/document and
choose the document to review. To view comments, click this NPRM, then
click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the internet,
you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations on the
ground floor of the DOT West Building, 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.
C. Privacy
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its regulatory process. DOT posts these
comments, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov as described in the system of records notice DOT/
ALL 14 (Federal Docket Management System (FDMS)), which can be reviewed
at https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices. The comments are posted without edits and are
searchable by the name of the submitter.
II. Abbreviations
ANPRM Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking
DOT Department of Transportation
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[[Page 22916]]
FMCSRs Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
FR Federal Register
FRA Federal Railroad Administration
HM Hazardous material
ICC Interstate Commerce Commission
NASS GES National Automotive Sampling System General Estimates
System
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PDO Property Damage Only
PIA Privacy Impact Analysis
PTA Privacy Threshold Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
U.S.C. United States Code
III. Legal Basis
This NPRM is based on the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (1935 Act), 49
Stat. 543, as amended, and the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (1984
Act), Title II of Public Law 98-554, 98 Stat. 2832 (Oct. 30, 1984), as
amended. The 1935 Act, as amended, provides that the Secretary of
Transportation (the Secretary) may prescribe requirements for--(1)
qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees of, and safety
of operation and equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2) qualifications
and maximum hours of service of employees of, and standards of
equipment of, a motor private carrier, when needed to promote safety of
operation'' (49 U.S.C. 31502(b)(1), (2)). This NPRM is directly related
to safe motor carrier operations.
The NPRM is also based on the authority of the 1984 Act, as
amended, which is codified at 49 U.S.C. 31136(a) and provides broad
concurrent authority to regulate drivers, motor carriers, and vehicle
equipment. It requires the Secretary to ``prescribe regulations on
commercial motor vehicle safety,'' including ``minimum safety standards
for commercial motor vehicles.'' Section 31136(a) requires that: ``At a
minimum, the regulations shall ensure that--(1) commercial motor
vehicles are maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely; (2) the
responsibilities imposed on operators of commercial motor vehicles do
not impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely; (3) the
physical condition of operators of commercial motor vehicles is
adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles safely . . .; (4) the
operation of commercial motor vehicles does not have a deleterious
effect on the physical condition of the operators; and (5) an operator
of a commercial motor vehicle is not coerced by a motor carrier,
shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary to operate a
commercial motor vehicle in violation of a regulation promulgated under
this section . . .'' (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(1)-(5)). This NPRM is based on
section 31136(a)(1) because it proposes amendments related to the safe
operation of CMVs at railroad grade crossings, but does not implicate
the driver-centered requirements of section 31136(a)(2) through (4), as
it removes a driver responsibility (to stop at railroad grade crossings
in certain circumstances), does not touch on operators' physical
condition, and makes a change that would not impact the physical
condition of the operator. Because the proposed rule would provide
another exception to the general requirement for buses and commercial
motor vehicles transporting specified types of hazardous materials (HM)
to stop at every grade crossing, the Agency believes the rule would be
welcomed by the motor carrier industry, ensuring that drivers would not
face a risk of coercion under section 31136(a)(5) to violate it. Before
prescribing regulations under these authorities, FMCSA must consider
their costs and benefits (49 U.S.C. 31136(c)(2)(A) and 31502(d)). These
factors are addressed below.
IV. Background
Railroad Grade Crossings and CMVs
FMCSA was established within DOT on January 1, 2000, pursuant to
the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (49 U.S.C. 113). The
primary mission of FMCSA is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities
involving CMVs, e.g., large trucks and buses. The improvement of CMV
safety at railroad grade crossings is part of that mission.
FMCSA has several regulations in 49 CFR part 392 related to how
CMVs interact with railroad grade crossings that are intended to lower
the potential for CMV and train collisions, including Sec. 392.10,
which generally requires buses transporting passengers and CMVs
transporting specified HM to stop at railroad grade crossings.
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) defines the term Highway-
rail grade crossing in 49 CFR 234.5 as ``a location where a public
highway, road, street, or private roadway, including associated
sidewalks and pathways, crosses one or more railroad tracks at grade.''
FMCSA did not define that term or the similar term ``railroad grade
crossing'' when it established the requirements in Sec. 392.10. It
should be noted that, because of the way highway is defined in Sec.
390.5T (which applies to all of subchapter B, unless specifically
defined elsewhere), FMCSA's regulations on railroad grade crossings do
not apply to private roadways unless they are ``open to public
travel.''
There are approximately 243,000 railroad grade crossings in the
United States.\1\ FRA estimates that roughly 51 percent of public
crossings, where the vast majority of traffic occurs, are equipped with
``active'' warning devices (such as automatic gates, bells, or flashing
light signals to alert drivers of an approaching train), while 43
percent are equipped with ``passive'' warning signs and markings.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Agency communication with FRA.
\2\ Agency communication with FRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking
FMCSA has several regulations in 49 CFR part 392 related to how
CMVs interact with railroad grade crossings, including Sec. 392.10,
which generally requires buses carrying passengers and CMVs carrying
specified HM to stop at railroad grade crossings. Specifically, Sec.
392.10(a) requires drivers of buses carrying passengers and CMVs
transporting certain types of HM to stop between 50 and 15 feet of a
grade crossing, to look and listen for approaching trains, and, when
safe, to cross the tracks without shifting gears.
Exceptions for the stopping requirement are found at Sec.
392.10(b). The exceptions are situations in which vehicles required to
stop under Sec. 392.10(a) need not stop. These exceptions include: (1)
a streetcar crossing or a railroad switching spur; (2) a grade crossing
when directed to proceed by a police officer or flagman; (3) a ``grade
crossing controlled by a functioning highway traffic signal
transmitting a green indication, which, under local law, permits the
commercial motor vehicle to proceed across the railroad tracks without
slowing or stopping''; (4) an abandoned grade crossing marked as such;
or (5) an industrial or spur line grade crossing marked with an
``Exempt'' sign. It should be noted that the exception under Sec.
392.10(b)(3) is limited to traffic signals ``transmitting a green
indication,'' a requirement that corresponds to very few railroad grade
crossings currently installed in this country. Railroad grade crossings
equipped with active warning devices generally use a flashing red light
to indicate a train is approaching. Motorists are required by local
traffic laws to stop when the flashing red light is activated. However,
when the flashing red light is not activated, local traffic laws allow
motorist to proceed through the crossing without stopping.
FMCSA proposes to add an exception to Sec. 392.10(b) for railroad
grade crossings equipped with an active warning device. The exception
would
[[Page 22917]]
allow CMVs subject to Sec. 392.10(a) to proceed if the device is not
activated. A crossing is in an activated state when, for example, the
lights on the warning device are flashing or the crossing gates (if
equipped) are in the down position to warn the driver that one or more
trains are arriving. FMCSA believes it would be appropriate to permit a
CMV to proceed through an active warning device equipped railroad grade
crossing without stopping where the warning device is not in activated
state, because local law allows vehicles to proceed across the railroad
tracks without slowing or stopping. An active warning device exception
would therefore be similar to existing exceptions for a police officer
or flagman directing traffic to proceed or for a highway traffic signal
transmitting a green signal which, under local law, permits vehicles to
proceed without slowing or stopping as described in Sec. 392.10(b),
paragraphs (2) and (3).
The NPRM would mainly affect drivers of buses carrying passengers
and CMVs transporting certain types of HM currently required to stop at
crossings unless there is an exception allowing it to proceed. This
would add an additional exception and therefore reduce the number of
required stops for these CMVs. The number of stops avoided is
impossible to estimate. There are no data on the number of times buses
and CMVs transporting specified types of HM encounter grade crossings.
In any case, that number would fluctuate with economic demand for bus
service and hazardous materials transportation. The Agency requests
comment on sources of information and data that could be used to
quantify the benefits of this rulemaking.
The Agency also requests comment on whether Sec. 392.11 Railroad
grade crossings; slowing down required could be eliminated to further
streamline the regulations without impacting safety.
VI. International Impacts
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 between nations.
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis
This section-by-section analysis describes the proposed changes in
numerical order.
Section 392.10 Railroad Grade Crossings; Stopping Required
FMCSA proposes to add paragraph (b)(6), which would allow drivers
of certain CMVs to proceed across a railroad grade crossing equipped
with an active warning device that is not in an activated state, which,
under local law, permits all vehicles including CMVs to proceed across
the railroad tracks without slowing or stopping.
VIII. 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 has considered the impact of this NPRM 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,
and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
determined that this NPRM is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of E.O. 12866, as supplemented by E.O. 13563, and 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.
Stopping at railroad grade crossings, as required by Sec.
392.10(a) for buses carrying passengers and CMVs transporting certain
types of HM, generally prevents crashes between those vehicles and
trains. However, the requirement for buses and CMVs transporting
certain kinds of HM to stop at railroad grade crossings, especially on
high-speed divided highways, is a potential crash risk because stopping
is not expected by drivers of other motor vehicles, making buses and
CMVs transporting certain kinds of HM vulnerable to rear-end crashes
while slowing or stopping.
With this NPRM, FMCSA is pursuing a more streamlined and risk-
informed regulatory approach that is performance-based and focuses on
desired, measurable outcomes, rather than the current prescriptive
regulation of Sec. 392.10. The amendments to Sec. 392.10 would allow
the CMVs listed in that section to proceed through an active-warning
device-equipped crossing without slowing or stopping where the warning
device is not in activated state, which, under local law, permits all
vehicles including CMVs to proceed across the railroad tracks without
slowing or stopping.
This proposed rule would primarily affect drivers of buses carrying
passengers and CMVs transporting certain types of HM, who are currently
required by Sec. 392.10 to stop at virtually all grade crossings.
Removal of the mandatory stop requirement for such buses and CMVs
transporting certain types of HM could result in cost savings if these
drivers are able to avoid unnecessary stops and thus improve efficiency
of operation. FMCSA is unable to estimate any cost savings that could
result from this rulemaking as there are no data on the number of times
buses and CMVs transporting certain types of HM encounter grade
crossings.
With this proposed rulemaking, FMCSA is pursuing a more streamlined
and risk-informed regulatory approach that is performance-based and
focuses on desired, measurable outcomes, rather than the current
prescriptive regulatory requirements. Further, it acknowledges
increased adoption and technological advances made in active traffic
control devices at railroad grade crossings since the promulgation of
the prescriptive stopping requirement in 1938. This proposed rule would
not result in any new costs but could result in cost savings for those
drivers that would no longer be required to stop at railroad grade
crossings by allowing for a continuous flow of traffic at railroad
grade crossings.
Further, the proposed changes could also potentially mitigate rear-
end crash risk for buses and CMVs transporting certain types of HM by
allowing for a predictable and flow of traffic at railroad grade
crossings.
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 14192 (90 FR 9065, Jan. 31, 2025), Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation, requires that for ``each new [E.O. 14192
regulatory action] issued, at least ten prior regulations be identified
for elimination.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Executive Office of the President. Executive Order 14192 of
January 31, 2025. Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation. 90 FR
9065-9067. Feb. 6, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation guidance for E.O. 14192 issued by OMB (Memorandum M-
25-20, March 26, 2025) defines two different types of E.O. 14192
actions: an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action, and an E.O. 14192
regulatory action.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and
Budget. Guidance Implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14192,
Titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.'' Memorandum M-
25-20. March 26, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An E.O. 14192 deregulatory action is defined as ``an action that
has been finalized and has total costs less than zero.'' This proposed
rulemaking is expected to have total costs less than zero as drivers of
buses and CMVs transporting certain types of HM would
[[Page 22918]]
be allowed to operate their vehicles more efficiently, and therefore
would be considered an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action upon issuance of
a final rule. The cost savings of this rulemaking could not be
quantified.
C. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(g), FMCSA is required to publish an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) or proceed with a negotiated
rulemaking, if a proposed safety rule ``under this part'' \5\ is likely
to lead to the promulgation of a major rule.\6\ As this proposed rule
is not likely to result in the promulgation of a major rule, the Agency
is not required to issue an ANPRM or to proceed with a negotiated
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Part B of Subtitle VI of Title 49, United States Code, i.e.,
49 U.S.C. chapters 311-317.
\6\ A major rule means any rule that the Office of Management
and Budget 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. 804(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (RFA), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996,\7\ 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
comprises 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. No regulatory
flexibility analysis is required, however, if the head of an Agency or
an appropriate designee certifies that the rulemaking will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would impact drivers. Drivers are not considered
small entities because they do not meet the definition of a small
entity in Section 601 of the RFA. Specifically, drivers are considered
neither a small business under Section 601(3) of the RFA, nor are they
considered a small organization under Section 601(4) of the RFA.
Therefore, this proposed rule would not impact a substantial number of
small entities.
This proposed rule could result in cost savings to drivers, but
FMCSA does not anticipate the cost savings to be significant.
Consequently, I certify that the proposed action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
E. Assistance for Small Entities
In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857),
FMCSA wants to assist small entities in understanding this proposed
rule so they can better evaluate its effects on themselves and
participate in the rulemaking initiative. If the proposed rule would
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 the Small Business Administration'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.
F. 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 $206 million (which is the
value equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation to
2024 levels) or more in any 1 year. Because this rulemaking would not
result in such an expenditure, a written statement is not required.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains no new information collection
requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).
H. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
A rulemaking 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 proposed rule would not have
substantial direct costs on or for States, nor would it limit the
policymaking discretion of States. Nothing in this document preempts
any State law or regulation. Therefore, this proposed rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Impact Statement.
I. Privacy
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005,\8\ requires the Agency
to assess the privacy impact of a regulation that will affect the
privacy of individuals. This NPRM would not require the collection of
personally identifiable information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 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,\9\ 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 would collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a
result of this rulemaking. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Public Law 107-347, sec. 208, 116 Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17,
2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Agency will complete 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 will be submitted to FMCSA's Privacy
Officer for review and preliminary adjudication and to DOT's Privacy
Officer for review and final adjudication.
[[Page 22919]]
J. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
This proposed 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.
K. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
FMCSA analyzed this proposed rule pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Agency
believes this proposed rule, if finalized, would not have a reasonably
foreseeable significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
This action would likely fall under a published categorical exclusion
and thus be excluded from further analysis and documentation in an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under FMCSA
Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680), Appendix 2. Specifically, paragraphs (6)(bb)
and (dd), which cover regulations pertaining to vehicle operation
safety standards and regulations concerning rules of the road, traffic
services, and marking of intelligent transportation systems,
respectively. The public is invited to comment on the impact of the
proposed Agency action.
L. Rulemaking Summary
As required by 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this proposed rule
can be found in the Abstract section of the Department's Unified Agenda
entry for this rulemaking at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=202410&RIN=2126-AC39.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 392
Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Highway safety, Motor carriers.
Accordingly, FMCSA proposes to revise 49 CFR part 392 to read as
follows:
PART 392--DRIVING OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES
0
1. The authority citation for part 392 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 504, 13902, 31136, 31151, 31502; Section
112 of Pub. L. 103-311, 108 Stat. 1673, 1676 (1994), as amended by
sec. 32509 of Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405-805 (2012); and 49 CFR
1.87.
0
2. Amend Sec. 392.10 by adding paragraph (b)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 392.10 Railroad grade crossings; stopping required.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) A railroad grade crossing equipped with an active warning
device that is not in an activated state (e.g., flashing lights or
crossing gates down, indicating the arrival of a train), which, under
local law, permits the commercial motor vehicle to proceed across the
railroad tracks without slowing or stopping.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Sue Lawless,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2025-09716 Filed 5-27-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P