[Federal Register: October 26, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 207)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 66505-66595]
[DOCID:fr26oc11-33]

Vol. 76

Wednesday,

No. 207

October 26, 2011

Part IV

Department of Transportation

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

49 CFR Parts 360, 365, 366, et al.

Unified Registration System; Proposed Rule

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 360, 365, 366, 368, 385, 387, 390 and 392

[Docket No. FMCSA-97-2349]
RIN 2126-AA22

Unified Registration System

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FMCSA amends its proposal regarding establishment of the
Unified Registration System (URS) required by the ICC Termination Act
of 1995 (ICCTA) and originally announced in a May 19, 2005 notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM). URS is the replacement system for several
existing registration and information systems for motor carriers,
property brokers, and freight forwarders under FMCSA jurisdiction. This
SNPRM responds to comments to the 2005 URS NPRM, incorporates new
proposals implementing requirements imposed by final rules published
after the 2005 URS NPRM, and includes new proposals to implement
certain provisions of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The Agency
believes the proposed URS would improve the registration process for
motor carriers, property brokers, freight forwarders and other entities
that register with FMCSA.

DATES: You must submit comments on or before December 27, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID Number FMCSA-97-2349 by any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public
Participation heading under the Supplementary Information caption of
this document. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the US
Department of Transportation's DOT Privacy Act System of Records Notice
for the DOT Federal Docket Management System published in the Federal
Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit http://
edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Clemente, Transportation
Specialist, Driver and Carrier Operations Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Business hours are from 8 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation

    The Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can get electronic
submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the ``How to Use
This Site'' menu option.
    Comments received after the comment closing date will be included
in the docket and we will consider late comments to the extent
practicable. The FMCSA may, however, issue a final rule at any time
after the close of the comment period.

Preamble Table of Contents

    The following is an outline of the preamble.

I. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
II. Regulatory History
    A. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    B. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion of the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    A. New Regulatory Drafting Strategy
    B. The Proposal
IV. Regulatory Evaluation of the URS SNPRM: Summary of Benefits and
Costs
V. Appendix to the Preamble--Proposed Form MCSA-1 and Instructions
VI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

I. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    This rulemaking is in response to sec. 103 of the ICC Termination
Act of 1995 (ICCTA) [Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat. 888, December 29, 1995]
and title IV of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) [Pub. L.
109-59, 119 Stat. 1714, August 10, 2005]. This rulemaking action is
consistent with the requirements of 31 U.S.C. 9701 and 49 U.S.C.
31136(a).
    In the ICCTA, Congress enacted 49 U.S.C. 13908 directing the
Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary), in cooperation with the
States, and after notice and opportunity for public comment, to issue
regulations to replace the existing information systems listed below
with a single, online, Federal system:
    1. The current Department of Transportation (USDOT) identification
number system;
    2. The single State registration system (SSRS) under [49 U.S.C.]
section 14504;
    3. The registration system contained in 49 U.S.C. chapter 139; and
    4. The financial responsibility information system under section
13906.
    Congress also directed the Secretary to consider whether to
integrate the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 13304 regarding service of
process in court proceedings into the new system. Congress specified
that the new URS should serve as a clearinghouse and depository of
information on, and identification of, all foreign and domestic motor
carriers, property brokers, freight forwarders, and others required to
register with the USDOT as well as information on safety fitness and
compliance with required levels of financial responsibility. The
language of 49 U.S.C. 13908(c) also authorized the Secretary to
``establish, under section 9701 of title 31 [of the U.S. Code], a fee
system for registration and filing evidence of financial responsibility
under the new system under subsection (a). Fees collected under the fee
system shall cover the costs of operating and upgrading the
registration system, including all personnel costs associated with the
system.''
    The Unified Carrier Registration Act of 2005, subtitle C of title
IV of SAFETEA-LU, modified the requirements for a unified registration
system for motor carriers contained in ICCTA. In particular, SAFETEA-LU
changed the scope of the Secretary's responsibility for the development
of a registration system to replace the SSRS. It also modified the
requirement that

fees collected under the new system cover the costs of operating and
upgrading the registration system and placed limitations on certain
fees that the Agency could charge. Section 4304 of SAFETEA-LU
reiterated the congressional requirement for a single, Federal, online
system to replace the four individual systems identified under 49
U.S.C. 13908 and also mandated inclusion of the service of process
agent systems under 49 U.S.C. 503 and 13304. SAFETEA-LU refers to the
Federal online replacement system as the Unified Carrier Registration
System. The Agency considers the URS announced in the May 2005 NPRM to
be the Unified Carrier Registration System.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) Agreement mandated
under section 4305 of SAFETEA-LU (which enacted 49 U.S.C. 14504a) is
the replacement for the Single State Registration System authorized
by former 49 U.S.C. 14504. Registration and payment of fees under
the UCR Agreement are not the responsibility of FMCSA. However, as
provided by 49 U.S.C. 13908(b), information about the compliance of
entities subject to the UCR Agreement will be available through the
URS when that system has been developed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress also repealed the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 14504
governing SSRS. (SAFETEA-LU section 4305(a)).\2\ The legislative
history indicates that the purpose of the UCR Plan and Agreement is
both to ``replace the existing outdated system [SSRS]'' for
registration of interstate motor carrier entities with the States and
to ``ensure that States don't lose current revenues derived from SSRS''
(S. Rep. 109-120, at 2 (2005)).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This repeal became effective on January 1, 2007, in
accordance with section 4305(a).
    \3\ The Senate bill's provisions were enacted ``with
modifications.'' H. Conf. Rep. No. 109-203, at 1020 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The statute provided for a 15-member Board of Directors for the UCR
Plan and Agreement (Board) appointed by the Secretary of
Transportation. The statute specified that the Board should consist of
Federal, State and motor carrier industry representatives. The
establishment of the board was announced in the Federal Register on May
12, 2006 (71 FR 27777). The Board's duties include issuing rules and
regulations, recommending fee levels for the system, and designating a
revenue depository for the new system. On Friday, August 24, 2007, the
Agency published a final rule establishing initial fees for 2007 and a
fee bracket structure for the Unified Carrier Registration Agreement in
the Federal Register (72 FR 48585). The FMCSA subsequently adjusted the
UCR Agreement fees and fee bracket structure in a final rule dated
April 27, 2010 (74 FR 21993).
    SAFETEA-LU also amended several definitions that affect the
coverage of the URS, amended certain financial responsibility
requirements, and eliminated the Agency's authority to collect certain
fees. Today's proposal incorporates new requirements imposed by
SAFETEA-LU.
    Title 31 U.S.C. 9701 (the so-called ``User Fee Statute'')
establishes general authority for agencies to ``charge for a service or
thing of value provided by the Agency.'' Accordingly, FMCSA proposes to
charge fees under URS that will enable the Agency to recoup costs
associated with processing registration applications and administrative
filings. Title 49 U.S.C. 13908(d) requires establishment of
registration fees that, as nearly as possible, cover the costs of
processing the registration, provided the fees do not exceed $300.
    Section 206 of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 [Pub. L. 98-
554, title II, 98 Stat. 2832, October 30, 1985, 49 U.S.C. App. 2505,
recodified at 49 U.S.C. 31136] requires the Secretary to prescribe
regulations on commercial motor vehicle safety. The regulations shall
prescribe minimum safety standards for commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs). At a minimum, the regulations shall ensure that: (1) CMVs are
maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely; (2) the
responsibilities imposed on operators of CMVs do not impair their
ability to operate the vehicles safely; (3) the physical conditions of
operators of CMVs is adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles
safely; and (4) the operation of CMVs does not have a deleterious
effect on the physical condition of the operators (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)).
    This SNPRM is intended to streamline the existing registration
process and ensure that FMCSA can more efficiently track motor
carriers, freight forwarders, brokers, intermodal equipment providers
and cargo tank facilities. It implements the mandate under sec.
31136(a)(1) that FMCSA's regulations ensure that CMVs are maintained
and operated safely. This proposal imposes no operational
responsibilities on drivers. Therefore, this proposed regulation would
not impair a driver's ability to operate vehicles safely (sec.
31136(a)(2)), would not impact the physical condition of drivers (sec.
31136(a)(3)), and would not have a deleterious effect on the physical
condition of drivers (sec. 31136(a)(4)).

II. Regulatory History

A. Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    In response to the ICCTA mandate to develop a unified registration
system, the Federal Highway Administration (FMCSA's predecessor agency)
issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) announcing
plans to develop a single, online, Federal information system (61 FR
43816, August 26, 1996). The ANPRM solicited specific detailed
information from the public about each of the systems to be replaced by
the URS, the conceptual design of the URS, uses and users of the
information to be collected, and potential costs.

B. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On May 19, 2005, FMCSA published an NPRM describing a proposal to
merge all of the prescribed information systems except SSRS into a
unified, online, Federal system (70 FR 28990) as set forth below.
1. Entities To Be Included in the Unified Registration System
    The Agency proposed to include the following entities in the
Unified Registration system: (1) All for-hire motor carriers (including
those exempt from the 49 U.S.C. chapter 139 registration requirements),
(2) private motor carriers, (3) property brokers, and (4) freight
forwarders.
    In the NPRM, the Agency proposed to exclude the following entities
from the Unified Registration System: (1) Mexico-domiciled motor
carriers applying to engage in long-haul operations, (2) applicants for
hazardous materials safety permits to haul certain hazardous materials
under 49 CFR part 385, subpart E, and (3) cargo tank facilities
required to register with FMCSA pursuant to 49 CFR 107.502 and 49
U.S.C. 5108. The Agency requested comment on whether the unique
conditions of these entities warranted retaining separate registration
procedures and application forms or whether they also should be
included in the Unified Registration System. The Agency also solicited
information on how to most effectively integrate the systems under
consideration for merger with URS.
2. Proposed User Fees
    The Agency proposed user fees as set forth in the Table to Sec.
360.401 below:

     Table to Sec.   360.401--Unified Registration Schedule of Fees
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Registration                      You must pay FMCSA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you:
    (a) Are subject to the registration     $200.
     requirements under Sec.   360.3 and
     are requesting a new application to
     operate in interstate commerce.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Other Services
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you file a:
    (b) Biennial update of registration...  No cost.
    (c) Request for change of name,         No cost.
     address, or form of business.
    (d) Request for cancellation of         No cost.
     registration.
    (e) Request for registration            $100.
     reinstatement.
    (f) Designation of process agent......  $10.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Agency proposed fees for record searching,
reviewing, copying, certifying, and related services under Sec.
360.419(a) through (d) as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Description                              Fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Certificate of the Director, Office of   $12.
 Information Management, as to the
 authenticity of documents.
(b) Service involved in locating records to  $21 per hour.
 be certified and determining their
 authenticity, including incidental
 clerical and administrative work.
(c) Photocopies of public documents........  $.80 per letter- or legal-
                                              size page; $5 minimum.
(d) Search and copying services requiring
 automated data processing services (ADP),
 as follows:
    (1) Professional staff time to fulfill   $50 per hour.
     an ADP request.
    (2) Computer searches..................  Current rate for computer
                                              service as determined by
                                              the Office of Information
                                              Management (MC-RIS).
    (3) Printing...........................  Paper--$.10 per page with a
                                              $1 minimum; Electronic
                                              media--Agency's cost.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Financial Responsibility
Bodily Injury and Property Damage Insurance (BI & PD) Filing
Requirement
    Existing regulations prescribe minimum levels of financial
responsibility for certain motor carrier classifications. However, only
for-hire motor carriers, brokers and certain freight forwarders \4\
that are subject to the chapter 139 registration requirements must file
evidence of financial responsibility with FMCSA as a precondition to
receiving and holding chapter 139 operating authority. Evidence of
financial responsibility may be in the form of certificates of
insurance, surety bonds, proof of qualifications as a self-insurer,
endorsements, or trust agreements, as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Household goods freight forwarders performing transfer,
collection and delivery service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency proposed to retain the financial responsibility filing
requirement for these entities and to extend them to for-hire motor
carriers exempt from the chapter 139 registration requirements
(hereafter referred to as ``exempt for-hire motor carriers'') and to
private interstate motor carriers transporting hazardous materials. All
such carriers already are required by statute (49 U.S.C. 31138 and
31139) and regulations (49 CFR part 387) to obtain and maintain BI & PD
insurance. The NPRM merely proposed to require the filing of evidence
of financial responsibility with FMCSA. The Agency believes the
proposed filing requirement would provide the public with assurances
that all for-hire motor carriers and private carriers transporting
hazardous materials in interstate commerce have the financial means to
compensate members of the public for injuries or damages caused by
negligence. These filings also would increase public accessibility to
insurance information and would enable FMCSA to more effectively track
insurance cancellations.
    The filing requirement would not be extended to motor carriers
transporting hazardous materials in intrastate commerce; these carriers
would continue to maintain evidence of financial responsibility at
their principal place of business.
Web-Based Filings by Insurers, Surety Companies, and Financial
Institutions
    The Agency proposed to require financial responsibility service
providers such as insurers to file evidence of financial responsibility
using a Web-based (HTML) format. These filings would include evidence
of certificates of insurance, proof of qualification to self-insure,
endorsements, surety bonds, trust-fund agreements, household goods
(HHG) cargo insurance, and notices of cancellations. The FMCSA believes
Web-based filings will promote efficiencies for FMCSA, insurers,
sureties, financial institutions, and the public. The NPRM solicited
comment on whether the proposed mandatory Web-based filing would be a
significant burden on small insurers, surety companies, and financial
institutions. Also, the Agency invited comments, ideas and suggestions
regarding a potential phase-in approach as opposed to immediate
mandatory on-line filing.
    Cargo Insurance. The NPRM included a proposal to eliminate the
cargo insurance requirement for all entities except HHG motor carriers
and HHG

freight forwarders. Current 49 CFR 387.303(c) and 387.405(a) require
non-exempt for-hire motor common carriers of property and freight
forwarders, respectively, to maintain cargo insurance in the amount of
$5,000 per vehicle, and $10,000 per occurrence, and to file evidence of
coverage with FMCSA. Contract carriers are not subject to a requirement
to maintain or file evidence of cargo insurance. However, SAFETEA-LU
prohibited FMCSA from registering motor carriers as ``common'' or
``contract'' carriers, effective January 1, 2007. The Agency proposed
to eliminate the cargo insurance requirement for all entities except
HHG carriers and HHG freight forwarders based on the assumption that
most for-hire motor carriers and freight forwarders carry cargo
insurance well above FMCSA limits because their shipper clients
generally require it as a condition of doing business. However the
Agency deemed it in the public interest to retain the cargo insurance
requirement for household goods motor carriers and household goods
freight forwarders.
    Self-Insurance Program. The Agency proposed several changes to the
self-insurance program, including changes to the fees charged to
applicants seeking approval to self-insure and changes to the fees
associated with annual and quarterly reporting by entities approved to
self-insure. The Agency announced that it would continue its practice
of processing and approving each motor carrier self-insurance
application on a case-by-case basis.
    Insurance Filing Fees. The Agency proposed insurance filing fees as
set forth in the Table to Sec.  360.415(b):

            Table to Sec.   360.415(b)--Insurance Filing Fees
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Financial responsibility service provider filing                 $10
 evidence of minimum level of insurance, surety bond,
 or trust fund agreement..............................
(2) Qualification as a self-insurer for bodily injury,             4,200
 property damage, or environmental restoration........
(3) Qualification as a self-insurer for cargo                        420
 insurance............................................
(4) Quarterly self-insurance monitoring filing........               500
(5) Annual self-insurance monitoring filing...........             (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No cost.

4. Process Agent Designations
    Current regulations under 49 CFR part 366 require only motor
carriers and brokers that are subject to the 49 U.S.C. chapter 139
commercial registration requirements to designate a process agent.\5\
Today exempt for-hire motor carriers are not subject to FMCSA
commercial regulations and thus are not required to designate a process
agent. Heretofore, the Agency has not exercised the authority granted
under 49 U.S.C. 503 to require private carriers to designate a process
agent. However, in the May 2005 NPRM, the Agency proposed to require
new and existing private and exempt for-hire motor carriers and freight
forwarders to make process agent designation filings with FMCSA.
Additionally, private motor carriers that operate in the United States
in the course of transportation between points in a foreign country
would need to file process agent designations with the Agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Although part 366 does not require process agent
designations by freight forwarders, designation of agents for
service of process by freight forwarders in connection with Agency
proceedings is required under 49 U.S.C. 13303. Consequently, the
Agency has required such designations by freight forwarders
notwithstanding the omission of freight forwarders in part 366. The
Agency proposed to add freight forwarders to part 366 to fully
implement section 13303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FMCSA concluded that extending the requirement to all URS
registrants would enhance the public's ability to serve legal process
on responsible individuals when seeking compensation for losses
resulting from a crash involving a commercial motor vehicle operated by
private or exempt for-hire motor carriers. Moreover, FMCSA would be
better able to identify among all of its regulated entities the
appropriate individual(s) upon whom to serve notices for enforcement
actions.
5. Timeframes for Evidence of Financial Responsibility and Process
Agent Designation Filings
    The Agency proposed to increase to 90 days the maximum time allowed
for an applicant to submit evidence of financial responsibility and to
designate a process agent (Sec. Sec.  360.13(a)(6) \6\ and (a)(7)).
Failure to make these filings within 90 days of applying for
registration would result in dismissal of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The May 2005 NPRM incorrectly included two paragraphs (a)(6)
under Sec.  360.13. This statement cross references the second
paragraph (a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Existing regulations already provide up to 80 days for these
filings. Today agents must file evidence of financial responsibility on
behalf of non-exempt for-hire motor carriers, brokers and freight
forwarders within 20 days of the date of publication of the application
in the FMCSA Register (published on the Agency Web site at http://
www.fmcsa.dot.gov). If the filings are not completed within the 20-day
period, FMCSA issues a dismissal warning and may grant a one-time 60-
day grace period.
    The Agency stated that a 90-day filing period for these
administrative filings more realistically reflects the actual time
necessary to arrange insurance and process agent coverage. The NPRM
included a proposal that administrative filings be completed within 90
days after submission of the Form MCSA-1, with no further extensions.
If either the insurance or process agent filings were not completed
within this 90-day period, the Agency would dismiss the registration
request.
    In addition, the Agency proposed a 180-day grace period for the
newly required administrative filings by existing exempt for-hire and
covered private motor carriers.
6. USDOT Number as the Sole Identifier for Entities Registered in URS
    At the time of publication of the NPRM, FMCSA registration systems
used five identification numbers: (1) The USDOT Number; (2) the MC
Number (assigned to non-exempt for-hire motor carriers and brokers
registering under 49 U.S.C. chapter 139); (3) the FF Number (assigned
to freight forwarders); (4) the MX Number (assigned to Mexico-domiciled
motor carriers operating exclusively within municipalities in the
United States on the U.S.-Mexico international border and the
commercial zones of such municipalities; and (5) cargo tank facility
(CT) numbers. The Agency proposed to discontinue issuing MC, MX, and FF
Number designations and to phase out the use of current MC, MX, and FF
Numbers within 2 years of the compliance date for the URS final rule.
Thus, the USDOT Number would become the sole identification number for
all entities registered by FMCSA (except for cargo tank facilities).
This unique USDOT Number would be

displayed on the side of the vehicle pursuant to the CMV marking
requirement in 49 CFR 390.21. The FMCSA would issue a USDOT Number with
a distinctive suffix to any Mexico-domiciled motor carrier granted
registration.
7. The Application Process
    The Agency proposed under subpart A to part 360 a new multi-step
application process and procedures for issuance of a USDOT Number under
which an applicant would begin the registration process by filing a
completed Form MCSA-1 and paying the registration fee. If the Agency
accepted the Form MCSA-1 application, it would assign a temporary
number to track the application through the registration process and
enable registrants to make required administrative filings. The
applicant's financial responsibility agent would use the tracking
number to file evidence of compliance with FMCSA financial
responsibility requirements under 49 CFR part 387; the motor carrier or
its agent also would use the temporary tracking number to make a
process agent designation filing. An applicant would be prohibited from
commencing operations until the Agency issues a USDOT Number and grants
registration.
    Upon receipt of the USDOT Number, a motor carrier applicant would
be considered a ``new entrant'' and placed under the appropriate safety
monitoring program. A U.S.- or Canada-domiciled motor carrier would be
subject to the FMCSA New Entrant Safety Assurance Program described
under 49 CFR part 385, subpart D, which includes a safety audit. The
provisional registration is the new entrant registration defined at 49
CFR 385.3. New entrant registration for these motor carriers would
become permanent only if the applicant satisfactorily completed the New
Entrant Safety Assurance Program. Similarly, to receive permanent
registration, a Mexico-domiciled new entrant operating exclusively
within the border commercial zones would be required to satisfactorily
complete the safety monitoring program and safety audit described under
49 CFR part 385, subpart B. Motor carrier operating authority obtained
under the procedures in 49 CFR part 365 would not become permanent
until an applicant operating commercial motor vehicles satisfactorily
completed the New Entrant Safety Assurance Program.
Special procedures for chapter 139 brokers, freight forwarders or motor
carriers
    Current registration procedures in 49 U.S.C. 13902 allow anyone to
oppose a request for permanent operating authority by non-exempt for-
hire motor carriers, property brokers, and freight forwarders, provided
the protest is based upon the applicant's willingness and ability to
comply with: (1) The registration procedures; (2) applicable DOT
regulations, including the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs), Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMRs) and regulations
implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); (3) the safety
fitness standards; and/or (4) the financial responsibility
requirements. The proposed unified registration system would continue
to allow protests for applications covered under section 13902, but
would not extend the right of protest to applications for registration
filed by private motor carriers or exempt for-hire motor carriers.
    In accordance with section 13902, FMCSA must notify the public when
applications for authority are under consideration and provide an
opportunity for protest. Upon acceptance of an application for
registration from a chapter 139 entity, FMCSA would publish notice of
the application in the FMCSA Register, initiating a 10-day protest
period. The Agency would issue the applicant a temporary tracking
number for the purpose of completing administrative filings and
tracking the application through the registration process. If the
Agency denied an application based on a protest, the application would
be dismissed, and the registration fee would not be refunded.
    If the application of a broker or freight forwarder is not
protested or if insufficient grounds exist to deny a protested
application, the Agency would issue a USDOT Number and grant permanent
registration. Brokers and freight forwarders are not subject to a
safety monitoring program.
    If the application of a non-exempt motor carrier is not protested,
or if insufficient grounds exist to deny a protested application, FMCSA
would grant the applicant new entrant registration subject to
completion of applicable administrative requirements. New entrant
registration would become permanent registration only after
satisfactory completion of the New Entrant Safety Assurance Program.
8. The Proposed Application Form (MCSA-1)
    The FMCSA proposed to combine the data elements now captured on
several different licensing, registration and certification forms into
a single, new application form called the Form MCSA-1. For those
entities subject to URS, Form MCSA-1 would replace the following forms:
(1) Motor Carrier Identification Report (Application for USDOT Number),
Form MCS-150; (2) Application for Motor Property Carrier and Broker
Authority, Form OP-1; (3) Application for Motor Passenger Carrier
Authority, Form OP-1(P); (4) Application for Freight Forwarder
Authority, Form OP-1(FF); and (5) Application for Mexican Certificate
of Registration for Foreign Motor Carriers and Foreign Motor Private
Carriers Under 49 U.S.C. 13902, Form OP-2. The NPRM also invited
comments on whether the URS should incorporate the data requirements of
three other registration processes: (1) Registration of Mexico-
domiciled motor carriers seeking to operate between points in Mexico
and points in the United States beyond the border commercial zones,
Form OP-1(MX); (2) registration of entities requesting a hazardous
materials safety permit, Form MCS-150B; and (3) registration of cargo
tank facilities (which is requested in a letter submitted by the
applicant to FMCSA).
9. Electronic Filing Requirement With Paper Filing Option
    The FMCSA proposed an online electronic application process with a
paper filing option. The Agency requested comments on the benefits or
hardships applicants might experience from a mandatory online
electronic filing requirement. The Agency also asked whether it should
immediately require online electronic filing or provide a phase-in
period. The FMCSA noted several factors in support of an online filing
requirement:
     There is widespread public access to computers and the
Internet;
     In 2005 when the Agency published the NPRM, more than 70
percent of U.S. motor carriers had Internet access, with Internet
access clearly increasing;
     Automated error-checking would result in more accurate
information about the applicant;
     Online filing would allow USDOT Numbers to be issued
faster, substantially reducing the current 2- to 4-week paper-based
processing time for registration applications; and
     Online filing would be more cost-effective for FMCSA than
manually processing applications.

10. Biennial Update Requirement
    The FMCSA proposed to require biennial updates using proposed Form
MCSA-1 by all motor carriers, brokers and freight forwarders. Passenger
and property motor carriers, freight forwarders, and property brokers
would have to file regular updates to their registration information
every 24 months. At the time the URS NPRM was published (May 19, 2005),
existing Sec.  390.19 required only safety registration information
filed on Form MCS-150 or Form MCS-150-B to be updated. There was no
requirement for non-exempt for-hire motor carriers, property brokers,
and freight forwarders to biennially update commercial registration
information. In the May 2005 NPRM, the Agency explained that since the
Form MCSA-1 would combine safety and commercial registration for most
motor carriers, FMCSA had preliminarily concluded it is reasonable to
extend the biennial update requirement to all motor carriers subject to
FMCSA's commercial and safety jurisdiction. As a result, all motor
carriers, property brokers, and freight forwarders would need to file
biennial updates. The registration updates would provide valuable motor
carrier and fleet information and would be useful in assessing safety
performance. A motor carrier that registers its vehicles in a
Performance and Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM)
Program State would fulfill the biennial update through its annual
State re-registration requirement.
11. Transfers of Operating Authority
    Existing 49 CFR part 365, subpart D, permits non-exempt for-hire
motor carriers, brokers and freight forwarders that register under
chapter 139 to merge, transfer or lease their operating authority
(indicated by an MC or FF Number), and establishes procedures for
Agency approval of these transactions. Currently, these entities are
required to file transfer applications with FMCSA and pay a $300 fee.
    The Agency determined that in enacting the ICCTA, Congress repealed
pre-existing statutory authority to approve transfers of operating
authority (former 49 U.S.C. 10926). Accordingly, the Agency proposed to
discontinue regulation of transfers of operating authority and to
remove 49 CFR part 365, subpart D, governing such transfers from the
FMCSRs.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ FMCSA (then part of the Federal Highway Administration)
initially proposed removal of the transfer regulations in a February
13, 1998 NPRM (63 FR 7362). On May 16, 2001, FMCSA published a
notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 27059) announcing the
withdrawal of the February 1998 NPRM with the intention of
addressing the transfer issue in the URS rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FMCSA proposed to issue only a USDOT Number as an indicator of
operating authority. Issuance of MC, MX, and FF Numbers would be
discontinued. Unlike chapter 139 certificates and permits, which have
traditionally been considered transferable motor carrier assets, a
USDOT Number is a unique identifier used to monitor a carrier's safety
performance. As such, the USDOT Number never has been subject to
transfer.
    Under the proposal, the Agency would permit retention of an
existing USDOT Number in a situation where an entity changed its legal
name, form of business, or address, provided that there was no change
in the ownership, management, or control of the entity. Thus, the USDOT
Number could be retained following a change in the legal name of a sole
proprietorship, corporation, or partnership; a change in the trade name
or assumed name of an entity; and a change in the form of a business,
such as the incorporation of a partnership or sole proprietorship. The
Agency proposed that all entities requesting a change in legal name,
form of business, or address be required to fill out a revised Form
MCSA-1 within 20 days of the precipitating change with a certification
that there had been no change in the ownership, management, or control
of the entity holding the USDOT Number. Such a certification would have
addressed whether the change in name, form of business, or address was
associated with a transfer of the operating authority.
12. Cancellation, Reinstatement, and Deactivation of USDOT Registration
    Under existing procedures, if a motor carrier, broker or freight
forwarder whose operations are authorized under 49 U.S.C. chapter 139
wishes to voluntarily cancel its operating authority, it must submit a
notarized Form OCE-46, ``Voluntary Revocation Request,'' or
electronically file its request. In the May 2005 NPRM, the Agency
proposed to replace the voluntary revocation request procedure with the
procedure now used by motor carriers requesting to discontinue use of a
USDOT Number. Motor carriers would be required to mail or
electronically submit to the Agency a cancellation request and
certification statement under proposed Sec.  360.701. Use of the Form
OCE-46 would be discontinued.
    Under proposed Sec.  360.705, FMCSA would deactivate a motor
carrier's USDOT Registration if the carrier failed to comply with the
financial responsibility and process agent filing requirements.
    Under proposed Sec.  360.707, a motor carrier, broker or freight
forwarder could reinstate a USDOT Registration that had been
deactivated for less than 2 years by making the necessary filings and
paying a reinstatement fee. If the USDOT Registration had been
deactivated for 2 or more years, the entity would need to request the
Agency to activate its USDOT Registration (under the previously-issued
USDOT Number) by completing the procedures in proposed subpart A to
part 360, including payment of a registration fee. A motor carrier that
sought to reinstate its USDOT Registration after 2 years of being
deactivated would be classified as a new entrant.
    In setting the proposed threshold for reclassification of a carrier
as a new entrant at 2 years, the Agency sought to prevent carriers that
go in and out of business for very short periods of time from being
required to re-enter the New Entrant Safety Assurance Program. The 2-
year threshold also would parallel the existing 2-year update
requirement for motor carrier information.
13. Requirements for Special Transit Operations (Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) Grantees)
    The Agency proposed to include under URS passenger carriers that
provide service funded, in whole or in part, by a grant from the FTA
under 49 U.S.C. 5307, 5310, or 5311. (49 U.S.C. 31138(e)(4)). These
motor carriers currently are exempt from Federal financial
responsibility requirements but must comply with the highest minimum
requirement imposed by any State in which they operate. The Agency
proposed to waive all fees for FTA grantees, including the registration
fee, insurance filing fee, and any fees related to the self-insurance
approval process. It also proposed amending 49 CFR part 387 to reflect
the financial responsibility requirements unique to FTA grantees.

III. Discussion of the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. New Regulatory Drafting Strategy

    The Agency proposes in the SNPRM to use a different regulatory
drafting strategy than earlier proposed. The FMCSA would not at this
time attempt to combine and redraft within a single CFR part the
diverse application and program requirements as proposed in the May
2005 URS NPRM. Instead, the Agency proposes an incremental approach
that would establish a general

requirement under 49 CFR part 390, subpart C, for all entities under
FMCSA safety or commercial jurisdiction to obtain USDOT Registration.
USDOT Registration encompasses all registration requirements for FMCSA
regulated entities, including the identification of motor carriers and
intermodal equipment providers for safety oversight, as required under
49 U.S.C. 31144, commercial registration required under 49 U.S.C.
chapter 139, hazardous materials safety permitting required under 49
U.S.C. 5109, and cargo tank facility registration required under 49 CFR
107.502 and 49 U.S.C. 5108. Existing 49 CFR part 390, subpart C, which
includes in-depth information governing intermodal equipment providers,
would be re-designated as subpart D to part 390.
    Fee schedules would remain under 49 CFR part 360, and information
regarding designation of process agents would remain under 49 CFR part
366.
    Conforming amendments would be made to parts 360, 365, 366, 368,
and 385 to replace references to obsolete forms in the OP- and MCS-
series with references to proposed Form MCSA-1, the Application for
USDOT Number/Operating Authority.
    The new regulatory strategy is necessary because registration
requirements vary widely among those entities regulated by FMCSA.
Although Congress directed the Secretary to combine several distinct
information systems into a new on-line replacement system, it did not
direct that there be uniform requirements for all entities under FMCSA
jurisdiction. For example, not all of the entities subject to FMCSA
safety oversight are subject to its commercial jurisdiction under 49
U.S.C. chapter 139 and thus required to obtain certificates, permits
and licenses granted to motor carriers, brokers and freight forwarders,
respectively. For this reason, the Unified Registration System would
need to accommodate these distinctions as long as they exist.

B. The Proposal

    The comment period for the May 2005 URS NPRM closed on August 17,
2005. The FMCSA received a total of 60 comment submissions to the
docket from 58 entities, including State and local government agencies,
motor carriers, industry trade associations, enforcement associations,
safety advocates, and private citizens. Most comments supported
creation of a unified registration system. Because the Agency is
soliciting additional comments on modifications made to the NPRM, we
will not, at this point in the proceeding, address all comments
received. Comments will be discussed if they have resulted in changes
to the Agency's original proposal. A more detailed response to comments
received to both the NPRM and this SNPRM will be included in the
preamble to the final URS rule.
    Major proposals carried over from the 2005 NPRM to this SNPRM
include the following:
     The URS would combine (1) the USDOT identification number
system; (2) the Title 49, chapter 139 commercial registration system;
and (3) the 49 U.S.C. 13906 financial responsibility information system
into a new single, online system. In accordance with section 4304 of
SAFETEA-LU, the Agency also proposes inclusion of the service of
process agent designation system in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 503 and
13304.
     All regulated entities would be required to update
registration information every 2 years.
     All entities registered under URS would be identified by
FMCSA solely by the USDOT Number. Motor carriers could continue to use
obsolete MC Numbers for business and advertising reasons, and the
Agency would not require a motor carrier to remove the existing MC
Number from its vehicles. But the Agency encourages motor carriers to
refrain from displaying the MC Number on new or repainted CMVs once the
rule becomes final.
     The Agency would no longer accept or review requests for
transfers of operating authority.
     All existing private motor carriers that transport
hazardous materials in interstate commerce would be required to
maintain and file evidence of financial responsibility with the Agency.
There would be at least a 3-month moratorium on enforcement of the
filing requirement after the effective date of the rule. The moratorium
would not apply to new entrants.
1. Single State Registration System (SSRS)
    Although numerous commenters addressed SSRS issues, section 4305 of
SAFETEA-LU repealed the SSRS and placed responsibility for developing
an SSRS replacement system with the Unified Carrier Registration Plan
(UCR Plan). Under Section 4305(b) of SAFETEA-LU, the UCR Plan is the
organization responsible for developing, implementing, and
administering the Unified Carrier Registration Agreement (49 U.S.C.
14504a(a)(9)) (UCR Agreement). The UCR Agreement developed by the UCR
Plan is the ``interstate agreement governing the collection and
distribution of registration and financial responsibility information
provided and fees paid by motor carriers, motor private carriers,
brokers, freight forwarders and leasing companies * * *.'' (49 U.S.C.
14504a(a)(8)).
    The statute provides for a 15-member Board of Directors for the UCR
Plan and Agreement (Board) appointed by the Secretary of
Transportation, only one of whom shall be from the Department of
Transportation. The remaining Board members represent State agencies
and the motor carrier industry. The establishment of the Board was
announced in the Federal Register on May 12, 2006 (71 FR 27777).
    The Board is charged with developing regulations governing the UCR
Agreement and recommends the applicable fees to the Secretary of
Transportation.\8\ The FMCSA is required by SAFETEA-LU to set the fees
within 90 days after receiving the Board's recommendation and after
notice and opportunity for public comment (49 U.S.C. 14504a(d)(7)(B)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Secretary's functions under section 14504a have been
delegated to the Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration. 49 CFR 1.73(a)(7), as amended, 71 FR 30833 (May 31,
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FMCSA described the statutory requirements in detail in an NPRM
published on May 29, 2007 (72 FR 29472). On Friday, August 24, 2007,
the Agency published a final rule establishing initial fees for 2007
and a fee bracket structure for the Unified Carrier Registration
Agreement in the Federal Register (72 FR 48585). The FMCSA subsequently
adjusted the UCR Agreement fees and fee bracket structure in a final
rule dated April 27, 2010 (74 FR 21993).
    For reasons stated in Section I of this SNPRM, development of the
replacement system for the SSRS is no longer addressed under the URS
rulemaking.
2. Entities Subject to the URS Registration Requirement
    Except as noted below, the Agency proposes to require all entities
which are under FMCSA commercial or safety jurisdiction to register
under the Unified Registration System using proposed Form MCSA-1.
Section 4304 of SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 13908(b) to require the
Federal on-line replacement system to ``serve as a clearinghouse and
depository of information on, and identification of, all foreign and
domestic motor carriers, motor private carriers, brokers, freight
forwarders, and others required to register with the Department of
Transportation * * *.'' The FMCSA

interprets this statute as authorizing the inclusion of all entities
regulated by FMCSA in the Unified Registration System.
    Accordingly, proposed 49 CFR 390.101 would establish a general
requirement for all regulated entities, except Mexico-domiciled motor
carriers seeking authority to operate beyond the border commercial
zones (Mexico-domiciled long-haul carriers), to obtain USDOT
Registration by filing proposed Form MCSA-1 and to provide FMCSA
biennial updates of the registration information.
    Under proposed Sec.  390.102, a motor carrier that registers its
vehicles in a State that participates in the Performance and
Registration Information Systems Management program (PRISM)
alternatively could satisfy the USDOT registration and biennial update
requirements in Sec.  390.101 by electronically filing the required
information with the State Driver Licensing Agency (SDLA) according to
its policies and procedures, provided the SDLA has integrated the USDOT
registration/update capability into its vehicle registration program.
If State procedures do not allow a motor carrier to file the MCSA-1
form or to submit updates within the required 24-month window, the
motor carrier would need to complete such filings directly with FMCSA.
    Proposed Sec.  390.103 would require all for-hire motor carriers
and private motor carriers that transport hazardous materials in
interstate commerce, as well as brokers and freight forwarders, to file
evidence of financial responsibility to receive USDOT Registration.
    Although seven comments supported the inclusion of Mexico-domiciled
long-haul carriers in the unified system, the Agency does not propose
to include such carriers at this time. In September 2007, FMCSA began
registering Mexico-domiciled long-haul carriers under a limited-term
cross-border demonstration project in which participation by Mexican
carriers was voluntary. This program was discontinued in March 2009,
following enactment of section 136 of the Transportation, Housing and
Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009
[Division I, title I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Public
Law 111-8, March 11, 2009], which prohibited the use of funds
appropriated in that Act to establish, implement, continue, promote, or
in any way permit a cross-border demonstration program. Subsequent to
enactment of section 136, Congress has not enacted any language that
prohibits funding for a new cross-border demonstration program.
Currently, FMCSA and USDOT are working closely with the Government of
Mexico to implement a new phased-in long-haul cross border trucking
program. FMCSA's experiences in implementing this new program will be
important in assessing the need to propose further changes in the
unified program at a future date. The applicable procedures governing
transportation by Mexico-domiciled motor carriers beyond the
municipalities and commercial zones along the United States-Mexico
international border remain 49 CFR part 365, subpart E, 49 CFR part
385, subpart B, and 49 CFR 390.19.
    Proposed Sec.  390.105 would list, and provide cross-references to,
other governing regulations that are applicable to those requesting
USDOT Registration. For-hire and private motor carriers, brokers and
freight forwarders additionally would be required to designate a
process agent as a pre-condition for receiving USDOT Registration and
commercial operating authority, when applicable. U.S. and Canada-
domiciled motor carriers must satisfactorily complete the new entrant
safety assurance program under 49 CFR part 385, subpart D in order for
their USDOT Registration and commercial operating authority, if
applicable, to become permanent. A Mexico-domiciled motor carrier is
subject to the safety monitoring system under 49 CFR part 385, subpart
B. A non-North America-domiciled motor carrier is subject to the
requirements of 49 CFR part 385, subpart H, and must complete the
safety monitoring program under 49 CFR part 385, subpart I. An
intermodal equipment provider is subject to the requirements of 49 CFR
part 390, subpart D. A person who applies for a hazardous materials
safety permit is subject to the requirements of 49 CFR part 385,
subpart E. A cargo tank facility is subject to the requirements of 49
CFR part 107, subpart F, 49 CFR part 172, subpart H, and 49 CFR part
180.
    Finally, Sec.  390.107 would direct a non-North America-domiciled
motor carrier that requests authority to conduct interstate commerce
within the United States to Sec.  385.607(a) for detailed information
about the requirement to complete a pre-authorization safety audit as a
pre-condition for receiving USDOT Registration and commercial operating
authority, if applicable.
    By placing the unified registration requirement under part 390,
FMCSA State partners that participate in the Motor Carrier Safety
Assistance Program would be able to enforce the registration
requirement consistent with the compatibility requirements under 49 CFR
parts 350 and 355.
    All entities required to register under URS are listed in the chart
below:

                       Entities Required To Register Under the Unified Registration System
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Entity                                                Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A for hire or private motor carrier
 domiciled in the U.S., Canada, Mexico
 or a non-North American country:
    a. For-hire carrier................  A person engaged in the transportation of goods or passengers for
                                          compensation.
        i. Exempt......................  A person engaged in transportation exempt from commercial regulation by
                                          the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) under 49
                                          U.S.C. chapter 135. Exempt motor carriers that operate commercial
                                          motor vehicles as defined in 49 U.S.C. 31101 are subject to the safety
                                          regulations set forth in Part B of Subtitle VI of subchapter B of
                                          Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations.
        ii. Non-exempt.................  A person engaged in transportation subject to commercial regulation by
                                          the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) under 49
                                          U.S.C. chapter 139, regardless of whether such transportation is
                                          subject to the safety regulations.
    b. Private carrier.................  A person who provides transportation of property or passengers, by
                                          commercial motor vehicle, and is not a for-hire motor carrier.
2. Broker..............................  A person who, for compensation, arranges, or offers to arrange, the
                                          transportation of property by a non-exempt for-hire motor carrier.

3. Freight forwarder...................  A person holding itself out to the general public (other than as an
                                          express, pipeline, rail, sleeping car, motor, or water carrier) to
                                          provide transportation of property for compensation in interstate
                                          commerce, and in the ordinary course of its business: (1) performs or
                                          provides for assembling, consolidating, break-bulk, and distribution
                                          of shipments; (2) assumes responsibility for transportation from place
                                          of receipt to destination; and (3) uses for any part of the
                                          transportation a carrier subject to FMCSA commercial jurisdiction.
4. Intermodal equipment provider.......  A person that interchanges intermodal equipment with a motor carrier
                                          pursuant to a written interchange agreement or has a contractual
                                          responsibility for the maintenance of the intermodal equipment.
5. Hazardous Materials Safety Permit     A motor carrier that transports in interstate or intrastate commerce
 applicant.                               any of the hazardous materials, in the quantity indicated for each,
                                          listed under 49 CFR 385.403.
6. Cargo tank facility.................  A cargo tank and cargo tank motor vehicle manufacturer, assembler,
                                          repairer, inspector, tester, and design certifying engineer subject to
                                          registration requirements under 49 CFR 107.502 and 49 U.S.C. 5108.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Proposed User Fees
    The Agency sets forth under Sec.  360.3(f) proposed registration,
insurance filing and other services fees as follows.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Type of proceeding                                       Fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I: Registration:
    (1).......................  An application for      $300.
                                 USDOT Registration
                                 pursuant to 49 CFR
                                 part 390, subpart C.
    (2).......................  An application for      $100.
                                 motor carrier
                                 temporary authority
                                 issued in response to
                                 a national emergency
                                 or natural disaster
                                 and following an
                                 emergency declaration
                                 under Sec.   390.23
                                 of this subchapter.
    (3).......................  Biennial update of      $0.
                                 registration.
    (4).......................  Request for change of   $0.
                                 name, address, or
                                 form of business.
    (5).......................  Request for             $0.
                                 cancellation of
                                 registration.
    (6).......................  Request for             $10.
                                 registration
                                 reinstatement.
    (7).......................  Designation of process  $0.
                                 agent.
Part II: Insurance:
    (8).......................  A service fee for       $10 per accepted
                                 insurer, surety, or     certificate,
                                 self-insurer accepted   surety bond or
                                 certificate of          other
                                 insurance, surety       instrument
                                 bond, and other         submitted in
                                 instrument submitted    lieu of a
                                 in lieu of a broker     broker surety
                                 surety bond.            bond.
    (9).......................  (i) An application for  [Reserved].
                                 original
                                 qualification as self-
                                 insurer for bodily
                                 injury and property
                                 damage insurance
                                 (BI&PD).
                                (ii) An application     [Reserved].
                                 for original
                                 qualification as self-
                                 insurer for cargo
                                 insurance.
                                (iii) Fee for           [Reserved].
                                 quarterly self-
                                 insurance monitoring
                                 filing.
                                (iv) Fee for annual     [Reserved].
                                 self-insurance
                                 monitoring filing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency proposes a $300 registration fee for all registered
entities. Please refer to the discussion of the proposed new
registration fee under ``IV. Regulatory Evaluation of the URS SNPRM:
Summary of Benefits and Costs'' of the preamble for an explanation of
the basis for this proposal. The FMCSA proposes to charge a $10
registration reinstatement fee for those seeking to reinstate USDOT
registration as a result of failure to maintain required financial
responsibility and process agent designation filings with the Agency.
The FMCSA also proposes to change the fee currently charged for
reinstating commercial operating authority after such authority has
been revoked from $80 to $10. After completion of required filings
(financial responsibility or process agent designation) and payment of
the reinstatement fee, the information system would match up the
payment with the filings and automatically issue a reinstatement letter
at 5:00 am on the next business day. Section 360.3(f)(7) would
eliminate the existing $10 process agent designation filing fee because
section 4304 of SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 13908(d)(2) to prohibit
the Agency from charging a fee for filing designation of an agent for
service of process.
    The Agency proposes under Sec.  360.1(e)(1) to exempt any Agency of
the Federal Government or a State government or any political
subdivision of any such government from paying the fees listed in Sec.
360.3(f) to access or retrieve URS data for its own use. Proposed
paragraph (e)(2) would exempt any registered entity within URS from
paying fees to access or retrieve its own data.
4. Financial Responsibility
Bodily Injury and Property Damage Insurance
    For-hire motor carriers. Existing regulations require only non-
exempt for-hire motor carriers to file evidence of financial
responsibility with the Agency. The NPRM included a proposal to require
both exempt and non-exempt for-hire motor carriers to file evidence of
financial responsibility with the Agency as a precondition to receiving
registration. Section 4303(b) of SAFETEA-LU amended financial security
requirements under 49 U.S.C. 13906 by requiring ``all persons, other
than a motor private carrier, registered with the Secretary to provide
transportation or service as a motor

carrier under section 13905(b)'' to file evidence of financial
responsibility with the Agency by December 10, 2005. The Agency
believes amended 49 U.S.C. 13906 mandates financial responsibility
filings by all for-hire motor carriers. Therefore, the Agency retains
its proposal for such filings to be required as a precondition for
registration under proposed Sec. Sec.  390.103(a)(2)(i) and 387.303
    Private motor carriers hauling hazardous materials. The SNPRM
retains under Sec.  390.103(a)(2)(ii) the proposal that a private motor
carrier hauling hazardous materials in interstate commerce be required
to file evidence of financial responsibility with the Agency to receive
registration. However, a private motor carrier hauling hazardous
materials in bulk in intrastate commerce would continue to be required
to meet the financial responsibility requirements under 49 CFR part 387
and maintain evidence of having met the financial responsibility
requirements at its principal place of business.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The statutory authority to require motor private carriers to
file evidence of insurance with FMCSA is codified at 49 U.S.C.
31139(c). This authority expressly applies to minimum levels of
financial responsibility established by the Secretary under 49
U.S.C. 31139(b). Section 31139(b) only applies to financial
responsibility requirements for transportation in interstate
commerce. Although the Secretary has other authority, in 49 U.S.C.
31139(d), to establish minimum levels of financial responsibility
for intrastate transportation of hazardous materials, section
31139(d) does not authorize the Secretary to require that evidence
of such insurance be filed with FMCSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Private motor carriers not hauling hazardous materials. Initially,
section 4120(a)(1) of SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 31138(a) and
31139(b)(1) to remove the phrase ``for compensation'' from the statutes
governing financial responsibility and filing of evidence of financial
responsibility with the Agency, thereby creating a financial
responsibility requirement for private motor carriers, which the Agency
was required to implement through rulemaking. Section 4120(a)(2) stated
the Agency could require a private non-hazardous materials motor
carrier to file evidence of financial responsibility with FMCSA.
Section 305(a) of the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act of 2008
[Pub. L. 110-244, 122 Stat. 1619-1620, June 6, 2008] amended section
31138 by limiting the Secretary's authority to establish minimum levels
of financial responsibility for private motor carriers of passengers to
those carriers transporting passengers for commercial purposes.
    The Agency anticipates that a proposal regarding financial
responsibility for private non-hazardous materials motor carriers would
generate major interest from the private motor carrier community and
might cause a significant delay in completing the URS rulemaking.
Consequently, FMCSA has decided to address the financial responsibility
requirements for private non-hazardous material motor carriers in a
separate rulemaking from URS.
    Brokers and freight forwarders. Brokers and freight forwarders
would be required under proposed Sec.  390.103(a)(2) to file evidence
of financial responsibility as a pre-condition to registration. This
requirement includes only those freight forwarders that perform
transfer, collection and delivery service (i.e., operate a motor
vehicle). Under the existing regulations, only HHG freight forwarders
performing transfer, collection and delivery service are subject to
this requirement. These regulations were transferred without change
from the Interstate Commerce Commission following enactment of the
ICCTA, which re-regulated general commodities freight forwarders.
However, the regulations were not amended to reflect the Agency's
broadened jurisdiction. The FMCSA believes there is no basis to limit
the requirement to HHG freight forwarders and therefore proposes to
extend this requirement to all freight forwarders.
Restoration of Liability Insurance Requirements for Small Freight
Vehicles
    Section 4120 of SAFETEA-LU removed FMCSA's commercial jurisdiction
over for-hire transportation of property in motor vehicles that did not
meet the definition of commercial motor vehicle (CMV) under 49 U.S.C.
31132. Consequently, the Agency removed former 49 CFR 387.303(b)(1)(i),
which established minimum public liability limits of $300,000 for
fleets that consisted only of vehicles with Gross Vehicle Weight
Ratings of under 10,000 pounds.\10\ The SAFETEA-LU Technical
Corrections Act of 2008 restored the Agency's commercial jurisdiction
over these vehicles. Accordingly, the Agency proposes to restore former
Sec.  387.303(b)(1)(i) with one minor change, revising 10,000 pounds to
10,001 pounds to be consistent with the statutory definition of CMV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 72 FR 55697, 55702 (October 1, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cargo Insurance. Section 4303(c) of SAFETEA-LU required the Agency
to discontinue designating operating authority as common or contract
carriage beginning January 1, 2007. The FMCSA concluded that because
the cargo insurance requirement is tied to the common/contract
distinction, and because we no longer may distinguish between common
and contract carriers in the Agency's registration process or base any
regulations upon that distinction, it was important to address the
cargo insurance issue as quickly as possible. Consequently, the Agency
published a separate final rule eliminating the cargo insurance
requirement for for-hire motor carriers of property (except household
goods motor carriers) and freight forwarders (except household goods
freight forwarders), effective March 21, 2011 (75 FR 35318, June 22,
2010). The preamble to that final rule addressed the comments filed in
this proceeding regarding the NPRM's cargo insurance proposal.
Web-Based Filing by Insurers, Surety Companies, and Financial
Institutions
    The Agency would require insurers, surety companies and financial
institutions to convert to a Web-based format when electronically
filing evidence of financial responsibility. (Sec.  387.323) These
filings would include evidence of surety bonds, certificates of
insurance, trust-fund agreements, proof of qualifications to self-
insure, and notices of cancellations. The Agency also proposes
conforming amendments to miscellaneous sections governing financial
responsibility requirements to convey that electronic filing would be
mandatory and not optional. (Sec. Sec.  360.3(a)(2), 387.313(b),
387.313(d), 387.323, 387.413(b), and 387.419)
Self-Insurance Program
    Commenters generally supported the proposal to modify fees related
to the self-insurance program. Currently, the cost of the program
exceeds the amounts recovered from fees collected from those entities
that self-insure. The Agency believes that because entities that
qualify to self-insure receive a valuable benefit, it is reasonable and
appropriate for the fees charged to support the costs of administering
the program. However, FMCSA has determined that the proposed fees for
the self-insurance program published in the 2005 NPRM are inadequate to
recover Agency costs to administer the program, including the costs of
evaluating and monitoring the financial health of motor carriers
requesting approval to participate in the self-insurance program. The
Agency seeks to make the self-insurance program self-sustaining more
quickly and is therefore developing a separate rulemaking to address
this issue.
Editorial Changes
    The Agency proposes to remove obsolete effective dates and
liability

information from the schedule of limits on Form MCS-90B, Endorsement
for Motor Carrier Policies of Insurance for Public Liability Under
Section 18 of the Bus Regulatory Reform Act of 1982 (Illustration I to
Sec.  387.39). Also, the Agency would correct an omission in Sec.
387.419 by adding the phrase ``notice of cancellations.'' Although the
existing section heading is ``Electronic filing of surety bonds,
certificates of insurance and cancellations'' the Agency neglected to
include information regarding cancellations.
5. Process Agent Designations
    The Agency, by proposing to amend 49 CFR 366.1, retains the NPRM
proposal to include private and exempt for-hire motor carriers among
those entities that would be required to file process agent
designations with FMCSA. Private motor carriers are already mandated by
49 U.S.C. 503 to make such filings, although FMCSA has not yet
promulgated a rule requiring them to do so. Inasmuch as non-exempt for-
hire motor carriers, brokers, and freight forwarders are required to
file process agent designations under 49 U.S.C. 13303 and 13304,
approximately 90 percent of the entities subject to this rule are
required, by statute, to file such designations. Although there is no
statutory requirement that exempt for-hire carriers file process agent
designations, FMCSA believes that extending the process agent
designation requirement to include such carriers, as well as private
carriers, would enhance the public's ability to serve legal process on
responsible individuals when seeking compensation for losses resulting
from a crash involving a commercial motor vehicle operated by any motor
carrier, regardless of the carrier's regulatory status. Moreover, FMCSA
would be able to better identify the appropriate individual(s) upon
whom to serve notices for enforcement actions. The Agency invites
comments on whether the process agent filing process can be made less
costly.
    The FMCSA also proposes to amend Sec.  366.1 by including freight
forwarders among those entities required to file process agent
designations with FMCSA. Under 49 U.S.C. 13303(a), a freight forwarder
providing service under FMCSA jurisdiction must designate an agent on
whom service of notices in Agency proceedings, as well as service of
Agency actions, may be made.
    The FMCSA proposes to amend Sec.  366.6 to obligate those entities
that would be required to file a process agent designation to update
FMCSA of any changes to the designated process agent's information,
including name, address or contact information. Amended Sec.  366.6
would require the report to be made within 20 days of the change.
6. Timeframes for Filing Evidence of Financial Responsibility and
Process Agent Designation
    As proposed in the NPRM, the Agency would require new filings of
both evidence of financial responsibility and designation of agents for
service of process to be completed within 90 days of the date that an
application is submitted, or within 90 days of the date that the notice
of application is published in the FMCSA Register if a carrier also is
seeking commercial operating authority. (Sec.  365.109) The proposed
90-day time period combines the existing 20-day initial deadline and
60-day extension period and adds 10 more days for Agency processing.
    Section 4303(b) of SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 13906(a) to
establish December 10, 2005 as the deadline for existing exempt for-
hire motor carriers to make insurance filings with FMCSA, making it
unnecessary to propose a grace period for financial responsibility
filings. Inasmuch as section 13906(a) excluded private motor carriers
registered with the Agency under 13905(b) from the expedited financial
responsibility filing requirement, and in the interest of treating all
applicants who must file evidence of financial responsibility
equitably, the Agency will not include in proposed Sec.  390.103 a 180-
day grace period for financial responsibility filings by existing
exempt for-hire or private motor carriers. Such carriers would have to
file by the effective date of the final rule.
    The SNPRM includes, in proposed Sec.  366.2(b), a 180-day grace
period for all existing private and exempt for-hire motor carriers to
file process agent designations. The grace period would be calculated
from the final rule compliance date. The FMCSA believes the 180-day
time period for existing private and exempt for-hire motor carriers to
make process agent designations is necessary for Agency IT systems to
accommodate the anticipated one-time surge in the number of filings
from this group and to provide them adequate time to comply with the
new filing requirements.
7. The Application Process
    The Agency proposed in the NPRM a new multi-step application
process and procedures for issuance of a USDOT Number under which
applicants would initially be assigned temporary numbers to track the
application through the registration process and enable applicants and
their agents to make required administrative filings using the tracking
number. Under this proposal, an applicant would not receive a USDOT
Number until all necessary filings were made and would be prohibited
from commencing operations until the USDOT Number was issued.
    The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, Inc. (OOIDA)
and Missouri Department of Transportation (MODOT) supported the
proposed multi-phase application process. MODOT further stated that
waiting until an application has passed initial screening before
issuing a USDOT Number is a valid approach.
    The American Trucking Associations, Inc. (ATA) commented that
because USDOT Numbers and provisional registrations would no longer be
issued at the time of application under the NPRM proposal, new carriers
may be delayed entry into the market. ATA urged the Agency to supply
applicants with temporary tracking numbers immediately upon receipt of
the application and provide the applicant a point of contact at FMCSA.
Greyhound stated that temporary tracking numbers would cause tremendous
confusion and the Agency should issue a tentative USDOT Number at the
beginning of the process, making the number permanent at the conclusion
of the process.
    The MODOT, the Iowa Department of Transportation (IADOT), the
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), ATA, and
the National Conference of State Transportation Specialists (NCSTS)
filed comments opposing the proposed system. MODOT commented that as a
partner in the implementation of the Federal safety fitness program it
should be able to continue to issue USDOT Numbers under PRISM. AAMVA
echoed the same concern, adding that if States are not able to issue
USDOT Numbers, their resulting inability to deliver accurate and timely
customer service will cause substantial delay for carriers wishing to
enter the market. ATA found it ``very disturbing'' that the process for
issuing USDOT Numbers and for updating MCS-150 data may conflict with
PRISM requirements in such a way as to delay the vehicle registration
of International Registration Plan (IRP) fleets. IADOT commented that
under the NPRM the States' inability to issue USDOT Numbers to
interstate carriers and registrants would have the following adverse
impacts: (1) Increased processing time for first-time motor carriers,
especially private carriers; and (2) increased costs for private and
exempt carriers to operate.

OOIDA urged FMCSA to ensure that States retain the ability to issue
USDOT Numbers to registering owner-operators. OOIDA suggested that a
simple separate electronic form should be used when a vehicle is
registered, and owner-operator USDOT Numbers could be maintained in the
URS system.
    After careful consideration of all filed comments and discussions
with PRISM States that issue USDOT Numbers to carriers on FMCSA's
behalf, the Agency has withdrawn the proposal to issue a temporary
tracking number to applicants and issue a USDOT Number only after
applicable administrative filings have been completed. Under proposed
Sec.  390.101(c)(2), each applicant would be issued an inactive USDOT
Number. The inactive USDOT Number would be activated by the Agency only
after the applicant has filed applicable administrative filings such as
evidence of financial responsibility or a process agent designation. If
a carrier also is seeking operating authority, the USDOT Number would
remain inactive until all protests filed under 49 CFR part 365 have
been resolved and the applicant has filed applicable administrative
filings. The Agency also proposes new Sec.  392.9b to prohibit a motor
carrier with an inactive USDOT Number from operating a CMV and to
establish penalties for violating the prohibition. This change has been
made in order to allow PRISM States to continue to offer one-stop
services to carriers and to better enable PRISM States to track and
monitor carriers' safety performance. PRISM States and insurance
companies would have had to alter their IT systems and administrative
processes to accommodate the issuance of temporary tracking numbers,
which would have been costly and time-consuming. The FMCSA believes its
current proposal is the most transparent and efficient model.
    The FMCSA plans to collaborate with PRISM States in developing a
unified message to notify motor carriers, at the time of registration,
that operating with an inactive USDOT Number would result in
enforcement at the Federal and State levels. During vehicle
registration, PRISM States would inform the motor carrier that its
license plates would be suspended if its application for operating
authority is denied as a result of the protest process, if appropriate
administrative filings are not made within a specified number of days,
and/or if its application is rejected during FMCSA review under 49 CFR
365.109.
8. Revisions to Proposed Application Form MCSA-1
    The Agency proposed in the NPRM to combine the data elements now
captured on several different licensing, registration and certification
forms into a single, new application form called the Form MCSA-1.
Commenters generally supported the use of a single form but urged that
the form be as simple as possible. Although ATA generally supported the
scope of the proposed Form MCSA-1, it argued that the benefits the new
form could provide may be outweighed by problems caused by an unwieldy,
complex, and inconvenient form. ATA urged the Agency to ensure that the
form is as simple as possible for use by the majority of the trucking
industry, which largely consists of small business entities. In
particular, ATA said it is important for the form and its instructions
to be clear regarding the transactions for which the form is to be used
and the compliance requirements for each transaction type. ATA believes
Form MCSA-1 should be concise and devoid of requests for safety- and
non-safety-related information that are not required by the current
FMCSRs and HMRs. Finally, ATA urged the Agency to review and eliminate
all entries on Form MCSA-1 and its appendices that do not contain
critical data needed for the registration process (i.e., research
data).
    The Utah Department of Transportation (UTDOT) and the Utah Trucking
Association (UTA) supported combining the filings in one form and using
one online central access point for motor carriers, freight forwarders,
and property brokers while providing an alternative for ``mom and pop''
companies that do not utilize computers.
    The OOIDA supported combining several existing forms into one new
form and urged the Agency to make the form available in hard copy to
filers who are not ``computer-savvy.'' OOIDA supported the proposed
collection of carrier and cargo classification and HHG arbitration
information. OOIDA stated that the Bureau of Transportation Statistics
(BTS) should continue to collect motor carrier financial information
and sought verification that the collection of information on the new
form is not intended to replace BTS information collection activities.
    Greyhound believed proposed Form MCSA-1 and the instructions for
its completion are somewhat confusing and need to be revised to be more
user friendly. Greyhound and ABA recommended that the Agency ``require
applicants to demonstrate they are in compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) [[Pub. L. 101-336, Title I, Sec.  102, July
26, 1990, 104 Stat. 331] as amended].'' The Community Transportation
Association of America (CTAA) applauded the Agency's efforts to unify
all registration information into a single form but suggested some
minor modifications to the proposed form.
    The National Propane Gas Association (NPGA) believed information
about gross operating revenue should not be collected. NPGA stated the
Form MCSA-1 instructions are unclear regarding whether a hazardous
materials shipper is required to file Form MCSA-1 and requested that
the Agency modify the instructions to explicitly state that the
proposed form would not apply to hazardous materials shippers. The
Corporate Transportation Coalition (CTC) stated that there must
continue to be a way to distinguish between private and for-hire
carriers and recommended that private carriers not be required to
submit financial data or other information unrelated to the safe
operation of their truck fleets.
    The American Moving and Storage Association (AMSA) commented that
the more detailed and tougher congressional registration requirements
for HHG movers should be incorporated in the URS rule. Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) supported the inclusion of the new
entrant provisions in the URS rule.
    The FMCSA agrees that proposed Form MCSA-1 should be as simple and
easy to use as possible, consistent with the need to collect the
necessary information. The FMCSA has reviewed the draft Form MCSA-1 and
instructions in light of the various comments and made revisions to
clarify the form and instructions and to eliminate extraneous material.
    The Agency proposes to revise the MCSA-1 form and instructions to
collect registration information from all FMCSA regulated entities,
except Mexico-domiciled long-haul carriers. Because hazardous materials
shippers are not subject to the FMCSRs, the Agency also proposes to
exclude them from the Unified Registration System. Conforming
amendments are proposed for Form MCSA-1 and instructions as well. As
mentioned previously, the URS rule was impacted by new provisions
enacted by SAFETEA-LU and subsequently promulgated final rules, which
brought new entities under FMCSA's registration jurisdiction (such as
intermodal equipment providers and non-North America-domiciled motor
carriers). To accommodate these

changes, the Agency proposes changes to the MCSA-1 form and
instructions, including additional questions and new or relocated
sections as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               MCSA-1 Form--URS SNPRM
       MCSA-1 Form--URS NPRM version                   version
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section A--Business Description             Section A--Business
                                             Description
Section B--Motor Carriers                   Section B--General
                                             Operational Information
Section C--Hazardous Materials (HM)         Section C--Hazardous
                                             Materials (HM)
Section D--Transportation of Household      Section D--Hazardous
 Goods                                       Materials Permitting
Section E--Commercial Zone Operations       Section E--Cargo Tank
                                             Facility
Section F--Additional Information           Section F--Transportation of
                                             Household Goods
Section G--Safety Certifications            Section G--Transportation of
                                             Passengers
Section H--Certifications                   Section H--Scope of
                                             Authority
Section I--Cancellation                     Section I--Commercial Zone
                                             Operations
Section J--Filing Fee Information           Section J--Non-North America-
                                             Domiciled Carriers
Attachments to Section G (Supplemental      ............................
 information required only from a Mexico-
 domiciled motor carrier)
                                            Section K--Additional
                                             Information
                                            Section L--Safety
                                             Certifications
                                             (Certifications applicable
                                             only to Mexico- or Non-
                                             North America-domiciled
                                             motor carriers)
                                            Section M--Compliance
                                             Certifications
                                            Section N--Applicant's Oath
                                            Section O--Filing Fee
                                             Information
                                            Attachments to Section L--
                                             Supplemental Information
                                             required only from a Mexico-
                                              or Non-North America-
                                             domiciled motor carrier
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with provisions under section 4204 of SAFETEA-LU, FMCSA
proposes collection of additional registration information from HHG
motor carriers as follows: (1) Evidence of participation in an
arbitration program and a copy of the notice of the arbitration program
as required by section 14708(b)(2); (2) identification of the carrier's
tariff and a copy of the notice of availability of the tariff for
inspection as required by section 13702(c); (3) evidence that carriers
have access to, have read, are familiar with, and will observe all
applicable Federal laws relating to consumer protection, estimating,
consumers' rights and responsibilities, and options for limitations of
liability for loss and damage; and (4) disclosure of any relationships
involving common stock, common ownership, common management, or common
familial relationships between filing carriers and any other motor
carriers, freight forwarders, or property brokers of HHG within 3 years
of the proposed date of registration.
    The FMCSA also proposes the following improvements to Form MCSA-1
and the instructions:
     Elimination of a requirement for U.S.- and Canada-
domiciled motor carriers to submit a ``description of a retraining and
educational program for poorly performing drivers.'' The form will
continue to require a certification that a motor carrier has in place
``a system and procedures for ensuring the continued qualification of
drivers to operate safely, including a safety record for each driver,
procedures for verification of proper age and licensing of each driver,
and procedures for identifying drivers who are not complying with the
safety regulations.'' The revised certification removes a requirement
not contained in the FMCSRs and is less burdensome.
     The Agency previously proposed a vehicle certification
which read: ``My vehicles were manufactured or have been retrofitted in
compliance with the applicable USDOT Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards.'' The SNPRM revises the proposed certification to read ``The
carrier will ensure, once operations in the United States have begun,
that all vehicles it operates in the United States were manufactured or
have been retrofitted in compliance with the applicable USDOT Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards in effect at the time of manufacture.'' The Agency believes
the new language clarifies the carrier's responsibility to ensure that
no vehicle may be operated in the United States unless it complies with
the applicable vehicle safety standards.
     The Agency proposes revisions to Form MCSA-1 to collect
information regarding ADA compliance. Although the Over-the-Road Bus
Accessibility Act of 2007 [Pub. L. 110-291, 122 Stat. 2915, July 30,
2008] requires FMCSA to consider compliance with DOT's ADA regulations
at 49 CFR part 37, subpart A, as an element of an over-the-road bus
company's fitness for receiving new operating authority, it does not
require the inclusion of detailed ADA compliance information in the
application form. Nonetheless, to assist in ensuring ADA compliance,
FMCSA will take the following actions:
    [cir] Ask the following questions regarding ADA compliance during
the new entrant safety audit--
     Does the carrier have the means to provide accessible
over-the-road bus (OTRB) service on a 48-hour advance notice basis by
its owned or leased OTRBs?
     If the carrier does not have the means then does the
carrier have an arrangement with another carrier that operates
accessible OTRBs?
    [cir] If noncompliance with DOT's ADA regulations is discovered in
the course of a new entrant safety audit or compliance review, FMCSA
will either forward the information to the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) for appropriate action or conduct its own investigation and
attempt to resolve the violations, in accordance with a February 2009
Memorandum of Understanding between DOJ and DOT executed pursuant to
Public Law 110-291. (A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding has been
placed in the docket for this rulemaking).
    [cir] Refer any non-compliant motor carrier that is also a
recipient of DOT financial assistance to FTA for administrative
enforcement action, as appropriate. FTA administers a program that
provides financial assistance to some over-the-road bus carriers and,
consistent with section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29
U.S.C. 794), as amended, and DOT rules implementing it (49 CFR part
27), cannot provide such assistance to carriers who are out of
compliance with their ADA obligations.

    [cir] When appropriate, initiate action to amend, suspend, or
revoke a carrier's registration based on willful noncompliance with
DOT's ADA regulations
    FMCSA proposes conforming amendments to align 49 CFR 365.105 with
certain information on Form MCSA-1. In proposed Sec.  365.105, the
Agency replaces references to obsolete OP series forms with ``Form
MCSA-1'' and reduces the number of operational categories from six to
three so it is clear that the fee for operating authority applies only
to the general categories of motor carrier, broker and freight
forwarder and not to each individual subgroup of these categories
listed in Section A, question 17 of Form MCSA-1. (see Instructions for
Form MCSA-1, item number 50)
    In proposed Sec.  365.107, the Agency replaces references to OP
series forms with ``Form MCSA-1.'' Also, the Agency proposes to remove
obsolete references to common and contract carriage as required by 49
U.S.C. 13902(f), as amended by section 4303(c) of SAFETEA-LU.
9. Adoption of an Exclusively Online Electronic Registration System
    Several commenters filed comments about the effect of a mandatory
online filing requirement, including a possible phase-in period for
mandatory online filing. ATA supported the emphasis on online filing
and said it should be made mandatory with a 2 to 3 year phase-in
period. NCSTS stated that a minimum 5-year phase-in period is needed
before electronic filing becomes mandatory and suggested that FMCSA
maintain an alternative system to allow paper filings during systems
failures and computer outages. The Property Casualty Insurers
Association of America (PCIAA) also favored phased-in mandatory
electronic filing.
    The Petroleum Marketers Association of America (PMAA), the American
Insurance Association (AIA), and OOIDA opposed mandatory electronic
filing. PMAA stated that some of its members would be unable to access
the Internet and urged the Agency to keep the paper filing option
available. OOIDA asserted electronic filing is a hardship for some
parties, opposed mandatory electronic filing and stated a 5-year phase-
in period is absolutely necessary in the event mandatory electronic
filing is adopted. OOIDA also stated that FMCSA should provide an
alternative back-up system to online filing.
    The Agency believes mandatory electronic filing is feasible and
would result in substantial cost savings to both filers and FMCSA.
Currently, an estimated 88 percent of motor carriers in the United
States have Internet access, and this number is steadily growing.
Furthermore, the Internet is publicly accessible via libraries and
other public facilities. Electronic filing is cost effective and would
incorporate automated error checking, reduce processing time, and
facilitate faster issuance of USDOT Numbers. A detailed cost/benefit
analysis performed by the Agency supporting this position, titled
``Report on Benefits and Costs of Mandatory Electronic Filing of
FMCSA's Unified Registration System,'' is included as Appendix A to the
regulatory evaluation. The conclusions of this analysis are reported in
the URS SNPRM under Section IV, titled ``Regulatory Evaluation of the
URS SNPRM: Summary of Benefits and Costs.''
    Based on the year-to-year increases in the percentage of electronic
filings for the Agency's MCMIS data, the Agency estimated that, even in
the absence of a mandatory electronic filing requirement, the
percentage of electronic filers would range between 80 and 90 percent.
The FMCSA developed projections of the numbers of new registrants
expected to enter the industry from 2014 to 2023 and assessed the costs
of electronic filing both for new registrants and for existing firms
that file biennial updates.
    Mandatory electronic filing would only impose a cost on firms that
would otherwise have filed by paper due to a lack of computer skills
and/or Internet access. The results of FMCSA's analysis showed that
costs to these affected firms would be low, ranging from $12.73 to
$80.00 for new registrants and from $3.14 to $51.53 for firms with
recent activity filing biennial updates. The low end of these cost
ranges are for firms that file their registrations at a public library,
and the high end is for firms that would hire another entity to
complete the forms on their behalf. The FMCSA also prepared estimates
of the benefits of mandatory electronic filing, consisting of estimates
of the value of time saved by carriers and the value of substantially
more rapid receipt of operating authority, as well as benefits to FMCSA
from electronic filing. A comparison of the costs and benefits
indicated that mandatory electronic filing would result in anticipated
benefits of more than $38 million.
    The FMCSA confirmed that the Small Business Administration (SBA)
would not consider a totally electronic registration system to be a
barrier to entry for small businesses, if the cost-benefit analysis
supported the proposal. Based on its analysis, FMCSA proposes a
mandatory electronic registration system. The system would incorporate
electronic signature technology for required signatures. Supplemental
documentation required for registration would be accepted
electronically as well. The system would include the capability to
upload scanned or electronic versions of this information.
    The Agency does not propose a phase-in period because it
anticipates that most entities should have online access when the URS
rule becomes effective. The Agency would provide adequate time to
adjust to the electronic filing requirement when setting the compliance
date for the final rule, and would adopt procedures to ensure continued
operational capability in case of system failure.
10. Transfers of Operating Authority
    This SNPRM withdraws the proposal that entities, when submitting a
revised Form MCSA-1 due to a change of name, form of business, or
address, must also submit a certification that there has been no change
in the ownership, management, or control of the entity. While the
Agency has determined that the ICCTA removed its statutory authority to
review transfers of operating authority, the ICCTA did not prohibit
such transfers. Therefore, FMCSA also would eliminate 49 CFR part 365,
subpart D, governing transfers of operating authority. A motor carrier
would be required, however, to identify any current management official
(e.g. Owner, President, Vice President, Safety Director, etc.)
responsible for motor carrier safety in its operation who was hired
after the last update when completing the Form MCSA-1 biennial
registration update. A motor carrier that changes its name, form of
business, or address would retain its existing USDOT Number.
    Regarding the comments about the practice of ``churning'' (motor
carriers `reincarnating' by registering for a new USDOT Number in an
attempt to conceal a negative safety history), the Agency believes that
existing regulations, the proposals contained in this SNPRM and the
requirements in 49 CFR part 385, together with procedures adopted and
recently implemented by the Agency for review of motor carrier
applications for operating authority, will discourage this practice. In
this SNPRM, the Agency also proposes to require information on motor
carrier ownership on the Form MCSA-1 to be filed with the Agency prior
to receipt of a new USDOT Number. This information would assist the
Agency in identifying individuals involved in churning and rejecting
their applications for new registration when

appropriate. The Agency also believes that the requirement under 49 CFR
part 385 for all new entrants (carriers receiving a new USDOT Number)
to undergo a safety audit within 18 months of beginning operation will
deter carriers from engaging in this practice.
    In addition, motor carriers required to obtain operating authority
pursuant to 49 CFR parts 390 and 365 may be subject to FMCSA review
procedures established under 49 CFR 365.109. Currently, FMCSA utilizes
these procedures for review of applications for household goods motor
carrier, broker, freight forwarder or passenger carrier authority.
However, in the future the Agency anticipates expanding the program to
include applications from all motor carriers that require operating
authority. Employing procedures established under Sec.  365.109, the
Agency reviews applications for completeness and for conformity with
the safety fitness standard. Through this process, if the Agency
determines that a carrier is not fit, willing and able to comply with
applicable statutes and regulations, the motor carrier's application
for operating authority will be rejected. In the event an application
is rejected, an appeal may be filed with the Agency pursuant to 49 CFR
365.111. In this SNPRM the Agency proposes revising 49 CFR 365.111 and
365.203 to provide the address and appropriate office for appeals of
rejections and for protests.
11. Cancellation, Reinstatement, and Deactivation of USDOT Registration
    In the NPRM, the Agency proposed that a motor carrier seeking to
reinstate its USDOT Registration more than 2 years after its
registration was deactivated would be classified as a new entrant. In
setting the proposed threshold for reclassification of a carrier as a
new entrant at 2 years, the Agency sought to prevent carriers that go
in and out of business for very short periods of time from being
required to re-enter the New Entrant Safety Assurance Program.
    The OOIDA disagreed with the Agency's statement that a carrier that
has been inactive for more than 2 years is functionally equivalent to a
new entrant. OOIDA explained that many motor carriers, including owner-
operators, may operate under another carrier's authority for a period
of time for economic reasons. In these cases, OOIDA believes the Agency
is not justified in proposing to require the carrier to pay a new
registration fee and to undergo a new safety audit as a condition for
activating registration.
    Advocates supported the proposal that carriers that have been
inactive for more than 2 years be treated as new entrants and be
required to successfully complete the New Entrant Safety Assurance
Program.
    Consistent with the new regulatory drafting strategy for the SNPRM,
the Agency is not proposing to make changes to its New Entrant Safety
Assurance Program. While the New Entrant Safety Assurance Program is
triggered by the registration process, it is a separate program whose
governing regulations are codified under 49 CFR parts 365 and 385. This
SNPRM addresses cancellation, reinstatement and deactivation of USDOT
Registration/operating authority only from the standpoint of fees and
other administrative requirements. The Agency recently published
revisions to its New Entrant Safety Assurance Program, including
regulations governing reinstatement. (``New Entrant Safety Assurance
Process; Final Rule,'' published on December 16, 2008 at 73 FR 76472).
12. Additional Proposals Regarding Special Transit Operations (Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) Grantees)
    The non-profit organization CTAA, which represents public and
community-based FTA grantees, generally supported the provisions of the
NPRM applicable to FTA grantees. However, CTAA suggested that the
Agency revise the rule to: (1) Clarify that the requirements would
apply to motor carriers of passengers that participate in interlining
or through-ticketing arrangements with one or more interstate for-hire
motor carriers of passengers; (2) designate an Agency point of contact
to assist FTA grantees in completing their applications; and (3) amend
proposed Form MCSA-1 to include specific information applicable to FTA
grantees, including governmental status, transit areas, certification
of compliance with FTA (not FMCSA) drug and alcohol testing
regulations, and a statement that FTA grantees need not pay a filing
fee. CTAA urged FMCSA to permit risk retention groups and other forms
of pooled insurance as ways to satisfy the Agency's financial
responsibility requirements. Finally, CTAA stated that the regulations
should take into account the effect on FTA programs of the last two
comprehensive reauthorization statutes.
    Greyhound and ABA supported clarifying the status of transit
providers that operate entirely within one State but participate in
interline relationships with interstate carriers. They agreed that
FMCSA should explicitly state that such transit providers are not
subject to the FMCSA insurance requirements but rather must meet the
insurance requirements of the States in which they operate.
    The Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA) asserted that the
NPRM offered little relief from what it considers a burdensome and
confusing system of compliance with FMCSA, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), and FTA requirements. The Ohio Department of
Transportation (ODOT) said the Agency must: (1) Clearly define the
difference between a ``for-hire'' CMV and a public FTA-funded transit
vehicle that travels across State lines beyond a contiguous
jurisdiction; (2) address the type of public transportation system that
is operated by a designated grantee (whether government or private non-
profit); (3) exempt vehicles transporting between 9 and 15 passengers
and originating and terminating in the same State but traveling through
an adjacent State for operational convenience; and (4) permit financial
responsibility requirements to be satisfied through participation in
shared risk programs, such as Ohio's County Risk Sharing Authority.
    The OOIDA opposed relieving FTA grantees of the requirement to pay
filing fees, contending the NPRM provides no rationale for relieving
what are essentially private companies with a government contract of
their fair share of the cost of the registration program.
    In response to these comments, FMCSA proposes under Sec. Sec.
390.101(b) and 387.33(b) to clarify the specific URS registration and
financial responsibility obligations for FTA grantees. Although all FTA
grantees would be required to register with FMCSA and would receive a
fee waiver, their financial responsibility requirements could differ,
depending on the FTA program under which the grantee receives funding.
The proposed minimum financial responsibility requirement for a grantee
that provides transportation within a transit service area located in
more than one State under an agreement with a Federal, State, or local
government funded, in whole or in part, with a grant under 49 U.S.C.
5307, 5310 or 5311 is the highest level of financial responsibility
required for any of the States in which it operates. An FTA grantee
that receives funding under other grant programs (section 5316 and 5317
grantees) would be subject to the general financial responsibility
requirements applicable to for-hire passenger carriers that do not
receive FTA funding. The different financial responsibility
requirements are due to the fact that 49 U.S.C. 31138(e)(4) expressly
exempts section 5307, 5310

and 5311 grantees from the Federal general financial responsibility
requirements and instead subjects them to applicable State
requirements. The exemption does not cover section 5316 and section
5317 grantees; neither the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA-21) [Pub. L. 105-78, 112 Stat. 107, June 9, 1988] nor
SAFETEA-LU amended 49 U.S.C. 31138 to expressly exclude them from the
Federal financial responsibility requirements.
    The Agency proposes to incorporate all but one of CTAA's
recommended changes to Form MCSA-1. The FMCSA could not add a cross
reference to existing FTA drug and alcohol regulations to the Drug and
Alcohol Safety Certification because the Drug and Alcohol Safety
Certifications under Section L of Form MCSA-1 apply only to Mexico- or
non-North America-domiciled motor carrier applicants--entities that are
ineligible to receive FTA grants. (See Section L, question 47, III, 1
on proposed Form MCSA-1).
    With respect to ODOT's suggestion to differentiate between for-hire
motor carriers and public transit vehicles, and to exempt certain types
of vehicles and transportation from the URS requirements, the Agency
notes that public transit vehicles are a subset of for-hire CMVs.
Accordingly, the Agency declines to distinguish between for-hire motor
carriers and public transit vehicles for purposes of registration under
proposed part 390, subpart C. Moreover, the Agency is not authorized to
grant ODOT's request to exempt from registration requirements those
vehicles transporting between 9 and 15 passengers and originating and
terminating in the same State but traveling through an adjacent State
for operational convenience. The Agency recognizes the limited
exemption from the Federal minimum financial responsibility
requirements set forth in proposed Sec.  387.33(b) granted to certain
public transit operators, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 31138(e)(4). However,
the exemption from the minimum financial responsibility requirements
does not include those operators providing service in more than one
State from having to file proof of financial responsibility pursuant to
the minimum levels set by State law.
    The CTAA and ODOT additionally requested that the Agency allow
transit operators to satisfy financial responsibility requirements
through shared risk programs. CTAA characterizes such shared risk
programs as ``risk retention groups and other forms of `pooled'
insurance * * * .'' In responding to these comments, the Agency must
first distinguish between risk retention groups and risk pools.
    Risk retention groups (RRGs) are established under the Liability
Risk Retention Act of 1981 [Pub. L. 97-45, 95 Stat. 949, September 25,
1981] and are defined at 15 U.S.C. 3901(a)(4). According to a 1987 ICC
Policy Statement, which authorized the Commission to accept
certificates of insurance from RRGs, those entities are required by
Congress to:
    (1) Be chartered or licensed under the laws of a State as a
liability insurance company and authorized by such State's laws to
engage in the business of insurance;
    (2) [Not] exclude any person from membership solely for the purpose
of providing existing members of such group a competitive advantage
over the excluded person;
    (3) Have as its owners only persons who comprise the membership of
the Risk Retention Group and who are provided insurance by the group,
or has as its sole owner an organization which has as its members only
persons who are members of the Risk Retention Group; and
    (4) Be formed by persons who are engaged in businesses or
activities similar or related as to the liability to which they are
exposed by virtue of related, similar or common business, etc.
    Implementation of Liability Risk Retention Act of 1986, Ex Parte
No. MC-178 (Sub-No. 4), 1987 WL 98199, at *1 (decided Mar. 31, 1987)
(``ICC Policy Statement''). The ICC Policy Statement indicated that
RRGs ``are unquestionably insurance companies, and can meet the
criteria prescribed for insurance * * * companies in 49 CFR 1043.8 * *
*.'' Id. at *2. Former Sec.  1043.8 is the predecessor to current 49
CFR 387.315. The FMCSA continues to accept RRG filings.
    Insurance risk pools are typically private associations operated on
a statewide basis for the benefit of their members. The main
distinction between risk pools and RRGs is that risk pools do not meet
the statutory requirements established for RRGs under the Liability
Risk Retention Act of 1981. The public transit risk pools allow the
State and municipal transit operators to achieve economies of scale in
purchasing insurance resulting in lower premiums and other benefits to
the limited membership. Transit risk pools are generally approved by
the State and supported by the State Departments of Transportation.
    Unlike RRGs, State and local government risk pools generally have
not been approved by FMCSA as an acceptable form of insurance pursuant
to the section 13906 requirement that the Secretary ``register a motor
carrier under section 13902 only if the registrant files with the
Secretary a bond, insurance policy or other type of security approved
by the Secretary * * *.'' The Agency's position has been that risk
pools do not qualify as a bond or insurance policy, and that a motor
carrier may meet the financial responsibility requirements through
self-insurance only if the insured applies for approval under the
Agency's self-insurance program.
    This issue is complicated by section 31138(e)(4), which exempts
transit operators receiving Federal grants under 49 U.S.C. 5307, 5310,
or 5311 from both the amounts and type of financial responsibility that
must be provided as evidence of compliance with the financial
responsibility requirement. Section 31138(e)(4) further provides,
however, that where the transit service area is in more than one State,
the minimum level of financial responsibility shall be the highest
level required for any of such States. This requirement has been
incorporated into proposed Sec.  387.33(b). The above notwithstanding,
these exempted transit services operators still are subject to
registration under 49 U.S.C. 13902(b)(2) and are required to register
and provide proof of insurance pursuant to proposed Sec.  365.109.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 13906(a)(1), the ``Secretary may register a
motor carrier under section 13902 only if the registrant files with the
Secretary a bond, insurance policy, or other type of security approved
by the Secretary, in an amount not less than such amount as the
Secretary prescribes pursuant to, or as is required by, sections 31138
and 31139, and the laws of the State or States in which the registrant
is operating, to the extent applicable.'' Section 387.301 currently
permits motor carriers to satisfy their financial responsibility
requirements by filing proof of such ``other securities'' as the
Secretary approves.
    This proposed rule expressly addresses registration and insurance
requirements for certain types of transit operators. It is therefore
appropriate to resolve confusion that has arisen in this area. The
Agency recognizes that allowing these transit operators to utilize
State-approved risk pools would expand the types of security approved
by the Secretary for certain transit service operators and harmonize
the provisions of sections 31138(e)(4) and 13906(a)(1) by recognizing
the State's approved form of financial responsibility for these
operators. As a

result, the Agency intends to publish a separate Federal Register
notice that will describe the Agency's proposed change in policy to
allow transit service providers that fall under the provisions of
proposed Sec.  387.33 to utilize State-approved risk pools in order to
meet the State financial responsibility requirements pursuant to
section 31138(e)(4) and proposed Sec.  387.33.
13. Temporary Operating Authority
    Former 49 U.S.C. 10928(b) allowed the ICC, which was sunsetted in
1995, to issue temporary authority to provide transportation to a place
or in an area having no motor carrier capable of meeting the immediate
needs of the place or area. Former section 10928(c) permitted the ICC
to issue emergency temporary authority if, due to emergency conditions,
there was insufficient time to process an application for temporary
authority.
    Temporary authority was originally made available because it took
several months for the former ICC to process applications for permanent
operating authority, particularly if competing carriers protested the
application. Following changes in statutory standards which led to
greatly reduced application processing time, the ICC limited the
issuance of temporary authority to ``exceptional circumstances (i.e.,
natural disasters or national emergencies) when evidence of immediate
service need can be specifically documented * * *.'' [See existing 49
CFR 365.107(g)]. FHWA (and later FMCSA) retained this provision when
the ICC operating authority regulations were transferred to USDOT in
1996.
    The ICCTA repealed 49 U.S.C. 10928(b) and (c) and did not enact any
comparable provisions expressly authorizing the issuance of temporary
authority. However, the ICCTA does not prohibit the issuance of
temporary authority and 49 U.S.C. 13905(c) provides that any
registration issued to motor carriers, freight forwarders, and property
brokers under chapter 139 shall remain in effect for such period as the
Secretary determines appropriate by regulation. Therefore, there is
general statutory authority to continue issuing temporary authority.
However, the NPRM did not include a provision permitting motor carriers
to obtain temporary registration or operating authority.
    Greyhound requested that the Agency grant temporary operating
authority to prevent service disruptions which may occur as a result of
Greyhound's restructuring its nationwide service. Greyhound believes
replacement companies will not be able to obtain operating authority
before it abandons certain routes. Greyhound claimed it provides at
least 30 days notice before it discontinues a route and cannot provide
more notification time ``if the restructuring is to be implemented in a
timely manner.'' Greyhound proposed the Agency adopt a process by which
emergency temporary authority would become effective immediately upon
the filing of a temporary authority application and proof of insurance
and would remain in effect until FMCSA processed the permanent
application, perhaps 90 days. ABA also supported the Greyhound
proposal.
    The FMCSA believes that continued issuance of temporary operating
authority as limited under Sec.  365.107(g) is warranted. During the
Hurricane Katrina relief effort in 2005, FMCSA received numerous
applications for emergency temporary authority pursuant to Sec.
365.107(g) and the Agency believes that having a procedure for the
issuance of temporary operating authority will enhance future emergency
relief efforts. However, except in extraordinary circumstances such as
natural disasters, the Agency does not anticipate many requests for
such applications. We believe Greyhound overstates the time it takes
FMCSA to currently process applications for operating authority and its
comments do not provide a convincing rationale for extending the
current requirements to prospective ``emergencies'' caused by
manageable business decisions. Under proposed Sec.  365.107(e), FMCSA
would grant temporary operating authority only in cases of national
emergency or natural disaster and following an emergency declaration
under 49 CFR 390.23. Entities granted temporary operating authority
would need to file evidence of financial responsibility with the
Agency.
14. NTSB Recommendation Impacting Cargo Tank Applications and Updates
    After investigating a 2009 incident involving the rollover of a
truck-tractor and cargo tank semitrailer and the resulting fire, the
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) made 20 draft
recommendations to four DOT modal administrations, including FMCSA, and
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
As part of a recommended rollover prevention program, NTSB recommended
that FMCSA revise the MCS-150 form to require hazardous materials
carriers to report the number and types of U.S. Department of
Transportation specification cargo tanks owned or leased by the
carriers and provide other pertinent data displayed on the
specification plates of such tanks. NTSB recommended that FMCSA require
this information to be updated annually. As FMCSA proposes to replace
the MCS-150 form with the new MCSA-1 form through this rulemaking, the
Agency believes it would be appropriate to solicit information from the
public regarding:
    (1) Whether the MCSA-1 form should be revised to incorporate the
NTSB recommendation;
    (2) Whether the collection of additional information regarding
cargo tanks would prove useful in connection with a rollover prevention
program;
    (3) Whether cargo tank carriers should be required to submit
updated data more frequently than biennially. If so, what event should
trigger the update requirement;
    (4) What would be the burden associated with collecting additional
cargo tank information biennially or more frequently;
    (5) Whether there are alternatives for collecting this information;
and
    (6) Whether this information is already being collected by other
entities, such as State Departments of Motor Vehicles.

IV. Regulatory Evaluation of the URS SNPRM: Summary of Benefits and
Costs

A. Summary

    The FMCSA has revised its 2005 NPRM in response to congressional
mandates included in SAFETEA-LU and in response to comments to the May
2005 NPRM. In this section of the SNPRM, FMCSA summarizes its
calculation of the costs and benefits associated with the changes
included in this proposed rulemaking. Although many of the revisions
proposed under URS would result in changes to existing fees paid by
motor carriers (creation of new fees or elimination of existing fees),
these changes would result in a shifting of fees from one group to
another and would not result in a net gain (benefit) or loss (cost)
from a societal perspective. For example, if FMCSA were to eliminate a
fee previously paid by motor carriers, that group would receive a
benefit. However, the benefit would be offset by an equal cost to the
Agency in the form of lost revenues. The FMCSA classified the costs and
benefits calculated in the regulatory evaluation as either changes in
fees, resource costs, or benefits. Changes in fees are neutral from a
societal perspective, but changes in resource costs and benefits result
in either a cost or a benefit to society. The

FMCSA estimated the costs and benefits associated with implementing the
following proposed major URS SNPRM provisions:
     A new requirement for private and exempt for-hire motor
carriers, cargo tank facilities, and intermodal equipment providers
(IEPs) to pay FMCSA registration fees; \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Throughout this section, cargo tank facilities and IEPs are
referred to as ``other entities.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A new requirement for private carriers and exempt for-hire
motor carriers to file proof of process agent designations with FMCSA;
     A new requirement for private HM and exempt for-hire motor
carriers to file proof of liability insurance with FMCSA;
     A reduction of the current reinstatement fee for non-
exempt for-hire motor carriers, brokers and freight forwarders and new
reinstatement fees for exempt for-hire and private hazmat motor
carriers;
     Elimination of operating authority transfers and filing
fees for name changes;
     Introduction of new Form MCSA-1 filing requirements; and
     Mandatory electronic filing of Form MCSA-1.
    Table 1 presents the total costs associated with the URS SNPRM. The
URS proposal results in an anticipated resource cost to industry of
$26,342,699 and a resource cost to FMCSA of $135,158 over the 10-year
analysis period (2014-2023). The total societal cost of the SNPRM is
thus $26.5 million ($26,342,699 + 135,158). The industry also would