|
|---|
|
Entry-Level Driver Training: SBL Truck Driving Academy, Inc.; Application for Exemption Publication: Federal Register Agency: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Byline: Robin Hutcheson Date: 22 December 2022 Subjects: American Government  , Driver Licensing, Trucking
Topic: SBL Truck Driving Academy |
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 245 (Thursday, December 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78764-78766]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27775]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2021-0169]
Entry-Level Driver Training: SBL Truck Driving Academy, Inc.;
Application for Exemption
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition; denial of application for
exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to deny the exemption application
from SBL Truck Driving Academy, Inc. (SBL). SBL sought an exemption
from the theory and behind-the-wheel (BTW) instructor requirements
contained in the entry-level driver training (ELDT) regulations for two
of its instructors. SBL specifically requested an exemption from the
requirement that instructors have at least two years of experience
driving a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) requiring a commercial
driver's license (CDL) of the same or higher class and/or the same
endorsement level for which training is to be provided. FMCSA analyzed
the exemption application and public comments and determined that the
application lacked evidence that would ensure an equivalent or greater
level of safety than would be achieved absent such exemption.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Clemente, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone: 202-366-2722. Email:
richard.clemente@dot.gov. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone
(202) 366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Participation
Viewing Comments and Documents
To view comments, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket
number ``FMCSA-2021-0169'' in the keyword box, and click ``Search.''
Next, sort the results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first
notice listed, and click ``View Related Comments.''
To view documents mentioned in this notice as being available in
the docket, go to www.regulations.gov, insert the docket number
``FMCSA-2021-0169'' in the keyword box, click ``Search,'' and chose the
document to review.
If you do not have access to the internet, you may view the docket
by visiting Dockets Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, 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. Legal Basis
FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the
Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the
public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the
application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted.
The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the
request.
The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period (up to 5
years) and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).
III. Background
Current Regulatory Requirements
The ELDT regulations, implemented on February 7, 2022, and set
forth in 49 CFR 380, subparts F and G, established minimum training
standards for individuals applying for certain CDLs and defined
curriculum standards for theory and BTW training. The ELDT regulations
also established an online training provider registry (TPR),
eligibility requirements for providers to be listed on the TPR, and
requirements for instructors. Under 49 CFR 380.713, a training provider
must use instructors
[[Page 78765]]
who meet the definitions of ``Theory instructor'' and ``Behind-the-
wheel (BTW) instructor,'' set forth in 49 CFR 380.605. The definitions
of ``Theory instructor'' and ``BTW instructor'' in 49 CFR 380.605
require that instructors hold a CDL of the same (or higher) class, with
all endorsements necessary to operate the CMV for which training is to
be provided, and have either: (1) a minimum of 2 years of experience
driving a CMV requiring a CDL of the same or higher class and/or the
same endorsement; or (2) at least 2 years of experience as a BTW CMV
instructor.
Applicant's Request
SBL seeks an exemption from the requirement in 49 CFR 380.713 that
a training provider use instructors who meet the definitions of
``Theory instructor'' and ``BTW instructor'' in 49 CFR 380.605. SBL
states that it has two employees who do not have two years of required
driving experience. SBL states the employees were qualified to provide
training prior to implementation of the ELDT regulations on February 7,
2022, have Class A CDLs with tanker endorsements, and are medically
qualified.
SBL argues that the instructor qualifications required by the ELDT
regulations will have a severe negative impact on its business and on
the driver shortage. SBL requests an exemption that would allow the two
instructors to provide instruction without having two years of driving
experience while they accumulate the required level of experience. They
assert that the exemption would allow for full instructor staffing,
resulting in a ``50% increase of approximately 96 students annually.''
If the exemption is not granted, SBL states that it would be forced to
terminate these employees and seek to replace them with other
instructors with unproven track records.
SBL reasons that FMCSA has included ``grandfathering'' provisions
in the implementation of other new rules and therefore should apply a
``grandfathering'' provision to the ELDT requirements relating to
driving experience. SBL points to 49 CFR 380.603 which provides that
individuals who obtained a Commercial Learner's Permit (CLP) before
February 7, 2022, are not required to comply with the ELDT rule if they
obtain a CDL before the CLP expires. SBL is requesting similar
consideration for State-licensed instructors who met applicable Federal
requirements prior to February 7, 2022.
IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or Greater Level of Safety
To ensure an equivalent level of safety, SBL offers a list of the
qualifications for the two driver training instructors for whom the
exemption is requested. According to SBL, both individuals meet the
qualifications that were required prior to implementation of the ELDT
rule; both have Class A CDLs with tanker endorsements; both are
medically qualified; both graduated from a State-licensed truck driver
training school; both have taught over the road driving; both have
previously trained commercial drivers; one individual worked as a
commercial driver; and both have the ability to instruct all topics
required by the ELDT regulations.
SBL indicates that the request for the exemption ``places no known
negative safety impact'' and avers that SBL will continue to adhere to
all applicable State and Federal regulations that govern the safe
operation of CMVs. SBL notes that the two instructors met the
qualification requirements of the South Carolina Department of Motor
Vehicles, in effect prior to implementation of the ELDT regulations,
and their instruction has not negatively impacted safety. Those
requirements allow instructors with fewer than two years of driving
experience to deliver training.
SBL also cites to a 2013 Bureau of Transportation Statistics report
stating that motor vehicle fatalities in 2010 were trending downward.
SBL also cites to a 2008 American Transportation Research Institute
(ATRI) report that found no relation between driver training duration
and subsequent driver safety performance. A copy of SBL's application
for exemption is available for review in the docket for this notice.
V. Public Comments
On May 25, 2022, FMCSA published notice of SBL's application and
requested public comment [87 FR 31930]. The Agency received nine
comments. The Owner-Operator Independent Driver's Association (OOIDA)
strongly opposed the exemption request. OOIDA commented that they were
one of the primary industry stakeholders on the ELDTAC when the
``framework'' of the ELDT rule was agreed upon during the negotiated
rulemaking, including support of the provision that required CDL
experience for training instructors, as CDL experience is essential to
deliver comprehensive training to entry-level drivers. OOIDA believes
there is no substitute for an experienced BTW trainer and employing
these instructors will help achieve the objectives of the ELDT
regulations. OOIDA states that exempting instructors without CDL
experience will not result in an equivalent or greater level of safety
than is now required by the ELDT regulations. OOIDA added that the
delayed implementation of the ELDT final rule, from 2020 to 2022,
allowed even more time for training providers to meet the requisite CMV
driving experience, or the minimum experience required to serve as a
BTW CMV instructor under the ELDT regulations.
Seven other individual commenters opposed the requested exemption,
while only one commenter supported the request. Of those opposing the
exemption, a number cited similar concerns raised by OOIDA, i.e., that
the ELDT rule was agreed upon through the negotiated rulemaking process
and, therefore, the rule's ``key'' provisions should not be changed.
Another commenter stated that if SBL's petition is approved, the Agency
may as well remove the two-year requirement for instructors, and that
other CDL driver training schools will request similar relief. The only
commenter supporting the request noted that SBL stated that these
individuals have trained before and should be allowed to be
grandfathered in as qualified instructors.
VI. FMCSA Safety Analysis and Decision
FMCSA has evaluated SBL's application and the public comments. The
Agency concludes that SBL presented insufficient evidence to establish
that not complying with the provisions of the ELDT regulations relating
to driving experience requirements for CMV instructors would meet or
exceed the level of safety achieved by complying with the ELDT
regulations. Although SBL provides the resumes of the two instructors
for whom it seeks the exemption, SBL has not demonstrated that allowing
the instructors to provide ELDT without the required experience would
achieve an equivalent level of safety as would be achieved by complying
with the ELDT instructor qualification requirements. SBL cites to 2010
data indicating a downward trend in motor vehicle fatalities, however,
that data is not relevant to whether not complying with the ELDT
regulations provides an equivalent level of safety (https://www.bts.gov/content/motor-vehicle-safety-data). As to the 2008 ATRI
study SBL cites, FMCSA and the ELDTAC considered that study, along with
other studies, during the rulemaking. FMCSA concluded that data quality
and
[[Page 78766]]
methodological issues prevented the study from being used as definitive
guidance and further noted that ATRI described the study's results as
preliminary. Further, the ATRI study is not determinative of whether
the ELDT provided by the individuals subject to this exemption request
would achieve a level of safety equivalent to that achieved by
complying with the current instructor qualifications.
The Agency concurs with commenters stating allowing some
individuals to provide ELDT without the required driving experience
could open the door for similar exemption requests. If exemptions are
granted on a widespread basis, such a result would be inconsistent with
a primary goal of the ELDT regulations, which was to establish a
uniform Federal minimum ELDT standard.
For the above reasons, SBL's exemption application is denied.
Robin Hutcheson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-27775 Filed 12-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P