[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 186 (Monday, September 29, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46509-46526]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-18869]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 383 and 384
[Docket No. FMCSA-2025-0622]
RIN 2126-AC98
Restoring Integrity to the Issuance of Non-Domiciled Commercial
Drivers Licenses (CDL)
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the Federal regulations for State Driver's
Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) issuing commercial driving credentials to
foreign-domiciled individuals. Through this interim final rule (IFR),
FMCSA restores the integrity of the commercial driver's license (CDL)
issuance processes by significantly limiting the authority for SDLAs to
issue and renew non-domiciled commercial learner's permits (CLPs) and
CDLs to individuals domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction. This change
strengthens the security of the CDL issuance process and enhances the
safety of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) operations.
DATES: This IFR is effective September 29, 2025. Comments must be
received on or before November 28, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2025-0622 using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2025-0622/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.
To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting
comments, including information collection comments for the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of Management and
Budget (OMB).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Thomas, Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Safety, FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001; (202) 366-9554; [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 IFR 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. Executive Summary
III. Abbreviations
IV. Legal Basis
V. Background
A. Existing Requirements for Issuance of Non-Domiciled CLPs and
CDLs
B. The Need for Secure Identification
C. Annual Program Reviews (APRs) of SDLAs
D. Recent, Fatal Crashes Involving Drivers With Non-Domiciled
CDLs
VI. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule
A. Justification for the IFR
B. Overview of the IFR
VII. International Impacts
VIII. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Regulatory Provisions
B. Guidance Statements and Interpretations
IX. Regulatory Analyses
A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563
(Improving
[[Page 46510]]
Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
C. Congressional Review Act
D. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)
F. Assistance for Small Entities
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
I. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
J. Privacy
K. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
L. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
I. Public Participation and Request for Comments
A. Submitting Comments
If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
IFR (FMCSA-2025-0622), 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-2025-0622/document, click on this IFR, 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 IFR 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 IFR, 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 IFR. 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-2025-0622/document and
choose the document to review. To view comments, click this IFR, 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.
D. Comments on the Information Collection
Written comments and recommendations for the information collection
discussed in this IFR should be sent within 60 days of publication to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this information collection by
clicking the link that reads ``Currently under Review--Open for Public
Comments'' or by entering OMB control number 2126-0087 in the search
bar and clicking on the last entry to reach the ``comment'' button.
II. Executive Summary
This IFR revises the regulations that allow SDLAs to issue and
renew non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs to individuals domiciled in a foreign
jurisdiction. The changes strengthen the security of the CDL issuance
process and enhance the safety of CMV operations by revising to whom an
SDLA may issue a non-domiciled CLP or CDL, what the requirements are
for issuance, and when a non-domiciled CLP or CDL must be canceled or
revoked. Non-domiciled CDL holders have been involved in several recent
fatal crashes. In addition, FMCSA recently uncovered evidence of
systemic, nationwide regulatory non-compliance by SDLAs in the issuance
of non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs at SDLAs. This IFR revises the
regulations to restrict issuance of non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs to
individuals maintaining lawful immigration status in the United States
in certain employment-based nonimmigrant categories, to certain
individuals domiciled in a U.S. territory, and to individuals domiciled
in a State that is prohibited from the issuance of CLPs or CDLs as a
result of the decertification of the State's CDL program. The revisions
will help ensure that individuals who do not have lawful immigration
status in the United States, and those who do have lawful immigration
status but whose status is not directly connected to a legitimate,
employment-based reason to hold a CDL, will no longer be eligible to
obtain non-domiciled CLPs or CDLs.
This rule: (1) limits individuals eligible for non-domiciled CLPs
and CDLs to those maintaining lawful immigration status in certain
employment-based nonimmigrant categories, certain individuals domiciled
in a U.S. territory, and individuals domiciled in a State that is
prohibited from issuing CLPs or CDLs because the State's CDL program is
decertified; (2) requires non-citizen applicants (except for lawful
permanent residents) to provide an unexpired foreign passport and an
unexpired Form I-94/I-94A (Arrival/Departure Record) indicating a
specified type of employment-based nonimmigrant status at every
issuance, transfer, renewal, and upgrade action defined in the
regulation; (3) requires SDLAs to query Systematic Alien Verification
for Entitlements (SAVE),\1\ administered by U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS), to confirm the applicant's claim to be in
lawful
[[Page 46511]]
immigration status in a specified category; (4) requires that SDLAs
retain copies of the application documents for no less than 2 years;
(5) requires the expiration date for any non-domiciled CLP or CDL to
match the expiration date of the Form I-94/I-94A or 1 year, whichever
is sooner; (6) requires the applicant to be present in-person at each
renewal; and (7) requires an SDLA to downgrade the non-domiciled CLP or
CDL if the State becomes aware that the holder is no longer eligible to
hold a non-domiciled CLP or CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Available at https://www.uscis.gov/save.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Abbreviations
APA Administrative Procedure Act
APR Annual Program Review
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CDL Commercial Driver's License
CDLIS Commercial Driver's License Information System
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLP Commercial Learner's Permit
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle
DACA Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
DOL Department of Labor
DOT Department of Transportation
EAD Employment Authorization Document
E.O. Executive Order
FARS Fatality Analysis Reporting System
FR Federal Register
ICR Information Collection Request
IFR Interim Final Rule
MCMIS Motor Carrier Management Information System
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
OES Occupational Employment Statistics
OIG Office of the Inspector General
OIRA Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SAS Service Annual Survey
SAVE Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements
Secretary The Secretary of Transportation
SDLA State Driver's Licensing Agency
SSN Social Security Number
U.S.C. United States Code
USCIS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
IV. Legal Basis
This IFR is based on the broad authority of the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA, 49 U.S.C. 31301, et seq.), as
amended, which was also the basis on which FMCSA relied in establishing
the CDL program and the performance standards with which State CDL
programs must comply. The statute requires the Secretary of
Transportation (Secretary), after consultation with the States, to
prescribe uniform minimum standards ``for testing and ensuring the
fitness of an individual operating a commercial motor vehicle'' (49
U.S.C. 31305(a)). In addition, the statute requires States that issue
non-domiciled CDLs to do so in accordance with regulations established
by the Secretary (49 U.S.C. 31311(a)(12)(B)(ii)). The Administrator of
FMCSA is delegated authority under 49 U.S.C. 113(f) and 49 CFR 1.87 to
carry out the functions vested in the Secretary by 49 U.S.C. chapters
311, 313, and 315 as they relate to CMV operators, programs, and
safety.
This IFR is also consistent with the concurrent authorities of the
Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31131, et seq.), as
amended, and the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (49 U.S.C. 31502), as
amended. The 1984 Act granted the Secretary broad authority to issue
regulations ``on commercial motor vehicle safety,'' including
regulations to ensure that ``commercial motor vehicles are . . .
operated safely'' (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(1)). This IFR is consistent with
the safe operation of CMVs. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(2),
the amendments contained in this rule will not impose any
``responsibilities . . . on operators of commercial motor vehicles
[that would] impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely.''
This IFR does not directly address medical standards for drivers (49
U.S.C. 31136(a)(3)) or possible physical effects caused by driving CMVs
(49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(4)). FMCSA does not anticipate that this rule will
result in the coercion of CMV drivers by motor carriers, shippers,
receivers, or transportation intermediaries to operate a CMV in
violation of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs, 49
U.S.C. 31136(a)(5)).
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 31502(b), ``[t]he Secretary of Transportation
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.'' This IFR, which addresses
the ability of individuals who are domiciled in foreign jurisdictions
to operate CMVs in the United States, is related to the safe operation
of motor carrier equipment because the CDL program is designed to
ensure that only individuals who have been determined by relevant State
licensing agencies--in accordance with Federal standards--to be
qualified to operate large commercial vehicles are allowed to drive
such vehicles on the Nation's roadways. Both identity verification and
skills testing are integral to the determination of a driver's
qualifications and are implicated in this rule.
V. Background
A. Existing Requirements for Issuance of Non-Domiciled CLPs and CDLs
The implementing regulations relating to CDL standards and State
compliance with the CDL program are codified under 49 CFR part 383,
Commercial Driver's License Standards; Requirements and Penalties, and
49 CFR part 384, State Compliance with Commercial Driver's License
Program. Under 49 U.S.C. 31311(a)(12)(B)(ii), States are authorized to
issue CDLs to individuals who are ``not domiciled in a State that
issues [CDLs],'' but if they choose to issue non-domiciled CDLs, they
must do so in accordance with regulations prescribed by FMCSA (49
U.S.C. 31311(a)(12)(B)). The regulations setting forth the standards
States must apply when issuing non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs are found at
49 CFR 383.23, 383.71(f), 383.73(f), 384.201, and 384.212(a). To obtain
a non-domiciled CLP or CDL under existing Sec. 383.71(f), the
applicant must be domiciled either in a foreign jurisdiction (defined
in Sec. 383.5 to mean ``outside the fifty United States and the
District of Columbia'') other than a jurisdiction the Administrator has
determined to have comparable testing and licensing standards (i.e.,
Canada and Mexico, see Sec. 383.23, note 1), or in a State that is
prohibited from issuing CLPs and CDLs in accordance with Sec. 384.405.
A person in these jurisdictions is eligible to apply for a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL from any State that elects to issue a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL and that complies with the testing and licensing
standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of part 383.
State procedures for issuing non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs under
Sec. 383.71(f)(2)(i) must require that an applicant domiciled in a
foreign jurisdiction show that he or she is registered by providing an
unexpired employment authorization document (EAD) issued by USCIS or an
unexpired foreign passport accompanied by an approved I-94 form
documenting the applicant's most recent admittance into the United
States.
B. The Need for Secure Identification
The events of September 11, 2001, highlighted the need for secure
identification, as all but one of the 9/11 hijackers acquired some form
of U.S. identification document. Acquisition of these forms of
identification assisted them in boarding commercial flights, renting
cars, and other activities. The report from the 9/11 Commission
recommended that the Federal government set standards for the
[[Page 46512]]
issuance of sources of identification, such as driver's licenses,
emphasizing that fraud in identification documents goes beyond theft,
and that ``[a]t many entry points to vulnerable facilities, including
gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are the last
opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are and to
check whether they are terrorists.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Thomas H. Kean, Lee H. Hamilton, and the National Commission
on Terrorist Attacks, The 9/11 Commission report: Final Report of
the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
(9/11 Report), Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Official Government Edition, July 22, 2004, p. 390. Available at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/content-detail.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2006, section 703(a) of the Security and Accountability for
Every Port Act of 2006 \3\ required FMCSA to issue regulations
implementing the recommendations in a management advisory issued by
DOT's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) concerning verification of
the legal status of commercial drivers.\4\ In its advisory to DOT's
Deputy Secretary, OIG noted vulnerabilities in the CDL program that
allowed applicants to obtain a CDL without being legally present in the
United States. OIG also noted that the requirement in FMCSR at that
time to provide a Social Security number (SSN), without additional
verified documentation, did not ensure the applicant's U.S. citizenship
or legal presence. OIG recommended that all CDL applicants be required
to demonstrate that they are either a U.S. citizen, a permanent legal
resident, or otherwise legally present in the United States. OIG
further recommended having a requirement for verification of SSNs or
for fingerprinting when issuing a CDL to help prevent fraud in the
program and further enhance security by verifying applicants'
identification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Public Law 109-347, 120 Stat 1884 at 1944 (2006); See 49
U.S.C. 31100 note.
\4\ DOT, OIG, Management Advisory to the Deputy Secretary of
Transportation, Need to Establish a Legal Presence Requirement for
Obtaining a Commercial Driver's License, June 4, 2004, https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/cc2004054.pdf. See also DOT,
OIG, Improving Testing and Licensing of Commercial Drivers, Report
No. MH-2002-093, May 8, 2002, https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/mh2002093e.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 9, 2011, FMCSA published a final rule implementing section
703 and addressing OIG recommendations.\5\ The rulemaking strengthened
the legal presence requirements and increased the documentation
required for CLP and CDL applicants to demonstrate their legal presence
in the United States. The final rule revised the CDL regulations to
specify that a State may issue a CLP or CDL only to an applicant who is
a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States, and
may issue a non-domiciled CLP or CDL to foreign applicants (other than
applicants from Canada or Mexico) who have temporary or indefinite
legal presence in the United States.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 76 FR 26854 (May 9, 2011). The final rule was effective July
8, 2011, and States were required to be in compliance with subpart B
of Part 384 by July 8, 2014. On March 25, 2013, in response to
various petitions for reconsideration, FMCSA made minor
clarifications to the final rule and extended the date for State
compliance to July 8, 2015. See 78 FR 17875 (Mar. 25, 2013); 49 CFR
384.301(f).
\6\ See 76 FR 26854, 26858. The final rule changed the term
``Nonresident'' to ``Non-domiciled'' for both CLPs and CDLs to
provide greater consistency with FMCSA's authorizing statute (which
bases jurisdictional authority to issue CDLs on domicile, not
residency), to avoid confusion, and to eliminate any actual or
perceived conflicts with DHS immigration programs. Other than the
change to ``Non-domiciled,'' the rule remained as proposed in the
NPRM. See 73 FR 19282, 19285 (Apr. 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Annual Program Reviews (APRs) of SDLAs
Each year, FMCSA conducts Annual Program Reviews (APRs) of SDLAs in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31311 and 49 CFR 384.307 to gauge the States'
compliance with the CDL program. This year's APRs (2025 APRs) included
a heightened focus on the issuance of non-domiciled CDLs, consistent
with Executive Order (E.O.) 14286.\7\ The 2025 APRs uncovered systemic
procedural and computer programming errors, significant problems with
staff training and quality assurance, and policies that lack sufficient
management controls in the issuance of non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs by
multiple SDLAs. As a result, SDLAs have issued non-domiciled CDLs to
drivers who do not qualify,\8\ issued non-domiciled CDLs that extend
beyond a driver's expiration of lawful presence known at the time of
issuance, issued non-domiciled CDLs without first validating the
drivers' eligibility under Sec. 383.71(f)(2)(i), and engaged in other
noncompliant practices. For example, as part of California's APR, FMCSA
reviewed a sample of records of drivers issued non-domiciled CDLs and
recently found that approximately one in four non-domiciled CDLs were
not compliant with requirements in 49 CFR parts 383 and 384. In that
same APR, FMCSA uncovered instances where the SDLA issued non-domiciled
CDLs with expiration dates as long as 4 years after the EAD's
expiration date--well beyond the driver's authorized employment period.
Even more troubling was that some of these non-domiciled CDLs included
a passenger and school bus endorsement. Furthermore, the 2025 APRs have
shown at least five other States including Colorado, Pennsylvania,
South Dakota, Texas, and Washington that have issued non-domiciled CDLs
in violation of the regulatory requirements. The 2025 APRs have
revealed inconsistencies or failures that demonstrate acute systemic
problems across the country in the non-domiciled CDL issuance
processes. FMCSA expects the number of States discovered to have
improperly issued non-domiciled CDLs to grow as FMCSA's APRs continue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Enforcing Commonsense Rules of the Road for America's Truck
Drivers, 90 FR 18759, May 2, 2025. See also, https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/newsroom/president-trumps-transportation-secretary-sean-p-duffy-announces-nationwide-audit-states.
\8\ For example, FMCSA is aware that numerous States have issued
non-domiciled CDLs to drivers who are domiciled in Mexico, despite
the fact that Mexican and Canadian drivers are not eligible for non-
domiciled CDLs under 49 CFR 383.71(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Recent, Fatal Crashes Involving Drivers With Non-Domiciled CDLs
Since the beginning of the 2025 calendar year, FMCSA has identified
at least five fatal crashes involving non-domiciled CDL holders. At
least two of these drivers were improperly issued a CDL, while others
held CDLs that complied with the regulations in place at the time of
issuance but would not be eligible for a non-domiciled CDL under the
revised regulations. These crashes show the tangible impact of States
failing to follow the proper procedures when issuing non-domiciled
CDLs, as well as the need for stronger regulations to ensure that non-
domiciled drivers present in the United States without lawful
immigration status are not able to obtain CLPs and CDLs.
Most recently, on August 12, 2025, the driver of a tractor-trailer,
who did not have lawful immigration status \9\ and held a non-domiciled
CDL based on a valid USCIS-issued EAD, caused a crash in Florida that
killed three people. The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor
Vehicles stated that its initial, but ongoing, investigation showed
that the driver attempted to execute a U-turn in an unauthorized area
on the Florida Turnpike in St. Lucie County.\10\ A dashcam video widely
broadcast across various forms of media shows the CMV crossing in front
of a minivan, which crashed into the truck and became lodged under its
trailer.\11\ The driver was later arrested in California on three
counts of vehicular
[[Page 46513]]
homicide and three counts of manslaughter and returned to Florida for
prosecution. The Department of Homeland Security announced that a U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigation revealed that the
driver had been living in the U.S. without lawful immigration status
since 2018 after unlawfully crossing the border from Mexico.\12\
Preliminary findings from FMCSA's post-crash investigation showed that
the driver was not proficient in the English language and also revealed
that he had previously been cited for speeding in New Mexico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The driver was present in the United States without being
inspected and admitted or paroled and was in removal proceedings
before the Executive Office for Immigration Review.
\10\ https://www.flhsmv.gov/2025/08/16/illegal-u-turn-truck-driver-arrested-for-vehicular-homicide/ (accessed Sep. 19, 2025).
\11\ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDgHr8KHOzw (accessed Sep.
19, 2025).
\12\ https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/08/18/criminal-illegal-alien-recklessly-driving-18-wheeler-kills-three-florida (accessed Sep. 19,
2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This driver had an unexpired EAD and was therefore eligible for a
non-domiciled CDL under the existing regulations but was improperly
issued a standard (full-term) CDL in Washington in 2023. He was
subsequently issued a proper non-domiciled CDL in California, but would
not have been eligible for a non-domiciled CDL under the revised
regulations requiring a driver to provide an I-94 or I-94A indicating a
specified employment-based nonimmigrant status.
In another crash, which occurred on July 11, 2025, a truck tractor
traveling on the Delaware Memorial Bridge from New Jersey into Delaware
crossed three lanes of traffic and crashed into a concrete wall. The
Delaware River and Bay Authority stated that the impact collapsed the
concrete wall, and the truck tractor careened into the Delaware
River.\13\ The driver of the vehicle, who was killed in the crash, held
a non-domiciled CDL. The emergency response for this incident involved
significant recovery resources and personnel including a crane and
barge repositioned from the active construction site of the Bridge Ship
Collision Protection project, the Delaware State Police Marine dive
unit, and a fire company. This driver similarly had entered the United
States unlawfully, was in removal proceedings, and had a valid USCIS-
issued EAD. Because a standalone EAD will no longer suffice as proof of
employment eligibility for issuance of non-domiciled CDLs and this
driver did not provide an I-94 or I-94A indicating a specified
employment-based nonimmigrant status, he would not have been able to
obtain his CDL under the revised regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ https://www.drba.net/drba-police-investigating-bobtail-tractor-accident (accessed Sep. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another crash took place on May 6, 2025, in Thomasville, AL, in
which a tractor-trailer hit four vehicles from behind as they were
stopped at a red light.\14\ Two people were killed and four people were
injured. The driver of the CMV held a valid USCIS-issued EAD, which
allowed him to obtain a non-domiciled CDL, but did not provide an I-94
or I-94A indicating a specified employment-based nonimmigrant status.
FMCSA's ongoing post-crash investigation has revealed that the driver
held the CDL for less than six weeks and initially failed his CDL
skills test for speeding and failing to obey a traffic control device
before passing the test a few days later. The crash occurred on the
driver's third day of employment with the carrier. Because a standalone
EAD will no longer suffice as proof of employment eligibility for
issuance of non-domiciled CDLs, this driver would not have been able to
obtain his CDL under the revised regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ https://www.waka.com/2025/05/07/2-dead-4-injured-in-thomasville-multi-wreck-crash-suspect-in-custody/; https://www.southalabamian.com/articles/tuesday-wreck-claims-two/ (accessed
Sep. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 14, 2025, a CMV driver caused a multi-vehicle collision in
Austin, TX. Witnesses stated that the driver of the 18-wheeler failed
to brake and crashed into a long line of stopped and slow-moving
traffic ahead of him.\15\ The incident involved 17 vehicles, killed
five people including two children, and caused 11 more people to be
hospitalized. The post-crash scene extended for approximately one-tenth
of a mile.\16\ The driver was improperly issued a standard (full-term)
CDL in Texas despite being eligible for only a non-domiciled CDL, a
fact that demonstrates the difficulty SDLAs are currently having in
correctly applying the existing regulations. Moreover, since this
driver did not provide an I-94 or I-94A indicating a specified
employment-based nonimmigrant status, he would not be eligible for a
CDL under the revised regulations. A post-crash investigation revealed
that this driver's driving record showed two prior citations, for
failure to obey a sign/traffic control device and erratic (unsafe) lane
changes. The investigation also found that the driver was not in
possession of a current medical certificate and had violated the hours
of service rules multiple times in the 11 days preceding the crash.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ https://apnews.com/article/austin-texas-crash-pileup-five-killed-509a46da52ec4552158d5b1d33f645af; https://www.fox7austin.com/news/austin-i-35-crash-lawsuit (accessed Sep. 19, 2025).
\16\ https://abcnews.go.com/US/5-people-dead-massive-car-crash-involving-17/story?id=119786467 (accessed Sep. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A crash in West Virginia on January 19, 2025, involved a driver of
a tractor-trailer who held a non-domiciled CDL and had two prior
citations for speeding. The driver entered the United States
unlawfully, is in removal proceedings, and had a valid USCIS-issued
EAD. According to news reports, the driver caused a collision on a
bridge over Cheat Lake on Interstate 68 resulting in a vehicle falling
from the bridge into the lake, killing the person inside.\17\ Those
reports also state that investigators determined that the driver, who
had also struck another vehicle prior to the crash on the bridge, was
traveling at an unsafe speed.\18\ After being arrested in California
and extradited to West Virginia, he was charged with negligent
homicide.\19\ As with other crashes described above, the driver's lack
of an I-94 or I-94A indicating a specified employment-based
nonimmigrant status and specifically allowing him to work as a truck
driver would have prevented him from receiving a CDL under the revised
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ https://www.wvnews.com/news/wvnews/tragic-fatal-accident-on-cheat-lake-bridge-leads-to-pending-criminal-charges/article_fed01d9c-f846-11ef-9e84-5bcd6ca70bef.html (accessed Sep. 19,
2025).
\18\ https://www.wtae.com/article/fayette-county-cheat-lake-missing-man-charges/64017724 (accessed Sep. 19, 2025).
\19\ https://www.wdtv.com/2025/05/24/sukhjinder-singh-booked-north-central-regional-jail/ (accessed Sep. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule
A. Justification for the IFR
Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq.,
an agency must typically provide prior notice and an opportunity for
public comment before a rule becomes effective. However, the APA
provides an exception ``when the agency for good cause finds (and
incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in
the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest'' (5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B)). With good cause, an agency may also make a rule
effective immediately upon publication (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)).
FMCSA finds good cause to issue this IFR without prior notice and
comment and to make it effective immediately. This finding is based on
the determination that notice and public procedure are both contrary to
the public interest and impracticable because it would delay the
adoption and immediate implementation of strict standards concerning
the issuance and renewal of non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs necessary to
address a recently
[[Page 46514]]
discovered, two-front crisis that constitutes an imminent hazard to
public safety and a direct threat to national security.
FMCSA has recently become aware of a critical safety failure that
is occurring in two distinct and dangerous ways: the eligibility
requirements for obtaining a non-domiciled CLP and CDL are not narrowly
tailored to provide a sufficient margin of safety to protect the
traveling public, and the existing regulatory framework is unworkable
in practice due to systemic deficiencies in State implementation. FMCSA
cannot, in good faith, permit a demonstrably failed non-domiciled
credential issuance regulatory framework and implementation to continue
while conducting a notice and comment rulemaking process.
The first front of this crisis--the overly broad eligibility
requirements of the current regulations--has been tragically
demonstrated by multiple fatal crashes in 2025 involving drivers who
held non-domiciled CDLs (or who were mistakenly issued a standard CDL
instead of a non-domiciled CDL), most of which were properly issued in
accordance with existing regulations. As discussed in Section V.D. of
this preamble, non-domiciled CDL holders have been involved in several
recent, fatal crashes that claimed the lives of 12 people (including
two children) and caused injuries to 15 people (at least 11 of which
were hospitalized). One driver had been in the U.S. illegally since
2018 and would not have been eligible for a non-domiciled CDL under the
revised regulation. Two of the drivers had prior citations on their
driving records, with one of those drivers also having inconsistencies
in his hours-of-service record leading up to the day of the crash.
These crashes demonstrate that the existing non-domiciliary
credentialing framework is dangerously permissive, creating an
untenable risk to the public even when the CDLs were properly issued
under the existing standards.
The second front of the crisis is a systemic breakdown in State
implementation of the rule, which can have disastrous consequences, as
evidenced by the March 14, 2025, fatal crash in Texas caused by a
driver with a license improperly issued by Texas and another crash in
Florida on August 12, 2025, where the driver had previously been issued
an improper license by Washington. As discussed in Section V.C. of this
preamble, the scale of this implementation failure was recently
uncovered by FMCSA's 2025 APRs, which revealed that States are
fundamentally failing to administer the issuance of non-domiciled
credentials to foreign-domiciled applicants properly. FMCSA's APR has
demonstrated that approximately one in four non-domiciled CDLs
California issued were not compliant with the requirements in 49 CFR
parts 383 and 384. Moreover, FMCSA has already confirmed improperly
issued non-domiciled CDLs across six States, including California,
Colorado, Washington, Texas, Pennsylvania, and South Dakota. FMCSA
expects the number of States discovered to have improperly issued non-
domiciled CDLs to grow as FMCSA's APRs continue.
When the integrity of the non-domiciled CDL process is in question,
the credential itself is compromised and can no longer be trusted to
verify an individual's eligibility and qualifications. Although FMCSA's
primary focus in this rulemaking is on highway safety, the Agency notes
that issuance of CLPs and CDLs to foreign individuals does have
national security implications that should not be overlooked. Failure
to properly vet such individuals raises the risk that individuals with
malicious intent could gain authorized control of CMVs, which can be
used to transport hazardous materials and target critical
infrastructure or to otherwise carry out a terrorist attack.\20\
Therefore the non-domiciled CLP and CDL issuance process must be
protected to prevent exploitation by bad actors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ On October 31, 2017, Sayfullo Saipov, who possessed a CDL,
carried out a terrorist attack when he used a 6,000-lb. truck to
murder eight victims and injure many more, including a 14-year old
child, on the Hudson River Bike Path in lower Manhattan. See https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/sayfullo-saipov-be-sentenced-life-prison-2017-truck-attack-isis. Though the truck used in this attack
did not qualify as a commercial motor vehicle under the definition
in 49 U.S.C. 31132 (because it did not have a gross vehicle weight
rating or gross vehicle weight of at least 10,0001 pounds), it shows
the lethal damage that can be inflicted by a single vehicle in the
wrong hands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the current regulations for issuing non-domiciled CLPs
and CDLs require States to obtain an applicant's complete 10-year
driving history from all States where the individual was previously
licensed. See Sec. 383.73(b)(3)(iv). However, States are unable to
carry out this requirement for individuals whose driving history exists
predominantly or solely within a foreign jurisdiction. Without a
verified driving record, there is a serious risk that unsafe or high-
risk drivers--who may have prior violations, suspensions, or a history
of crashes in foreign jurisdictions--could be granted non-domiciled
CLPs and CDLs and operate large trucks and buses on U.S. roadways. This
undermines the integrity and safety of the CLP and CDL issuance
process. Though there is a need to handle the issuance processes
differently (due to the lack of authority to compel foreign
jurisdictions to provide driving records), FMCSA believes that limiting
eligibility for non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs (particularly when limited
to employees holding an I-94 or I-94A indicating a specified
employment-based nonimmigrant status that ensure additional screening
of drivers) will increase safety by appreciably reducing the number of
non-domiciled CLP and CDL drivers with unknown driver safety records on
the Nation's roadways.
The confluence of these recent events and recently uncovered
factors creates an imminent concern that the current regulatory
framework does not provide a sufficient margin of safety to protect the
traveling public. The recent fatal crashes demonstrate that the current
regulations related to non-domiciled credentials fail even when
properly followed, while the systemic issuance errors and fatal crashes
caused by drivers who were improperly issued a license confirm the
current regulatory framework has allowed for frequent points of
failure--allowing ineligible persons to obtain non-domiciled CLPs and
CDLs. This combination constitutes an imminent hazard that warrants
immediate action to protect the traveling public.
Furthermore, providing advance notice through a proposed rule is
impracticable and contrary to the public interest because it would
actively subvert the rule's purpose by creating a foreseeable and
concentrated surge in applications that would exacerbate the current
safety crisis. A non-domiciled CDL is a high-value economic credential,
and historical precedent shows that announcing a closing window for
such an opportunity invariably triggers a rush of applicants. For
example, when the compliance date for FMCSA's entry-level driver
training requirements was approaching, SDLAs saw a large spike in CLP
and CDL issuances immediately before applicants would have been subject
to the new training requirements. The compliance date for the
requirements was February 7, 2022. Data from the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS) \21\ shows that CLP and CDL
issuances steadily increased during 2021 culminating in numbers for
December 2021 through February 2022
[[Page 46515]]
that were around twice as high as the same time period in the previous
year.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See https://www.aamva.org/technology/systems/driver-licensing-systems/cdlis.
\22\ According to CDLIS CLPs and CDLs issued by month and year:
32,970 in December 2020; 37,571 in January 2021; 43,366 in February
2021; 63,462 in December 2021; 84,291 in January 2022; and 87,672 in
February 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The incentive and willingness to seek a CDL during a pendency
period between a proposed rule and its potential finalization is
amplified by the unique nature of the non-domiciled foreign applicant
pool. Unlike U.S. citizens, non-citizen nationals residing in a U.S.
territory, or lawful permanent residents who must apply for a CDL or
CLP in their State of domicile, non-domiciled CDL or CLP applicants are
not bound by such requirements. They are uniquely mobile and can
strategically apply in any State that issues non-domiciled CDLs or
CLPs.
The public notice itself would effectively serve as a guide for
this forum shopping. The justification for the rulemaking would
identify States with systemic weaknesses and high error rates,
inadvertently advertising the path of least resistance. This is likely
to funnel a national, and even international, pool of applicants toward
the very State agencies least equipped to handle them, overwhelming
their capacity for due diligence. Knowing that their window of
opportunity was closing, those seeking to obtain a CDL improperly would
rush to secure a license before the final rule takes effect. This would
dramatically exacerbate the very danger the rulemaking is designed to
eliminate, flooding the Nation's roadways with a new cohort of
ineligible drivers.
The harm from such a concentrated surge is not speculative--it is
foreseeable. Based on FMCSA's own 2025 APRs, California was found to
have an error rate in excess of 25 percent and issued approximately
3,820 non-domiciled CDLs and CLPs in June 2025 alone. FMCSA expects a
notice-and-comment period would result in this State being inundated
with applicants, and extrapolating from the 2025 APR finding in June,
could lead to the issuance of potentially over 1,000 improperly issued
credentials every month. Even if fewer drivers than expected seek to
secure licenses before the regulatory changes take effect, the current
processes in noncompliant States indicate that as many as one in four
drivers who would normally apply during that timeframe could be issued
non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs improperly. Dangerous drivers who would be
eligible to obtain a non-domiciled CLP or CDL under the current
framework but are at risk of causing fatal crashes such as those
involved in the fatal crashes cited above in West Virginia, Alabama,
Delaware, and Florida would equally be incentivized to obtain a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL before the enhanced standards became effective,
resulting in a higher number of dangerous drivers on America's roadways
and threatening public safety.
Therefore, advance notice would create a perverse incentive,
turning the period between the publication of the notice and the
publication of the final rule into a window of heightened danger and
making the standard rulemaking process unworkable and self-defeating.
For the same reasons described above, FMCSA finds good cause to make
the rule effective on publication, rather than making it effective at
least 30 days after publication. States that choose to issue non-
domiciled CDLs and CLPs will be required to pause issuance of those
CDLs and CLPs until they can ensure compliance with the updated
regulations.
Though this IFR is effective immediately, FMCSA invites comments
from interested members of the public. These comments must be submitted
on or before November 28, 2025. FMCSA will consider these comments and
determine whether to make any revisions to the rule as a result of
these comments.
B. Overview of the IFR
The current regulations focus on an individual's possession of a
valid USCIS-issued EAD or an unexpired foreign passport accompanied by
evidence that the individual was inspected and admitted or paroled into
the United States. As some of the recent incidents highlighted in
Section V demonstrate, this allows individuals without lawful
immigration status, including those who entered the United States
illegally, to receive non-domiciled CLPs or CDLs as long as they obtain
an EAD. This IFR revises the regulations to focus on lawful immigration
status in the United States in certain employment-based nonimmigrant
categories. An EAD will no longer be sufficient to obtain a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL. An EAD only serves as proof that an individual is
authorized to work in the United States for a specific time period, not
that the individual entered the United States legally by presenting
themselves at a port of entry.\23\ This standard of documentation is no
longer sufficient to ensure that the non-domiciled CLP and CDL issuance
process is narrowly tailored to those individuals who have lawfully
entered the United States and should be allowed to drive a CMV.
Individuals who do not possess evidence of lawful immigration status as
defined in this IFR in certain employment-based nonimmigrant
categories, will no longer be eligible to receive non-domiciled CLPs or
CDLs. These individuals excluded from eligibility for a non-domiciled
CLP or CDL would include asylum seekers, asylees, refugees, and
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients. Although
these individuals may be eligible for employment in the United States,
they would not be eligible to apply for a non-domiciled CLP or CDL. The
rule will continue to allow U.S. citizens and lawful permanent
residents, and non-citizen nationals domiciled in a U.S. territory
(other than the 50 States and the District of Columbia) to obtain a
non-domiciled CLP or CDL in a U.S. State. This rule also does not
impact the ability of an individual domiciled in a State that is
prohibited from issuing CDLs to obtain a non-domiciled CLP or CDL in
another State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ An EAD may be issued to certain groups of individuals who
may not have presented themselves at a valid port of entry to be
screened. See 8 CFR 274a.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only those in lawful status in the United States in one of the
following employment-based nonimmigrant categories will be permitted to
obtain a non-domiciled CLP or CDL: H-2A (Temporary Agricultural
Workers), H-2B (Temporary Non-Agricultural Workers), or E-2 (Treaty
Investors). No other immigration categories will be eligible for a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL under the IFR. These nonimmigrant categories
require either a labor certification through the Department of Labor
(DOL), current employment, or other specified proof of work established
through the Federal visa process.\24\ These requirements ensure that
individuals in the United States under these nonimmigrant categories
are already approved to work specific jobs that may require acquisition
of a non-domiciled CDL. In addition, being issued the visa by the
Department of State, presenting themselves at a valid port of entry to
be screened by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and being issued a
Form I-94/94A ensures that these visa holders have entered the United
States lawfully and have lawful immigration status. This list of
specified nonimmigrant categories does not include every employment-
based
[[Page 46516]]
nonimmigrant category, but encompasses the vast majority of individuals
working in such categories that cover jobs that would require the
acquisition of a non-domiciled CDL. Keeping the list targeted to CDL-
specific employment-based nonimmigrant categories will eliminate
confusion regarding who may be eligible for a non-domiciled CLP or CDL
and ensure that those credentials are being issued only to those who
need them for specific employment purposes. In addition, as discussed
in Section VI.A of this preamble, limiting eligibility for non-
domiciled CLPs and CDLs (particularly when limited to employees working
under one of the specified employment-based nonimmigrant categories
that ensure additional screening of drivers) will also increase safety
by appreciably reducing the number of non-domiciled CLP and CDL drivers
with unknown driver safety records on the Nation's roadways. In
consulting with DOL's Office of Foreign Labor Certification, FMCSA
understands that employer applications related to commercial trucking
typically include some combination of the following job requirements:
possess U.S. CDL or foreign CDL equivalent, related work experience (12
months to 2 years), clean driving record, pass drug or medical testing,
and knowledge or proficiency in English. This employer screening, in
addition to the incentive to avoid unnecessarily repeating the lengthy
job order process,\25\ helps ensure that the population of drivers
being hired under one of the specified employment-based nonimmigrant
categories are more likely to be drivers with safe driving records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ For more information on the requirements and processes
required for the listed visas see https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states.
\25\ For example, employers that would like to hire H-2B workers
are required by DOL to submit a job order (``Application for
Temporary Employment Certification'') no more than 90 days and no
less than 75 days before the work start date. See 20 CFR 655.15(b).
Each job qualification and requirement must be listed in the job
order and must be bona fide and consistent with the normal and
accepted qualifications and requirements imposed by non-H-2B
employers in the same occupation and area of intended employment. 20
CFR 655.18(a)(2). An employer therefore has an incentive to
thoroughly screen a prospective employee's driver safety record and
apply similar qualifications and requirements to avoid having to go
through the application process again, as this would delay the
hiring of another driver for more than 75 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individuals in approved employment-based nonimmigrant categories
will be required to provide an unexpired Form I-94/94A and unexpired
foreign passport at every issuance, transfer, renewal, and upgrade
action defined in the regulation. Applicants who are U.S. citizens,
lawful permanent residents, or non-citizen nationals domiciled in a
U.S. territory will be required to provide any of the documents
specified in Table 1 of Sec. 383.71 as proof that they are eligible to
receive a non-domiciled CLP or CDL. The expiration date for any non-
domiciled CLP or CDL will be the expiration of the alien's period of
admission documented on the Form I-94/94A or 1 year, whichever is
sooner. This ensures that the SDLA will verify U.S. citizens and non-
citizen nationals domiciled in a U.S. territory will be issued a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL with an expiration date one year from the date of
issuance to ensure consistency in the licensing process, which will
reduce confusion for SDLAs issuing these non-domiciled credentials.
Once an applicant has presented the proper documentation, SDLAs
will be required to utilize SAVE,\26\ administered by USCIS, to verify
the immigration status and employment-based nonimmigrant category
information provided by the applicant. If the information received from
SAVE does not confirm the applicant's claim to be in lawful immigration
status (i.e., if the applicant's Form I-94/94A ``admit until date'' has
expired) or the applicant's nonimmigrant category as reflected by SAVE
is no longer one of those specified in this rule (i.e., no longer
denotes H-2A (Temporary Agricultural Workers), H-2B (Temporary Non-
Agricultural Workers), or E-2 (Treaty Investors), the SDLA would be
prohibited from issuing the non-domiciled CLP or CDL. However, the SDLA
may not rely solely on the SAVE response; it must confirm the
applicant's claim to be in lawful immigration status in a specified
category, it must retain copies of the required documents in its
records, and it must provide copies of these documents and proof of
SAVE verification to FMCSA upon request. The SDLA will also be required
to retain these documents for no less than 2 years. The new
requirements for verification through SAVE and records retention
ensures that FMCSA has access to relevant information during APRs
moving forward to verify the integrity of a State's non-domiciled CLP
and CDL issuance process. This will address many of the challenges the
Agency encountered in assessing a State's compliance during the current
round of APRs caused by the lack of documentation showing the number of
non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs issued or that such CLPs and CDLs were
properly issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Available at https://www.uscis.gov/save.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SDLAs will be prohibited from renewing non-domiciled CLPs or CDLs
by mail and must require the applicant to be present in-person at each
renewal. The rule also contains a mandatory downgrade provision. If a
State receives notification from FMCSA, the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of State, or other Federal agency with
jurisdiction that a non-domiciled CLP or CDL holder licensed in that
State no longer holds lawful nonimmigrant status in a category
established in this rule, or if the non-domiciled CLP or CDL holder
violates any terms of their immigration status, the SDLA will be
required to initiate a process to remove the commercial privilege from
the license within 30 days. Each time an SDLA renews, transfers
upgrades, amends, corrects, reprints, or otherwise duplicates a
previously issued CLP or CDL, the SDLA (in addition to confirming that
the applicant's foreign passport is unexpired) must verify through SAVE
that the applicant's I-94/94A ``admit until date'' has not expired and
that the applicant's immigration category as noted on the I-94/94A or
as confirmed by SAVE, remains listed as H-2A (Temporary Agricultural
Workers), H-2B (Temporary Non-Agricultural Workers), or E-2 (Treaty
Investors).
VII. International Impacts
Motor carriers and drivers are subject to the laws and regulations
of the countries where they operate, unless an international agreement
states otherwise. Drivers and carriers should be aware of the
regulatory differences between nations in which they operate.
This rule will not impact drivers domiciled in Canada or Mexico.
FMCSA has previously determined that CDLs issued by Canadian Provinces
and Territories in conformity with the Canadian National Safety Code
and ``Licencias Federales de Conductor'' issued by the United Mexican
States are in accordance with the standards of part 383. Under these
reciprocity determinations, drivers that live in Canada and Mexico
would operate in the United States with the license issued by their
country of domicile. Therefore, under the single license provision of
Sec. 383.21, a driver holding a CDL issued under the Canadian National
Safety Code or a ``Licencia Federal de Conductor'' issued by Mexico is
prohibited from obtaining a non-domiciled CDL, or any other type of
driver's license, from a State or other jurisdiction in the United
States.
VIII. Section-By-Section Analysis
This section-by-section analysis describes the changes to the
regulatory text in numerical order.
[[Page 46517]]
A. Regulatory Provisions
Section 383.5 Definitions
FMCSA adds a definition of evidence of lawful immigration status to
Sec. 383.5.
Section 383.71 Driver Application and Certification Procedures
FMCSA revises paragraph (f) of Sec. 383.71.
Section 383.73 State Procedures
FMCSA amends Sec. 383.73 by revising paragraphs (a)(6), (b)(6),
(c)(7), (d)(7), and (e)(5); revising the introductory text of paragraph
(f)(2); adding a new paragraph (f)(2)(iv), revising paragraph (f)(3),
adding new paragraphs (f)(5) and (6), and revising paragraph (m).
Section 384.212 Domicile Requirement
FMCSA adds new paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) to Sec. 384.212.
Section 384.301 Substantial Compliance--General Requirements
FMCSA adds new paragraphs (q) to Sec. 384.301.
B. Guidance Statements and Interpretations
This IFR amends a regulation that has associated guidance
statements. Such guidance statements do not have the force and effect
of law, are strictly advisory, and are not meant to bind the public in
any way. Conformity with guidance statements is voluntary. Guidance is
intended only to provide information to the public regarding existing
requirements under the law or FMCSA policies. A guidance statement does
not alter the substance of a regulation.
FMCSA rescinds the following guidance:
1. FMCSA-CDL-383.23-FAQ001(2023-05-08): \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Available at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/commercial-drivers-license/may-state-drivers-licensing-agency-sdla-issue-non-domiciled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This guidance document, which refers to individuals present under
the DACA immigration policy as a citizen of Mexico, is rescinded. It is
no longer applicable under the new requirements to provide evidence of
legal status.
2. FMCSA-CDL-383.23-Q1 \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Available at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov//registration/commercial-drivers-license/may-foreign-driver-employment-authorization-document-obtain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This guidance document, which refers to foreign drivers with
employment authorization documents, is rescinded. Foreign drivers must
meet the new requirements in this rule to obtain non-domiciled CLPs and
CDLs and the rest of the guidance is unnecessary as it is simply a
restatement of what is already explained in footnote 1 to Sec. 383.23.
Nomenclature for Non-Domiciled CLPs and CDLs
In addition, some SDLAs were operating under informal guidance
previously issued by FMCSA that permitted States to refer to their non-
domiciled credentials under different nomenclature. FMCSA notes that
during the 2025 APRs, SDLA use of these disparate terms generated
confusion for some SDLAs because it made it difficult to determine
whether the State did in fact issue non-domiciled credentials in the
first place. This IFR supersedes any past guidance on this issue and
clarifies that Sec. Sec. 383.73(f)(2)(ii) and 383.153(c) require that
the word ``non-domiciled'' appear across a CLP or CDL and must ``be
conspicuously and unmistakably displayed'' on the face of the CLP or
CDL when a State issues a non-domiciled CLP or CDL. States may not use
other nomenclature (such as ``limited term'' or ``temporary'') as a
substitute for ``non-domiciled,'' use restriction codes that require
the examination of fine print on the back of the license as a
substitute for ``non-domiciled'' on the face of the credential, or use
any other alternatives to conspicuously and unmistakably displaying
``non-domiciled'' on the face of the CDL or CLP.
IX. Regulatory Analyses
A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
OMB has determined that this rulemaking is a significant regulatory
action under E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), Regulatory
Planning and Review, as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, Jan.
21, 2011), Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review, because of the
substantial Congressional and public interest concerning issuance of
non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs. The rulemaking is also significant under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
This IFR amends the Federal regulations for SDLAs issuing
commercial driving credentials to foreign-domiciled individuals.
Through this rulemaking, FMCSA restores the integrity of the CDL
issuance processes by significantly limiting the authority for SDLAs to
issue and renew non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs to individuals domiciled in
a foreign jurisdiction.
The analysis below discusses the affected entities, the need for
the regulation, and the costs, benefits, and transfers that may result
from this IFR.
Analysis Inputs
Wage Rates
FMCSA computes its estimates of labor costs using data gathered
from several sources. Labor costs are comprised of wages, fringe
benefits, and overhead. Fringe benefits include paid leave, bonuses and
overtime pay, health and other types of insurance, retirement plans,
and legally required benefits (Social Security, Medicare, unemployment
insurance, and workers compensation insurance). Overhead includes any
expenses to a firm associated with labor that are not part of
employees' compensation; this typically includes many types of fixed
costs of managing a body of employees, such as management and human
resource staff salaries or payroll services. The economic costs of
labor to a firm should include the costs of all forms of compensation
and labor related expenses.
FMCSA used the driver wage rate to represent the value of the
drivers' time that, in the absence of the rule, would have been spent
being gainfully employed and performing duties as a CMV driver. The
source for driver wages is the median hourly wage data (May 2024) from
DOL, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Occupational Employment
Statistics (OES).\29\ The CMV driver wage is a weighted average of
three occupational codes that require a CDL: 53-3032 Heavy and Tractor-
Trailer Truck Drivers, 53-3051 Bus Drivers, School, and 53-3052, Bus
Drivers, Transit and Intercity. BLS does not publish data on fringe
benefits for specific occupations, but it does for the broad industry
groups in its Employer Costs for Employee Compensation release. To
calculate the fringe benefits rate, this analysis uses an average
hourly wage of $32.71 and average hourly benefits of $14.99 for private
industry workers in ``transportation and warehousing'' \30\ to estimate
that fringe benefits are equal to 45.83 percent ($14.99 / $32.71) of
wages.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ DOL, BLS. Occupational Employment Statistics (OES).
National. May 2024. Available at: https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm
(accessed Aug. 27, 2025).
\30\ DOL, BLS. Table 4: Employer Costs for Employee Compensation
for private industry workers by occupational and industry group,
December 2024. Available at: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ecec_03142025.htm (accessed Sept. 9, 2025).
\31\ FMCSA's standard approach to accounting for the opportunity
cost of drivers' time considers hourly base wage plus fringe
benefits, but exclusive of overhead, representing the value to the
driver of his or her forgone best alternative (i.e., in the absence
of this rule it is assumed these individuals would be working during
that time and as such, the analysis values that time at the same
amount that they accept in exchange for it, that is, their base wage
plus fringe benefits). Including an overhead rate as a component
element of the driver wage rate, over and above the base wage and
fringe benefits, for the purposes of evaluating the opportunity cost
to drivers does not accurately reflect the value as incident upon
the driver (because the value of the overhead component of wage
rates is not incident upon, nor received as compensation by, the
driver, as are base wages and fringe benefits).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 46518]]
FMCSA used the wage rate for employees in office and administrative
support to represent the value of the SDLA employees' time that, in the
absence of the rule, would have been spent performing other duties and
responsibilities. The source for SDLA employees' wages is the median
hourly wage data (May 2024) from the BLS' OES. To calculate the fringe
benefits rate, this analysis uses an average hourly wage of $25.56 and
average hourly benefits of $18.95 for State and local government
workers in ``office and administrative support'' to estimate that
fringe benefits are equal to 74.14 percent ($18.95 / $25.56) of wages.
FMCSA uses the Census Bureau's Service Annual Survey (SAS) Table 5 data
to calculate overhead expenses and their ratio to gross annual payroll
expenses for the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
484 (Truck Transportation) and NAICS 485 (Transit and Ground Passenger)
industries.\32\ FMCSA reviewed SAS data from 2013 through 2021, finding
2015 to be the most appropriate baseline from which to estimate
industry overhead rates. While it is typically preferrable to use the
most recent information, data from 2020 was an anomalous year with
especially high overhead rates, likely due to the coronavirus disease
2019 pandemic and subsequent business disruptions. For the 2018 and
2019 SAS tables, Census greatly reduced the number of expenses
published in Table 5. Based on the assigned expense categories as
overhead, FMCSA followed two steps to calculate the overhead rate.
First, FMCSA added together the seven overhead expense categories
(expensed purchases of software; data processing and other purchased
computer services; purchased repairs and maintenance to buildings,
structures, and offices; lease and rental payments for land, buildings,
structures, store spaces, and offices; purchased advertising and
promotional services; purchased professional and technical services;
and cost of insurance). FMCSA then divided the sum of the overhead
expense categories by gross annual payroll. Following this approach
including only the seven expense categories most focused on firm fixed
expenses, the 2015 overhead expenses in truck transportation would be
$13.0 billion.\33\ Dividing the $13.0 billion overhead by $62 billion
gross annual payroll gives a 21 percent overhead rate for NAICS 484.
The 2015 overhead expenses in passenger and ground transportation would
be $3.1 billion. Dividing the $3.1 billion overhead by the $13 million
gross annual payroll gives a 23 percent overhead rate for NAICS 485.
FMCSA then combined the expense and payroll categories for both
industries to calculate an average transportation industry overhead
rate of 21 percent for use in this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See SAS Table 5. Available at: https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/sas/data/tables.html (accessed: Sept. 10, 2025).
\33\ The seven expense categories included in this overhead
estimate are: ``Expensed purchases of software'' ($321 million),
``Data processing and other purchased computer services'' ($320
million), ``Purchased repairs and maintenance to buildings,
structures, and offices'' ($541 million), ``Lease and rental
payments for land, buildings, structures, store spaces, and
offices'' ($3,067 million), ``Purchased advertising and promotional
services'' ($507 million), ``Purchased professional and technical
services'' ($1,782 million), and ``Cost of insurance'' ($6,535
million).
Table 1--Hourly Median Wage Rate, Fringe Benefits, and Overhead Rates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Median hourly
Fringe Median hourly base wage +
BLS occupation code Occupation Hourly median benefits rate Overhead rate base wage + fringe
wage (%) (%) fringe benefits +
benefits overhead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
53-3032; 53-3051; 53-3052................. CDL Driver Composite........ NA 45.83 NA $39.19 NA
43-1011................................... First-Line Supervisors of $31.80 74.14 21 55.38 $62.05
Office and Administrative
Support Workers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average SDLA Fee for License Renewal
FMCSA reviewed fees for CDL renewal across all 51 (50 States and
the District of Columbia) jurisdictions and found that renewal fees
range from $5 to $164.50. The average renewal fee is $55.28, and FMCSA
uses an estimate of $55 to represent the renewal fee paid by non-
domiciled CDL applicants.
Crash Costs
FMCSA uses crash cost values to assess and estimate the safety
benefits of various regulatory initiatives. FMCSA publishes its
methodology for calculating crash costs for fatal, injury, and non-
injury crashes on its website.\34\ The values below incorporate the
most recent crash data from the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, from calendar year 2023, inflated to 2024 values based
on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Available at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/fmcsa.dot.gov/files/2024-12/FMC-PRE-240812-001-Federal%20Motor%20Carrier%20Safety%20Administraction%20Crash%20Cost%20Methdology%20Report-2024_0.pdf.
Table 2--CMV Crash Cost, by Crash Type
[In 2024 dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CMV crash
Crash type costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost per non injury crash............................... $52,864
Cost per injury crash................................... 400,025
Cost per fatal crash.................................... 15,739,682
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected Entities
SDLAs
This IFR will impact the SDLAs in 46 States that currently issue
non-domiciled CDLs (AL, MS, NH, TN, and WV do not issue non-domiciled
CDLs).
Drivers
This final rule will impact current and prospective non-domiciled
CDL holders. Drivers will be required to provide additional
documentation, and in some cases will no longer be eligible for a non-
domiciled CDL. FMCSA gathered information on current CLP and CDL
holders during the APRs discussed earlier in the preamble, and
estimates that there are approximately
[[Page 46519]]
200,000 non-domiciled CDL holders, and approximately 20,000 non-
domiciled CLP holders. Upon renewal, some number of these individuals
will no longer be eligible for a non-domiciled CDL and will have their
credential downgraded. In an effort to determine the number of drivers
that will still be eligible for non-domiciled CDLs, FMCSA spoke with
other Government agencies and reviewed data from SDLAs and other on-
line resources. Approximately 500 to 600 individuals receive a H-2B
status with the intent to operate a CMV each year. This nonimmigrant
classification can be granted for up to the period of time authorized
on the temporary labor certification and may be extended for qualifying
employment in increments of up to one year.\35\ FMCSA thus assumes that
500 to 600 individuals will seek a non-domiciled CDL, including
renewals or extensions, each year. FMCSA does not have clear estimates
of the number of H-2A workers that intend to operate a CMV because it
is often incidental to the work they are doing. The Office of Homeland
Security Statistics yearbook estimates that approximately 27,240 H-2A
visas were issued to individuals from countries other than Canada and
Mexico in 2023.\36\ This represents an upper bound in that it is highly
unlikely that all of these individuals would seek a CDL. The Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS) reports employment based on industry and
occupational code. In 2024, BLS estimates that there were approximately
15,000 heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers in the agricultural
industry.\37\ Many of these drivers are U.S. citizens and would not
seek a non-domiciled CDL. FMCSA makes the simplifying assumption that
\1/3\ of these individuals hold H-2A status, are not domiciled in
either Canada or Mexico, and will be applying for non-domiciled CDLs
each year. Including the individuals in the remaining nonimmigrant
categories (E-2) FMCSA estimates that SDLAs will issue approximately
6,000 non-domiciled CDLs per year. The remaining roughly 194,000
current non-domiciled CDL holders will exit the freight market, which
is discussed in more detail in the cost section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/h-2b-temporary-non-agricultural-workers.
\36\ Available at https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2023/table25.
\37\ Available at https://data.bls.gov/projections/nationalbMatrix?querybParams=111000&ioType=i.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor Carriers
This IFR will impact motor carriers that currently, or intend to,
employ non-domiciled CDL holders that are no longer eligible to receive
a credential. Motor carriers that currently employ non-domiciled CDL
holders will have some time to adjust to the change as the drivers will
be aware if their license will not be renewed under the standards set
forth in this IFR. By providing this time for adjustment, FMCSA
anticipates that impacts to motor carriers will be mitigated.
Need for the Regulation
As discussed at length in the preamble, the confluence of recent
events creates an imminent concern that the current regulatory
framework does not provide a sufficient margin of safety to protect the
traveling public. The fatal crashes identified above demonstrate that
the regulations fail even when properly followed, while the systemic
issuance errors confirm the current regulatory framework has allowed
for frequent points of failure--enabling ineligible persons to obtain
non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs. This combination constitutes an imminent
hazard that warrants immediate action to protect the traveling public.
Costs
This IFR will require States and their SDLAs to verify additional
documentation, utilize SAVE, and retain copies of the verified
documents in their records. FMCSA anticipates that States will issue
fewer non-domiciled CDLs, but that each credential will require
additional time to verify and retain documents. Currently, States are
not required to pay transactions fees to query SAVE and FMCSA does not
estimate a fee impact for that transaction. Lastly, States that choose
to issue non-domiciled CDLs and CLPs will be required to pause issuance
of those CDLs and CLPs until they can ensure compliance with the
updated regulations. FMCSA anticipates that States will incur costs in
the process of realigning their non-domiciled CDL program issuance with
the standards set forth in this IFR.
FMCSA estimates that verifying and retaining additional
documentation and running a SAVE query will require approximately 15
minutes of time per query for SDLA personnel. FMCSA estimates that the
total cost, across all impacted SDLAs, will total approximately $93,075
per year (6,000 applicants x $62.05 wage rate x 15 minutes).
SDLAs that choose to issue non-domiciled CDLs will be required to
pause issuance of the credential until their program is aligned to the
standards set forth in this IFR. Each SDLA has developed a process that
is unique to their State, and as such, will incur different costs to
adjust their program. Some program adjustments could include
reprograming the IT system to interpret SAVE results in alignment with
the new standards, changing the credential that is issued to ensure
that ``non-domiciled'' is conspicuously and unmistakably displayed on
the face of the CLP or CDL, and ensuring that SDLA employees are
properly issuing non-domiciled CDLs and retaining appropriate records.
FMCSA is unable to estimate a specific cost for each SDLA due to the
variance in current non-domiciled CDL issuance (e.g., many SDLA systems
already issue credentials with ``non-domiciled'' displayed on the face
of the credential and some SDLAs were already retaining appropriate
records to document the issuance process). FMCSA has previously
estimated costs of approximately $70,000 (in 2024 dollars) to develop
an interface between the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse and the SDLA IT
system.\38\ This would likely overestimate the cost of reprogramming
State IT systems to interpret SAVE results because SDLAs are already
interfacing with SAVE for purposes of REAL ID and this change will
represent an adjustment to the existing interface. It is, however, a
reasonable estimate of the average impact for States to align their
non-domiciled CDL program with the standards set forth in this rule
(inclusive of IT system upgrades, credential updates, and ensuring
staff are properly issuing credentials). FMCSA estimates that each of
the 46 effected SDLAs will incur costs of $70,000 in the first year of
the analysis, resulting in total first year costs for program
realignment of $3.2 million (46 SDLAs x $70,000 = $3,220,000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ (86 FR 55718).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This IFR will also result in costs to non-domiciled CDL drivers as
they will now be required to renew their license in person every year,
which increases the amount of time needed to renew the license.
Previously, some drivers were likely able to renew online or via mail
and had expiry dates beyond a one-year timeframe. FMCSA assumes that
non-domiciled CDL holders previously had a two-year expiry date and
spent approximately one hour (or 30 minutes a year) renewing their
license. FMCSA estimates they will now spend four hours, or 3.5
additional hours renewing their license each year. FMCSA estimates the
annual in person visit will take an additional 3.5 hours of a driver's
time, resulting in total annual costs of
[[Page 46520]]
$822,990 (6,000 applicants x $39.19 x 3.5 hours).
FMCSA anticipates that drivers who will no longer be eligible for a
non-domiciled CDL will be able to find similar employment in other
sectors (e.g., construction, driving vehicles that don't require a CDL,
etc.). They will experience some de minimis costs as they move from one
industry to another when their current credential expires.
Regarding potential economic impacts within the freight market,
FMCSA looked at data during and after the COVID-19 pandemic to
understand how the market could react to a reduction in CDL holders and
found that the freight market tends to be flexible and responsive to
external factors. During the COVID-19 pandemic the industry saw a
historic increase in spot market rates, followed by a record influx of
motor carriers and drivers entering the market to meet the increased
demand.\39\ In 2021 there was a nearly 20 percent increase in the
number of interstate motor carriers and a 6 percent increase in the
number of interstate CDL drivers.\40\ Since that time, the rates have
fallen, as have load volumes and the number of motor carriers. There
are roughly 200,000 non-domiciled CDL holders, which is approximately
five percent of the 3.8 million active interstate CDL holders in 2024.
FMCSA anticipates that these drivers will exit the market within
approximately two years as their credential comes up for renewal, and
that the market will respond to this change in capacity as it has in
the past, with rates adjusting and drivers and carriers entering the
market where needed. Further, due to the prolonged two-year period of
attrition, motor carriers will have time to adjust their hiring based
on the requirements set forth in this IFR, including by marketing
available positions to drivers with the proper qualifications to obtain
a CDL. As such, FMCSA believes there will be a limited economic impact
on the freight market and motor carriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Available at https://www.bts.gov/freight-indicators#spot-rates.
\40\ Data available from MCMIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers
In addition, drivers who previously paid the renewal fee every two
years will now pay that fee annually. As discussed above, the average
renewal fee is $55, and will now be paid annually instead of
biannually, which results in an increase of $27.50 per year. FMCSA
anticipates that drivers will incur additional fees of approximately
$165,000 per year (6,000 drivers x $27.50). Fees are considered
transfer payments, or monetary payments from one group to another that
do not affect the total resources available to society, and therefore
do not represent actual costs or benefits of the rule.
Total Costs and Transfers
As shown in the table below, FMCSA estimates that the total 10-year
cost of the rulemaking (excluding transfers) is approximately $10.9
million discounted at three percent and $9.4 million discounted at
seven percent. Total annualized impacts range from $1.6 million
discounted at three percent to $1.3 million discounted at seven
percent.
Table 3--Total Costs and Transfers
[In 2024 dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total cost Total cost Total cost
Analysis year Total state Total driver Total (excluding (discounted at (discounted at
cost cost transfers transfers) 3 percent) 7 percent)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................................... $3,313,075 $822,990 $165,000 $4,136,065 $4,015,597 $3,865,481
2....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 863,479 800,127
3....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 838,329 747,782
4....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 813,912 698,862
5....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 790,206 653,142
6....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 767,190 610,413
7....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 744,845 570,479
8....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 723,150 533,158
9....................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 702,088 498,279
10...................................................... 93,075 822,990 165,000 916,065 681,638 465,681
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 930,750 8,229,900 1,650,000 12,380,650 10,940,434 9,443,403
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized.......................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. 1,557,672 1,344,528
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits
FMCSA anticipates that restoring the integrity of non-domiciled CDL
license issuance will enhance the safety of CMV operations and is
likely to result in improved safety outcomes, such as the reduced
frequency and/or severity of crashes or reduced frequency of
violations. There is not sufficient evidence, derived from well-
designed, rigorous, quantitative analyses, to reliably demonstrate a
measurable empirical relationship between the nation of domicile for a
CDL driver and safety outcomes in the United States such as changes in
frequency and/or severity of crashes or changes in frequency of
violations. FMCSA conducted a literature review and found a few
articles focused on the safety performance impacts of undocumented
immigrants or illegal aliens, but has not obtained information on how
many such drivers have sought to obtain a non-domiciled CDL in the
United States.41 42
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Zhao, Ruinan, The Impact of granting undocumented
immigrants driver's licenses on fatal crashes, Journal of Policy
Analysis and Management (Sept. 1, 2025), available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pam.70053?msockid=00e07d21548e668d115f6b375508675a (accessed Sept.
17, 2025).
\42\ Federation for Immigration Reform. Drivers' Licenses for
Illegal Aliens: A bad policy that undermines our immigration laws,
available at: https://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/drivers-licenses-illegal-aliens-policy-immigration (accessed Sept.
17, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given insufficient evidence, a direct quantitative estimate of the
potential safety benefits resulting from this IFR cannot be developed.
Break-Even Analysis
When it is not possible to quantify and monetize the estimated
benefits (or all costs) of a rule, OMB Circular A-4 suggests that
agencies perform a threshold or break-even analysis.\43\ In the context
of this IFR, FMCSA estimated the number of fatal crashes that would
need to be avoided as a
[[Page 46521]]
result of the rule for the benefits to exceed the estimated costs.
Applying FMCSA's total annualized cost estimate of $1,344,528 (at a
seven percent discount rate) and FMCSA's per-fatal crash cost estimate
$15,739,682 (both in 2024 dollars), the interim final rule would have
positive net benefits if it were to result in 0.085 fewer fatal crashes
involving CMVs each year. Extrapolated to a full year, the break-even
number of annual avoided crashes would be just 1.3 percent of the
identified crashes. As is discussed in detail in the preamble above,
FMCSA has identified five fatal crashes in just the first 8 months of
2025 in which the CMV driver responsible for the crash held a non-
domiciled CDL that would not have been issued under this final rule.
Therefore, FMCSA is confident that this rule would reduce the crash
risk associated with such fatal crashes to at least that degree, and
that the benefits would be even greater when accounting for non-fatal
crashes that would also be avoided. As a result, FMCSA has determined
that the benefits of the interim final rule are likely to exceed its
costs, including costs discussed above that are unquantified, but are
not expected to be large.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ OMB, Circular A-4, Regulatory Analysis (Sept. 17, 2003),
available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/CircularA-4.pdf (accessed Sept. 10, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, issued on
January 31, 2025 (90 FR 9065, Jan. 31, 2025), requires that, for every
one new regulation issued by an Agency, at least 10 prior regulations
be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations
be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process. Final
implementation guidance addressing the requirements of E.O. 14192 was
issued by OMB on March 26, 2025. This rule does not meet the definition
of ``rule'' or ``regulation'' as defined in section 5 of E.O. 14192,
because it is issued with respect to an immigration-related function of
the United States per section 5(a) of E.O. 14192.
C. Congressional Review Act
This rule is not a major rule as defined under the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808).'' \44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 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. 804(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. 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 safety rulemaking ``under this part'' \45\ is likely to
lead to the promulgation of a major rule. As this IFR is not likely to
result in the promulgation of a major rule, FMCSA is not required to
issue an ANPRM or to proceed with a negotiated rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ Part B of Subtitle VI of Title 49, United States Code,
i.e., 49 U.S.C. chapters 311-317.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996,\46\ 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 for any rule subject to
notice-and-comment rulemaking under the APA unless the agency head
certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. As discussed above, FMCSA has
determined that there is good cause to forego prior notice and comment
and amend the FMCSR through this IFR. The Regulatory Flexibility Act,
therefore, does not require FMCSA to conduct an RFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonetheless, FMCSA conducted a screening analysis on the impact of
the IFR on small entities. This rule has the potential to impact States
and drivers. Under the standards of the RFA, as amended, States are not
small entities because they do not meet the definition of a small
entity in section 601 of the RFA. Specifically, States are not small
governmental jurisdictions under section 601(5) of the RFA, both
because State government is not among the various levels of government
listed in section 601(5), and because, even if this were the case, no
State, including the District of Columbia, has a population of less
than 50,000, which is the criterion to be a small governmental
jurisdiction under section 601(5) of the RFA.
CDL holders 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 rule would not impact
a substantial number of small entities.
This rule would require that States verify and retain additional
documentation on non-domiciled CLP and CDL applicants and complete a
check with SAVE. FMCSA estimates costs to all impacted States of
approximately $93,000 per year. Further drivers would be required to
renew their license annually, in-person at the SDLA at an estimated
impact of approximately $988,000 per year, or less than $120 per driver
per year. For these reasons, FMCSA certifies that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
F. 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 final rule
so they can better evaluate its effects on themselves and participate
in the rulemaking initiative. If the IFR 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 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.
G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
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,
[[Page 46522]]
adjusted for inflation to 2024 levels) or more in any one year. Though
this IFR would not result in such an expenditure, and the analytical
requirements of UMRA do not apply as a result, FMCSA discusses the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
H. Paperwork Reduction Act
This IFR contains information collection requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As defined in 5
CFR 1320.3(c), collection of information comprises reporting,
recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other similar
actions. The title and description of the information collection, a
description of those who must collect the information, and an estimate
of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of data, gathering
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection.
Title: Non-Domiciled Commercial Driver's License Records.
OMB Control Number: 2126-0087.
Summary of the Information Collection: This information collection
request (ICR) covers the collection and retention of the documentation
provided to a SDLA during the application process for a non-domiciled
CLP or CDL.
Need for Information: The licensed drivers in the United States
deserve reasonable assurances that their fellow motorists are properly
qualified to drive the vehicles they operate. Under the Commercial
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA, 49 U.S.C. 31301 et seq.), as
amended, FMCSA established the CDL program and the performance
standards with which State CDL programs must comply. The CDL
regulations in 49 CFR part 383 prescribe uniform minimum standards for
testing and ensuring the fitness of individuals who operating
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs), and State compliance with the CDL
program is addressed in Part 384. In particular, States that issue non-
domiciled CDLs must do so in accordance with Sec. Sec. 383.71, 383.73
and 384.212.
This collection is intended to ensure that States retain all
documents involved in the licensing process for non-domiciled CLP and
CDL holders for a period of no less than two years from the date of
issuing (which includes amending, correcting, reprinting, or otherwise
duplicating a previously issued CLP or CDL), transferring, renewing, or
upgrading a non-domiciled CLP or CDL. If States do not retain this
documentation, FMCSA is severely hindered in its efforts to ensure
compliance with the regulatory requirements because States are unable
to accurately determine the number of non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs they
have issued, or to prove to FMCSA officials that such CLPs and CDLs
were properly issued.
Proposed Use of Information: State officials use the information
collected from non-domiciled CDL applicants to determine whether an
individual is eligible to receive a non-domiciled CDL and to prevent
unqualified, and/or disqualified CLP and CDL holders and applicants
from operating CMVs on the Nation's highways. During State CDL
compliance reviews, FMCSA officials review this information to ensure
that the provisions of the regulations are being carried out. Without
the aforementioned requirements, there would be no uniform control over
driver licensing practices to prevent uncertified and/or disqualified
foreign drivers from being issued a non-domiciled CLP or CDL. Failure
to collect this information would render the regulations unenforceable.
Description of the Respondents: SDLAs issuing non-domiciled CDLs.
Number of Respondents: 51.
Frequency of Response: Ongoing.
Burden of Response: 6,000 responses. The associated cost burden is
$93,075.
Estimate of Total Annual Burden: 1,500 hours.
In accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), FMCSA will submit the
proposed information collection amendments to OIRA at OMB for approval.
FMCSA requests comment on any aspect of this information
collection, including: (1) Whether the proposed collection is necessary
for FMCSA to perform its functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated
burden; (3) ways for FMCSA to enhance the quality, usefulness, and
clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways that the burden
could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected
information.
I. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
FMCSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and
criteria of E.O. 13132, Federalism, and has determined that it does not
have federalism implications. E.O. 13132 applies to ``policies that
have federalism implications,'' defined as regulations and other
actions that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government'' (Sec. 1(a)). The key concept here is ``substantial direct
effects on the States.'' Section 3(b) of the E.O. provides that
``[n]ational action limiting the policymaking discretion of the States
shall be taken only where there is constitutional and statutory
authority for the action and the national activity is appropriate in
light of the presence of a problem of national significance.''
The rule amends a single aspect of the CDL program authorized by
the CMVSA (49 U.S.C. chapter 313). States have been required to issue
all CDLs in accordance with Federal standards for decades and have been
required to issue all CLPs in accordance with Federal standards since
2011. Moreover, the CDL program does not have preemptive effect; it is
voluntary, and States may withdraw at any time, though doing so will
result in the loss of certain Federal-aid highway funds pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 31314. Because this IFR makes only a modest change to
requirements already imposed on participating States, FMCSA has
determined that it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the Federal and State governments,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
Nonetheless, FMCSA recognizes that this rule has an impact on the
States and their commercial driver licensing operations. Most notably,
it requires all States that issue non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs to amend
their existing procedures. The Agency continually works with the States
to identify CDL program deficiencies that need to be addressed, and it
was mostly through these reviews that systemic deficiencies with the
non-domiciled CLP and CDL issuance process were identified. Therefore,
States that issue non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs are generally already on
notice that this aspect of the CDL program is under scrutiny and that
procedural changes may be necessary.
Section 6(b) of E.O. 13132 provides in part that ``[t]o the extent
practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on State and local governments, and that is not
required by statute, unless . . . the agency, prior to the formal
promulgation of the regulation, (A) consulted with State and local
officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.''
As described in Section IX.A of the Regulatory Analysis, above, the
total cost to States of complying with these new regulations is not
expected to be substantial, so the
[[Page 46523]]
Agency has determined that consultation is not required. Furthermore,
because this is an IFR, there is no ``proposed regulation.'' The
expedited process necessitated by the immediate need to address the
issues discovered in the recent APRs means it is not practicable to
consult with the States prior to promulgation of this rulemaking.
However, FMCSA values input from States and will ensure States have the
opportunity to provide input after the publication of the IFR. FMCSA
will determine whether any revisions to the rule are warranted as a
result of information the Agency receives.
J. Privacy
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005,\47\ requires agencies to
assess the privacy impact of a regulation that will affect the privacy
of individuals. This rule would not require the collection of
personally identifiable information (PII). The supporting Privacy
Impact Analysis (PIA), available for review in the docket, gives a full
and complete explanation of FMCSA practices for protecting PII in
general and specifically in relation to this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ 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,\48\ requires Federal agencies to
conduct a PIA for new or substantially changed technology that
collects, maintains, or disseminates information in an identifiable
form. No new or substantially changed technology will collect,
maintain, or disseminate information as a result of this rule.
Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ Public Law 107-347, sec. 208, 116 Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec.
17, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA 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.
K. 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.
L. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
FMCSA analyzed this IFR pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). FMCSA believes this
IFR will not have a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. This action falls under a published
categorical exclusion and is thus excluded from further analysis and
documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental impact
statement under DOT Order 5610.1D,\49\ Subpart B, Subsection e,
paragraph (6)(s)(7), and (6)(t)(2), which cover regulations pertaining
to requirements for State-issued commercial license documentation and
having the appropriate laws, regulations, programs, policies,
procedures and information systems concerning the qualification and
licensing of persons who apply for a CDL, and persons who are issued a
CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Available at https://www.transportation.gov/mission/dots-procedures-considering-environmental-impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 383
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Motor carriers.
49 CFR Part 384
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Motor carriers.
Accordingly, FMCSA amends 49 CFR parts 383 and 384 as follows:
PART 383--COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS; REQUIREMENTS AND
PENALTIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 383 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502;
secs. 214 and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1766, 1767;
sec. 1012(b) of Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 297, sec. 4140 of
Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1746; sec. 32934 of Pub. L. 112-141,
126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 23019 of Pub. L. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429,
777; and 49 CFR 1.87.
0
2. Amend Sec. 383.5 by adding, in alphabetical order, the definition
for ``Evidence of lawful immigration status'' to read as follows:
Sec. 383.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
Evidence of lawful immigration status for purposes of subpart B of
this part, means:
(1) For applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction (except
Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands):
(i) An unexpired foreign passport; and
(ii) An unexpired Form I-94/94A issued by the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security indicating one of the following classifications: H-
2A--Temporary Agricultural Workers, H-2B--Temporary Non-Agricultural
Workers, or E-2--Treaty Investors.
(2) For applicants domiciled in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands: any of the documents specified in Table 1 of section
383.71.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 383.71 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 383.71 Driver application and certification procedures.
* * * * *
(f) Non-domiciled CLP and CDL. (1) A person must obtain a Non-
domiciled CLP or CDL:
(i) If the applicant is domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, as
defined in Sec. 383.5, and the Administrator has not determined that
the commercial motor vehicle operator testing and licensing standards
of that jurisdiction meet the standards contained in subparts G and H
of this part, provided the applicant provides the evidence of lawful
immigration status required under paragraph (f)(3)(i)(B) of this
section.
(ii) If the applicant is domiciled in a State that is prohibited
from issuing CLPs and CDLs in accordance with Sec. 384.405 of this
subchapter. That person is eligible to obtain a non-domiciled CLP or
CDL from any State that elects to issue a non-domiciled CLP or CDL and
that complies with the testing and licensing standards contained in
subparts F, G, and H of this part.
(2) An applicant for a non-domiciled CLP and CDL must do both of
the following:
(i) Complete the requirements to obtain a CLP contained in
paragraph (a) of this section or a CDL contained in paragraph (b) of
this section, except as provided in paragraph (f)(3) of this section.
[[Page 46524]]
(ii) After receipt of the non-domiciled CLP or CDL, and for as long
as it is valid, notify the State which issued the non-domiciled CLP or
CDL of any adverse action taken by any jurisdiction or governmental
agency, foreign or domestic, against his/her driving privileges. Such
adverse actions include, but are not limited to, license
disqualification or disqualification from operating a commercial motor
vehicle for the convictions described in Sec. 383.51. Notifications
must be made within the time periods specified in Sec. 383.33.
(3) Eligibility for applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction:
(i) To be eligible for a Non-domiciled CLP or CDL, an applicant
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction must:
(A) Have lawful immigration status in the United States, and
(B) Provide evidence of lawful immigration status, as defined in
Sec. 383.5.
(ii) No proof of domicile is required.
(iii) An applicant for a non-domiciled CLP or CDL is not required
to surrender his/her foreign license.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 383.73 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(6);
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(6);
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(7);
0
d. Revising paragraph (d)(7);
0
e. Revising paragraph (e)(5);
0
f. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (f)(2);
0
g. Adding paragraph (f)(2)(iv);
0
h. Revising paragraph (f)(3);
0
i. Adding paragraphs (f)(5) and (6); and
0
j. Revising paragraph (m).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 383.73 State procedures.
(a) * * *
(6) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(a)(5) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(a)(6) for applicants domiciled in a State; and for applicants
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence of lawful immigration
status as required by Sec. 383.71(f)(3)(i)(B). Exception: A State is
required to check the proof of citizenship or immigration status
specified in this paragraph only for initial issuance, renewal or
upgrade of a CLP or non-domiciled CLP (for applicants domiciled in a
State) and for initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer of a CDL
or non-domiciled CDL (for applicants domiciled in a State) for the
first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or immigration
status check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done. This exception does not apply to applicants domiciled
in a foreign jurisdiction.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10) for applicants domiciled in a State; and for applicants
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence of lawful immigration
status as required by Sec. 383.71(f)(3)(i)(B). Exception: A State is
required to check the proof of citizenship or immigration status
specified in this paragraph only for initial issuance, renewal or
upgrade of a CLP or non-domiciled CLP (for applicants domiciled in a
State) and for initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer of a CDL
or non-domiciled CDL (for applicants domiciled in a State) for the
first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or immigration
status check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done. This exception does not apply to applicants domiciled
in a foreign jurisdiction.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(7) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10) for applicants domiciled in a State; and for applicants
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence of lawful immigration
status as required by Sec. 383.71(f)(3)(i)(B). Exception: A State is
required to check the proof of citizenship or immigration status
specified in this paragraph only for initial issuance, renewal or
upgrade of a CLP or non-domiciled CLP (for applicants domiciled in a
State) and for initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer of a CDL
or non-domiciled CDL (for applicants domiciled in a State) for the
first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or immigration
status check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done. This exception does not apply to applicants domiciled
in a foreign jurisdiction.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(7) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10) for applicants domiciled in a State; and for applicants
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence of lawful immigration
status as required by Sec. 383.71(f)(3)(i)(B). Exception: A State is
required to check the proof of citizenship or immigration status
specified in this paragraph only for initial issuance, renewal or
upgrade of a CLP or non-domiciled CLP (for applicants domiciled in a
State) and for initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer of a CDL
or non-domiciled CDL (for applicants domiciled in a State) for the
first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or immigration
status check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done. This exception does not apply to applicants domiciled
in a foreign jurisdiction.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(5) Require compliance with the standards for providing proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(9) and proof of State of domicile specified in Sec.
383.71(b)(10) for applicants domiciled in a State; and for applicants
domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, evidence of lawful immigration
status as required by Sec. 383.71(f)(3)(i)(B). Exception: A State is
required to check the proof of citizenship or immigration status
specified in this paragraph only for initial issuance, renewal or
upgrade of a CLP or non-domiciled CLP (for applicants domiciled in a
State) and for initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer of a CDL
or non-domiciled CDL (for applicants domiciled in a State) for the
first time after July 8, 2011, provided a notation is made on the
driver's record confirming that the proof of citizenship or immigration
status check required by this paragraph has been made and noting the
date it was done. This exception does not apply to applicants domiciled
in a foreign jurisdiction.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) State procedures for the issuance of a non-domiciled CLP and
CDL, for any modifications thereto, and for notifications to the
Commercial Driver's License Information System must at a minimum be
identical to those pertaining to any other CLP or CDL, except as set
forth in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (iv) and (f)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
[[Page 46525]]
(iv) For applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, the State
must ensure that the period of validity of the non-domiciled CLP or CDL
does not exceed the Admit Until Date or expiration date on the
applicant's I-94/A or 1 year, whichever is sooner.
(3) Documentation of lawful immigration status. (i) Applicants
domiciled in a State. The State must require compliance with the
standards for providing evidence of lawful immigration status specified
in Sec. 383.71(b)(9) of this part.
(ii) Applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction.
(A) Beginning September 29, 2025, the State must not issue (which
includes amending, correcting, reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a
previously issued CLP or CDL), transfer, renew, or upgrade a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL unless, at the time of the transaction, the
applicant provides evidence of lawful immigration status as defined
under Sec. 383.5. Applicants for a non-domiciled CLP or CDL who do not
provide evidence of lawful immigration status as required under Sec.
383.71(f)(3)(i)(B) are not eligible for a non-domiciled CLP or CDL.
(B) States must comply with the document verification requirements
for applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction set forth in Sec.
383.73(m)(2) before issuing (which includes amending, correcting,
reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a previously issued CLP or CDL),
transferring, renewing, or upgrading a non-domiciled CLP or CDL.
(C) States are prohibited from granting non-domiciled CLP or CDL
privileges on a temporary or interim basis pending review and
validation of an applicant's evidence of lawful immigration status.
* * * * *
(5) Downgrade. If after issuing (which includes amending,
correcting, reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a previously issued
CLP or CDL), transferring, renewing, or upgrading a non-domiciled CLP
or CDL, the State receives information from FMCSA, the Department of
Homeland Security, the Department of State, or other Federal agency
with jurisdiction that the applicant no longer has lawful immigration
status in the United States in a category specified in paragraph
(1)(iii) of the definition of evidence of lawful immigration status in
Sec. 383.5 of this part, the State must initiate established State
procedures for downgrading the non-domiciled CLP or CDL. The downgrade
must be completed and recorded on the CDLIS driver record within 30
days of the State's receipt of such information. As used in this
paragraph, the term ``downgrade'' means the State's removal of the CLP
or CDL privilege from the driver's license, as set forth in paragraph
(4) the definition of CDL downgrade in Sec. 383.5.
(6) Non-domiciled CDL renewal. States must require non-domiciled
CLP or CDL renewal be conducted in-person only and must not permit
renewal by mail or electronic means.
* * * * *
(m) Document verification. Except as provided in paragraphs (m)(1)
and (2) of this section, the State must require at least two persons
within the driver licensing agency to participate substantively in the
processing and verification of the documents involved in the licensing
process for initial issuance, renewal or upgrade of a CLP or non-
domiciled CLP and for initial issuance, renewal, upgrade or transfer of
a CDL or non-domiciled CDL. The documents being processed and verified
must include, at a minimum, those provided by the applicant to prove
lawful immigration status and (if applicable) domicile, the information
filled out on the application form, and knowledge and skills test
scores. This section does not require two people to process or verify
each document involved in the licensing process.
(1) Exception for applicants domiciled in a State. For offices with
only one staff member, at least some of the documents must be processed
or verified by a supervisor before issuance or, when a supervisor is
not available, copies must be made of some of the documents involved in
the licensing process and a supervisor must verify them within one
business day of issuance of the CLP, non-domiciled CLP, CDL, or non-
domiciled CDL.
(2) Document Verification for applicants domiciled in a foreign
jurisdiction. States must verify evidence of lawful immigration status
for applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction before initial
issuance and before any subsequent issuance (which includes amending,
correcting, reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a previously issued
CLP or CDL), transfer, renewal, or upgrade of a non-domiciled CLP or
CDL.
(i) For offices with only one staff member, all documents must be
processed or verified by a supervisor before issuing (which includes
amending, correcting, reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a previously
issued CLP or CDL), transferring, renewing, or upgrading a non-
domiciled CLP or CDL.
(ii) In reviewing the evidence of lawful immigration status an
applicant domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction (except an applicant
domiciled in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa
or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands), the State must
query the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system
(administered by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services). If the
SAVE final response, including additional verification if needed, does
not confirm the applicant's claim to be in lawful immigration status in
a category specified in paragraph (1)(ii) of the definition of evidence
of lawful immigration status in Sec. 383.5 of this part, the State
must not issue (which includes amend, correct, reprint, or otherwise
duplicate a previously issued CLP or CDL), transfer, renew, or upgrade
a non-domiciled CLP or CDL, and must initiate downgrade procedures in
accordance with paragraph (f)(5) of this section if the applicant holds
an unexpired non-domiciled CLP or CDL.
(iii) The State must retain copies of all documents involved in the
licensing process, including documents provided by the applicant to
prove lawful immigration status and documents showing the results of
any SAVE query to verify an applicant's lawful immigration status, and
a supervisor must verify them within one business day of issuing (which
includes amending, correcting, reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a
previously issued CLP or CDL), transferring, renewing, or upgrading a
non-domiciled CLP or CDL. The State must retain the documents for no
less than 2 years from the date of issuing (which includes amending,
correcting, reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a previously issued
CLP or CDL), transferring, renewing, or upgrading a non-domiciled CLP
or CDL.
* * * * *
PART 384--STATE COMPLIANCE WITH COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE PROGRAM
0
5. The authority citation for part 384 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31301, et seq., and 31502; secs. 103
and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1753, 1767; sec. 32934
of Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 5524 of Pub. L. 114-94,
129 Stat. 1312, 1560; and 49 CFR 1.87.
0
6. Amend Sec. 383.212 by adding paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) to read as
follows:
[[Page 46526]]
Sec. 384.212 Domicile requirement.
(a) * * *
(1) For applicants domiciled in a foreign jurisdiction, the State
must:
(i) Comply with the document verification requirements set forth in
Sec. 383.73(m)(2) before issuing (which includes amending, correcting,
reprinting, or otherwise duplicating a previously issued CLP or CDL),
transferring, renewing, or upgrading a non-domiciled CLP or CDL;
(ii) Retain copies of all documents involved in the licensing
process, including documents provided by the applicant to prove lawful
immigration status, for a period of no less than 2 years from the date
of issuing (which includes amending, correcting, reprinting, or
otherwise duplicating a previously issued CLP or CDL), transferring,
renewing, or upgrading a non-domiciled CLP or CDL; and
(iii) Provide copies of all documents involved in the licensing
process to FMCSA within 48 hours after request.
(2) [Reserved]
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 384.301 by adding paragraph (q) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.301 Substantial compliance-general requirements.
* * * * *
(q) A State must come into substantial compliance with the
requirements of subpart B of this part and part 383 of this chapter
related to non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs, effective September 29, 2025,
prior to issuing (which includes amending, correcting, reprinting, or
otherwise duplicating a previously issued CLP or CDL), transferring,
renewing, or upgrading a non-domiciled CLP or CDL.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Jesse Elison,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2025-18869 Filed 9-26-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P