[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 918-928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-00269]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 383
[Docket No. FMCSA-2024-0121]
RIN 2126-AC59
Transportation of Fuel for Agricultural Aircraft Operations
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations to
allow States to waive the hazardous materials (HM) endorsement
requirement for holders of Class A commercial driver's licenses (CDL)
who transport no more than 1,000 gallons of aviation grade jet fuel in
support of seasonal agricultural aircraft operations.
DATES: Effective March 10, 2026. Petitions for reconsideration of this
final rule must be submitted to the FMCSA Administrator no later than
February 9, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rebecca Rehberg, Transportation
Specialist, CDL Division, Office of Safety Programs, FMCSA; (850) 728-
2034; [email protected]. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Dockets Operations at (202)
366-9826.
[[Page 919]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FMCSA organizes this final rule as follows:
I. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of the Regulatory Action
B. Costs and Benefits
III. Abbreviations
IV. Legal Basis
V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments
A. Proposed Rulemaking
B. Comments and Responses
VI. International Impacts
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)
and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
C. Congressional Review Act
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Assistance for Small Entities
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
I. Privacy
J. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
K. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
I. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
To view any documents mentioned as being available in the docket,
go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FMCSA-2024-0121/document and
choose the document to review. To view comments, click this final rule,
then click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations
at U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help
you, please call (202) 366-9317 or (202) 366-9826 before visiting
Dockets Operations.
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of the Regulatory Action
FMCSA amends the CDL regulations to allow States additional
flexibility to waive the HM endorsement \1\ requirement for certain
drivers transporting aviation fuel in furtherance of agricultural
aircraft operations.\2\ Many farm operations rely on aircraft to apply
pesticides or fertilizers to their crops. Agricultural aviation
companies often deliver aircraft fuel to staging areas some distance
from their headquarters. These companies, particularly in remote, rural
areas have difficulty finding CDL holders with HM endorsements to
complete these deliveries. Under the current regulations found in 49
CFR 383.93(b)(4), most CDL holders must obtain an HM endorsement before
transporting fuels. However, 49 CFR 383.3(i) provides a limited
exception to this requirement and allows States to waive the
requirement of an HM endorsement if the holder of a Class A CDL is
transporting diesel fuel (1) in the CDL holder's State of domicile or
in another State that has adopted the waiver and (2) as an employee of
four specific agriculture-related businesses. The four business
categories are custom harvesters, farm retail outlets and suppliers,
agrichemical businesses, and livestock feeders. This final rule gives
States authority to waive the HM endorsement requirement in an
additional category for Class A CDL holders who transport up to 1,000
gallons of aviation grade jet fuel (often called Jet A, referred to as
jet fuel for the purposes of this preamble) in the CDL holder's State
of domicile (or in another State that has adopted the waiver) and in
support of agricultural aircraft operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endorsement, as defined in Sec. 383.5, means an
authorization to an individual's commercial learner's permit (CLP)
or CDL required to permit the individual to operate certain types of
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs).
\2\ FMCSA notes that the term ``waive'' or ``waiver'' is used
throughout this preamble in the ordinary sense of those terms,
rather than in the sense of the term ``waiver'' as contemplated by
49 CFR 381.200, which permits only temporary regulatory relief from
the specified regulations for up to three months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Costs and Benefits
This final rule may result in costs to States and their licensing
agencies, and may result in cost savings to drivers and to agricultural
aircraft operations. States and their State driver's licensing agencies
(SDLAs) may incur costs for updating their websites to reflect the
changes in requirements for Class A CDL holders transporting HM and for
training roadside officers. The final rule will result in cost savings
for agricultural aircraft operators and the drivers these operators
hire to mix, load, and transport jet fuel in quantities of 1,000
gallons or less in participating States. Class A CDL holders affected
by the final rule will avoid approximately $260 in costs associated
with obtaining an HM endorsement, and agricultural aircraft operations
will be able to run their businesses more efficiently by making use of
satellite airstrips. FMCSA does not expect that this final rule will
negatively impact commercial motor vehicle (CMV) safety. For various
reasons, drivers who transport jet fuel operate in low-risk safety
conditions and rarely experience crashes. More in depth discussion of
the potential impacts resulting from this rule are found in the
regulatory analyses section below.
III. Abbreviations
ARDOT Arkansas Department of Transportation
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CDL Commercial driver's license
CE Categorical exclusion
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLP Commercial learner's permit
CMV Commercial motor vehicle
CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986
DOT Department of Transportation
FAST Act Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FR Federal Register
HM Hazardous materials
IRFA Initial regulatory flexibility analysis
NAAA National Agricultural Aviation Association
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NATA Nebraska Aviation Trades Association
NEIA Nebraska-Iowa Aviation
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
PIA Privacy Impact Assessment
PTA Privacy Threshold Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBA Small Business Administration
SDLA State driver's licensing agency
STA Security Threat Assessment
TPR Training Provider Registry
TSA Transportation Security Administration
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
U.S.C. United States Code
IV. Legal Basis
The CDL regulations are based on the authority of the Commercial
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA). Section 12013 of the CMVSA
allowed the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FMCSA's predecessor
agency, to ``waive, in whole or in part, application of any provision
of this title or any regulation issued under this title with respect to
class of persons or class of commercial motor vehicles if the Secretary
of Transportation determines that such waiver is not contrary to the
public interest and does not diminish the safe operation of commercial
motor vehicles'' (Pub. L. 99-570, Title XII, 100 Stat. 3207-170, 3207-
186, Oct. 27, 1986, codified at 49 U.S.C. app. 2711).
On the basis of section 12013, FHWA authorized the States to waive
the knowledge and skills tests otherwise required to obtain a CDL for
employees
[[Page 920]]
of custom harvesters, farm retail outlets and suppliers, agrichemical
businesses, and livestock feeders (57 FR 13650, Apr. 17, 1992). CDL
applicants in States that exercised this waiver option were required to
meet certain conditions, including a prohibition on carrying any
placarded quantities of HM, except for diesel fuel in quantities of
1,000 gallons or less (57 FR 13650, 13654). The 1992 CDL waiver option,
with the 1,000-gallon restriction on the transportation of diesel fuel,
was codified originally as 49 CFR 383.3(f)(3)(v) (61 FR 9546, Mar. 8,
1996).
Following statutory amendments,\3\ the language of the CMVSA's
section 12013--that a waiver must be ``not contrary to the public
interest'' and ``not diminish the safe operation of commercial motor
vehicles''--has been replaced by the standard that a waiver or
exemption must ``likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved in the absence of
the waiver'' (49 U.S.C. 31315(a)) or ``absent such exemption'' (49
U.S.C. 31315d(b)(1)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ As part of the recodification of Title 49, United States
Code (U.S.C.) in 1994, the waiver authority in 49 U.S.C. app. 2711
was redesignated as 49 U.S.C. 31315 (Pub. L. 103-272, 108 Stat. 745,
1029, July 5, 1994), and the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21) revised 49 U.S.C. 31315 as ``Waivers, exemptions,
and pilot programs'' (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, 401, June 9,
1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 7208 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST)
Act (Pub. L. 114-94, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1312, 1593) allowed the
States to waive the requirement that a holder of a Class A CDL obtain
the HM endorsement required by 49 CFR 383.93(b)(4), provided the Class
A CDL holder is an employee of one of the four categories of business
specified in FHWA's 1992 waiver who transports diesel fuel in
quantities of 1,000 gallons or less. As thus amended, the State waiver
authority is now codified at section 383.3(i).
The 1992 rule required that the State waiver option not diminish
the safe operation of CMVs, and all subsequent versions of the statute
and regulation have retained that concept. Congress itself embraced
that standard when section 7208 was explicitly limited to the same four
agriculture-related businesses covered by the 1992 waiver.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 31305(a), which sets forth the general
standards for the CDL rules, FMCSA ``shall prescribe regulations on
minimum standards for testing and ensuring the fitness of an individual
operating a commercial motor vehicle.'' Implicit in that provision is
the authority to decide whether certain CDL holders may meet the
``fitness'' requirement without complying with every part of the CDL
regulations. Exempting employees of agricultural aviation companies who
hold Class A CDLs and transport jet fuel from the requirement to obtain
an HM endorsement is consistent both with the standard of the CMVSA's
section 12013 and with the current equivalent level of safety and
``fitness'' standards enacted by Congress. A waiver granted by a State
under this rule, as under section 7208 of the FAST Act, would also
exempt eligible drivers from the Transportation Security
Administration's (TSA) background records check in 49 CFR part 1572,
subpart B.
V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments
A. Proposed Rulemaking
On December 4, 2024, FMCSA published in the Federal Register (89 FR
96176) an NPRM titled ``Transportation of Fuel for Agricultural
Aircraft Operations.'' The NPRM proposed to amend the CDL regulations
to provide States additional flexibility to waive the HM endorsement
requirement for certain drivers transporting jet fuel in furtherance of
agricultural aircraft operations. FMCSA proposed to give States
authority to waive the HM endorsement requirement for Class A CDL
holders who transport up to 1,000 gallons of aviation grade jet fuel in
the CDL holder's State of domicile (or in another State that has
adopted the waiver) and in support of agricultural aircraft operations.
B. Comments and Responses
FMCSA solicited comments concerning the NPRM for 60 days ending
February 3, 2025. Sixty-four comments were received from the following
parties: Arkansas Agricultural Aviation Association, Arkansas
Department of Transportation (ARDOT), Arkansas Trucking Association,
National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA), Nebraska Aviation
Trades Association (NATA), South Dakota Aviation Association, 41
businesses (mainly agricultural aircraft operators), and 14
individuals. A total of 42 commenters fully supported the rule. A group
of 20 commenters generally supported the rule but suggested
modifications, mainly to expand the applicability of the waiver to
other CDL classes. Two commenters opposed the rulemaking.
Support for the Rule
Supportive commenters, including ARDOT, trade associations, and
many agricultural aircraft operators stressed that the rulemaking would
promote cost efficiency while improving seasonal agricultural
operations. Many commenters said that finding and retaining drivers
with an HM endorsement for seasonal work, in addition to the claimed
shortage in qualified drivers, is especially difficult and costly. Many
business owners or agricultural aircraft operators explained that some
employers take on the additional cost of training drivers who do not
have an HM endorsement. Retention issues were also identified as
challenging because drivers often leave for higher-paying jobs, as one
commenter explained.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The individual's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0027.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARDOT noted that waiving the HM endorsement would reduce expenses
for the employer, and provide for additional new entrants to the
workforce, while still maintaining appropriate regulatory controls.\5\
NAAA pointed out that, in addition to the difficulty in finding drivers
with an HM endorsement, operations are primarily located in rural areas
and are at a considerable distance from SDLAs, let alone fingerprinting
facilities. This can make accessing SDLAs offering the HM endorsement
especially challenging.\6\ Many other commenters agreed that adopting
the rule would alleviate the burden of finding drivers for seasonal
work, while expanding the pool of applicants would allow operators to
serve agricultural communities more efficiently and in a timely manner.
The commenters pointed out that, as a result, this would increase crop
yields, which would be beneficial to farming communities and the
operators who serve them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ARDOT's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0025.
\6\ NAAA's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0062. See also comment from an individual in this docket at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0062.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenters including R&M Spraying Service \7\ and the HeliTeam \8\
pointed to the similar properties of diesel and jet fuel. As NAAA
noted, jet fuel has nearly identical properties to diesel fuel, as
diesel engines can--and often do--run
[[Page 921]]
on jet fuel, since they are virtually identical in behavior and
volatility.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ R&M Spraying Service's comment can be found in the docket
for this rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0064.
\8\ The HeliTeam's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0033.
\9\ NAAA's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other commenters who own or operate agricultural aircraft
operations added that the waiver, if adopted, would streamline the
process for applying products to crops for farmers in a timely manner,
benefitting the farming community and reducing costs associated with
ferrying aircraft to a fueling location. Specifically, NAAA estimated
that 758 agricultural aircraft operations across the United States
could utilize this waiver, saving an additional $1,378.08 per day for a
single agricultural aircraft.
Suggestions for Modifications
1. Applicability to Other CDL Classes
Approximately one third of commenters, including individuals,
agricultural aircraft operations, and trade associations such as NATA,
suggested expanding the waiver, mainly to Class B CDL holders. Morgan's
Flying Service explained that most agricultural aircraft operations use
straight trucks with no trailer or medium duty non-CDL trucks, and that
drivers either carry a Class B CDL or a State-designated Class D for
non-CDL trucks carrying jet fuel tanks holding less than 100 gallons
each.\10\ In a subsequent comment, the same commenter suggested
extending the waiver to any class of driver for agricultural aircraft
operations. Other commenters, such as Brett's Spray Service, JBI
Helicopter Services, Lake Air Service, NEIA Aviation (NEIA), and one
individual, requested that Class B CDL holders be included in the
waiver, as vehicles in that category are the most widely used in
support of agricultural aircraft operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Morgan's Flying Service comments can be found in the docket
for this rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0014 and https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hexagon Helicopters, Inc. explained that they operate both Class A
and Class B vehicles and suggested broadening the scope of the waiver
by changing ``Class A'' as it was proposed to ``properly licensed in
the vehicle class.'' The commenter explained that this change would
maintain the intent of the waiver without restricting its use to only a
portion of the intended drivers and vehicles.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Hexagon Helicopters' comment can be found in the docket at:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vincent Flying Service suggested adding to the waiver both Class B
CDL drivers and holders of State-designated Class D (or equivalent)
licenses operating medium duty loader trucks for support of
agricultural aircraft operations. The rationale provided for the
suggested change is that most drivers carry either a Class B CDL or
Class D license for non-CDL trucks carrying jet fuel tanks holding less
than 100 gallons.\12\ Similarly, Central Valley Helicopters suggested
the waiver would only be beneficial if Classes A, B, and C CDLs were
included.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Vincent Flying Service's comment can be found in the docket
at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0043.
\13\ Central Valley Helicopters' comment can be found in the
docket at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0050.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An individual commenter pointed to a potential misinterpretation of
the rule, as many commenters thought that other Classes of CDLs would
be included in this waiver. The commenter added that many were under
the impression that the rule would apply to Class B CDL holders and
requested clarification whether the waiver applies to Class B CDL
holders as well.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The individual's comment can be found in the docket at:
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0028.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA Response: This final rule amends the regulations in response
to NAAA's petition for a rulemaking to allow States to waive the HM
endorsement requirement for CDL holders who transport jet fuel to
support seasonal agricultural aircraft operations. The jet fuel waiver
is intended to mirror the diesel fuel waiver, as provided by Congress
in section 7208 of the FAST Act, which was limited to Class A CDL
holders transporting 1,000 gallons or less of diesel fuel. NAAA stated
``It is NAAA's request that section 383.3(i) be further amended to
allow for the drivers supporting agricultural aircraft operations
holding a CDL also be exempted from a hazardous materials endorsement
for the transportation of 1,000 gallons or less of aviation grade
kerosene (Jet A) due to its similar chemical makeup as diesel fuel, as
well as other factors.'' This final rule amends section 383.3(i) to
expand the waiver options.
In the NPRM, FMCSA noted the similarity in chemical composition of
jet fuel and diesel fuel, which was an important component of the
Agency's safety analysis (89 FR 96180). This factor supports an
identical waiver option for the transport of jet fuel with the same
required CDL class. FMCSA also noted the high level of knowledge and
skills required to obtain a Class A CDL will not be affected by the
waiver of the HM endorsement.
As for Class D or similarly designated non-CDLs, FMCSA does not
have the authority to issue regulations governing non-CDL categories.
Based on these factors, the scope of this rule extends only to Class A
CDL holders.
In response to the commenters suggesting that FMCSA expand the
waiver to Class B CDL holders and to clarify potential confusion on the
applicability of the waiver, FMCSA declines to extend the waiver to
Class B CDL holders to maintain parity with the diesel waiver. In
addition, extension to Class B CDL holders was not included in NAAA's
petition.
2. Additional Suggestions To Modify the Rule
NATA commented in support of the rule, with some additional
suggestions for modifications, including increasing the limit of jet
fuel that can be transported from 1,000 gallons to 1,500 or 2,000
gallons, provided that proper safety measures were followed. It
explained this would reduce the number of trips required to deliver
fuel, which would further reduce costs, emissions, and driver
shortages.
Second, NATA said that although States can choose whether to adopt
the waiver, agricultural aircraft operations frequently cross State
lines during the growing season. It requested that FMCSA provide
guidance on whether States adopting the waiver will honor waivers
granted in other States. NATA stated that clear interstate reciprocity
guidelines would prevent regulatory confusion and ensure consistent
rule application across State lines, reducing administrative burdens on
businesses that operate in multiple jurisdictions.
NATA also pointed out that drivers transporting larger quantities
of jet fuel in association with agricultural aircraft operations still
require HM endorsements, and that obtaining the endorsement requires
background checks and fingerprinting, which can be challenging to
accomplish in rural areas where testing locations are scarce. NATA
requested that FMCSA explore ways to streamline this process for such
drivers, such as mobile testing units in rural areas or an expedited
approval process during peak seasons.
Finally, NATA requested that FMCSA consider a broader seasonal
waiver for transportation of other types of fuel used in association
with agricultural aircraft operations to ensure that all needed fuels
can be transported without unnecessary regulatory barriers. NATA
explained that agricultural aircraft operations utilize other fuel
types (e.g., aviation gasoline (avgas) for piston-engine aircraft) and
stated this would
[[Page 922]]
reduce operational inefficiencies, enhance safety, and provide greater
regulatory flexibility for agricultural aircraft operations.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ NATA's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0074.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA Response: One of NATA's suggestions proposed increasing the
limit of jet fuel for transport to 1,500 or 2,000 gallons to minimize
the number of trips traveled for refueling. FMCSA declines to make this
change as increasing the allowable fuel volume could jeopardize the
level of safety, which FMCSA intentionally set to mirror the safety
standard of the waiver permitted by the FAST Act.
In addition, FMCSA clarifies that the waiver would impact Class A
CDL holders responsible for transporting 1,000 gallons or less of jet
fuel, who are employed by agricultural aircraft operations in
participating States. Issuing reciprocity guidelines is not
appropriate, as the current regulations are clear that drivers
transporting jet fuel across State lines into non-participating States
are still required to obtain an HM endorsement.
FMCSA understands the unique challenges for conducting
fingerprinting and testing in remote or rural areas. While this comment
is outside the scope of this rulemaking, FMCSA encourages NATA to work
with the appropriate SDLAs to devise adequate solutions to increase the
efficiency of testing and fingerprinting.
FMCSA also declines to incorporate avgas for piston-engine aircraft
among the fuel types included in this waiver, due to the difference in
composition and chemical characteristics as compared to diesel fuel and
jet fuel. The waiver finalized in this rule incorporates jet fuel only.
However, diesel and jet fuel have similar characteristics and are
subject to the same Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) guidance on handling in the initial stages of an
HM transportation incident.\16\ These similarities allowed FMCSA to
conclude that the safety of the waiver for jet fuel is consistent with
the equivalent level of safety determination under the FAST Act for
diesel fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See PHMSA's 2024 Emergency Response Guidebook, available at
https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2024-04/ERG2024-Eng-Web-a.pdf. The guidebook (at pp. 107 and 113) references the
same recommended emergency response guidance (Guide No. 128) for
both ``Diesel fuel'' (ID Nos. UN1202 and NA1993) and ``Fuel,
aviation, turbine engine'' (ID No. UN1863).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opposition to the Rule
1. Safety Concerns Related To Transporting Fuel
An anonymous commenter and the National Tank Truck Carriers, Inc.
(NTTC) opposed the rulemaking, raising concerns about the safety of
exempting Class A CDL drivers from the HM endorsement when transporting
up to 1,000 gallons of jet fuel. NTTC expressed concern that unscreened
and undertrained drivers transporting jet fuel would pose safety
concerns, while the anonymous commenter argued that transporting such a
quantity of fuel can be dangerous and potentially damaging, implying
the waiver from the HM endorsement would decrease roadway safety. The
commenter added that the HM endorsement requirement should be retained
for safety purposes.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The comment can be found in the docket for this rulemaking
at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0060.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA Response: FMCSA expects the waiver option from the HM
endorsement will not diminish the safe operation of CMVs, in part
because training and testing are still required under 49 CFR parts 172
and 177 for drivers transporting jet fuel. Parts 172 and 177 are within
chapter I, subchapter C of PHMSA's regulations and outline HM
placarding requirements (part 172, subpart F) and driver training.
Under sections 172.700, 172.704, and 177.816, operators of vehicles
used to transport HM must undergo employer-provided training so they
have familiarity with applicable HM regulations (49 CFR parts 171-177);
are able to recognize and identify HM; and have knowledge of emergency
response information, self-protection measures, and accident prevention
methods and procedures. Also, under section 172.702, operators of
vehicles used to transport HM must be tested on these subjects. The
testing and training requirements under PHMSA's regulations are
distinct from the testing and training requirements for CDLs and HM
endorsements under part 383 and are not affected by this rulemaking.
Furthermore, non-participating States would still require an HM
endorsement for drivers crossing State lines.
FMCSA notes that allowing States to waive the HM endorsement
requirement does not constitute a waiver from all the other HM safety
regulations outlined in 49 CFR parts 100 through 180.
2. Security Concerns Related To Vetting Drivers
NTTC raised concerns about the relaxed requirements that would
result from this rule, specifically regarding the security checks TSA
performs to assess an individual's security risk as part of the
Security Threat Assessment (STA) program. The commenter added that the
thoroughness and extensiveness of the screening assessment, which
checks for multiple types of criminal convictions, violations, and
offenses through multiple watchlists and databases, ensures that
individuals transporting HMs have been thoroughly vetted. Furthermore,
NTTC stated that FMCSA's proposal is not satisfactory to communities
within the NTTC group, which include the Safety Security Council,
Workforce Committee, and Energy Services Committee. NTTC added that the
rule will result in allowing drivers with inadequate levels of
experience and training to transport jet fuel and expressed concern
about the environmental risks posed by fuel spills, regardless of the
quantity being hauled.
Finally, NTTC expressed concerns about the possibility that fuel
racks will not authorize non-HM credentialed drivers to enter their
facility to load.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ NTTC's comment can be found in the docket for this
rulemaking at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0063.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA Response: FMCSA does not believe waiving the HM endorsement
will negatively impact safety. The diesel fuel waiver option, already
codified in section 383.3(i), allows drivers to transport a limited
quantity of HM under certain conditions without an HM endorsement. The
diesel fuel waiver has been in place for over 30 years without a
negative impact on safety. Because jet fuel has a similar chemical
composition to diesel and the conditions under this rule for
transporting jet fuel without an HM endorsement are identical to those
for transporting diesel without an HM endorsement, a jet fuel waiver
option is expected to maintain an equivalent level of safety.
In addition, drivers covered by this waiver must have and maintain
Class A CDLs. As such, they are subject to the driver disqualification
and penalty rules in subpart D of part 383 and the drug and alcohol
testing requirements in part 382.
FMCSA disagrees that allowing a waiver for the HM endorsement for
jet fuel would increase environmental risks posed by fuel spills
because the waiver is limited to a specific quantity of fuel. In
addition, the quantities of jet fuel hauled in support of agricultural
aircraft operations are typically vastly less than the 1,000-gallon
limit established by this rule. Those operations typically occur using
smaller trucks operating out of smaller, rural, airports.
[[Page 923]]
Finally, NTTC mentioned fuel racks might not authorize non-HM
credentialed drivers to access their loading facilities. A fuel rack,
as a private wholesale distribution facility for fuel products, can
establish its own entry requirements, such as requiring a CDL with an
HM endorsement. However, agricultural aircraft operation drivers who
qualify for the waiver may have alternative options for obtaining jet
fuel, such as loading from a storage tank owned by their company rather
than relying on a fuel rack.
Out of Scope Comments
1. Inclusion of a New Definition
FMCSA received a comment from NEIA requesting the addition of a
definition for agricultural aviation because it is a unique type of
business that operates seasonally.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ NEIA's comment can be found in the docket at: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FMCSA-2024-0121-0031.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA Response: FMCSA disagrees that a definition of agricultural
aviation should be added because the current language in the
regulations is not ambiguous. FMCSA declines to make modifications
based on the commenter's suggestion because this comment concerns a
topic that is beyond the scope of the rulemaking.
2. 14 CFR Parts 133 and 137
Two commenters requested that all types of aviation operators under
parts 133 and 137, which cover rotorcraft external-load operations and
agricultural aircraft operations, also be eligible for this waiver. One
of the commenters added that suspended load operations that are not
covered under a part 137 certificate should be included in the HM
endorsement waiver, as well.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA does not have authority to adopt the proposed
changes in this rulemaking because they do not address the licensing of
CMV drivers.
VI. International Impacts
Motor carriers and drivers are subject to the laws and regulations
of the countries in which they operate, unless an international
agreement states otherwise. Drivers and carriers should be aware of the
regulatory differences between nations.
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis
This section-by-section analysis describes the changes in numerical
order. Part 383 ``Applicability'' will be amended in five locations.
Paragraph (i) of section 383.3 will be amended to add ``or jet fuel''
to the commodities States may exempt from the subpart H CDL
requirement. Paragraph (i)(1) will be amended by adding ``agriculture
aviation operation'' to the list of industries to which the hazardous
material endorsement waiver applies. Paragraph (i)(2)(i) will be
amended to add operators of vehicles transporting jet fuel in a
quantity of 1,000 or less gallons to the conditions of the hazardous
material waiver. Paragraph (i)(2)(ii) will be revised to make clear to
readers that jet fuel or diesel fuel transported under this hazardous
material endorsement waiver must be clearly placarded in accordance
with Part 172 subpart F and all other applicable hazardous materials
regulations.
Finally, section 383.5 ``Definitions'' will be amended to add a
definition for jet fuel. The definition includes all classes of fuel,
aviation, turbine engine as listed in the Hazardous Materials Table in
49 CFR 172.101, including Jet A, that are reclassed as a combustible
liquid in accordance with 49 CFR part 173.
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
FMCSA has considered the impact of this final rule under E.O. 12866
(58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning and Review, and DOT
Order 2100.6B, Policies and Procedures for Rulemakings.\20\ The Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) determined that this final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 and has not reviewed
it under that E.O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ DOT Order 2100.6B is available at https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/dot-order-21006b-policies-and-procedures-rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule will amend the CDL regulations to allow States
additional flexibility to waive the HM endorsement requirement for
holders of a Class A CDL that are transporting aviation fuel in
quantities of 1,000 gallons or less in service of agricultural aircraft
operations. Under the current regulations, drivers working for
agricultural aircraft operators must obtain an HM endorsement, which
requires completing training and testing requirements, and passing a
TSA background check. This final rule will allow flexibility for a
limited population of drivers that operate within their State of
domicile and contiguous States that have adopted the same waiver, while
providing services to agricultural aircraft operations.
This final rule is voluntary in nature and does not require that
States adopt any flexibilities contained herein. This final rule could
impact States, SDLAs, agricultural aircraft operators, and drivers. The
analysis below discusses these affected entities, the need for the
regulation, and the costs and benefits that may result from the final
rule.
Affected Entities
States
States could be impacted by this final rule, however, FMCSA does
not know how many States will opt to waive the HM endorsement for
agricultural aviation businesses and their drivers under this final
rule. In response to Section 7208 of the FAST Act, 16 of 50 States
chose to grant the waiver for diesel fuel, which is similar to the jet
fuel waiver specified in this final rule. FMCSA assumes that there will
be a similar level of adoption for this final rule, and that the
majority of participating States will be those with agriculture-
dependent economies.
SDLAs
This final rule will impact SDLAs in States that choose to waive
the requirement for HM endorsements for Class A CDL holders employed by
agricultural aircraft operators transporting 1,000 gallons or less of
jet fuel. SDLAs are responsible for administering CDLs and endorsements
for the motor carrier driver population. SDLAs in participating States
will need to become familiar with these new requirements and update
information on requirements for CDL holders.
Drivers
This final rule will impact Class A CDL holders that are employed
by agricultural aircraft operations in participating States and are
responsible for transporting jet fuel in quantities of 1,000 gallons or
less. Drivers serve as ``mixer-loaders'' for crop protection products
and load agricultural aircrafts with these products and fuel. Drivers
pump fuel from fixed base tanks into the fuel truck and then transport
it to the satellite airstrip to load into agricultural aircraft. Under
this final rule, drivers operating CMVs will still need to hold a Class
A CDL since this final rule will only allow States to waive the HM
endorsement requirement. These drivers will still be required to obtain
an HM endorsement when transporting jet fuel across State lines to a
State that has not adopted the waiver.
FMCSA anticipates that any impacted drivers will work in the same
NAICS industry as agricultural aircraft operators; 11511--support
activities for
[[Page 924]]
crop production. As of May 2023, BLS reports that there are 5,430 heavy
tractor-trailer drivers working in the 1151 industry.\21\ The 1151
industry is broader than agricultural aircraft operations, and as such
drivers impacted by this rule will be a subset of the 5,430 within this
industry. FMCSA did not receive specific comments on the number of
affected drivers. However, the NAAA commented that an agricultural
aircraft operation might want to have two supply trucks for a single
aircraft operation, and five supply trucks to support three aircraft.
Therefore, every impacted agricultural aircraft operation might have
two to three drivers total, but it is not clear that all their drivers
would have Class A CDLs. As stated by several commenters, many drivers
in this industry have a Class B CDL and will therefore not be subject
to the waiver provided in this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), date extracted: July 11,
2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural Aircraft Operations
According to the NAAA, there are approximately 1,560 agricultural
aviation businesses and 3,400 agricultural pilots (approximately 2,000
are hired pilots and 1,400 are owner/operators) operating in the United
States.\22\ NAAA provided further comment to the NPRM explaining that
of the 1,560 agricultural aircraft operations in the United States, 748
operate in States that currently grant the HM waiver for diesel fuel.
This would be an upper-bound estimate as some of these entities only
operate out of a single airport and would not make use of an HM waiver
for jet fuel. FMCSA does not know how many agricultural aircraft
operations will be impacted by this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ https://www.agaviation.org/about/about-ag-aviation/industry-facts-faqs/.(accessed Jul. 16, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Need for the Regulation
Both fueling and mixing and loading of crop-protection products
(e.g., fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, or herbicides) are
normally conducted at a location where agricultural aircraft operations
have permanent fuel tanks and mixing and loading facilities. Sometimes,
however, operators and pilots work so far from their permanent facility
that it is cost-effective to use a satellite landing strip and an on-
site fuel truck. When on-site fuel trucks or drivers are not available,
pilots must fly agricultural aircraft back to their permanent mixing
and loading facilities, which limits the amount of land pilots can
spray on a given day and increases fuel costs, leading to reduced
revenue for agricultural aircraft operations and decreased crop yields
for the acreage that was not accessible by agricultural aircraft.
Agricultural aircraft operations face a need for qualified drivers
because a Class A CDL with an HM endorsement is a marketable asset, and
these drivers are likely to find consistent, non-seasonal work.
Furthermore, these businesses tend to operate in remote, rural areas
that may be hundreds of miles away from the nearest SDLA, making it
more difficult for drivers to obtain the HM endorsement. These factors
limit agricultural aviation businesses from meeting their workforce
needs.
Costs and Benefits
Costs
This final rule could result in costs to States and their licensing
agencies, and may result in cost savings to drivers and to agricultural
aircraft operations.
Under this final rule, States and their SDLAs may incur costs.
SDLAs in participating States may need to update their websites to
reflect the changes in requirements for Class A CDL holders
transporting HM. Also, roadside officers in participating States would
need to undergo training to be able to determine which drivers are
operating under the waiver. FMCSA anticipates that participating States
would update their biannual training to include a module on any changes
to the CDL regulations and model any changes resulting from this rule
after the training for the diesel fuel waiver. Because this training is
ongoing, FMCSA anticipates that any additional costs related to this
change would be de minimis. FMCSA does not have data with which to
estimate these potential State and SDLA costs.
The final rule will result in cost savings for agricultural
aircraft operations and the drivers these operations hire to mix, load,
and transport jet fuel in quantities of 1,000 gallons or less in
participating States. Under the final rule, Class A CDL holders will
not need to undergo the four-step process of obtaining an HM
endorsement: completing a theory training module, passing a written
exam, passing a TSA STA, and paying an SDLA fee, if applicable. As
outlined below, the total cost per driver to obtain an HM endorsement
is approximately $260.
Drivers must take theory training from training providers listed on
the FMCSA Training Provider Registry (TPR). FMCSA anticipates that
drivers impacted by this rule will opt to take online theory training
because they live in remote areas. There are over 1,000 providers
listed on the TPR that provide online HM endorsement training. FMCSA
took a random sample of approximately 180 providers and researched
websites to develop estimates of training cost and time. Based on those
websites that provided information, FMCSA found that the theory
training cost ranges from $16 to $200, with an average cost of $96 and
a median cost of $99. These trainings tend to be self-paced, so few
companies advertise the average length of time to complete the
training. From those companies that provided information, the time
ranges from 1 hour to 16 hours, with an average of 5 and a median of 2
hours. For estimation purposes, FMCSA anticipates that drivers impacted
by this rule will save a $99 theory training fee and 2 hours of
training, valued at $61.50. The value of opportunity cost of training
time is calculated at the rate at which drivers would accept in
exchange for it, $30.75 per hour ($20.75 median hourly wage x 48.19
percent fringe benefit rate).23 24
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Department of Labor (DOL), BLS, Occupational Employment
Statistics (OES) (May 2023). Median hourly wage for Heavy and
Tractor-Trailer truck drivers in the 115110 occupation is $20.75.
Available at: http://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm (accessed July 11,
2024).
\24\ DOL, BLS, Employer Cost for Employee Compensation for
Transportation and Warehousing, Table 4: Table 4: Employer Costs for
Employee Compensation for private industry workers by occupational
and industry group, (Mar. 17, 2023), available at: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf (accessed Apr. 22, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drivers seeking an HM endorsement must complete a background
investigation through the TSA HM Endorsement Threat Assessment Program
online application, visiting an application center, and paying a non-
refundable fee of $85.25.\25\ This process must be completed every 5
years to maintain the HM endorsement. Drivers operating under the
waiver will not be required to complete this process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ The requirements associated with obtaining a HM endorsement
are outlined in 49 CFR 1572, subpart E, which can be found at:
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-49/subtitle-B/chapter-XII/subchapter-D/part-1572.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, Class A CDL holders operating under the waiver will not
need to return to the SDLA to obtain an HM endorsement and will not be
required to pay the associated SDLA fee. The SDLA HM endorsement fee
changes by jurisdiction, ranging from $0 to over $40. For illustrative
purposes, FMCSA estimates the average SDLA fee to be $14. As displayed
in the table below,
[[Page 925]]
the total per driver cost to obtain an HM endorsement is approximately
$260.
Table 1--Costs To Obtain HM Endorsement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theory Training Fee..................................... $99.00
Driver Opportunity Cost of Training..................... 61.50
TSA Background Fee...................................... 85.25
SDLA HM Endorsement Fee................................. 14.00
---------------
Total Cost Savings for each Class A CDL Holder...... 260.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA does not expect this final rule to immediately impact drivers
who currently hold a Class A CDL and HM endorsement. The final rule
could impact these drivers at the time of renewal by eliminating the
fees for the HM endorsement.
These estimates do not include the costs associated with traveling
to a TSA appointment center for the STA or traveling to the SDLA to
take an HM knowledge test or obtain the HM endorsement. In rural areas
where agricultural aircraft operations are based, an SDLA may be
several hundred miles away. FMCSA does not have data on how far drivers
must travel to a TSA appointment center or an SDLA to obtain an HM
endorsement.
Agricultural aircraft operations could gain efficiencies from this
final rule because pilots working for operators in participating States
would not need to expend time and fuel to travel back to their home
bases to refuel. Instead, they would rely on CMV drivers with Class A
CDLs to transport jet fuel and crop protection products from permanent
facilities, that are often far from the agricultural fields, to
satellite airstrips. According to an NAAA survey from 2005, operators
shared that in many cases they could not work because drivers were not
available. The NAAA maintains that a shortage of available drivers with
HM endorsements prevents the use of satellite airstrips, limiting the
amount of land that can be sprayed on a given day and resulting in
increased jet fuel costs of over $1,300 per day. In its comment to the
NPRM, NAAA stated that an operation able to make use of satellite
airstrips would be able to complete 20 additional loads per day, a 50
percent increase relative to when a satellite airstrip is unavailable.
This increase in loads would allow for more efficient crop spraying,
lower fuel costs, and increase the ability to reach fields that would
not be accessible otherwise. Even so, FMCSA does not have the data to
accurately quantify the aggregate impact of this provision.
Agricultural aircraft operations vary based on the season, the current
weather conditions, and the specific crop requiring service. As such,
FMCSA cannot estimate the cost savings that could result from this
provision.
Benefits
FMCSA does not expect this final rule will negatively impact CMV
safety. For various reasons, drivers who transport jet fuel operate in
low-risk safety conditions and rarely experience crashes. According to
the aforementioned survey from 2005 cited in the NAAA's initial
petition for rulemaking, 95.3 percent of agricultural aircraft
operations had never been involved in any type of accident and 92.9
percent travel on rural roads with minimal traffic. The NAAA also noted
in this survey that drivers transporting fuel and chemicals travel an
average of 57.81 miles per day although they only drive once or twice a
week to a satellite facility. Furthermore, the NAAA provides highway
safety education for a large portion of the small business owners of
agricultural aircraft operations throughout the country through its
Professional Agricultural Aviation Support System.
Some commenters provided information on the non-safety benefits
that could be realized as a result of this final rule, many of them
highlighting the increase in crop yields that result from aerial
application. NATA commented that ``aerial application directly
contributes to higher crop yields, benefits not just Nebraska farmers
but also the entire agricultural supply chain, from grain processors to
livestock feeders.'' NAAA further commented that ``the value in
additional crop yield that the aerial application industry brings to
farmers, input suppliers, processors, and agricultural transportation
and storage industries for corn, wheat, cotton, soybean, and rice
production in the U.S. is estimated to be about $37 billion.'' FMCSA
does not have the tools or information to measure the potential
increase in crop yields or its impact on the economy that could result
from this rule, but notes that any additional increase in crop yield
would be beneficial.
FMCSA has not identified any other positive or negative benefits to
society that would result from the proposed change to section 383.3(i).
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 14192 (90 FR 9065, January 31, 2025), Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation, requires that for ``each new [E.O. 14192
regulatory action] issued, at least ten prior regulations be identified
for elimination.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Executive Office of the President, Executive Order 14192 of
January 31, 2025, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation, 90 FR
9065-9067 (Feb. 6, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation guidance for E.O. 14192 issued by OMB (Memorandum M-
25-20, March 26, 2025) defines two different types of E.O. 14192
actions: an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action, and an E.O. 14192
regulatory action.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget, Guidance Implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14192,
Titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' Memorandum M-
25-20 (Mar. 26, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An E.O. 14192 deregulatory action is defined as ``an action that
has been finalized and has total costs less than zero.'' This
rulemaking is expected to have total costs less than zero, and
therefore is considered an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action. As explained
in the E.O. 12866 analysis section, the cost savings of this rulemaking
could not be quantified.
C. Congressional Review Act
This rule is not a major rule as defined under the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808).'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ A major rule means any rule that OMB finds has resulted in
or is likely to result in (a) an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more; (b) a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, geographic regions, Federal,
State, or local government agencies; or (c) significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export
markets (5 U.S.C. 802(4)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 926]]
D. 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,\29\ requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the
regulatory action on small business and other small entities and to
minimize any significant economic impact. The term small entities
comprises small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000 (5
U.S.C. 601(6)). Accordingly, DOT policy requires an analysis of the
impact of all regulations on small entities, and mandates that agencies
strive to lessen any adverse effects on these businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857, (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA has prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis
discussing the impact of this final rule on small entities and
addresses each component below.
(1) A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule.
FMCSA amends the CDL regulations to provide States additional
flexibility to waive the HM endorsement \30\ requirement for certain
drivers transporting 1,000 gallons or less of jet fuel in furtherance
of agricultural aircraft operations. Agricultural aviation companies
often deliver aircraft fuel to staging areas some distance from their
headquarters. These companies, particularly in remote, rural areas,
have difficulty finding CDL holders with HM endorsements to complete
these deliveries. This final rule gives States authority to waive the
HM endorsement requirement for Class A CDL holders who transport up to
1,000 gallons of jet fuel in the CDL holder's State of domicile (or in
another State that has adopted the waiver) and in support of
agricultural aircraft operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Endorsement as defined in section 383.5 means an
authorization to an individual's CLP or CDL required to permit the
individual to operate certain types of CMVs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) A statement of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis
(IRFA), a statement of the assessment of the Agency of such issues, and
a statement of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of
such comments.
FMCSA reviewed the comments submitted in response the NPRM and
discusses them in the preamble to this rule. There were no comments
submitted in response to the IRFA.
(3) The response of the Agency to any comments filed by the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in
response to the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change
made to the proposed rule in the final rules as a result of the
comments.
The Office of Advocacy did not issue comments in response to the
proposed rule.
(4) A description of and an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such
estimate is available.
This rule could affect drivers, agricultural aircraft operations,
and State governments. Drivers are not considered small entities
because they do not meet the definition of a small entity in section
601 of the RFA. Specifically, drivers are considered neither a small
business under section 601(3) of the RFA, nor are they considered a
small organization under section 601(4) of the RFA. State governments
do not meet the definition of a small entity because they are
governmental jurisdictions with populations greater than 50,000.
Section 601(3) of the RFA defines a small business as having the
same meaning as small business concern under section 3 of the Small
Business Act. This includes any firm that is ``independently owned and
operated'' and is ``not dominant in its field of operation.'' The SBA
has developed size standards used to classify entities as small,
establishing separate standards for each industry, as defined by the
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). In the NPRM,
FMCSA estimated that the impacted entities would fall within NAICS
industry 11511 (Support activities for crop production). More
specifically, in the NAICS national industry, 115112 (Soil preparation,
planting, and cultivating), which has an SBA size standard based on
annual revenue of $9.5 million.
The 2022 Economic Census provides summary statistics for
industries, including the number of firms, value of revenue, and number
of employees. From this data, FMCSA estimated that the average revenue
per firm is $1.9 million per year, well under the SBA size standard of
$9.5 million. The Census data estimates that there are 3,181 firms in
this national industry. FMCSA anticipates that this rule would impact
less than 748, or 24 percent, of all firms.
(5) A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record.
There are no projected reporting, recordkeeping, or other
compliance requirements in this rulemaking. It provides States
authority to waive the HM endorsement requirement for Class A CDL
holders who transport up to 1,000 gallons of aviation grade jet fuel in
the CDL holders' State of domicile (or in another State that has
adopted the waiver).
(6) A description of the steps the Agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative
adopted in the final rule and why each of the other significant
alternatives to the rule considered by the Agency which affect the
impact on small entities was rejected.
FMCSA anticipates that this final rule would result in cost savings
to the impacted entities. While the cost savings for impacted
agricultural aircraft operations is not quantified, it is possible that
they will exceed one percent of revenue for small entities. FMCSA did
not consider alternatives to minimize the economic impact on small
entities. Many commenters requested, and FMCSA considered, the
possibility of extending the flexibility provided in the rule to Class
B CDL holders. Ultimately, FMCSA decided against this alternative
because the final rule amends the regulations in response to NAAA's
petition for rulemaking, and is intended to mirror the diesel fuel
waiver, as provided by Congress in section 7208 of the FAST Act, which
was limited to Class A CDL holders transporting 1,000 gallons or less
of diesel fuel.
E. Assistance for Small Entities
In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857),
FMCSA wants to assist small entities in understanding this final rule
so they can better evaluate its effects on themselves and participate
in the rulemaking initiative. If the final rule will affect your small
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees
[[Page 927]]
who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal regulations
to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman (Office of the National Ombudsman, see
https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/oversight-advocacy/office-national-ombudsman) and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards.
The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's
responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by
employees of FMCSA, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). DOT has a
policy regarding the rights of small entities to regulatory enforcement
fairness and an explicit policy against retaliation for exercising
these rights.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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, adjusted for inflation to 2024 levels) or more
in any one year. Though this final rule would not result in such an
expenditure, and the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply as a
result, the Agency discusses the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule contains no new information collection requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
H. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
A rule has implications for federalism under section 1(a) of E.O.
13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.''
FMCSA has determined that this rule will not have substantial
direct costs on or for States, nor will it limit the policymaking
discretion of States. Nothing in this document preempts any State law
or regulation. Therefore, this rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Impact
Statement.
I. Privacy
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005,\31\ requires agencies to
assess the privacy impact of a regulation that will affect the privacy
of individuals. This rule will not require the collection of personally
identifiable information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 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,\32\ requires Federal agencies to
conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) for new or substantially
changed technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates
information in an identifiable form. No new or substantially changed
technology will collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a
result of this rule. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Public Law 107-347, sec. 208, 116 Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec.
17, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Agency submitted a Privacy Threshold Assessment
(PTA) to evaluate the risks and effects the proposed rulemaking might
have on collecting, storing, and sharing personally identifiable
information. The PTA was adjudicated by DOT's Chief Privacy Officer on
July 8, 2025.
J. 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.
K. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
FMCSA analyzed this rule pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined this action
is categorically excluded from further analysis and documentation in an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under DOT
Order 5610.1D,\33\ Subpart B, paragraph e(6)(t)(2). The categorical
exclusion (CE) in paragraph (e)(6)(t)(2) covers requirements ensuring
that States have the appropriate regulations concerning the
qualification and licensing of persons who apply for, and are issued, a
CDL. The proposed requirements in this rule are covered by this CE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Available at https://www.transportation.gov/mission/dots-procedures-considering-environmental-impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 383
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Drug testing, Highway safety, Motor carriers, Penalties, Safety,
Transportation.
Accordingly, FMCSA amends 49 CFR chapter III, part 383 as follows:
PART 383--COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS; REQUIREMENTS AND
PENALTIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 383 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301, et seq., and 31502;
secs. 214 and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1766, 1767;
sec. 1012(b) of Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 397, sec. 4140 of
Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1746; sec. 32934 of Pub. L. 112-141,
126 Stat. 405, 830; secs. 5401 and 7208, Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat.
1312, 1546, 1593 (49 U.S.C. 31305(d)), sec. 23019 of Pub. L. 117-58,
135 Stat. 429, 777; and 49 CFR 1.87.
Subpart A--General
0
2. Amend Sec. 383.3 by revising paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Sec. 383.3 Applicability.
* * * * *
(i) Hazardous materials endorsement exemption for certain drivers
transporting diesel or jet fuel. A State may waive the requirement for
a holder of a Class A commercial driver's license to obtain a hazardous
materials endorsement under this part, if the license holder is:
(1) Acting within the scope of the license holder's employment, and
within the State of domicile (or another State with a hazardous
materials endorsement exemption) as an employee of a custom harvester
operation, agrichemical business, farm retail outlet and supplier,
livestock feeder, or agricultural aviation operation; and
(2) Operating a service vehicle that is:
(i) Transporting diesel or jet fuel in a quantity of 3,785 liters
(1,000 gallons) or less; and
(ii) Clearly placarded in accordance with 49 CFR part 172 subpart
F.
0
3. Amend Sec. 383.5 by adding in alphabetical order the definition for
Jet fuel to read as follows:
Sec. 383.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
Jet fuel means ``fuel, aviation, turbine engine'' as listed in the
Hazardous
[[Page 928]]
Materials Table in 49 CFR 172.101 that is reclassed as a combustible
liquid in accordance with 49 CFR part 173.
* * * * *
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Derek Barrs,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-00269 Filed 1-8-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P