[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7860-7864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-03263]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 383
[Docket No. FMCSA-2025-0118]
RIN 2126-AC92
Commercial Driver's License Standards; Requirements and
Penalties: Applicability to the Exception for Certain Military
Personnel
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the Federal Motor Carrier Safety regulations
(FMCSR) to allow dual-status military technicians to qualify for the
exception for certain military personnel from commercial driver's
license (CDL) standards. Dual-status military technicians are civilian
technicians employed by military units to provide day-to-day support
such as training, maintenance, and other activities required to support
the unit. They are required by statute to maintain membership in one of
the Army or Air Force Reserve Components as a condition of their
civilian employment.
DATES: Effective March 23, 2026.
Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted to
the FMCSA Administrator no later than March 23, 2026.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Nemons, Office Director,
Office of Safety Programs. FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4986, [email protected]. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call
Dockets Operations at (202) 366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FMCSA organizes this final rule as follows:
I. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of the Regulatory Action
III. Abbreviations
IV. Legal Basis
VI. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments
A. Proposed Rulemaking
B. Comments and Responses
C. Final Rule
VI. International Impacts
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Analyses
A. 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
D. 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-2025-0118/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
in room W58-213 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.
II. Abbreviations
ART Air Reserve Technician
ATA American Trucking Associations
CDL Commercial Driver's License
CE Categorical Exclusion
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMV Commercial motor vehicle
CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act
DOT Department of Transportation
ELDT Entry-Level Driver Training
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FMCSR Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
FR Federal Register
ICR Information Collection Request
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OOIDA Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
PIA Privacy Impact Assessment
PTA Privacy Threshold Assessment
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
U.S.C. United States Code
III. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and Summary of the Regulatory Action
On October 22, 2023, FMCSA received a petition from Mr. James D.
Welch, an employee of the United States Air Force Reserve Command,
asking the Agency to amend section 383.3(c). Mr. Welch asserted in his
petition that the current regulation places an unfair burden on career
U.S. Air Force Reserve Technicians (ARTs) who are required to wear the
military uniform in the same manner as National Guard Military
Technicians but are not similarly authorized to utilize the CDL
exemption. On March 11, 2024, FMCSA granted Mr. Welch's petition after
determining that the petition contained adequate justification to
initiate a rulemaking. On May 20, 2025, FMCSA also granted an exemption
sought by Mr. Welch for ARTs working under the U.S. Air Force Reserve
Command from the requirement to obtain a CDL in order to operate a CMV
(90 FR 21540). Subsequently, on May 30, 2025, FMCSA published a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (90 FR 22896) to amend the regulations to
allow dual-status military technicians to qualify for the exception for
certain military personnel from CDL standards.
In this final rule, FMCSA is removing the language making the
military exception inapplicable to U.S. Reserve Technicians. For the
reasons presented in the NPRM, and after reviewing the public comments,
FMCSA concludes the existing regulation is outdated. FMCSA therefore
amends 49 CFR 383.3(c) to allow dual-status military technicians
appointed in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 10216 to be eligible for
[[Page 7861]]
the military exception contained in the regulation.
IV. Legal Basis
The Administrator of FMCSA is delegated authority under 49 CFR 1.87
to carry out the functions vested in the Secretary of Transportation
(the Secretary) by 49 U.S.C. chapters 311, 313, and 315 as they relate
to commercial motor vehicle (CMV) operators, programs, and safety. The
CDL regulations are based primarily on the broad authority of the
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA or the 1986 Act)
(Title XII of Pub. L. 99-570, 100 Stat. 3207-170 (Oct. 27, 1986)), as
amended, codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter 313, which established the CDL
program. The authority for FMCSA to require an operator of a CMV to
obtain a CDL rests on the authority found in 49 U.S.C. 31302. FMCSA, in
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31311 and 31314, has authority to prescribe
procedures and requirements for the States to observe in order to issue
CDLs (set forth, generally, in 49 CFR part 384).
Section 12013 of the CMVSA allowed the Federal Highway
Administration, 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 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). Following statutory amendments,\1\ the language of the
CMVSA's section 12013--that a waiver must not be ``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. 31315(b)(1)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ When Title 49, United States Code, was recodified 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).
Subsequently, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
revised 49 U.S.C. 31315 as ``Waivers, exemptions, and pilot
programs'' (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, 401, June 9, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule is also consistent with the Motor Carrier Safety
Act of 1984 (Title II of Pub. L. 98-554, 98 Stat. 2832 (Oct. 30,
1984)), as amended, codified at 49 U.S.C. 31131, et seq.; and the Motor
Carrier Act of 1935 (49 Stat. 543 (Oct. 9, 1935)), as amended, codified
at 49 U.S.C. 31502. The 1984 statute granted the Secretary broad
authority to issue regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety,
including regulations to ensure that ``commercial motor vehicles are
maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely'' (49 U.S.C.
31136(a)(1)). This final rule is consistent with the safe operation of
CMVs. In accordance with section 31136(a)(2), the amendment finalized
in this final rule will not impose any ``responsibilities . . . on
operators of commercial motor vehicles [that would] impair their
ability to operate the vehicles safely.'' This final rule does not
directly address medical standards for drivers (section 31136(a)(3)) or
possible physical effects caused by driving CMVs (section 31136(a)(4)).
FMCSA does not anticipate that drivers will be coerced (section
31136(a)(5)) as a result of this final rule because it will simply
permit certain military personnel to operate subject to the same
requirements as other military personnel currently operate. Under 49
U.S.C. 31315(a), the Secretary is authorized to grant waivers from any
regulations prescribed under this section.
V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments
A. Proposed Rulemaking
On May 30, 2025, FMCSA published an NPRM titled ``Commercial
Driver's License Standards; Requirements and Penalties: Applicability
to the Exception for Certain Military Personnel'' (90 FR 22896). The
NPRM proposed to amend the FMCSRs to allow dual-status military
technicians to qualify for the exception for certain military personnel
from CDL standards, by removing the phrase ``This exception is not
applicable to U.S. Reserve technicians,'' from 49 CFR 383.3(c). The
NPRM stated that removing the phrase pertaining to national guard
military technicians would not affect their ability to claim the
exception, as it also covers all part-time and full-time National Guard
members on active duty; doing so merely indicates that the regulation
no longer distinguishes between military technicians who are in the
National Guard and those in the Reserves. FMCSA also proposed to add
`dual-status military technicians' as defined in 10 U.S.C. 10216, to
the list of exempt personnel. The Agency explained that the amendment
would explicitly allow dual-status military technicians, regardless of
whether they are members of either the Reserves or the National Guard,
to qualify for the military exception from the CDL standards. The
Agency also stated the rulemaking would remove outdated language,
improve clarity for stakeholders, and promote greater efficiency for
military units employing dual-status military technicians.
For a full discussion of the history behind the exception under 49
CFR 383.3(c), please see the May 30, 2025, NPRM. (90 FR 22896). FMCSA
sought comment on its proposal to amend section 383.3(c) to allow dual-
status military technicians to qualify for the exception. FMCSA also
sought comment on the number of drivers that would be impacted by this
rule each year, whether they would be considered Class A or Class B
drivers, and any additional areas of cost savings associated with the
exception, as well as any safety impacts.
B. Comments and Responses
FMCSA solicited comments concerning the NPRM for 30 days ending
July 29, 2025. Four unique comments were received. Two were from
individuals, one was from the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers
Association (OOIDA), and one was from the American Trucking
Associations (ATA).\2\ All commenters supported the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The docket reflects two comments from ATA, however, the
second is a duplicate of the first.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Ravnitzky described the current regulation as outdated and
stated that the proposed amendments would harmonize the treatment of
all military personnel operating CMVs. He also estimated that the
amendments would yield savings of approximately $1,900 to $3,100 in
training costs per technician, allow Reserve Commands to better
allocate resources toward mission-critical activities, and improve
retention and recruitment. He also stated that safety would not be
compromised because these Reservists receive rigorous, specialized
training to carry out their duties as CMV operators.
Kyle White stated that he is a Chief Master Sergeant in the Air
Force who operated CMVs as part of his duties, and that the ARTs who
work for him have the same qualifications and training as he does. He
highlighted the difficulty caused by allowing dual-status military
technicians to operate CMVs while deployed but not while at their home
base. He also estimated the cost of commercial training programs to be
about $5,000 to $8,000 per operator for a license and endorsements.
OOIDA stated that the proposal was ``an example of commonsense
regulatory reform.'' ATA commented that the proposal would remove
[[Page 7862]]
ambiguity regarding who is eligible for the military-CDL exemption
found in section 393.3(c), and stated that the individual exemptions
FMCSA previously granted for military technicians have not compromised
safety.
No commenters addressed the number or classification of drivers
impacted by the amendments. Two commenters, identified above, estimated
significant cost savings, ranging from $1,900 to $8,000 per driver.
Both commenters also expressed that military Reservists, including
dual-status military technicians, receive stringent training and that
operational safety will not be compromised by allowing them to claim
the military exception from the CDL requirements in 49 CFR 383.3.
C. Final Rule
The Agency did not receive any suggestions for modifications or
comments that would cause it to reevaluate its proposal during the
comment period. This action will benefit America's armed forces without
compromising the safety of the nation's roadways. Therefore, FMCSA is
finalizing the rule as proposed, without change.
VI. 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.
VII. Section-by-Section Analysis
This section-by-section analysis describes the changes in numerical
order.
Section 383.3 Applicability
In paragraph (c), FMCSA would remove the phrase ``and national
guard military technicians (civilians who are required to wear military
uniforms)'' and the sentence ``This exception is not applicable to U.S.
Reserve technicians.'' FMCSA would add the phrase, ``dual-status
military technicians, as defined in 10 U.S.C. 10216'' to the list of
exempt personnel.
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.\3\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ DOT Order 2100.6B is available at https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/dot-order-21006b-policies-and-procedures-rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule removes the language making the military exception
inapplicable to U.S. Reserve Technicians. This will allow the exception
that already applies to certain military and Reserve personnel who
operate CMVs for military purposes to also apply to U.S. Reserve
Technicians operating CMVs for military purposes. The petition for
rulemaking states that the ART program is experiencing difficulties in
hiring and retaining employees and the current exclusion to the
exception further exacerbates these concerns. Under the existing
regulations, dual-status military technicians operating under the
oversight of either the Army Reserve Command or the Air Force Reserve
Command (but not those who are members of the Army National Guard or
Air Force National Guard) are required to obtain training prior to
receiving their CDL, causing an undue funding burden on the ART
program. This final rule will result in cost savings for the ART
program, and any similar program administered by the Army Reserve
Command, by alleviating the need to receive training at a training
provider located listed on FMCSA's training provider registry. The
final rule requiring entry-level driver training (ELDT) training (81 FR
88732, Dec. 8, 2016) estimated that the tuition cost would range from
$1,430 for a Class B license to $2,340 for a Class A license, both in
2014 dollars. Inflating those values to 2024 dollars using the Consumer
Price Index for all Urban Consumers, FMCSA anticipates that the avoided
training costs for each dual-status military technician driver will
range from $1,900 to $3,100. The Reserve Commands may also experience
cost savings in the form of reduced fees for CDLs. Commenters agreed
with the Agency, stating that the cost savings could range from $1,900
to $8,000 per individual driver. Lacking data on the number of drivers
that would no longer be receiving training each year, FMCSA is unable
to quantify the total cost savings associated with this rulemaking.
FMCSA does not anticipate that this final rule will impact safety. The
dual-status military technicians covered by this final rule transport
items on an installation with multiple layers of safety requirements
along preapproved routes.
B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 14192 (90 FR 9065, Jan. 31, 2025), Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation, requires that for ``each new [E.O. 14192
regulatory action] issued, at least ten prior regulations be identified
for elimination.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 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.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget, Guidance Implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14192,
Titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' Memorandum M-
25-20 (March 26, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An E.O. 14192 deregulatory action is defined as ``an action that
has been finalized and has total costs less than zero.'' This final
rulemaking is expected to have total costs less than zero as Reserve
Command drivers would no longer be required to receive ELDT training or
obtain a CDL, and therefore would be considered an E.O. 14192
deregulatory action upon issuance of a final rule.
C. Congressional Review Act
This final rule is not a major rule as defined under the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808).'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 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. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996,\7\ requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the
regulatory action on small business and other small entities and to
minimize any significant economic impact. The term small entities means
small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000 (5
U.S.C.
[[Page 7863]]
601(6)). Accordingly, DOT policy requires an analysis of the impact of
all regulations on small entities, and mandates that agencies strive to
lessen any adverse effects on these businesses. No regulatory
flexibility analysis is required, however, if the head of an agency or
an appropriate designee certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule would impact dual-status military technician drivers and
the Army Reserve Command and Air Force Reserve Command, which are part
of the U.S. Military. 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. The U.S. Military is also
not considered a small entity because it does not meet the definition
of small entity in section 601 of the RFA. Therefore, this final rule
would not impact a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will result in cost savings for the Reserve
Commands by eliminating the need to fund ELDT training for dual-status
military technician drivers. FMCSA cannot estimate the total cost
savings that would result from this final rule but anticipates that it
will not be a significant impact. Consequently, I certify that the
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
E. Assistance for Small Entities
In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857),
FMCSA wants to assist small entities in understanding this proposed
rule so they can better evaluate its effects on themselves and
participate in the rulemaking initiative. If the final rule will affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman (Office of the National
Ombudsman, see https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/oversight-advocacy/office-national-ombudsman) and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness
Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each
agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on
actions by employees of FMCSA, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247).
DOT has a policy regarding the rights of small entities to regulatory
enforcement fairness and an explicit policy against retaliation for
exercising these rights.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
(UMRA) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their
discretionary regulatory actions. The Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or Tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $206 million (which is the
value equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation to
2024 levels) or more in any 1 year. Because this final rule will not
result in such an expenditure, a written statement is not required.
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). FMCSA
will evaluate whether this final rule will impact the currently
approved Information Collection ``Commercial Driver Licensing and
Testing Standards'' (OMB Control No. 2126-0011) during that
collection's next routine renewal. The current Information Collection
Request (ICR) was due to expire on April 30, 2025. On April 16, 2025,
FMCSA published a 30-day notice to address the extension of the current
ICR (90 FR 16061) and to announce its plan to submit the ICR to OMB for
review and approval.
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 final rule will not have substantial
direct costs on or for States, nor would it limit the policymaking
discretion of States. Although States will be required to exempt dual-
status military technicians operating CMVs for military purposes from
CDL requirements, this is a small population of drivers and States are
already required to exempt other listed individuals from those
requirements. Moreover, States may already consider some dual-status
military technicians exempt due to their status as members of Reserve
Components, whether in the National Guard, the Army Reserve, or the Air
Force Reserve. Therefore, this final rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism
Impact Statement.
I. Privacy
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005,\8\ requires the Agency
to assess the privacy impact of a regulation that will affect the
privacy of individuals. This final rule will not require the collection
of personally identifiable information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Public Law 108-447, 118 Stat. 2809, 3268, note following 5
U.S.C. 552a (Dec. 4, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) applies only to Federal agencies
and any non-Federal agency that receives records contained in a system
of records from a Federal agency for use in a matching program.
The E-Government Act of 2002,\9\ requires Federal agencies to
conduct a Privacy Impact Analysis (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 final rule. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Public Law 107-347, sec. 208, 116 Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17,
2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Agency submitted a Privacy Threshold Assessment
(PTA) to evaluate the risks and effects the rulemaking may have on
collecting, storing, and sharing personally identifiable information.
The PTA was adjudicated by DOT's Chief Privacy Officer on August 28,
2025.
J. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
This final 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 final rule pursuant to the National
Environmental
[[Page 7864]]
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Agency believes this
final rule will not have a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on
the quality of the human environment. This action falls under a
published categorical exclusion (CE) and is therefore excluded from
further analysis and documentation in an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under DOT Order 5610.1D,\10\ Subpart B,
Subsection (e). The CE in paragraph (e)(6)(z) covers regulations
establishing the minimum qualifications for persons who drive CMVs as,
for, or on behalf of motor carriers; and the minimum duties of motor
carriers with respect to the qualifications of their drivers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 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 part 383 to read 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. 383.3 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 383.3 Applicability.
* * * * *
(c) Exception for certain military drivers. Each State must exempt
from the requirements of this part individuals who operate CMVs for
military purposes. This exception is applicable to active duty military
personnel; members of the military reserves; members of the national
guard on active duty, including personnel on full-time national guard
duty and personnel on part-time national guard training; dual-status
military technicians, as defined in 10 U.S.C. 10216; and active duty
U.S. Coast Guard personnel.
* * * * *
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Derek Barrs,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-03263 Filed 2-18-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P