Military Licensing and State Commercial Driver's License Reciprocity |
|---|
|
Raymond P. Martinez
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
28 September 2018
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 189 (Friday, September 28, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48964-48976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21289]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 383 and 384
[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0047]
RIN 2126-AB99
Military Licensing and State Commercial Driver's License
Reciprocity
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule allows, but does not require, State Driver Licensing
Agencies (SDLAs) to waive requirements for the commercial learner's
permit (CLP) knowledge test for certain individuals who are, or were,
regularly employed within the last year in a military position that
requires, or required, the operation of a commercial motor vehicle
(CMV). This rule includes the option for an SDLA to waive the tests
required for a passenger carrier (P) endorsement, tank vehicle (N)
endorsement, or hazardous material (H) endorsement, with proof of
training and experience.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 27, 2018.
Petitions for Reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted
to the FMCSA Administrator no later than October 29, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Selden Fritschner, CDL Division,
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, by email at Selden.fritschner@dot.gov, or by
telephone at (202) 366-0677. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, by
telephone at (202) 366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule is organized as follows:
I. Rulemaking Documents
A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
B. Privacy Act
II. Executive Summary
III. Abbreviations and Acronyms
IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
V. Regulatory Background
A. Current Standards
B. Recent Activity
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
VI. Discussion of Comments and Responses
A. Endorsements, License Classes, and License Restrictions
B. Military Occupational Specialties, Military Occupational
Codes
C. Time Period for Waiver
D. Extension of the Proposal
E. SDLA Compliance
F. Driver Training
G. Proof of Training and Experience
H Converting CLP to CDL
I. Other Comments
VII. International Impacts
VIII. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Section 383.23 Commercial Driver's License
B. Section 383.77 Substitute for Knowledge and Driving Skills
Tests for Drivers With Military CMV Experience
C. Section 383.79 Driving Skills Testing of Out-of-State
Students; Knowledge and Driving Skills Testing of Military Personnel
D. Section 384.301 Substantial Compliance General Requirements
IX. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review),
and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)
D. Assistance for Small Entities
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection of Information)
G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
K. Privacy
L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
N. E.O. 13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic
Growth)
O. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
P. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)
Q. Environment (NEPA)
I. Rulemaking Documents
A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
For access to docket FMCSA-2017-0047 to read background documents
and comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time, or
to Docket Services at U.S. Department of Transportation, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
B. Privacy Act
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments without edit including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.transportation.gov/privacy.
II. Executive Summary
This rule allows, but does not require, SDLAs to waive the
knowledge test requirements and tests required for some endorsements
with proof of experience for certain individuals who are regularly
employed, or were regularly employed within the last year, in a
military position requiring the operation of a vehicle that would be
classified as a CMV pursuant to 49 CFR 383.5, if operated in a civilian
context. This rulemaking implements part of section 5401 of the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Pub. L. 114-94).
In combination with a recent rulemaking--Commercial Driver's
License Requirements of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act (MAP-21) and the Military Commercial Driver's License Act
of 2012 (2012 Act), published on October 13, 2016 (81 FR 70634),
hereafter referred to as the Military CDL I Rule--this rule gives
States the option to waive both the CDL knowledge and driving skills
tests for certain current and former military service members who
received training to operate CMVs during active-duty, National Guard or
reserve service in military vehicles that are comparable to CMVs. The
combined effect of the Military CDL I Rule and this rule will allow
certain current or former military drivers, domiciled in participating
States, to transition to a civilian CDL more quickly due to their armed
forces training and experience.
FMCSA evaluated potential costs and benefits associated with this
rulemaking. The Agency concluded that the final rule would result in a
10-year cost savings of $16.66 million undiscounted, $14.21 million
discounted at 3 percent, $11.70 million discounted at 7 percent, and
$1.67 million on an annualized basis at both 7 percent and 3 percent
discount rates. FMCSA has determined that this final rule is a
deregulatory action under Executive Order (E.O.) 13771.
III. Abbreviations and Acronyms
AAMVA American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators
ABA American Bus Association
ATA American Trucking Associations
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
CDL Commercial Driver's License
CE Categorical Exclusion
CLP Commercial Learner's Permit
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle
[[Page 48965]]
CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986
CVTA Commercial Vehicle Training Association
DMV Department of Motor Vehicles
DOL Department of Labor
DOR Department of Revenue
DOT Department of Transportation
E.O. Executive Order
ECEC Employer Costs for Employee Compensation
ELDT Entry-Level Driver Training
FAST Act Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
H Hazardous Material Endorsement
IFDA International Foodservice Distributors Association IFDA
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
Michigan Bureau of Driver and Vehicle Programs for the Michigan
Department of State
MOS Military Occupational Specialties
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
N Tank Vehicle Endorsement
NPGA National Propane Gas Association
NSTA National School Transportation Association
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OES Occupational Employment Statistics
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OOIDA Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
Oregon Oregon Driver and Motor Vehicle Service
PGANE Propane Gas Association of New England
P Passenger Carrier Endorsement
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
SDLAs State Driver Licensing Agencies
TSA Transportation Security Administration
IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
This final rule rests on the authority of the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA), as amended, codified at 49 U.S.C.
chapter 313 and 49 CFR parts 382, 383, and 384. The rule also responds
to section 5401(a) of the FAST Act [Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312,
1546, December 4, 2015]. This section requires FMCSA to modify the
minimum testing standards of its CDL regulations to credit the training
and knowledge received by certain current or former military drivers in
the armed forces, including the reserve components and National Guard,
to drive military vehicles similar to civilian CMVs [49 U.S.C.
31305(d)(1)(C)].
The CMVSA provides broadly that ``[t]he Secretary of Transportation
shall prescribe regulations on minimum standards for testing and
ensuring the fitness of an individual operating a commercial motor
vehicle'' [49 U.S.C. 31305(a)]. In general, those regulations must
include the following: (1) Minimum standards for knowledge and driving
(skills) tests; (2) use of a representative vehicle to take the driving
test; (3) minimum testing standards; and (4) working knowledge of CMV
regulations and vehicle safety systems [49 U.S.C. 31305(a)(1)-(4)].
Section 5401(a) of the FAST Act, as amended by section (3)(1) of
the Jobs for Our Heroes Act (Pub. L. 115-105, 131 Stat. 2263, January
8, 2018) added 49 U.S.C. 31305(d): ``Standards for Training and Testing
of Operators Who Are Members of the Armed Forces, Reservists, or
Veterans.'' Section 31305(d)(1)(A) requires the Agency to modify its
CDL regulations to ``exempt a covered individual from all or a portion
of a driving test if the covered individual had experience in the armed
forces or reserve components driving vehicles similar to a commercial
motor vehicle.'' Section 31305(d)(1)(B), as also amended by the Jobs
for Our Heroes Act, requires FMCSA to ``ensure that a covered
individual may apply for an exemption under subparagraph (A)--(i) while
serving in the armed forces or reserve components; and (ii) during, at
least, the 1-year period beginning on the date on which such individual
separates from services in the armed forces or reserve components.''
The term ``reserve components'' includes the Army and Air National
Guard, as well as the normal reserve units of all branches of the
military service. Section 5401(c) of the FAST Act also directed the
Agency to adopt regulations allowing certain military personnel an
exemption from the normal CDL domicile requirement, as authorized by
the 2012 Act and codified at 49 U.S.C. 31311(a)(12)(C). These three
provisions were implemented by the Military CDL I Rule.
The last element of section 5401(a), which was not addressed in the
Military CDL I Rule, directed the Agency to ``credit the training and
knowledge a covered individual received in the armed forces or reserve
components driving vehicles similar to a commercial motor vehicle for
purposes of satisfying minimum standards for training and knowledge''
[49 U.S.C. 31305(d)(1)(C)]. That requirement is the subject of this
final rule. It should be noted that section 31305(d)(2)(B) originally
defined a ``covered individual'' as someone over 21 years of age who is
``(i) a former member of the armed forces; or (ii) a former member of
the reserve components.'' However, section 3(3) of the Jobs for Our
Heroes Act amended section 31305(d)(2)(B) to define a ``covered
individual'' as someone over 21 years of age who is ``(i) a current or
former member of the armed forces; or (ii) a current or former member
of one of the reserve components.'' Using the broad authority of 49
U.S.C. 31315(b), the Agency implicitly took the same position in
granting all SDLAs the temporary option (for a 2-year period) of
waiving the CLP knowledge test for current or former members of the
military services, including the reserves and National Guard, who had
completed certain formal military driver training (81 FR 74861, Oct.
27, 2016). [See ``Knowledge Test Exemption Request'' discussion below.]
Federal training standards for CDL drivers were adopted only
recently. Section 32304 of MAP-21 [Pub. L. 112-141, July 6, 2012, 126
Stat. 405, 791] required entry-level driver training (ELDT) of CDL
applicants [49 U.S.C. 31305(c)]. That requirement was promulgated on
December 8, 2016 [81 FR 88732]. However, the ELDT rule provides that
``[v]eterans with military CMV experience who meet all the requirements
and conditions of Sec. 383.77'' are not required to complete the new
entry-level training program [49 CFR 380.603(a)(3)]. Because Sec.
383.77 authorizes the States to exempt CDL applicants with military CMV
experience from the driving skills test, those drivers are also exempt
from ELDT.
Under 49 CFR 383.77, as amended by the Military CDL I Rule, the
Agency now provides credit for military drivers' training and knowledge
by allowing States to exempt from the CDL driving skills test those
employees who are or were regularly employed within the last year in a
military position requiring the operation of a military vehicle that is
comparable to a CMV.
This rule implements 49 U.S.C. 31305(d)(1)(C) by giving States
limited discretion, to exempt CDL applicants with military CMV
experience from the knowledge test required for a CLP. This final rule
completes the requirement of section 31305(d)(1)(C) to ``credit the
training and knowledge a covered individual received in the armed
forces or reserve components driving vehicles similar to a commercial
motor vehicle for purposes of satisfying minimum standards for training
and knowledge.''
V. Regulatory Background
A. Current Standards
Knowledge Test
As specified in 49 CFR 383.71(a)(2)(ii), any individual applying
for a CDL is first required to take and pass a general knowledge test,
which
[[Page 48966]]
authorizes the issuance of a CLP. The general knowledge test must meet
the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of part 383 for
the commercial vehicle group that person operates or expects to
operate.
Skills Test
Any individual applying for a CDL is required to take and pass a
general skills test, but only after passing the knowledge test and
obtaining a CLP. A final rule published on May 9, 2011 [``Commercial
Driver's License Testing and Commercial Learner's Permit Standards''
(76 FR 26854)] added a new 49 CFR 383.77, which allows the States to
substitute CDL applicants' eligible military CMV experience for the
skills test.
B. Recent Activity
Military CDL I Rule
The Military CDL I Rule addressed the requirements of 49 U.S.C.
31305(d)(1)(A) and (B) (81 FR 70634, Oct. 13, 2016) and allows States
to extend the period to apply for a skills test waiver after leaving
the military from 90 days to 1 year for an individual who is regularly
employed or was regularly employed in a military position requiring
operation of a CMV.
Additionally, the Military CDL I Rule allows the SDLA in the State
where military personnel are stationed (State of duty station) to
coordinate with the State of domicile to expedite the processing of
applications and administer the knowledge and skills tests for a CLP or
CDL. The SDLA in the State of domicile could then issue the CLP or CDL
based on tests performed by the SDLA in the State of duty station.
Knowledge Test Exemption Request
The Missouri Department of Revenue (DOR) submitted a request for an
exemption from the FMCSA regulation that requires any driver to pass
the general knowledge test before being issued a CLP or CDL. The
exemption request is available in docket FMCSA-2016-0130, at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FMCSA-2016-0130-0004. The Missouri DOR
asked FMCSA to waive the knowledge test requirement for qualified
veterans who participated in dedicated training through approved
military programs. The Missouri DOR contended that qualified personnel
who participated in such programs had already received the numerous
hours of classroom training, practical skills, and one-on-one road
training that are essential for safe driving. FMCSA agrees with
Missouri DOR's reasoning and granted a 2-year exemption on October 27,
2016 (81 FR 74861), which the Agency extended to allow all SDLAs, at
their discretion, to waive the knowledge test requirements to qualified
veterans, reservists, National Guard, and active-duty personnel. FMCSA
does not have data from all of the States utilizing this exemption.
However, since January 1, 2018, Illinois has granted more than 75
exemptions through this program. There have been no reports of serious
incidents about any of these drivers.
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On June 12, 2017, FMCSA published an NPRM (82 FR 26894) that
proposed allowing SDLAs to waive the requirements for the CLP knowledge
tests for certain individuals who are, or were, regularly employed
within the last year in a military position that requires, or required,
the operation of a CMV.
VI. Discussion of Comments and Responses
FMCSA received 17 comments on the NPRM. Of these, 15 supported the
proposal, though some requested alterations. The rule was supported by
the American Trucking Associations (ATA), the Owner-Operator
Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), the American Bus Association
(ABA), the International Foodservice Distributors Association (IFDA),
the Propane Gas Association of New England (PGANE), the National
Propane Gas Association (NPGA), the Commercial Vehicle Training
Association (CVTA), the Oregon Driver and Motor Vehicle Service
(Oregon), the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (Virginia DMV), the
National School Transportation Association (NSTA), a motor carrier, and
several individuals. Commenters in favor of the NPRM argued that it
would: Build on the success of past waiver programs and recent
complementary regulations; reduce the burden to enter the industry for
qualified military and veterans; remove duplicative requirements and
reduce the time to get licensed; reduce problems in recruiting
qualified employees; establish a standard of safety equivalent to that
of the CLP knowledge test requirement of the CDL exam; and codify
already existing practices by individual SDLAs. Several commenters
lauded the Agency, saying the provisions of the proposed rule ensured
that individuals receiving a waiver would be well-qualified.
One commenter, the Bureau of Driver and Vehicle Programs for the
Michigan Department of State (Michigan), agreed with the need to help
veterans, but not with a waiver of the knowledge test.
One commenter opposed the NPRM, claiming that there is no way to
know if someone meets the knowledge test requirements unless that
individual takes the test.
Several individuals commented on the licensing process, medical
standards, and other issues outside the scope of the NPRM.
A. Endorsements, License Classes, and License Restrictions
The NPRM did not address the question of waiving the knowledge
tests for endorsements, nor did it discuss license classes or license
restrictions for current service personnel or veterans.
The ABA requested clarification on whether the proposed testing
waiver would apply to endorsements as well, and stated that it did not
support exemptions from the knowledge tests for endorsements.
Citing an inconsistency between Sec. Sec. 383.79(c)(1) and
383.111, Oregon asked whether the Agency intended to allow waivers for
all knowledge tests or just the general CDL knowledge test. Oregon
pointed out that allowing a waiver only of the general knowledge test
would limit the type of license that could be issued and acknowledged
the concern about waiving other knowledge tests.
The NPGA and PGANE asked that the proposal be amended to allow
SDLAs to waive the knowledge test for the H endorsement for veterans
and military service members with applicable experience. They argued
that this change would not reduce safety and would increase
opportunities for service men and women. One commenter pointed out that
military training and experience would likely exceed civilian training
and experience, due to military concerns over the transportation of
hazardous materials. CVTA stated that many military drivers haul
materials that would be considered hazardous in a non-military setting,
and that they should have access to the H endorsement via a testing
waiver, though only for a Class A license.
The NSTA asked that the passenger and school bus endorsements be
waived only for drivers with applicable experience. CVTA stated that
FMCSA should consider a restricted license for a military driver who
operated only an automatic, not a manual, transmission.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA believes that a waiver of certain endorsement
tests is appropriate, given that many service members operate vehicles
and transport loads using an equivalent endorsement on a civilian CDL.
In response to these comments, this final rule explicitly allows
SDLAs to
[[Page 48967]]
waive the knowledge tests for H and N endorsements, and the knowledge
and driving skills tests for the P endorsement. Several Military
Occupational Specialties (MOS) include training that corresponds to the
knowledge tests for H, N, and P endorsements. If applicants can
demonstrate that they have received such training, SDLAs may waive one
or more of these knowledge tests. FMCSA provides regulatory language
with which SDLAs must comply to waive the testing requirements for
these three endorsements.
As the D.C. Circuit said in National Mining Ass'n v. Mine Safety
and Health Admin., 116 F.3d 520 (1997), ``[a]gencies are not limited to
adopting final rules identical to proposed rules. No further notice and
comment is required if a regulation is a `logical outgrowth' of the
proposed rule . . . Our cases offer no precise definition of what
counts as a `logical outgrowth.' We ask `whether ``the purposes of
notice and comment have been adequately served.'' ' . . . Notice was
inadequate when `the interested parties could not reasonably have
``anticipated the final rulemaking from the draft [rule] (internal
citations omitted).'' ' '' Id. at 531. In this case, the purposes of
the NPRM were more than adequately served. Many commenters not only
anticipated the possibility that the final rule might waive the
knowledge tests for certain endorsements, some argued that the Agency
had overlooked that obvious implication of the proposed rule while
others, although accepting that implication, argued that such knowledge
tests should not be waived, at least in certain cases. The inclusion of
three endorsement waivers in this final rule is therefore a logical
outgrowth of the purpose and structure of the NPRM.
No waivers of endorsements are allowed beyond the three discussed
above because the various military services provide training equivalent
to that required to pass the written endorsement tests only for H, N,
and P. Additionally, because this rule is voluntary, SDLAs may decide
not to adopt it at all, or may adopt it but decline to offer waivers
for the H or N knowledge tests, or P knowledge or driving skills tests.
FMCSA believes that allowing waivers for endorsement knowledge testing
will resolve nearly all concerns expressed by commenters about the
class of licensure, as SDLAs will be able to issue CDLs with certain
endorsements.
There is no need to require restricted licenses based upon the type
of transmission installed on military vehicles, because FMCSA
recognizes that many military vehicles are fitted with automatic
transmissions. However, all service branches have vehicles with manual
transmissions in their fleet inventory. Each service branch has
documentation of drivers' training, experience, and certification in
vehicles with manual transmissions that can be provided to the SDLA
when the driver applies for a CDL. The same proof of experience with
different braking systems exists, including air brakes and air over
hydraulics. As this rule is voluntary, SDLAs are still allowed to test
these drivers' brake and manual transmission abilities, if they wish,
and to impose a license restriction.
B. Military Occupational Specialties, Military Occupational Codes
The NPRM provided examples of training and certification for four
MOS: Army--88M--Motor Transport, Operator; Air Force--2T1--Vehicle
Operations; Marine Corps--3531--Motor Vehicle Operator; and Navy--EO--
Equipment Operator. The NPRM proposed allowing SDLAs to waive the
knowledge test for current service members or veterans who are or were
regularly employed in a military position requiring operation of a CMV,
and are or were operating a vehicle representative of the CMV the
driver applicant expects to operate after receiving a CDL, or who
operated such a vehicle immediately preceding separation from the
military, regardless of MOS.
The ABA requested that a list of MOS be put into regulatory
language or the driver's SDLA record, and suggested that it would be
appropriate to add such a list to an appendix to the final rule, a
website, or a new ELDT rule. The ABA stated that a driver's use of the
waiver and potentially his or her MOS should be included in the
driver's record for prospective employers to review and evaluate during
pre-employment screening.
Oregon asked for a list of specific MOS to which the knowledge test
waivers would apply and provided a list it said should be used. Oregon
stated that the list could be expanded in the future, but was necessary
for SDLAs' use.
Virginia DMV asked if the Agency's intent was to allow test waivers
only for the MOS listed in the NPRM; if so the regulatory language
should be amended to refer to ``a military position occupation
specialty requiring completion of a military driver training program
that has been approved by FMCSA and operation of a CMV.''
FMCSA Response: FMCSA agrees with the commenters and has included
in the regulatory language a full list of MOS that are eligible for a
waiver of the general knowledge test.
The list of MOS in this final rule has been expanded to include the
following:
88M (Army), motor transport operator.
14T (Army), PATRIOT launching station operator.
92F (Army), fueler.
2T1 (Air Force), vehicle operator.
2F0 (Air Force), fueler.
3E2 (Air Force), pavement and construction equipment
operator.
3531 (Marine Corps), motor vehicle operator.
EO (Navy), equipment operator.
The Agency has concluded that these programs enable drivers likely
to achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level
that would be achieved by requiring them to pass the CLP knowledge
test. The Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Navy provide specific
training dedicated to operating heavy-duty vehicles.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note: Heavy-duty vehicles is a generic description used in
the military to describe vehicles that have been determined by FMCSA
and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators to have
weights equal to or larger than the weights that require a driver to
hold a CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are three basic military job training classifications, with
additional training for other types of heavy-duty specialty vehicles
(e.g., fuel haulers, construction vehicles, and military equipment
transport oversize/overweight [non-track vehicles]).
The four core training programs for heavy vehicle operations, based
on the occupational specialty code of the service member, are:
Army--88M--Motor Transport Operator.
Air Force--2T1--Vehicle Operations.
Marine Corps--3531--Motor Vehicle Operator.
Navy--EO--Equipment Operator.
Army--88M Training
The 88M Instructor Training Manual is 142 pages long. The student
manual--STP 55-88M14-SM-TG Soldier's Manual and Trainer's Guide 88M,
Motor Transport Operator--is 229 pages long and includes four levels of
training. The 6-week core curriculum of the Army 88M course contains a
total of 221 hours of training, including:
Lecture--32 classroom hours.
Practical application--road driving--189 hours.
Motor Transport Operators are responsible primarily for operating
wheeled vehicles to transport personnel
[[Page 48968]]
and cargo. Motor Transport Operator duties include: Interior
components/controls and indicators; basic vehicle control; driving
vehicles over all types of roads and terrain, traveling alone or in
convoys; braking, coupling, backing, and alley docking; adverse/
tactical driving operations; pre-trip inspections; reading load plans;
checking oil, fuel and other fluid levels, as well as tire pressure;
operations in automatic and manual modes; crash prevention; safety
check procedures; basic vehicle maintenance and repairs; transporting
hazardous materials; and keeping mileage records.
A fueler for the Army, a driver with an Army classification of 92F,
has completed the Army 88M course and additional training specific to
the job of a fueler.
A PATRIOT Launching Station Operator, a driver with an Army
classification of 14T, has completed the Army 88M course and additional
training specific to the both the vehicle and systems the vehicle
transports. Total training for this MOS exceeds 264 hours.
Air Force--2T1--Vehicle Operations
The Air Force Tractor Trailer Plan of Instruction (POI) is 226
pages long. The minimum length of instruction for the basic school is
84 hours, including:
22 hours of classroom.
62 hours of hands-on activity, both alone on a training
pad and on the road with an instructor.
The core curriculum is based on the material in the American
Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) CDL Manual--2005
edition (2014 revised). Students participating in the basic 2T1
curriculum learn general principles in the classroom. Specialized
training occurs at the installation using the Tractor Trailer Plan of
Instruction. A minimum of 40 hours over-the-road time is expected on
each vehicle/trailer type.
Topics covered in the Air Force Vehicle Operations course include:
Overview of training and Federal requirements; Federal motor vehicle
safety standards; tractor/trailer design; hazards and human factors
relative to the environment where used; safety clothing and equipment;
driving safely; pre- and post-trip vehicle inspection; basic vehicle
control; shifting gears; managing space and speed; driving in
mountains, fog, winter, very hot weather, and at night; railroad
crossings; defensive awareness to avoid hazards and emergencies; skid
control and recovery; what to do in case of a crash; fires; staying
alert and fit to drive; hazardous materials--rules for all commercial
drivers; preparing, inspecting, and transporting cargo safely;
inspecting and driving with air brakes; driving combination vehicles
safely; and coupling and uncoupling.
Air Force fuelers holding 2F0, and Air Force pavement and
construction equipment operators holding 3E2, must first complete
training for 2T1, before completing additional training specific to the
roles of 2F0 and 3E2.
Marine Corps--3531--Motor Vehicle Operator
The core curriculum of the Marine Corps 3531 course--TM 11240-15/3G
contains three training areas:
Lecture--24 classroom hours.
Demonstration--classroom/training pad--35 hours.
Practical application--road driving--198 hours.
Instructional breakout includes:
Demonstration: 35 hours.
Guided discussion: 1.5 hours.
Lecture: 24 hours.
Performance examination: 62 hours.
Practical application (individual): 198 hours.
Knowledge examination: 7 hours.
Classroom instruction includes lectures, demonstration, and
practice time for the specific tasks identified. Each classroom session
includes knowledge and performance evaluations to ensure students have
mastered all learning objectives for the specialty proficiency.
Training includes simulators and actual vehicle operation. Practical
training includes on-the-road and skills operations, ground guide
procedures, and operating a vehicle with a towed load. Students
practice their driving and backing, with and without a trailer.
Instructors ride with the students as they operate on approved road
routes. Specific training areas (pads) are provided for the students to
practice their backing skills and ground guide procedures safely.
The Marine Corps training curriculum includes emergency procedures
and cargo loading.
Navy--EO--Equipment Operator
The core curriculum of the USN Heavy Vehicle Operator (Truck
Driver) (EO) course (53-3032.00) is designed to train Navy personnel to
operate passenger and cargo vehicles to rated capacity. They palletize,
containerize, load and safely transport various types of cargo and
demonstrate knowledge and skills to qualify as a driver journeyman. The
complete program covers topics including:
Hazardous materials transportation.
Line haul planning.
Manual tractor-truck operations.
Vehicle Recovery Operations.
The course is taught over 160 hours including 30 hours of classroom
and 130 hours of lab (behind the wheel). Upon completion of this
course, the Navy driver will be able to:
Perform the duties of normal, non-combat conditions
driving in accordance with the local State driver licensing agency's
CDL driver handbook;
Manage hazardous petroleum, oils and lubricants (POL)
material required during line haul and worksite activities, to support
normal, non-combat operations;
Perform preventive maintenance on a non- or up-armored
manual truck tractor with drop-neck trailer, consisting of pre-start,
during-operations, and after-operations equipment checks, to support
normal, non-combat operations, in accordance with local State Driver
License Agency CDL handbooks;
Operate vehicle controls of a non- or up-armored manual
truck-tractor, to support normal, non-combat operations; and
Be proficient with the components and controls of a drop-
neck trailer relative to a detached/attached gooseneck and a coupled/
uncoupled trailer.
Other topics covered within the Navy EO training program include:
Development and maintenance of operational records.
Operation of high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles.
Weight distribution and load securement.
Loading bulk and container cargo.
Preventive maintenance.
Pre- and post-trip vehicle safety inspections.
The military training programs described above are thorough and
comprehensive, incorporating most of the elements recommended by the
Professional Truck Driver Institute, which has been the principal
standard-setting organization for private-sector motor carrier training
for decades. They are entirely compatible with the requirements of
FMCSA's ELDT rule. Although geared to heavy-duty military vehicles,
military training is readily transferrable to a civilian context, as
the operational characteristics of large military and civilian vehicles
are very similar and, in some cases, identical. The Agency believes
that exempting these drivers from the CLP knowledge test, in addition
to the skills test, will have no adverse effect on highway safety.
This final rule also provides for waivers involving H, N, and P
endorsements of drivers who hold an
[[Page 48969]]
MOS listed above. Though military service members are not required to
comply with 49 CFR, including hazardous materials training (part 172,
subpart H), several service branches offer a training curriculum that
meets or exceeds FMCSA testing requirements for endorsements. Proof of
such training can be confirmed at the SDLA, for example by providing a
copy of the U.S. Air Force motor vehicle identification card (AF 2293)
which includes an identification of the class of vehicle operated, any
endorsement held by the operator, and any restrictions to which he or
she are subject. The identification card also includes a list of the
vehicles the person is authorized to operate. Similar cards are
authorized by the Navy and Marine Corps (both designated as OF 346),
and Army (DA 5984). This rule is not applicable to school bus
endorsement but, as noted above, is acceptable for the P endorsement if
the service member verifies his/her military Passenger credential.
FMCSA recognizes that military vehicles can carry a variety of
hazardous materials. Military personnel who carry fuel and other types
of hazardous materials, including powder, weapons, and ammunition, are
trained and certified to transport these materials. FMCSA clarifies
that service members applying for waivers from the H endorsement
knowledge test must still undergo the Hazardous Materials Endorsement
Threat Assessment Program through the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) (49 CFR part 1572). SDLAs may not issue the H
endorsement until TSA has completed its background check and approved
the driver.
The Agency's ELDT final rule has a compliance date of February 7,
2020. Under 49 CFR 383.603(a)(3) of that rule, ``[v]eterans with
military CMV experience who meet all the requirements and conditions of
Sec. 383.77'' are exempt from the rule's training requirements [81 FR
88732, 88790, December 8, 2016]. Section 383.77 allows States to waive
the skills test for certain drivers with military CMV experience. This
final rule allows a comparable waiver of the knowledge test. However,
this rule does not affect 49 CFR 391.31, under which motor carriers
must require their drivers to complete a road test before operating a
CMV, unless the carrier chooses to accept a valid CDL in lieu of the
road test (though it may not waive the road test if the driver has an N
endorsement) [49 CFR 391.33]. In short, employers may still require
drivers with military CMV experience who obtain a CDL without
completing either the skills test or the knowledge test to complete a
road test.
C. Time Period for Waiver
FMCSA proposed to allow States to exempt from the knowledge test
for a CLP or CDL certain current or former military service members who
were regularly employed in a military position requiring the operation
of a CMV during a 1-year period immediately prior to the application.
There would be no time limit for military personnel while on active
duty or serving actively within a reserve component or the National
Guard to apply for the waiver.
The NPGA and the PGANE asked that the proposal's 1-year waiver
period be extended to 5 years. These commenters argued that the nature
of CMV driving does not change so rapidly that a 5-year period would
make training obsolete, even if the applicant had not driven in the
past year.
Oregon thought that the time limits for the knowledge and skills
test waivers should be identical. Oregon stated that, as proposed, the
NPRM did not match the length of the skills test waiver.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA declines to extend the 1-year waiver period.
This rule's intended effect is to allow qualified veterans and service
members to waive the knowledge and skills tests simultaneously to
obtain licensure. The Military CDL I rule used a 1-year period; FMCSA
believes that is appropriate here as well, as the two are now
synchronized.
D. Extension of the Proposal
One commenter requested that the proposal be extended to non-
military personnel. Another stated that veterans should have licenses
granted automatically, as they are driving on behalf of the U.S.
Military.
FMCSA Response: The application process for what might be called an
``even exchange'' of a military truck or bus license for a civilian CDL
was directed by the 2012 Act and section 5401 of the FAST Act. That
process is limited explicitly to military service members with
appropriate experience. As amended by section 5401(a), 49 U.S.C.
31305(d)(1)(C) requires FMCSA to ``credit the training and knowledge a
covered individual received in the armed forces or reserve components
driving vehicles similar to a commercial motor vehicle for purposes of
satisfying minimum standards for training and knowledge.'' Only
individuals currently serving on active duty, including the National
Guard and reserve components, or recently separated service men and
women with comparable training and experience, will be eligible for a
waiver of the knowledge test. There is no equivalent requirement to
waive knowledge tests for non-military personnel. In any case, that
step would take this rule far beyond its original purpose and scope.
Federal regulations already exempt active duty military personnel
from the need to hold a CDL when driving while on duty in a military
vehicle on official military orders (49 CFR 383.3(c)). This final rule,
in combination with the Military CDL I final rule, will allow States to
make the licensing of current or former military personnel as close to
automatic as possible. Other Federal requirements for licensure, like a
medical examiner's certification, must be met and cannot be waived.
However, qualified current and separated service members will now have
significantly reduced obstacles to earning non-military licenses.
E. SDLA Compliance
The Agency's June 12, 2017, NPRM proposed that SDLAs may waive the
knowledge test; it would be entirely voluntary.
The CVTA asked FMCSA to consider setting guidelines for the process
to increase consistency between SDLAs. ABA asked how the driver's SDLA
record will reflect whether certain tests were waived.
Several commenters, including the two propane gas organizations,
supported a voluntary waiver program and stated that a 3-year
compliance date for States was appropriate.
ATA suggested that FMCSA work with AAMVA to develop a required form
to verify that a driver has been trained in the ELDT elements to a
level at least equivalent to that reflected by passage of the knowledge
exam. Oregon asked several questions regarding coordination between the
State of duty station and the State of domicile. Oregon asked if it was
the Agency's intention to allow a State to administer all knowledge
tests for certain military service members not domiciled there, but to
limit that provision to just the general knowledge test for all other
non-domiciled applicants.
The Virginia DMV stated that the process outlined in the proposed
rule regarding testing for and obtaining a civilian CDL seems
unnecessary and burdensome to the applicant because the 2012 Act
already allows a State to issue a CDL to military personnel stationed
but not domiciled there. The commenter called attention to the CDL rule
prohibiting a driver from holding
[[Page 48970]]
more than one license, noting that issuance of a CDL by the State of
domicile would invalidate any other license held by the driver, making
it illegal for him or her to drive for a period of several days until
the newly-issued CDL arrived. Moreover, the commenter added that the
proposed rule did not require States that decide to participate in the
program to change their laws, if necessary, and invalidate or destroy
the non-CDL, even before the CDL document is delivered to the
applicant.
Another concern of the Virginia DMV was the requirement of 49 CFR
383.71(b)(9) for applicants to provide a proof of citizenship or lawful
residency in a State of domicile in cases where they do not have such
identification. Moreover, the commenter believed that FMCSA should
provide an exception for applicants who do not have an active
residential or mailing address in the State of domicile and allow such
applicants' CDL or CLP to show an address located in the State of duty
station.
The Virginia DMV was concerned with the provision that permits the
State of duty station to accept an application for a CLP or CDL,
including an application for waiver of the knowledge test or skills
test, only if the State of duty station obtains prior approval from the
State of domicile. The commenter wrote that ``this creates an excessive
burden on States to go state by State in obtaining prior approval
agreements with other States. DMV is also concerned that if a duty
station State does not obtain prior approval from a State of domicile
before proceeding or the duty station State misunderstands what is
approved[,] this will result in an undue hardship on military service
members who must rely on the duty station State to follow regulations.
Therefore, the Virginia DMV recommends that it should be the
applicant's responsibility to obtain written approval from the State of
domicile prior to beginning any exams in the duty station State since
some applicants may be ineligible for domicile accommodation, due to
outstanding administrative requirements in the State of domicile (e.g.
photograph, compliance, lawful presence, State residency).''
Furthermore, given that the NPRM would allow, but not require, States
to waive the knowledge test, this commenter stated that permitting
States to impose additional conditions and limitations on applicants,
beyond those included in the proposed rule, would result in a lack of
uniformity from State to State, creating a confusing process for
service members to navigate.
Lastly, Virginia DMV noted that the cost associated with complying
with the proposed rule is neither minimal, given the need for changes
to State law, nor would the required re-programming of information
technology systems would be minor, as the NPRM indicated. FMCSA needs
to address these administrative and other costs. Moreover, Virginia DMV
said that, if it participates in the waiver program, it would not do so
until AAMVA had developed a secure system to transmit knowledge test
results and other documentation.
FMCSA Response: As stated previously, States waiving knowledge
tests under this rule are not required to coordinate their programs
between States, although all States granting waivers must verify the
qualifications of applicants based on various military documents, as
specified in this rule. With respect to the CVTA comment, Sec.
383.135(c) currently requires recording of the application for waiver
in the driver's file. As for the comments of the propane gas
organizations, FMCSA believes this rule should be available to States
as soon as possible. The Agency is therefore making this final rule
effective 60 days after publication.
Responding to the ATA's request that FMCSA specify a form
demonstrating the equivalence of military training with the standards
required for ELDT, the Agency has concluded, after consultation with
AAMVA and close examination of the military training and testing
manuals and procedures, that training to the prescribed MOS standards
meets or exceeds that required by the ELDT rule. The form requested by
ATA is therefore unnecessary.
This final rule makes no changes to the existing domicile
requirements or any other provision of part 383. While the 2012 Act
does allow States to issue CDLs to military personnel stationed there,
no States have done so. The NPRM and this final rule avoid the
possibility that CDL applicants could inadvertently lose their ``home''
State of domicile by accepting a CDL from the State of duty station.
The requirement and documents needed to provide proof of
citizenship or lawful permanent residency in Sec. 383.71(b)(9) are the
same, whether the application is being made in the State of domicile or
some other State. Without that proof, a CLP or CDL may not be issued.
As for Virginia DMV's concern about the possible inability of an
applicant to show an active mailing address in his or her ``home''
State to prove domicile, Sec. 383.71(b)(10) allows the use of a
``government issued tax form'' to serve as proof. Without such a tax
record, there is no good reason to believe an applicant's assertion of
domicile in a State.
F. Driver Training
The NPRM described the various military training programs and
explained that they are thorough and comprehensive. These programs
incorporate most of the elements recommended by the Professional Truck
Driver Institute. Military training is entirely compatible with the
requirements of FMCSA's ELDT rule (81 FR 88732, December 8, 2016, also
available in docket FMCSA-2007-27748).
ATA stated that FMCSA should verify that all military training
programs thoroughly cover all elements required by the ELDT rule, and,
if they do not, should work with the military branches to secure
comparable training.
CVTA stated that the training manuals from the Army, Navy, Air
Force, and Marines all covered, in ``considerable detail,'' the skills
needed under the ELDT rule.
FMCSA Response: As stated previously, the training and testing by
the military meet or exceed FMCSA's various training standards listed
in appendices A through E to 49 CFR part 380 (compliance required by
February 7, 2020) and the AAMVA testing standard specified in 49 CFR
383.131.
G. Proof of Training and Experience
NSTA stated that individuals seeking a waiver should ``certify and
provide evidence'' of their training and experience, specifically for
passenger carrier and school bus endorsements. ATA asked the Agency for
``explicit acknowledgement'' that a driver using the waiver has the
knowledge necessary to pass the test. ATA also said that employers may
view the waiver as a lesser standard, and that FMCSA should provide the
same process for checking the driver's record, experience,
restrictions, equipment, etc., as States allow for other drivers. ATA
expressed concern that veterans utilizing this program might be
perceived as holding a lesser license.
ABA requested guidance on how an employer could confirm a driver's
service and MOS. Oregon asked how to confirm that a driver attempting
to use this waiver had proper training and experience. Oregon also
asked if certain MOS should be considered proof of appropriate
training, and requested a formal definition of ``approved training.''
[[Page 48971]]
FMCSA Response: Under this rule, drivers who hold or held such
designations have completed ``approved training'' comparable to that
required to pass the general knowledge test. SDLAs will be able to
verify a driver's MOS status. As indicated above, the SDLA will be able
to check military documents, such as AF 2293, etc. The Agency will also
provide SDLAs with guidance and sample documents that can be used to
verify an applicant's required training and testing in the appropriate
vehicle. A document summarizing that guidance is currently under
development, and will be available to SDLAs. Certification to an
employer that a driver is qualified is not part of this rulemaking.
Individuals who are waived from the tests will receive standard CDLs
and be treated the same as all other CDL holders.
H. CDL Waiting Period
ATA asked if FMCSA planned to require the usual 14-day waiting
period between issuing these two licenses (49 CFR 383.25(e)).
FMCSA Response: Under this rule, a State may treat military
personnel with the appropriate MOS as though they had completed the
knowledge test for a CLP. However, because recipients of such waivers
are eligible immediately for a CDL, they are not issued a CLP. The 14-
day waiting period was adopted to ensure that drivers had time to
obtain behind-the-wheel training before attempting to pass the skills
test. However, Sec. 383.77 requires applicants with military
experience seeking a waiver of the driving skills test to certify
certain experience over a 2-year period prior to the application. The
MOSs listed in this final rule demonstrate that the applicant has
received training equivalent to that required by the ELDT rule, which
is also sufficient to pass the general and endorsement knowledge tests.
Under these circumstances, a 14-day waiting period would serve no
purpose. This rule does not waive other requirements for the issuance
of a CDL, including the medical card required of all CDL holders and
the TSA background check for applicants for H endorsement.
I. Other Comments
FMCSA revised 49 CFR 383.77, Substitute for driving skills tests
for drivers with military CMV experience, and 49 CFR 383.79, Skills
testing of out-of-State students; Knowledge and skills testing of
military personnel, in the 2016 Military CDL I final rule. In the NPRM,
FMCSA proposed edits to these two sections to accommodate the
provisions related to the knowledge test.
Virginia DMV submitted multiple comments and questions about parts
of the FMCSRs that were not substantively modified by this rulemaking,
reflecting misunderstandings about the NPRM. Modifications to the final
rule in response to other comments have resolved and clarified the
issues raised by Virginia DMV.
VII. International Impacts
The FMCSRs, and any exceptions to the FMCSRs, apply only within the
United States (and, in some cases, United States territories). 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 among nations.
VIII. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Section 383.23 Commercial Driver's License
The reference to ``written'' tests in paragraph (a)(1) is changed
to ``knowledge'' tests and the term ``commercial motor vehicle'' is
abbreviated as ``CMV'' to match the terminology used elsewhere in 49
CFR part 383. The word ``skills'' is added after ``driving'' to clarify
the type of test. No changes are made to other paragraphs in this
section.
B. Section 383.77 Substitute for Knowledge and Driving Skills Tests for
Drivers With Military CMV Experience
This section is retitled as Substitute for knowledge and driving
skills tests for drivers with military CMV experience to include
knowledge test waivers. The existing introductory paragraph is now
contained in new paragraph (b)(1) and the introductory text of
paragraph (b)(2).
FMCSA adds new paragraph (a), titled Knowledge test waivers for
certain current or former military service members applying for a CLP
or CDL, to outline the requirements for eligibility for knowledge test
waivers, including paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(A) through (H) that list
specific MOS eligible for knowledge test waivers. Existing paragraph
(a) is now contained in new paragraph (b)(2)(ii). The language has been
slightly modified to make it consistent with new paragraph (a).
New paragraph (b) is titled Driving skills test waivers for certain
current or former military service members applying for a CDL. Existing
paragraph (b) is now contained in new paragraph (b)(2)(i).
New paragraph (c) is titled Endorsement waivers for certain current
or former military service members applying for a CLP or a CDL.
Paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) contain the requirements certain
applicants must meet for SDLAs to grant them relief from the knowledge
and skills tests for P, and the knowledge tests for N and H. New
paragraph (c)(4) provides the conditions and limitations that are
placed on a waiver of the tests required for a P, N, or H endorsement.
C. Section 383.79 Driving Skills Testing of Out-of-State Students;
Knowledge and Driving Skills Testing of Military Personnel
The title of this section and paragraph (a) are modified to include
the term ``driving'' before the terms ``skills.'' Other editorial
changes are made to paragraph (a). Existing paragraph (b), Military
service member applicants for a CLP or CDL, is removed and replaced by
a new paragraph (b), Active duty military service members. New
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) discuss the responsibilities of the State of
duty station and the State of domicile, respectively.
D. Section 384.301 Substantial Compliance General Requirements
New paragraph (l) is added to provide a compliance date for this
rule.
IX. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O.
13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures
FMCSA performed an analysis of the impacts of the final rule and
determined it is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as supplemented by E.O.
13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Accordingly, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it under that
Order. It is also not significant within the meaning of DOT regulatory
policies and procedures (DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR
11034 (Feb. 26, 1979)).
This rule will allow, but not require, States to waive the
requirements for the CDL knowledge tests for certain current or former
military service members who can certify and provide evidence that they
were regularly employed within the last year in a military position
that requires/required the operation of a CMV. This rule will provide
an expedited path for certain military service members to enter the
labor market by eliminating the usual 14-day waiting period after
passing the knowledge test for the CLP and either
[[Page 48972]]
taking the driving skills test or applying for a skills test waiver.
FMCSA evaluated potential costs and benefits that could result from
this rulemaking. The Agency estimates that an annual average of 2,460
military service members will be affected by the rule, with each
experiencing a reduction in costs related to elimination of the CDL
knowledge test and the 14-day waiting period. As presented in Table 1,
the final rule will result in a 10-year cost savings of $16.66 million
undiscounted, $14.21 million discounted at 3 percent, $11.70 million
discounted at 7 percent, and $1.67 million on an annualized basis at 7
percent or 3 percent discount rates.
Scope and Key Inputs to the Analysis
The Agency does not know how many military service members will
receive CDL knowledge test waivers and uses the number of CDL skills
test waivers issued as a proxy for the number of military service
members who will be most likely to use the relief provided in this
rule. In the Military CDL I final rule, FMCSA estimated that an annual
average of 2,460 military service members were granted skills test
waivers, and thus estimates that the same number will be granted
knowledge test waivers as a result of this final rule. For purposes of
this analysis, FMCSA assumed that number would remain constant in
future years.
The Agency evaluated changes in the opportunity cost of time for
military service members, or drivers, using the driver wage rate to
represent the value of the drivers' time. In the absence of the rule,
that time would have been spent taking the CDL knowledge tests and
waiting to procure employment as CMV drivers, time that will now be
available to drivers for other uses, such as productive employment. The
source for driver wages is the median hourly wage data (May 2016) from
the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS),
Occupational Employment Statistics (OES).\2\ The BLS does not publish
data on fringe benefits for specific occupations, but it does for the
broad industry groups in its Employer Costs for Employee Compensation
(ECEC) release. For drivers, this analysis uses an average hourly wage
of $25.75 and average hourly benefits of $14.49 for private industry
workers in ``transportation and warehousing'' \3\ to estimate that
fringe benefits are equal to 56 percent ($14.49 / $25.75) of wages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS). Occupational Employment Statistics (OES). National. May 2016.
Available at: http://www.bls.gov/oes/special.requests/oesm16nat.zip
(accessed January 16, 2018).
\3\ U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS). Table 10: Employer costs per hour worked for employee
compensation and costs as a percent of total compensation: Private
industry workers, by industry group, September 2017. Available at:
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf (accessed January 16,
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA assumes that military service members are employed while they
are waiting to obtain a CDL and uses the light truck or delivery
service driver wage rate (industry code 53-3033) as a proxy for the
employment opportunities available to non-CDL drivers. Per the BLS
definition, drivers in the light truck or delivery service industry
drive a truck or van with a capacity of less than 26,000 pounds gross
vehicle weight and, as such, do not require a Class A or a Class B CDL.
FMCSA uses a driver wage rate of 23 to account for non-CDL driving
opportunities available to military service members, which is the base
median hourly wage of $14.70 adjusted to account for fringe benefits
($23 = $14.70 x 1.56).
FMCSA uses the heavy tractor-trailer wage rate (industry code 53-
3032) of $31 to represent the employment opportunities available to
military service members after they obtain their CDL. This value is the
base median wage of $19.87, adjusted to account for fringe benefits
($31 = $19.87 x 1.56).
Costs
This rule will reduce driver opportunity cost by creating an
expedited path for certain military service members to obtain their CDL
and begin working for a motor carrier. First, the affected military
service members will receive a waiver for the CDL knowledge tests and
will experience a reduction in opportunity cost equal to the length of
time they would have spent taking the CDL knowledge tests. FMCSA
estimates that each of the 2,460 affected military service members will
save approximately 60 minutes, or one hour, and values this time at the
wage the driver will be earning in the absence of the CDL knowledge
test requirement, $31. As displayed in Table 1, FMCSA estimates that
the annual undiscounted cost savings of allowing a CDL knowledge test
waiver are approximately $76,000 ($76,000 = 2,460 drivers x 1 hour x
$31), and the total 10-year undiscounted cost savings are approximately
$760,000.
Second, because of the waiver, certain military service members
will no longer be required to wait 14 days before obtaining their CDL
and beginning employment for a motor carrier. Eliminating the waiting
period could result in up to 80 hours of increased wages (two 40-hour
work weeks). Because the military service members are estimated to be
working and earning a wage during the waiting period, the impact of
removing the waiting period is the difference between what they are
earning under the baseline (estimated at $23), and what they will earn
under the rule (estimated at 31). Thus, FMCSA quantified the impact of
removing the waiting period at 8 per hour ($8 = $31 - $23). The
analysis similarly estimated that this will impact 2,460 service
members. As presented in Table 1, FMCSA estimates that the annual
undiscounted cost savings are $1.59 million ($8 x 80 x $2,460), and the
10-year total undiscounted cost savings are $15.90 million.
As presented in Table 1, the total cost savings of the final rule
are $16.66 million undiscounted, $14.21 million discounted at 3
percent, $11.70 million discounted at 7 percent, and $1.67 million
annualized at both a 3 percent and 7 percent discount rate.
Table 1--Summary of the Total Costs of the Final Rule
[In millions of 2016 $]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undiscounted Discounted
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Total costs Discounted at Discounted at
Reduced test time Earlier employment \a\ 3 percent 7 percent
A = 2,460 drivers B = 2,460 drivers C = A + B
x 31 x -1 hour x 8 x -80 hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018............................................................ ($0.08) ($1.59) ($1.67) ($1.62) ($1.56)
[[Page 48973]]
2019............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.57) (1.46)
2020............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.52) (1.36)
2021............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.48) (1.27)
2022............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.44) (1.19)
2023............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.40) (1.11)
2024............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.35) (1.04)
2025............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.32) (0.97)
2026............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.28) (0.91)
2027............................................................ (0.08) (1.59) (1.67) (1.24) (0.85)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... (0.76) (15.90) (16.66) (14.21) (11.70)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized.............................................. .................. .................. (1.67) (1.67) (1.67)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Total cost values may not equal the sum of the components due to rounding (the totals shown in this column are the rounded sum of unrounded
components).
\b\ Values shown in parentheses are negative values (i.e., less than zero), and represent a decrease in cost or a cost savings.
Benefits
In considering the potential impacts on safety from this rule, the
Agency notes that affected military service members have previous
training or experience operating a CMV, which serves as an adequate
substitute for taking the knowledge test and holding a CLP for a
minimum of 14 days. Therefore, the Agency anticipates that there will
be no change in potential safety benefits associated with this rule.
B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs)
This final rule is expected to be an E.O. 13771 deregulatory
action. \4\ The present value of the cost savings of this rule,
measured on an infinite time horizon at a 7 percent discount rate, are
approximately $20.8 million. Expressed on an annualized basis, the cost
savings are $1.5 million. These values are expressed in 2016 dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Executive Office of the President. Executive Order 13771 of
January 30, 2017. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs. 82 FR 9339-9341. Feb. 3, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857), requires Federal
agencies to consider the impact of their regulatory proposals on small
entities, analyze effective alternatives that minimize small entity
impacts, and make their analyses available for public comment. 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 a
population of less than 50,000.\5\ 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
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Available
at: https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/regulatory-flexibility-act
(accessed December 14, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When an agency issues a rulemaking proposal, the RFA requires the
agency to ``prepare and make available for public comment an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis'' which will ``describe the impact of
the proposed rule on small entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605 of
the RFA allows an agency to certify, in lieu of preparing an analysis,
that the proposed rulemaking is not expected to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
FMCSA provided a factual basis and certified in the proposal that
the rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of
small entities. FMCSA did not receive comments on the factual basis or
the proposal, and has not changed the determination in this final rule.
D. Assistance for Small Entities
In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, FMCSA wants to assist small entities
in understanding this final rule so that 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 FMCSA point of
contact, Selden Fritschner, listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this final rule.
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 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.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions
[[Page 48974]]
that may result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $156
million (which is the equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for
inflation to 2015 levels) or more in any one year. Though this final
rule will not result in such expenditure, the Agency does discuss the
effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection Information)
This final rule calls for no new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
G. 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 would not have substantial
direct costs on or for the States, nor will it limit the policymaking
discretion of the 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.
H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This final rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks, requires agencies issuing ``economically
significant'' rules, if the regulation also concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that an agency has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, to include an evaluation of the
regulation's environmental health and safety effects on children. The
Agency determined this final rule is not economically significant.
Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on children is required. In any
event, the Agency does not anticipate that this regulatory action could
in any respect present an environmental or safety risk that could
disproportionately affect children.
J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
FMCSA reviewed this final rule in accordance with E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights, and has determined it will not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have taking implications.
K. Privacy
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, (5 U.S.C. 552a note)
requires the Agency to conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of a
regulation that will affect the privacy of individuals. Because this
final rule does not require the collection of personally identifiable
information (PII), the Agency is not required to conduct a PIA.
Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note)
requires Federal agencies to conduct a PIA for new or substantially
changed technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates
information in an identifiable form. No new or substantially changed
technology would collect, maintain, or disseminate information as a
result of this rule. Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted a PIA.
L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this
program.
M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
FMCSA has analyzed this final rule under E.O. 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined that the rule is not a
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it
does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211.
N. E.O. 13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth)
E.O. 13783 directs executive departments and agencies to review
existing regulations that potentially burden the development or use of
domestically produced energy resources, and to appropriately suspend,
revise, or rescind those that unduly burden the development of domestic
energy resources. In accordance with E.O. 13783, DOT prepared and
submitted a report to the Director of OMB that provides specific
recommendations that, to the extent permitted by law, could alleviate
or eliminate aspects of agency action that burden domestic energy
production. This final rule has not been identified by DOT under E.O.
13783 as potentially alleviating unnecessary burdens on domestic energy
production.
O. 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 would 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.
P. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance,
design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related
management systems practices) are standards that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use
technical standards. Therefore, FMCSA did not consider the use of
voluntary consensus standards.
Q. Environment (NEPA)
FMCSA analyzed this rule for the purpose of 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 FMCSA Order 5610.1(69 FR 9680, March 1, 2004),
Appendix 2, paragraphs 6.s.(6) and 6.t.(2). The Categorical Exclusion
(CE) in paragraph 6.s.(6) covers a requirement for States to give
knowledge and skills tests to all qualified applicants for commercial
drivers' licenses which meet the Federal standard. The CE in paragraph
6.t.(2) covers regulations to ensure that the States comply with the
provisions of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986, by: (2)
Having the appropriate laws, regulations, programs, policies,
procedures and information systems concerning the qualification and
[[Page 48975]]
licensing of persons who apply for a commercial driver's license, and
persons who are issued a commercial driver's license. The requirements
in this rule are covered by these CEs and the proposed action does not
have any effect on the quality of the environment. The CE determination
is available for inspection or copying in the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 383
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Motor carriers.
49 CFR Part 384
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
Highway safety, Motor carriers.
In consideration of the foregoing, FMCSA amends 49 CFR chapter III,
parts 383 and 384, to read 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, 297, 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 of Pub. L. 114- 94, 129 Stat.
1312, 1546, 1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.
0
2. Amend Sec. 383.23 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 383.23 Commercial driver's license.
(a) * * *
(1) No person shall operate a CMV unless such person has taken and
passed knowledge and driving skills tests for a CLP or CDL that meet
the Federal standards contained in subparts F, G, and H of this part
for the CMV that person operates or expects to operate.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec. 383.77 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.77 Substitute for knowledge and driving skills tests for
drivers with military CMV experience.
(a) Knowledge test waivers for certain current or former military
service members applying for a CLP or CDL--(1) In general. For current
or former military service members, as defined in Sec. 383.5, who meet
the conditions and limitations set forth in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section, a State may waive the requirements in Sec. Sec. 383.23(a)(1)
and 383.25(a)(3) that a person must pass a knowledge test for a CLP or
CDL.
(2) Conditions and limitations. A current or former military
service member applying for waiver of the knowledge test described in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section must certify and provide evidence
that, during the 1-year period immediately prior to the application,
he/she:
(i) Is or was regularly employed and designated as a:
(A) Motor Transport Operator--88M (Army);
(B) PATRIOT Launching Station Operator--14T (Army);
(C) Fueler--92F (Army);
(D) Vehicle Operator--2T1 (Air Force);
(E) Fueler--2F0 (Air Force);
(F) Pavement and Construction Equipment Operator--3E2 (Air Force);
(G) Motor Vehicle Operator--3531 (Marine Corps); or
(H) Equipment Operator--E.O. (Navy).
(ii) Is operating a vehicle representative of the CMV type the
driver applicant expects to operate upon separation from the military,
or operated such a vehicle type immediately preceding separation from
the military;
(iii) Has not simultaneously held more than one civilian license
(in addition to a military license);
(iv) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
(v) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec. 383.51(b);
(vi) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec. 383.51(c);
and
(vii) Has not had any conviction for a violation of military,
State, or local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other
than a parking violation) arising in connection with any traffic
accident, and has no record of an accident in which he/she was at
fault.
(b) Driving skills test waivers for certain current or former
military service members applying for a CDL--(1) In general. At the
discretion of a State, the driving skills test required by Sec.
383.23(a)(1), and as specified in Sec. 383.113, may be waived for a
CMV driver with military CMV experience who is currently licensed at
the time of his/her application for a CDL and substituted with an
applicant's driving record in combination with certain driving
experience.
(2) Conditions and limitations. The State shall impose conditions
and limitations to restrict the applicants from whom a State may accept
alternative requirements for the driving skills test described in Sec.
383.113. Such conditions must require at least the following:
(i) An applicant must provide evidence and certify that he/she:
(A) Is regularly employed or was regularly employed within the last
year in a military position requiring operation of a CMV;
(B) Was exempted from the CDL requirements in Sec. 383.3(c); and
(C) Was operating a vehicle representative of the CMV type the
driver applicant operates or expects to operate, for at least the 2
years immediately preceding separation from the military.
(ii) An applicant must certify that, during the 2-year period
immediately prior to applying for a CDL, he/she:
(A) Has not simultaneously held more than one civilian license (in
addition to a military license);
(B) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
(C) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec. 383.51(b);
(D) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec. 383.51(c);
and
(E) Has not had any conviction for a violation of military, State
or local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than a
parking violation) arising in connection with any traffic crash, and
has no record of a crash in which he/she was at fault.
(c) Endorsement waivers for certain current or former military
service members applying for a CLP or a CDL--(1) Passenger. For current
or former military service members, as defined in Sec. 383.5, who meet
the conditions and limitations set forth in paragraph (c)(4) of this
section, a State may waive the requirements in Sec. 383.25(a)(5)(i),
Sec. 383.93(a) and (c)(2) that an applicant must pass a driving skills
test and a specialized knowledge test, described in Sec. 383.117, for
a passenger (P) endorsement.
(2) Tank vehicle. For current or former military service members,
as defined in Sec. 383.5, who meet the conditions and limitations set
forth in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, a State may waive the
requirements in Sec. Sec. 383.25(a)(5)(iii) and 383.93(a) and (c)(3)
that an applicant must pass a specialized knowledge test, described in
Sec. 383.119, for a tank vehicle (N) endorsement.
(3) Hazardous materials. For current or former military service
members, as defined in Sec. 383.5, who meet the conditions and
limitations set forth in
[[Page 48976]]
paragraph (c)(4) of this section, a State may waive the requirements in
Sec. 383.93(a)(1) and (c)(4) that an applicant must pass a specialized
knowledge test, described in Sec. 383.121, for a hazardous materials
(H) endorsement. States must continue to meet the requirements for a
hazardous materials endorsement in subpart I of this part.
(4) Conditions and limitations. A current or former military
service member applying for waiver of the driving skills test or the
specialized knowledge test for a passenger carrier endorsement, the
knowledge test for the tank vehicle endorsement, or the knowledge test
for the hazardous materials endorsement, must certify and provide
evidence that, during the 1-year period immediately prior to the
application, he/she:
(i) Is or was regularly employed in a military position requiring
operation of a passenger CMV, if the applicant is requesting a waiver
of the knowledge and driving skills test for a passenger endorsement;
operation of a tank vehicle, if the applicant is requesting a waiver of
the knowledge test for a tank vehicle endorsement; or transportation of
hazardous materials, if the applicant is requesting a waiver of the
knowledge test for a hazardous materials endorsement;
(ii) Has not simultaneously held more than one civilian license (in
addition to a military license);
(iii) Has not had any license suspended, revoked, or cancelled;
(iv) Has not had any convictions for any type of motor vehicle for
the disqualifying offenses contained in Sec. 383.51(b);
(v) Has not had more than one conviction for any type of motor
vehicle for serious traffic violations contained in Sec. 383.51(c);
and
(vi) Has not had any conviction for a violation of military, State
or local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than a
parking violation) arising in connection with any traffic crash, and
has no record of a crash in which he/she was at fault.
0
4. Revise Sec. 383.79 to read as follows:
Sec. 383.79 Driving skills testing of out-of-State students;
knowledge and driving skills testing of military personnel.
(a) CDL applicants trained out-of-State--(1) State that administers
the driving skills test. A State may administer its driving skills
test, in accordance with subparts F, G, and H of this part, to a person
who has taken training in that State and is to be licensed in another
United States jurisdiction (i.e., his or her State of domicile). Such
test results must be transmitted electronically directly from the
testing State to the licensing State in a direct, efficient and secure
manner.
(2) The State of domicile. The State of domicile of a CDL applicant
must accept the results of a driving skills test administered to the
applicant by any other State, in accordance with subparts F, G, and H
of this part, in fulfillment of the applicant's testing requirements
under Sec. 383.71, and the State's test administration requirements
under Sec. 383.73.
(b) Active duty military service members. An active-duty military
service member may apply for a CLP or a CDL in the State where the
individual is stationed but not domiciled if the requirements of this
section are met.
(1) Role of State of duty station. (i) Upon prior agreement with
the State of domicile, a State where active-duty military service
members are stationed, but not domiciled, may accept an application for
a CLP or CDL, including an application for waiver of the knowledge test
or driving skills test prescribed in Sec. Sec. 383.23(a)(1) and
383.25(a)(3), from such a military service member who:
(A) Is regularly employed or was regularly employed within the last
year in a military position requiring operation of a CMV;
(B) Has a valid driver's license from his or her State of domicile;
(C) Has a valid active-duty military identification card; and
(D) Has a current copy of either the service member's military
leave and earnings statement, or his or her orders.
(ii) A State where active-duty military service members are
stationed, but not domiciled, may:
(A) Administer the knowledge and driving skills tests to the
military service member, as appropriate, in accordance with subparts F,
G, and H of this part, if the State of domicile requires those tests;
or
(B) Waive the knowledge and driving skills tests in accordance with
Sec. 383.77, if the State of domicile has exercised the option to
waive those tests; and
(C) Destroy the military service member's civilian driver's license
on behalf of the State of domicile, unless the latter requires the
driver's license to be surrendered to its own driver licensing agency.
(iii) The State of duty station must transmit to the State of
domicile by a direct, secure, and efficient electronic system the
completed application, any supporting documents, and--if the State of
domicile has not exercised its waiver option--the results of any
knowledge and driving skills administered.
(2) Role of State of domicile. Upon completion of the applicant's
application pursuant to Sec. 383.71 and any testing administered by
the State of duty station pursuant to Sec. Sec. 383.71 and 383.73, the
State of domicile of the military service member applying for a CLP or
CDL may:
(i) Accept the completed application, any supporting documents, and
the results of the knowledge and driving skills tests administered by
the State of duty station (unless waived at the discretion of the State
of domicile); and
(ii) Issue the applicant a CLP or CDL.
PART 384--STATE COMPLIANCE WITH COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE PROGRAM
0
5. The authority citation for part 384 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502; secs. 103
and 215 of Pub. L. 106-59, 113 Stat. 1753, 1767; sec. 32934 of Pub.
L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 5401 and 7208 of Pub. L. 114-
94, 129 Stat. 1312, 1546, 1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.
0
6. Amend Sec. 384.301 by adding paragraph (l) to read as follows:
Sec. 384.301 Substantial compliance--general requirements.
* * * * *
(l) A State must come into substantial compliance with the
requirements of subpart B of this part and part 383 of this chapter in
effect as of November 27, 2018 as soon as practicable, but, unless
otherwise specifically provided in this part, not later than November
27, 2021.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87. September 25,
2018.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-21289 Filed 9-27-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P