[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 44 (Wednesday, March 6, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8029-8042]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04044]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 380

[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0371]
RIN 2126-AC05

Commercial Driver's License Upgrade from Class B to Class A

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA amends the entry-level driver training (ELDT)
regulations published on December 8, 2016, titled ``Minimum Training
Requirements for Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators'' (ELDT
final rule), by adopting a new Class A CDL theory instruction upgrade
curriculum to reduce the training time and costs incurred by Class B
commercial driver's license (CDL) holders upgrading to a Class A CDL.
This final rule does not change the regulatory text proposed in the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The Agency believes that this
modest change in the Class A theory training requirements for Class B
CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL maintains the same level of
safety established by the ELDT final rule, and the regulatory burden
reduction will result in annualized cost savings of $18 million.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 6, 2019. The compliance date
for this final rule is February 7, 2020.
    Petitions for Reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted
to the FMCSA Administrator no later than April 5, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Clemente, Driver and
Carrier Operations (MC-PSD) Division, FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Ave SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or submitting material
to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule is organized as follows:

I. Rulemaking Documents
    A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
    B. Privacy Act
II. Executive Summary
III. Abbreviations
IV. Legal Basis
V. Background
VI. Discussion of Proposed Rule
VII. Discussion of Comments and Responses
VIII. International Impacts
IX. Section-by-Section
X. Regulatory Analyses
    A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review and DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures as Supplemented by E.O. 13563)
    B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small Entities)
    D. Assistance for Small Entities
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    F. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection of Information)
    G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
    H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
    I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
    J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
    K. Privacy
    L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
    M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
    N. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
    O. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)
    P. Environment (NEPA)

I. Rulemaking Documents

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    For access to docket FMCSA-2017-0371 to read background documents
and comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time, or
to Docket Services at U.S. Department of Transportation, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Executive Summary

    The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21)
required the issuance of final regulations establishing minimum ELDT
requirements addressing the knowledge and skills necessary for the safe
operation of a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) that must be acquired
before obtaining a CDL for the first time or upgrading from one class
of CDL to another (49 U.S.C. 31305(c)(1)). On December 8, 2016, FMCSA
published a final rule establishing minimum ELDT requirements meeting
the MAP-21 mandate (81 FR 88732) (``ELDT final rule''). Today, as part
of the Agency's ongoing effort to review existing regulations to
evaluate their continued necessity and effectiveness, FMCSA amends 49
CFR part 380 by adding a new theory instruction upgrade curriculum for
Class B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL. This final rule does
not change the regulatory text proposed in the June 29, 2018, NPRM.
    The ELDT final rule required the same level of theory training for
individuals obtaining a CDL for the first time as for those who already
hold a Class B CDL and are upgrading to a Class A CDL. FMCSA now
concludes that, because Class B CDL holders have prior training or
experience, they are not required to receive the same level of theory
training as individuals who have never held a CDL. Accordingly, the
Agency adds an optional theory instruction upgrade curriculum for Class
B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL, which removes eight
instructional units involving ``Non-Driving Activities.'' However,
Class B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL remain free to choose to
complete the Class A theory instruction standard curriculum, which
includes the eight units of theory instruction not included in the
upgrade curriculum established by this rule. This rule applies only to
Class B CDL holders; therefore, individuals obtaining a Class A CDL who
do not already hold a Class B CDL must complete the full Class A theory
(standard) curriculum, as required by the ELDT final rule.
    The theory instruction upgrade curriculum for Class B CDL holders
does not require a minimum number of instruction hours, but the
training provider is required to cover all topics in the curriculum and
driver-trainees must receive an overall minimum score of 80 percent on
the written theory assessment. This approach is consistent with the
theory curricula requirements in the ELDT final rule. This final rule
does not change the behind-the-wheel (BTW) (range and public road)
training requirements set forth in the ELDT final rule. All driver-
trainees, including those who hold a Class B CDL, must demonstrate
proficiency in all elements of the BTW curriculum in a Group A vehicle.
Costs and Benefits
    The Agency estimates that an annual average of approximately 11,340
driver-trainees are affected by the rule, with each experiencing a
reduction of 27 hours in time spent completing their theory
instruction. This results in a substantial time cost savings to these
driver-trainees, who no longer must attend this training, as well as a
cost savings to the motor carriers that employ these drivers. The rule
does not

result in any increase in costs. As presented in Table 1, the Agency
estimates that the rule results in a 10-year cost savings of $182
million on an undiscounted basis, $155 million discounted at 3%, $127
million discounted at 7%, and $18 million on an annualized basis at a
7% or a 3% discount rate, representing a decrease in cost or a cost
savings. Most of this annualized cost savings ($17.10 million) is
realized by driver-trainees, with the remainder of the annualized cost
savings ($1.04 million) realized by motor carriers.

                                 Table 1--Summary of the Total Cost of the Rule
                                             [In millions of 2014$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Undiscounted                             Discounted
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                Driver-trainee   Motor carrier   Total  Costs   Discounted  at  Discounted  at
                                       costs           costs           \(a)\            3%              7%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020............................   \(b)\ ($16.7)          ($1.0)         ($17.8)         ($17.2)         ($16.6)
2021............................          (16.8)           (1.0)          (17.8)          (16.8)          (15.6)
2022............................          (16.9)           (1.0)          (17.9)          (16.4)          (14.6)
2023............................          (17.0)           (1.0)          (18.0)          (16.0)          (13.8)
2024............................          (17.1)           (1.0)          (18.1)          (15.6)          (12.9)
2025............................          (17.2)           (1.0)          (18.2)          (15.3)          (12.2)
2026............................          (17.3)           (1.0)          (18.3)          (14.9)          (11.4)
2027............................          (17.4)           (1.1)          (18.4)          (14.5)          (10.7)
2028............................          (17.5)           (1.1)          (18.5)          (14.2)          (10.1)
2029............................          (17.6)           (1.1)          (18.6)          (13.9)           (9.5)
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................           (171)            (10)           (182)           (155)           (127)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized......................  ..............  ..............            (18)            (18)            (18)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
(a) Total cost values may not equal the sum of the components due to rounding. (The totals shown in this column
  are the rounded sum of unrounded components.)
(b) Values shown in parentheses are negative values (i.e., less than zero) and represent a decrease in cost or a
  cost savings.

    In the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule, FMCSA
estimated that not only would driver-trainees and motor carriers incur
costs, but that training providers, State Driver Licensing Agencies
(SDLAs), and the Federal government would also incur costs, as a result
of the ELDT final rule. For this rule, FMCSA does not anticipate any
change in costs relative to the ELDT final rule for training providers,
SDLAs, or the Federal government, because the regulatory obligations of
these entities, as set forth in the ELDT final rule, are not affected.
    The Agency believes that this rule does not result in changes to
the benefits of the ELDT final rule. In the regulatory evaluation for
the ELDT final rule, the Agency estimated quantified benefits for three
categories of non-safety benefits, including savings from reductions in
fuel consumption, reductions in CO2 emissions related to
those reductions in fuel consumption, and reductions in vehicle
maintenance and repair costs. These estimated non-safety benefits were
derived from the Speed Management and Space Management instructional
units in the Class A theory instruction curriculum in the ELDT final
rule. Because these two instructional units remain in the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum, the Agency does not anticipate any
change in these non-safety benefits from this rule.
    The regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule addressed the
potential safety benefits of ELDT. In considering the potential safety
impacts from the June 29, 2018, NPRM, the Agency noted that Class B CDL
holders have prior training or experience in operating CMVs, which
serves as an adequate substitute for the eight non-driving
instructional units not included in the optional theory instruction
upgrade curriculum. The Agency therefore presumed that the NPRM would
not impact safety, and specifically requested comment on whether the
proposed optional Class A CDL theory curriculum would reduce safety
benefits relative to the ELDT final rule. The Agency received no
comments in response to that request. Therefore, the Agency does not
anticipate that this rule will change potential safety benefits
previously identified in connection with the ELDT final rule.

III. Abbreviations and Acronyms

ANPRM Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
ATA American Trucking Associations, Inc.
BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis
BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics
BTW Behind the Wheel
CDL Commercial Driver's License
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLP Commercial Learner's Permit
CMV Commercial Motor Vehicle
CMVSA Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act
CVTA Commercial Vehicle Training Association
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
ELDT Entry-Level Driver Training
E.O. Executive Order
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FMCSRs Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
FR Federal Register
HM Hazardous Materials
IT Information Technology
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OOIDA Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
OOS Out-of-Service
PIA Privacy Impact Assessment
PII Personally Identifiable Information
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PTDI Professional Truck Driver Institute
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RIN Regulation Identifier Number
SBA Small Business Administration
SDLA State Driver Licensing Agency
Sec.  Section symbol
TPR Training Provider Registry
U.S.C. United States Code

IV. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    As noted above, FMCSA's publication of the final rule, ``Minimum
Training Requirements for Entry-Level Commercial Vehicle Operators''
(81 FR 88732 (Dec. 8, 2016)), satisfied the MAP-21 requirement that the
Agency

issue ELDT regulations. This rule, which amends regulations established
by the ELDT final rule, is based on the authority of the Motor Carrier
Act of 1935 (the 1935 Act) and the Motor Carrier Act of 1984 (the 1984
Act), both as amended, and the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of
1986 (CMVSA).
    The 1935 Act, codified at 49 U.S.C. 31502(b), provides that ``The
Secretary of Transportation may prescribe requirements for--(1)
qualifications and maximum hours of service of employees of, and safety
of operation and equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2) qualifications
and maximum hours of service of employees of, and standards of
equipment of, a motor private carrier, when needed to promote safety of
operation.'' This rule addresses the qualifications of certain motor
carrier employees, consistent with the safe operation of CMVs.
    The 1984 Act, codified at 49 U.S.C. 31136(a), provides concurrent
authority to regulate drivers, motor carriers, and vehicle equipment.
Section 31136(a)(1) grants the Secretary broad authority to issue
regulations ``on commercial motor vehicle safety,'' including
regulations to ensure that ``commercial motor vehicles are . . .
operated safely''. The remaining statutory factors and requirements in
section 31136(a), to the extent they are relevant, are also satisfied
here. In accordance with section 31136(a)(2), the elimination of
duplicative theory training does not impose any ``responsibilities . .
. on operators of commercial motor vehicles [that would] impair their
ability to operate the vehicles safely.'' This rule does not directly
address medical standards for drivers (section 31136(a)(3)) or possible
physical effects caused by driving CMVs (section 31136(a)(4)). However,
to the extent that the various curricula in the 2016 final rule on ELDT
address FMCSA's medical requirements for CMV drivers, section
31136(a)(3) was considered and addressed in that rulemaking. FMCSA does
not anticipate that drivers will be coerced (section 31136(a)(5)) as a
result of this rulemaking. However, the Agency notes that the ELDT
theory training curricula for Class B CDLs, as well as the Class A
theory instruction standard curriculum, includes a ``Whistleblower/
Coercion'' unit, addressing the right of an employee to question the
safety practices of an employer without incurring the risk of losing a
job or being subject to reprisal simply for stating a safety concern.
This unit also instructs driver-trainees in procedures for reporting to
FMCSA incidents of coercion from motor carriers, shippers, receivers,
or transportation intermediaries.
    The CMVSA provides, among other things, that the Secretary shall
prescribe regulations on minimum standards for testing and ensuring the
fitness of an individual operating a CMV (49 U.S.C. 31305(a)). This
rule addresses the fitness of specified individuals (i.e., Class B CDL
holders upgrading to a Class A CDL) operating a CMV.
    Finally, the Administrator of FMCSA is delegated authority under 49
CFR 1.87 to carry out the functions vested in the Secretary of
Transportation by 49 U.S.C. Chapters 311, 313, and 315, as they relate
to commercial motor vehicle operators, programs and safety.

V. Background

    On December 8, 2016, FMCSA published a final rule establishing
minimum training standards for certain individuals applying for their
CDL for the first time; an upgrade of their CDL (e.g., a Class B CDL
holder upgrading to a Class A CDL); or a hazardous materials (H),
passenger (P), or school bus (S) endorsement for the first time. The
final rule, which set forth ELDT requirements for BTW and theory
(knowledge) instruction, fulfilled the Congressional mandate in section
32304 of MAP-21 and was based in part on consensus recommendations from
the Agency's Entry-Level Driver Training Advisory Committee (ELDTAC).
The ELDT final rule, effective on June 5, 2017 \1\ (with a compliance
date of February 7, 2020), is the culmination of previous efforts by
FMCSA and its predecessor agency, the Federal Highway Administration,
to address the issue of CMV driver training standards.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The ELDT rule was initially effective on February 6, 2017.
In accordance with the Presidential directive as expressed in the
memorandum of January 20, 2017, from the Assistant to the President
and Chief of Staff, entitled ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review,''
the effective date was temporarily delayed three times by final
rules published on February 1, 2017 (82 FR 8903), March 21, 2017 (82
FR 14476), and May 23, 2017 (82 FR 23516).
    \2\ For a more extensive review of the legal and regulatory
history of these efforts, see 81 FR 88732, 88739-40 (Dec. 8, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department has longstanding processes to periodically review
regulations and other agency actions and, if appropriate, revised to
ensure that they continue to meet the needs for which they were
originally designed, and that they remain cost-effective and cost-
justified.\3\ Consistent with these processes, the Agency revised the
theory training requirements applicable to CMV drivers already holding
a Class B CDL who wish to upgrade to a Class A CDL. The requirements
pertaining to BTW (range and public road) instruction, as set forth in
the ELDT final rule, remain unchanged for all driver-trainees,
including Class B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Exec. Order No. 13777, section 1, 82 FR 12285 (March 1,
2017) (``It is the policy of the United States to alleviate
unnecessary regulatory burdens placed on the American people or . .
.''); Exec. Order No. 13610, 77 FR 28469 (May 14, 2012) (requiring
agencies to conduct retrospective analyses of existing rules to
determine whether they remain justified); Exec. Order No. 13563,
section 6(b), 76 FR 2831, (Jan. 21, 2011) (requiring agencies to
submit a plan ``under which the agency will periodically review its
existing significant regulations to determine whether any such
regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed
so as to make the agency's regulatory program more effective or less
burdensome in achieving the regulatory objectives''); Exec. Order
No. 12866, section 5, (Sept. 30, 1993) (requiring each agency to
``review its existing significant regulations to determine whether
any such regulations should be modified or eliminated so as to make
the agency's regulatory program more effective in achieving the
regulatory objectives, less burdensome, or in greater alignment with
the President's priorities and the principles set forth in this
Executive order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. June 29, 2018, Proposed Rule

    The ELDT final rule required the same level of theory training for
individuals obtaining a CDL for the first time as those who already
hold a Class B CDL and are upgrading to a Class A CDL. FMCSA
subsequently concluded that this approach imposed an unnecessary
regulatory burden because, due to prior training or experience in
operating a CMV, Class B CDL holders do not require the same level of
theory training as individuals who have never held a CDL. Accordingly,
the Agency proposed the following change: Class B CDL holders upgrading
to a Class A CDL would not be required to complete eight instructional
units currently included in Section A.1.5, ``Non-Driving Activities,''
of the theory instruction portion of the Class A CDL training
curriculum as set forth in Appendix A to 49 CFR part 380. Under this
proposal, the theory instructional units that would no longer be
required for Class B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL are:
Handling and Documenting Cargo, Environmental Compliance Issues, Post-
Crash Procedures, External Communications, Whistleblower/Coercion, Trip
Planning, Drugs/Alcohol, and Medical Requirements. These units would,
however, remain required elements of the theory instruction standard
curriculum for any individual obtaining a Class A CDL who does not
already hold a Class B CDL. These units, which provide instruction in
activities that do not involve actually operating a CMV, are identical,
except for minor editorial differences in some of the topic

descriptions, to the above-specified instructional units included in
Section B.1.5, ``Non-Driving Activities,'' of the Theory Instruction
portion of the Class B CDL Curriculum as set forth in Appendix B to 49
CFR part 380.
    The NPRM explained that driver-trainees affected by the proposal
would fall into one of two categories: those who obtain a Class B CDL
after the compliance date of February 7, 2020, and thus are subject to
the training requirements set forth in the ELDT final rule, and those
who obtain a Class B CDL before the compliance date of the final rule
and thus are not subject to those requirements.\4\ The first category,
drivers who obtain a Class B CDL by completing ELDT training after
February 7, 2020, will have already demonstrated proficiency in the
eight non-driving theory topics, identified above, included in the
Section B.1.5 of the Class B training curriculum, the content of which
is virtually identical to the content of section A.1.5. The Agency
noted that, accordingly, requiring Class B CDL holders who are
upgrading to Class A to be re-trained in those topics, which they have
already mastered by successfully completing the Class B theory
instruction, imposes an unnecessary regulatory burden on those
individuals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The latter category would also include drivers who obtain a
Class B CLP before the compliance date of the ELDT final rule and
obtain the Class B CDL after the compliance date, but before the CLP
or renewed CLP expires. See 49 CFR 380.603(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second category of driver-trainees affected by the NPRM would
be drivers who obtained their Class B CDL prior to the February 7,
2020, compliance date of the final rule. These Class B CDL holders
would already have experience operating a CMV and would have received
some training, including, for example, the ELDT required in Sec.
380.503 \5\ and/or finishing training provided by motor carrier
employers. Accordingly, FMCSA proposed that these drivers not be
required to complete the entire Class A theory instruction curriculum
as set forth in the ELDT final rule. Under the NPRM, any Class B holder
could thus choose to complete the Class A CDL theory curriculum
(upgrade or standard) best suiting their individual needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The current ELDT requirements, set forth in subpart E of
part 380, will be removed and reserved and replaced by new subparts
F and G on the compliance date of the ELDT final rule. See 81 FR
88732, 88783.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA also explained that, unlike the eight Class A theory
instructional units not included in the proposed upgrade curriculum,
instruction in two ``non-driving'' theory units--Hours of Service (HOS)
Requirements and Fatigue and Wellness Awareness--would vary to some
extent, depending on the vehicle group (Group A or Group B).
Consequently, the Agency proposed that those instructional units be
retained in the Class A theory upgrade curriculum.
    FMCSA also noted that instruction would vary, depending on the
underlying vehicle group, for the theory topics identified in Sections
A.1.1 and B.1.1 (Basic Operation), A.1.2 and B.1.2 (Safe Operating
Procedures), A.1.3 and B.1.3 (Advanced Operating Practices), and A.1.4
and B.1.4 (Vehicle Systems and Reporting Malfunctions)--all of which
address, to varying degrees, operational characteristics of the two
vehicle groups. FMCSA therefore proposed to retain those topics in the
theory instruction upgrade curriculum.
    In the proposed rule, FMCSA emphasized that the Class A BTW range
and public road curriculum would remain unchanged for all driver-
trainees, including those who hold a Class B CDL. The Agency also
stated that, to the extent that Class B CDL holders already have
previous training or experience in the CMV industry, they are not
novice drivers. FMCSA therefore concluded that the proposed addition of
an optional Class A theory instruction upgrade curriculum would not
impact the level of safety established in the ELDT final rule, and
invited comments addressing this issue. The proposal set forth minimum
theory training requirements applicable to Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL. Nothing in the NPRM precluded training
providers from imposing more extensive theory training requirements for
Class B CDL holders to whom they provide Class A theory training.
Additionally, under the proposal, States remained free to impose theory
training requirements more stringent than those proposed in the NPRM,
just as they remain free to impose ELDT requirements more stringent
than those set forth in the ELDT final rule.

VII. Discussion of Comments and Responses

    The Agency received eight comments in response to the NPRM. As
discussed further below, none of the comments warranted a change in the
proposed regulatory text or in FMCSA's rationale for the proposal, as
set forth in the preamble to the NPRM. The American Trucking
Associations (ATA) supported the proposal, describing the NPRM as ``an
important improvement to the ELDT regulations that will help keep these
experienced drivers in the industry.'' Citing the difficulty of
recruiting drivers capable of meeting DOT's driver qualification
requirements, ATA also noted that ``[l]ooking for ways that provide
flexibility in the hiring process but maintain a high level of safety
is important to the growth and continued success of the trucking
industry.'' Similarly, C.R. England, Inc. (C.R. England) appreciated
the Agency's effort ``to reduce unnecessary requirements and `red tape'
for the benefit of drivers and carriers alike.'' Overall, the Owner-
Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) favored the
``elimination of these duplicative requirements.''
    The Commercial Vehicle Training Association (CVTA) opposed the
NPRM, stating that the proposed removal of the eight topics from the
Class A CDL theory curriculum ``is not warranted.'' Two anonymous
individuals opposed the proposal, but neither commenter provided a
substantive explanation for their position.
    The remaining two comments were also submitted by individuals, but
both were outside the scope of the NPRM.

1. Retention of Drugs/Alcohol and Trip Planning Units in the Class A
CDL Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum

    Comment: C.R. England suggested that drugs/alcohol and trip
planning should be retained in the proposed Class A CDL Theory
Instruction Upgrade Curriculum ``due to the ongoing importance of these
two topics.''
    FMCSA Response: The Agency notes that, as discussed in the NPRM,
all Class B CDL holders who choose the Class A CDL theory instruction
upgrade curriculum will already have received training in drug and
alcohol testing. Class B holders who obtain their CDL before February
7, 2020, must receive detailed information from their employer
concerning the drug and alcohol use and testing requirements and
prohibitions set forth in 49 CFR parts 382 and 40, as required by Sec.
382.601. These employer-provided materials must also include
information concerning the impact of drug and alcohol use on an
individual's health and ability to perform safety sensitive functions
and require that each driver certify in writing that he or she received
these materials. Class B holders who obtain their CDL after February 7,
2020, will have demonstrated their proficiency in the drugs/alcohol
theory topic included in the Class B Theory Curriculum as Unit B1.5.9,
in addition to being subject to the requirements of Sec.  382.601.
    Similarly, drivers who obtain their Class B CDL after February 7,
2020, will

have demonstrated proficiency in the trip planning topic included in
the Class B Theory Curriculum as Unit B1.5.8. Drivers who obtain their
Class B CDL before February 7, 2020, will have gained knowledge and
experience as CMV operators and thus will be familiar with the core
principles of trip planning.
    FMCSA therefore continues to believe that inclusion of these non-
driving topics in the Class A CDL theory instruction upgrade curriculum
is not necessary. The Agency notes, however, that Class B holders who
want further training in these topics when upgrading to a Class A CDL
may choose the Class A theory instruction standard curriculum, which
includes units on drugs/alcohol and trip planning.

2. Application of Class A CDL Theory Training Requirements to Drivers
Obtaining a Class B CDL Prior to February 7, 2020

    Comment: OOIDA, while supporting elimination of duplicative Class A
CDL theory training requirements for drivers who obtain a Class B CDL
after February 7, 2020, stated that ``commercial drivers with a Class B
CDL prior to February 7, 2020, should not be exempt from the training
requirements discussed in this rulemaking.''
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA did not propose that drivers who obtain a
Class B CDL before February 7, 2020, should be exempt from Class A CDL
theory training requirements. Under the proposal and this final rule,
all Class B CDL holders seeking to upgrade their license to a Class A
CDL must successfully complete Class A theory training, regardless of
when they obtained their Class B CDL. The Agency proposed providing
Class B CDL holders with the option to fulfill the Class A CDL theory
instruction training requirement by completing either the standard or
the upgrade curriculum. As discussed in the NPRM, drivers who obtain
their Class B CDL before February 7, 2020, will already have some
degree of training, knowledge, and experience and, in that sense, are
not new to the motor carrier industry. Accordingly, these Class B
holders may choose the upgrade curriculum, which contains fewer non-
driving instructional units than the standard curriculum. Drivers who
obtain their Class B CDL after February 7, 2020, will have completed
the Class B theory instruction curriculum set forth in the ELDT final
rule, which includes the eight non-driving units not included in the
Class A upgrade curriculum. Therefore, these Class B holders, who have
already demonstrated proficiency in those eight non-driving
instructional units, may choose the upgrade curriculum when seeking a
Class A CDL. FMCSA reiterates that Class B holders upgrading to a Class
A CDL may choose the theory instruction curriculum that best suits
their needs, including the full standard curriculum.

3. The Proposed Class A CDL Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum

    Comment: CVTA, while acknowledging FMCSA's effort to reduce
redundancies for Class B CDL holders seeking to upgrade to a Class A
CDL, nevertheless opposed the NPRM. First, CVTA argued that because
most commercial truck driving schools are likely to offer a Class A
curriculum that meets or exceeds the minimum requirements established
by the ELDT final rule, ``[i]t is more efficient to subject Class B
holders to a full Class A curriculum rather than dedicating resources''
to ``create a special program for a limited number of people.'' Second,
CVTA argued that even if FMCSA allowed a training provider to offer the
abbreviated upgrade curriculum, as proposed, ``students would still be
required to take and pass an assessment, which will contain questions
covering these eight subjects.'' Lastly, CVTA disputed FMCSA's
assertion that Class B CDL holders ``will already have demonstrated
proficiency in the eight non-driving theory topics'' not included in
the Class A theory upgrade curriculum, concluding that ``the NPRM
wrongly presumes all Class B holders have some experience handling
freight.''
    FMCSA Response: Under the ELDT final rule and this rule, training
providers are free to continue or develop ELDT programs that exceed the
Agency's requirements. The Agency did not propose to require that
training providers offer the Class A theory instruction upgrade
curriculum.
    FMCSA also disagrees that students subject to the upgrade
curriculum would be required to take and pass an assessment covering
subjects that are not part of that curriculum. CVTA correctly noted
that the ELDT final rule requires that driver-trainees must demonstrate
proficiency in the knowledge objectives described in the theory
curricula by achieving an overall score of 80% on a written assessment.
However, FMCSA does not intend that driver-trainees who complete the
Class A upgrade curriculum be tested on the eight non-driving theory
instructional units not included in that curriculum. The introductory
paragraph to ``Appendix A to part 380, Class A CDL training
curriculum,'' as set forth in the ELDT final rule and this rule, notes
that training providers must cover all theory subjects set forth in the
curriculum. Additionally, in the ELDT final rule, Sec.  380.715(a),
``Assessments,'' states that training providers must ``determine
driver-trainees' proficiency in the knowledge objectives in the theory
portion of each unit of instruction in appendices A through E of part
380, as applicable.'' Accordingly, driver-trainees would be tested only
on the instructional units included in the Class A theory curriculum
(i.e., standard or upgrade curriculum) they choose to complete.
    Finally, FMCSA's statement that certain Class B holders will
already have demonstrated proficiency in the eight non-driving theory
instructional units referred specifically to drivers who obtain their
Class B CDL after February 7, 2020, and therefore are subject to the
ELDT final rule. To obtain a Class B CDL, these drivers would be
required to complete the Class B theory instruction curriculum (thereby
demonstrating proficiency), which includes the eight non-driving units
not included in the Class A upgrade curriculum. FMCSA emphasizes,
however, that as proposed in the NPRM and as adopted in this final
rule, these Class B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL, as well as
drivers who obtained their Class B CDL before February 7, 2020, can
receive theory instruction in handling and documenting cargo (as well
as the other seven non-driving units) by selecting the Class A standard
curriculum rather than the upgrade curriculum. The Agency believes that
this approach obviates CVTA's concern that Class B holders who operate
commercial passenger vehicles, such as motor coaches and school buses,
would not necessarily have experience in handling and documenting
cargo.

4. Estimated Cost Savings Resulting From the NPRM

    Comment: OOIDA suggested that the estimated cost savings of $182
million ``be reallocated towards other ELDT programs.''
    FMCSA Response: This rule retains the estimated 10-year cost
savings of $182 million on an undiscounted basis, as discussed in the
NPRM. However, the cost savings attributable to this rule would not
accrue to FMCSA or any other part of the Federal Government, and the
Agency has no authority to ``reallocate'' the savings to other aspects
of ELDT. The cost savings would be primarily experienced by driver-
trainees able to complete their Class A theory instruction in fewer
hours relative to the

baseline of the ELDT final rule, resulting in lower tuition costs and
reducing the opportunity cost of time for these individuals. Motor
carriers employing these drivers would also experience reduced
opportunity cost, or cost savings, relative to the baseline of the ELDT
final rule. The estimated cost savings resulting from this final rule
are discussed further below in Section VIII.A, ``E.O. 12866, E.O.
13563, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures.''

VIII. International Impacts

    The FMCSRs, and any exceptions to the FMCSRs, apply only within the
United States (and, in some cases, United States territories). Motor
carriers and drivers are subject to the laws and regulations of the
countries in which they operate, unless an international agreement
states otherwise. Drivers and carriers should be aware of the
regulatory differences among nations.

IX. Section-by-Section Analysis

    FMCSA made no changes to the proposed regulatory text in response
to the comments it received.
    As proposed, this final rule amends Sec.  380.707(a) to add ``or
Class A theory instruction upgrade curriculum applicants'' to the last
sentence in the paragraph to account for the fact that training
providers must verify that Class A CDL theory instruction upgrade
curriculum training applicants possess a valid Class B CDL.
    In Appendix A to part 380, Class A CDL Training Curriculum, as
proposed, FMCSA adds a sentence to the introductory text that states,
``Class A CDL applicants who possess a valid Class B CDL may complete
the Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum in lieu of the Theory
Instruction Standard Curriculum.'' Additionally, the Agency renames the
Class A ``Theory Instruction'' as ``Theory Instruction Standard
Curriculum.'' Finally, the Agency adds a new section, ``Theory
Instruction Upgrade Curriculum.''

X. Regulatory Analyses

A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures

    FMCSA performed an analysis of the impacts of the rule and
determined it is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning and
Review, as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011),
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it under that Order. It is
also not significant within the meaning of DOT regulatory policies and
procedures (DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR 11034 (Feb. 26,
1979)).
    As discussed earlier, because Class B CDL holders have previous
training or experience in the CMV industry, the rule establishes a new
theory instruction upgrade curriculum that removes eight instructional
units involving ``Non-Driving Activities'' for Class B CDL holders
upgrading to a Class A CDL. The rule does not change the BTW training
requirements set forth in the ELDT final rule. Consistent with the ELDT
final rule, the Class A theory instruction upgrade curriculum does not
have a required minimum number of instruction hours, but the training
provider must cover all topics in the curriculum, and driver-trainees
must receive an overall minimum score of 80 percent on the written
theory assessment. FMCSA estimates that this new curriculum results in
cost savings by taking less time to complete, without impacting the
benefits of the ELDT final rule.
    The Agency estimates that an annual average of approximately 11,340
driver-trainees are affected by the rule, with each experiencing a
reduction of 27 hours to complete the theory instruction. This results
in a substantial cost savings to these driver-trainees, as well as a
cost savings to the motor carriers that ultimately employ these
drivers. The rule does not result in any increase in costs. As
presented in Table 3, the Agency estimates that the rule results in a
10-year cost savings of $182 million on an undiscounted basis, $155
million discounted at 3%, $127 million discounted at 7%, and $18
million on an annualized basis at a 7% or a 3% discount rate. Most of
this annualized cost savings ($17.10 million) is realized by driver-
trainees, with the remainder of the annualized cost savings ($1.04
million) realized by motor carriers.
Scope and Key Inputs to the Analysis
    The rule revises regulations established in the ELDT final rule
and, therefore, the ELDT final rule serves as the baseline against
which the effects of the rule are evaluated. The compliance date of the
regulations established by the ELDT final rule remains February 7,
2020; therefore, the same analysis period of 2020 to 2029, used in
evaluating the effects of the ELDT final rule, is used in evaluating
the effects of this rule. Furthermore, to ensure that meaningful
relative comparisons can be made between the results of the regulatory
analysis for this rule and the baseline represented by the ELDT final
rule, all monetary values are expressed in 2014 dollars, the same base
year used to express monetary values in the evaluation of the ELDT
final rule.
    Many of the key inputs to this analysis are based on the same data
sources as those developed and used in the evaluation of the ELDT final
rule. Therefore, a copy of the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final
rule is available in the docket,\6\ and, where applicable, the Agency
cites that document in the analysis below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). ``Regulatory Evaluation of
Minimum Training Requirements for Entry-Level Commercial Motor
Vehicle Operators. final rule. Regulatory Impact Analysis. Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Unfunded Mandates Analysis.''
November 2016. Docket ID FMCSA-YEAR-2007-27748. Available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FMCSA-2007-27748-1291
(accessed September 7, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Number of Driver-Trainees Affected by the Rule
    The Agency estimates that an annual average of 11,340 driver-
trainees are affected by the rule, totaling approximately 113,000
driver-trainees affected over the 10-year analysis period. Annual
estimates of the number of driver-trainees affected by the rule are
presented below in Table 2.

    Table 2--Estimated Number of Driver-Trainees Affected by the Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Driver-
                                                             trainees
                          Year                              affected by
                                                             the rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020....................................................          11,069
2021....................................................          11,129
2022....................................................          11,188
2023....................................................          11,248
2024....................................................          11,309
2025....................................................          11,369
2026....................................................          11,430
2027....................................................          11,491
2028....................................................          11,553
2029....................................................          11,615
                                                         ---------------
  Total.................................................         113,403
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The estimated number of driver-trainees affected by the rule is a key
input in determining the potential cost savings to driver-trainees and
to the motor carriers that ultimately employ these drivers.
    To derive the estimates presented above in Table 2, FMCSA first
estimated the total annual number of Class B CDL holders upgrading to a
Class A CDL. These estimates are based on a June 2015 information
collection, performed as part of the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT
final rule, requesting data from the 51 SDLAs, including

information regarding the number of upgrades of Class B CDLs to Class A
CDLs issued in 2014.\7\ Seventeen SDLAs responded to this data
collection, 13 of which provided data regarding the number of upgrades.
For these 13 SDLAs, a total of 13,937 upgrades from Class B CDLs to
Class A CDLs were issued in 2014. Accounting for the difference in the
number of licensed drivers across states, FMCSA extrapolated this value
to a national total that is representative of all 51 SDLAs. This
adjustment results in a national estimate of 67,000 upgrades from Class
B CDLs to Class A CDLs issued in 2014. Further details regarding the
June 2015 information collection and the methods used to develop the
national estimate of 67,000 upgrades from Class B CDLs to Class A CDLs
issued in 2014 can be found in the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT
final rule.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). ``Report by State Driver
Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) on the Annual Number of Entry-Level
Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Applicants and Related Data.'' OMB
Control No: 2126-0059.
    \8\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
19-20, 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This 2014 baseline value of 67,000 upgrades from Class B CDLs to
Class A CDLs was then used to develop projections of the number of
Class B CDL to Class A CDL upgrades issued annually for the 2020 to
2029 analysis period. These future projections were developed by
increasing the current baseline 2014 value consistent with occupation-
specific employment growth projections for several commercial vehicle-
related occupations obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
Employment Projections program.\9\ FMCSA projected that the annual
number of Class B CDL to Class A CDL upgrades for the 2020 to 2029
analysis period would range between 69,000 and 73,000. These
projections and further details regarding their development can be
found in the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS). Employment Projections Program. ``Table 1.2: Employment by
detailed occupation, 2014 and projected 2024.'' Available at: http://www.bls.gov/emp/ind-occ-matrix/occupation.xlsx (accessed July 29,
2016).
    \10\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation.''
Annual projections for 2020 to 2029 for ``Upgrade of Class B CDL to
Class A CDL'' are presented in Table 11 on page 18, and discussed on
pp. 27-30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the resulting annual projections of the overall number of
upgrades from Class B CDLs to Class A CDLs are then adjusted to account
for the portion of these drivers who are not affected by the ELDT final
rule because these drivers are already receiving training in the
absence of that rule. These drivers are not affected by the rule. In
the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule, FMCSA estimated that
84% of driver-trainees obtaining a Class A CDL already receive training
in the absence of that rule and therefore are not affected by the ELDT
final rule.\11\ The remaining portion (16%) of driver-trainees are
those affected by the ELDT final rule, and therefore, by this rule. The
annual projections of the overall number of upgrades from Class B CDLs
to Class A CDLs developed earlier are adjusted accordingly, using this
16% value to estimate the number of Class B CDL holders upgrading to a
Class A CDL who are affected by the rule. This results in the estimated
number of driver-trainees affected annually by the rule, as presented
earlier in Table 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
52-62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estimated Hours To Complete the Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum

    The estimated number of hours necessary to complete the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum, and the resulting time savings compared
to the estimated time necessary to complete the Class A theory
instruction curriculum that was set forth in the ELDT final rule,
provide key inputs in determining the potential cost savings to driver-
trainees and to the motor carriers that ultimately employ these
drivers. Under both the ELDT final rule and this rule, there is no
minimum number of hours that driver-trainees are required to spend on
the theory portions of any of the training curricula. The training
provider must, however, cover all topics in the theory instruction
curriculum, and driver-trainees must receive an overall minimum score
of at least 80 percent on the written theory assessment. The Agency
estimated that, on average, driver-trainees need 60 hours to complete
the Class A theory instruction curriculum set forth in the ELDT final
rule,\12\ which, in this rule, is renamed the ``Theory Instruction
Standard Curriculum.'' For this rule, the Agency estimates that Class B
CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL on average need 33 hours to
complete the theory instruction upgrade curriculum. Accordingly, the
Agency estimates the rule results in a time savings of 27 hours for
each Class B CDL holder upgrading to a Class A CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
70-74.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Class A theory instruction curriculum set forth in the ELDT
final rule included 30 instructional units, among them 10 instructional
units related to non-driving activities. The theory instruction upgrade
curriculum removes eight of these instructional units related to non-
driving activities. In the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final
rule, the Agency did not develop separate estimates of the time
necessary to complete each of the 30 instructional units comprising the
Class A theory instruction curriculum. Accordingly, FMCSA cannot make a
direct estimate of the time savings resulting from the elimination of
eight instructional units related to non-driving activities. Although
the number of instructional units is reduced by 27% (with eight out of
30 instructional units removed), the varying subject matter and content
of each of the 30 instructional units means that the number of hours
required to complete the training is not necessarily reduced by a
proportional 27% (i.e., a 16-hour reduction from the 60-hour estimate
for the theory instruction standard curriculum discussed above).
    Therefore, in order to develop an estimate of the number of hours
necessary to complete the theory instruction upgrade curriculum and the
resulting time savings compared to the estimated time necessary to
complete the Class A theory instruction curriculum in the ELDT final
rule, the Agency examined the theory instructional units of the
curricula standards for driver-trainees as established by the
Professional Truck Driver Institute (PTDI).\13\ These PTDI curricula
standards were reviewed previously during the development of the ELDT
final rule. The theory instructional units of the PTDI curricula
standards align closely with the 30 instructional units of the Class A
theory instruction curriculum in the ELDT final rule. Furthermore, the
PTDI curricula standards specify a minimum number of hours for six
major categories into which each of the individual instructional units
is assigned. These PTDI estimates help to provide a relative measure of
the amount of time necessary to complete each of the individual
instructional units in the rule. Based on the minimum number of
training hours required under the PTDI standards for each of the
individual

theory instructional units, the elimination of the eight instructional
units related to non-driving activities reduces the total hours of
Class A theory instruction by approximately 44.2%. Applying this 44.2%
reduction to the estimated 60 hours needed to complete the Class A
theory instruction curriculum in the ELDT final rule results in a 27-
hour reduction in the time needed for Class B CDL holders upgrading to
a Class A CDL to complete theory training by taking the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum. Accordingly, the Agency estimates that
Class B CDL holders upgrading to a Class A CDL, on average, now only
require 33 hours to complete the theory instruction upgrade curriculum.
Accordingly, the Agency estimates the rule results in a time savings of
27 hours for each Class B CDL holder upgrading to a Class A CDL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Professional Truck Driver Institute, Inc. (PTDI).
``Curricula Standards and Guidelines for Entry-Level Commercial
Motor Vehicle Driver Courses.'' February 15, 2017. Page 16.
Available at: http://www.ptdi.org/resources/Documents/Standards/CURRICULUM%20STANDARDS%20ENTRY%20LEVEL%20021517.pdf (accessed
October 2, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other Inputs to the Analysis
    The reduction of 27 hours in theory training for each of the
driver-trainees affected by the rule results in a change in the costs
incurred by these driver-trainees, relative to the baseline of the ELDT
final rule. This change in cost is comprised of two components, a
reduction in tuition costs incurred by these driver-trainees, and a
reduction in the opportunity cost of time for these driver-trainees.
    FMCSA evaluated tuition costs using an average hourly cost of
training of $26 per hour, based on a review of nearly nine hundred CDL
driver training programs as discussed in the regulatory evaluation for
the ELDT final rule.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
68-69.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency evaluated changes in the opportunity cost of time for
driver-trainees using the driver wage rate to represent the value of
driver-trainee time that, in the absence of the rule, was spent in
training but now is available to driver-trainees for other uses, such
as productive employment. FMCSA uses a driver wage rate of $30 per
hour, representing the median hourly base wage rate for truck drivers
plus fringe benefits, as discussed in the regulatory evaluation of the
ELDT final rule.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
11-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the reduction of 27 hours in theory training for each of
the driver-trainees affected by the rule also reduces the opportunity
costs incurred by motor carriers that ultimately employ these driver-
trainees. The opportunity cost to motor carriers from a regulatory
action represents the value of the best alternative to the firm that
must be forgone by, or is now made available to, the firm as a result
of that regulatory action.\16\ Under the rule, an input of production
(driver labor) that was previously unavailable to carriers in the
absence of the rule is now available to carriers, for a time equivalent
to the 27-hour reduction in theory training for each of the affected
driver-trainees. The value of this time to the motor carrier is
measured by estimating the change in profit to the firm, and is a
function of the estimated 27-hour reduction in theory training for each
of the affected driver-trainees, the marginal cost of operating a CMV,
and an estimate of a typical average motor carrier profit margin. As
discussed in the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule, the
Agency estimates that the marginal cost of operating a CMV is $68 per
hour, and that the average profit margin for motor carriers is 5%.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
76-79.
    \17\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
76-79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs
    The rule does not result in any increase in costs. In the
regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule, the Agency estimated
that not only would driver-trainees and motor carriers incur costs, but
that training providers, SDLAs, and the Federal government would also
incur costs as a result of the ELDT final rule. For this rule, the
Agency does not anticipate any change in costs relative to the ELDT
final rule for training providers, SDLAs, or the Federal government
because it does not affect the regulatory obligations of these entities
as set forth in the ELDT final rule.
    Costs to training providers resulting from the ELDT final rule
included costs for submitting a Training Provider Registration Form
(TPRF) for each training location to the Training Provider Registry
(TPR), costs for electronically submitting training certification
information to the TPR for driver-trainees who have completed training,
and costs for preparing for and being subject to compliance audits.\18\
Under the rule, training providers still need to register with the TPR,
and for those driver-trainees affected by the rule, training providers
still need to transmit training completion information electronically
to the TPR. Accordingly, FMCSA does not anticipate any change in costs
to training providers resulting from the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
79-81.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Costs to SDLAs resulting from the ELDT final rule included costs
for updates to SDLA information technology (IT) systems to be able to
receive driver training completion information from CDLIS and store
this information in the driver history record. Under the rule, SDLAs
continue to receive and store the same information. Therefore, FMCSA
does not anticipate any change in costs to SDLAs resulting from the
rule.
    Finally, costs to the Federal Government resulting from the ELDT
final rule included costs for FMCSA to create and manage the TPR and to
enforce the regulations established by the final rule. Under the rule,
the TPR must be developed and maintained in the same manner as under
the ELDT final rule. In addition, training program enforcement
activities, such as compliance audits performed on training providers,
remain unchanged under the rule as compared to the ELDT final rule, and
FMCSA's review of training provider registration forms also remains
unchanged. Accordingly, FMCSA does not anticipate any change in costs
to the Federal government resulting from the rule.
    As discussed above, FMCSA estimates a reduction in costs incurred
by driver-trainees and motor carriers affected by the rule. Because
there is an estimated reduction of 27 hours of training for each
driver-trainee affected by the rule, the Agency estimates that both
driver-trainees and motor carriers experience negative costs, that is,
a decrease in costs or a cost savings. The rule does not result in any
increase in costs for driver-trainees or motor carriers. The rule
reduces tuition costs, as well as the opportunity cost of time for
these driver-trainees, relative to the baseline of the ELDT final rule.
    For each year of the 10-year analysis period, FMCSA multiplied the
estimated number of driver-trainees annually that are affected by the
rule, as presented in Table 2, by the estimated reduction of 27 hours
in theory training for each of these driver-trainees. FMCSA then
multiplied the resulting total aggregate reduction in theory training
hours by $26 per hour (the estimated average hourly cost of
training),\19\ yielding an estimate of the overall change in tuition
costs experienced by

driver-trainees for each year of the analysis period. Additionally, the
Agency multiplied the total aggregate reduction in theory training
hours by the estimated driver wage rate of $30 per hour, yielding an
estimate of the change in the opportunity cost of time experienced by
driver-trainees for each year of the analysis period. As presented in
Table 3, the Agency estimates that the rule results in a 10-year
tuition cost savings to driver-trainees of $80 million on an
undiscounted basis. The Agency estimates that the rule also results in
a 10-year opportunity cost of time savings to driver-trainees of $92
million on an undiscounted basis. In total, the Agency estimates that
the rule results in a 10-year cost savings to driver-trainees of $171
million on an undiscounted basis, and $17.10 million on an annualized
basis at a 7% discount rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The tuition costs noted above are derived from observed
tuition charged for the CDL training programs identified by FMCSA,
and are proxies for tuition costs that might be charged for a
curriculum that meets the requirements of the rule. More details can
be found in section 3.2.1 of the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT
final rule. DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,''
pp. 68-69.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The development of the key inputs necessary to estimate the change
in cost to motor-carriers, described earlier, includes the marginal
cost of operating a CMV, an estimate of a typical average motor carrier
profit margin, and the estimated 27-hour reduction in theory training
for each of the driver-trainees affected by the rule. For each year of
the 10-year analysis period, the estimated number of driver-trainees
who are affected by the rule as presented earlier in Table 2 is
multiplied by the estimated reduction of 27 hours in theory training
for each of these driver-trainees. The resulting total reduction in
theory training hours is then multiplied by the estimated marginal cost
of operating a CMV of $68 per hour, and the estimated profit margin of
5% for motor carriers. As presented in Table 3, the Agency estimates
that the rule results in a 10-year opportunity cost savings to motor
carriers of $10 million on an undiscounted basis, and $1.04 million on
an annualized basis at a 7% discount rate, representing a decrease in
opportunity cost, or an opportunity cost savings to motor carriers.
    As presented in Table 3, the Agency estimates that the rule results
in a 10-year cost savings of $182 million on an undiscounted basis,
$155 million discounted at 3%, $127 million discounted at 7%, and $18
million on an annualized basis at a 7% discount rate, representing a
decrease in cost or a cost savings. Most of this annualized cost
savings ($17.10 million) is realized by driver-trainees, with the
remainder of the annualized cost savings ($1.04 million) realized by
motor carriers.

                                                             Table 3--Total Cost of the Rule
                                                                 [in millions of 2014$]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Undiscounted                                     Discounted
                                              Driver-    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                       trainees                     Driver-trainee   Motor carrier
                                            affected by   Driver-trainee    opportunity     opportunity    Total  costs   Discounted  at  Discounted  at
                                             the rule      tuition costs       costs           costs           \(a)\            3%              7%
                                                     [A]  [B] = [A] x [-  [C] = [A] x [-  [D] = [A] x [-           [E] =  ..............  ..............
                                                             27 hours] x     27 hours] x     27 hours] x     [B] + [C] +
                                                          [$26 per hour]  [$30 per hour]  [$68 per hour]             [D]
                                                                                x [0.05]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020....................................          11,069    \(b)\ ($7.8)          ($9.0)          ($1.0)         ($17.8)         ($17.2)         ($16.6)
2021....................................          11,129           (7.8)           (9.0)           (1.0)          (17.8)          (16.8)          (15.6)
2022....................................          11,188           (7.9)           (9.1)           (1.0)          (17.9)          (16.4)          (14.6)
2023....................................          11,248           (7.9)           (9.1)           (1.0)          (18.0)          (16.0)          (13.8)
2024....................................          11,309           (7.9)           (9.2)           (1.0)          (18.1)          (15.6)          (12.9)
2025....................................          11,369           (8.0)           (9.2)           (1.0)          (18.2)          (15.3)          (12.2)
2026....................................          11,430           (8.0)           (9.3)           (1.0)          (18.3)          (14.9)          (11.4)
2027....................................          11,491           (8.1)           (9.3)           (1.1)          (18.4)          (14.5)          (10.7)
2028....................................          11,553           (8.1)           (9.4)           (1.1)          (18.5)          (14.2)          (10.1)
2029....................................          11,615           (8.2)           (9.4)           (1.1)          (18.6)          (13.9)           (9.5)
                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................         113,403            (80)            (92)            (10)           (182)           (155)           (127)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized..............................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............            (18)            (18)            (18)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\a\ Total cost values may not equal the sum of the components due to rounding (the totals shown in this column are the rounded sum of unrounded
  components).
\b\ Values shown in parentheses are negative values (i.e., less than zero), and represent a decrease in cost or a cost savings.

Benefits
    The Agency anticipates no change in the benefits of the ELDT final
rule as a result of this rule. In the regulatory evaluation for the
ELDT final rule, the Agency estimated quantified benefits for three
categories of non-safety benefits, including savings from reductions in
fuel consumption, reductions in CO2 emissions related to
these reductions in fuel consumption, and reductions in vehicle
maintenance and repair costs. These estimated non-safety benefits were
derived from the Speed Management and Space Management instructional
units in the Class A theory instruction curriculum set forth in the
ELDT final rule.\20\ Because these two instructional units remain in
the theory instruction upgrade curriculum, the Agency does not
anticipate any change in these non-safety benefits from this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ DOT FMCSA, ``ELDT Final Rule Regulatory Evaluation,'' pp.
87-122.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule addressed the
potential safety benefits of entry-level driver training. In
considering the potential impacts on safety from this rule, the Agency
notes that Class B holders have previous training or experience in the
CMV industry, which serves as an adequate substitute for the eight non-
driving instructional units that are not included in the theory
instruction upgrade curriculum. Therefore, the Agency anticipates that
there is no change in potential safety benefits associated with this
rule.

B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs)

    Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs, was issued on January 30, 2017 (82 FR 9339, Feb. 3,
2017). E.O. 13771 requires that for every one new regulation issued by
an Agency, at least two prior regulations be identified for
elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently
managed and controlled through a budgeting process.\21\ Final
implementation guidance addressing the requirements of E.O. 13771 was
issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on April 5,
2017.\22\ The OMB guidance defines what is an E.O. 13771 regulatory
action and what is an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action, provides
procedures for how agencies should account for the costs and cost
savings of such actions, and outlines various other details regarding
implementation of E.O. 13771.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Executive Office of the President. Executive Order 13771 of
January 30, 2017. Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs. 82 FR 9339. Feb. 3, 2017. Section 1 (Purpose).
    \22\ Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and
Budget. Memorandum M-17-21. Guidance Implementing Executive Order
13771. April 5, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This final rule has total costs less than zero, and is therefore an
E.O. 13771 deregulatory action.\23\ The present value of the cost
savings of this rule, measured on an infinite time horizon at a 7%
discount rate, expressed in 2016 dollars, and discounted to 2020 (the
year the rule goes into effect and cost savings would first be
realized), is $278 million. On an annualized basis, these cost savings
are $19.5 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and
Budget. Memorandum M-17-21. Guidance Implementing Executive Order
13771. April 5, 2017. Q4 on page 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purpose of E.O. 13771 accounting, the April 5, 2017, OMB
guidance requires that agencies also calculate the costs and cost
savings discounted to year 2016.\24\ In accordance with this
requirement, the present value of the cost savings of this rule,
measured on an infinite time horizon at a 7% discount rate, expressed
in 2016 dollars, and discounted to 2016, is $212 million. On an
annualized basis, these cost savings are $15 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and
Budget. Memorandum M-17-21. Guidance Implementing Executive Order
13771. April 5, 2017. Q25 on page 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601, et
seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857), requires Federal
agencies to consider the impact of their regulatory actions on small
entities, analyze effective alternatives that minimize small entity
impacts, and make their analyses available for public comment. The term
``small entities'' means small businesses and not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations under 50,000.\25\ Accordingly, DOT policy requires an
analysis of the impact of all regulations on small entities, and
mandates that agencies strive to lessen any adverse effects on these
entities. Section 605 of the RFA allows an Agency to certify a rule, in
lieu of preparing an analysis, if the rulemaking is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Regulatory Flexibility Act, Public Law 96-354, 94 Stat.
1164 (codified at 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule affects a subset of driver-trainees and motor carriers.
Driver-trainees are not considered small entities because they do not
meet the definition of a small entity in Section 601 of the RFA.
Specifically, driver-trainees are considered neither a small business
under Section 601(3) of the RFA, nor are they considered a small
organization under Section 601(4) of the RFA.
    Motor carriers affected by this rule are most likely those that
hire Class A CDL drivers. Passenger motor carriers generally rely on
CMVs that do not require a Class A CDL to operate (i.e., Group B
vehicles), and thus are not be affected by this rule. In the regulatory
evaluation for the ELDT final rule, FMCSA estimated that there were
approximately 1.1 million inter- and intrastate freight motor carriers,
of which a subset operate Group A vehicles, and thus are affected by
this rule. FMCSA estimates that this rule affects between 11,000 and
12,000 CMV driver-trainees per year, resulting in fewer than 12,000
motor carriers affected per year, which is approximately 0.9% of the
total number of inter- and intrastate freight motor carriers. FMCSA
does not know how many of these motor carriers would be considered
``small.''
    The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) defines the size
standards used to classify entities as small. SBA establishes separate
standards for each industry, as defined by the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS).\26\ This rule could affect many
different industry sectors; for example, the transportation sector
(e.g., General freight trucking industry group (4841) and the
Specialized freight trucking industry group (4842)), the agricultural
sector, and the construction sector. Industry groups within these
sectors have size standards for qualifying as small based on the number
of employees (e.g., 500 employees), or on the amount of annual revenue
(e.g., $27.5 million in revenue). FMCSA does not have specific
information about the number of employees or revenue for each of the
motor carriers. However, FMCSA is aware that the motor carrier industry
largely consists of smaller firms. Of the 1.1 million freight motor
carriers, roughly 1 million have between 1 and 6 power units. If all of
the approximately 1 million freight motor carriers with 6 or fewer
power units are considered small based on the applicable size standard,
then a maximum of 1.2% (12,000 / 1 million) of small entities are
affected by this rule. Therefore, FMCSA estimates that this rule does
not impact a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). ``North American Industry Classification System.''
2017. Available at: https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/2017NAICS/2017_NAICS_Manual.pdf (accessed December 1, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed earlier in the Regulatory Analyses section, FMCSA
estimates the impact to the affected motor carriers as a reduction in
opportunity cost, or a cost savings, relative to the baseline of the
ELDT final rule. This rule removes some of the training requirements
accounted for in the regulatory evaluation for the ELDT final rule,
allowing those drivers who are upgrading from a Class B CDL to a Class
A CDL to begin working and earning a profit for the motor carrier
earlier than under the current training procedures. Therefore, this
rule provides affected motor carriers with increased access to labor
hours, and consequently profit, resulting in an opportunity cost
savings to the motor carrier. FMCSA estimated the opportunity cost to
the motor carrier as a function of the number of hours previously spent
in training that are now available for labor, an estimate of the profit
margin, and the marginal hourly operational costs of the CMV. As
discussed earlier in the Regulatory Analyses section, the Agency
estimates that the rule results in a cost savings to all motor carriers
of $1.04 million on an annualized basis at a 7% discount rate. On a per
driver basis for those drivers affected by the rule, the cost savings

realized by the motor carriers is approximately $92 (27 hours x 0.05
profit margin x $68 marginal operating costs).
    The RFA does not define a threshold for determining whether a
specific regulation results in a significant impact. However, the SBA,
in guidance to government agencies, provides some objective measures of
significance that the agencies can consider using.\27\ One measure that
could be used to illustrate a significant impact is labor costs,
specifically, if the cost of the regulation exceeds 5% of the labor
costs of the entities in the sector. The American Transportation
Research Institute (ATRI) performed an annual survey of motor carriers
and published its findings in the ``Analysis of the Operational Costs
of Trucking: 2017 Update.'' ATRI found that driver wages and benefits
represent approximately 33% of average marginal costs to a carrier.\28\
ATRI further estimated that average marginal hourly driver costs,
including wages and benefits, were $27.09 in 2016. FMCSA hours of
service regulations allow drivers 60 hours of on-duty time in a 7-day
period. This equates to approximately $84,500 in driver labor costs per
year ($27.09 x 60 hours per week x 52 weeks). The impact of this rule
is approximately 0.11% of labor costs ($92 impact / $84,500 labor
costs)--well below the 5% threshold identified in the SBA guide.
Therefore, this rule does not have a significant impact on the entities
affected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy. ``A
Guide for Government Agencies. How to Comply with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.'' 2017. Available at: https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/How-to-Comply-with-the-RFA-WEB.pdf (accessed
on September 7, 2018).
    \28\ American Transportation Research Institute. ``An Analysis
of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2017 Update. Available at:
http://atri-online.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/ATRI-Operational-Costs-of-Trucking-2017-10-2017.pdf (Accessed on: September 7, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, I hereby certify that the action does not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Assistance for Small Entities

    In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, FMCSA wants to assist small entities
in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its effects
and participate in the rulemaking initiative. If the rule affects your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction, and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please consult the FMCSA point of contact, Mr. Richard Clemente, listed
in the For Further Information Contact section of this rule.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call
1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The DOT has a policy regarding the
rights of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an
explicit policy against retaliation for exercising these rights.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). ``The Rights of
Small Entities To Enforcement Fairness and Policy Against
Retaliation.'' Available at: https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/SBREFAnotice2.pdf (accessed December 1, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act requires agencies to prepare
a comprehensive written statement for any proposed or final rule that
may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $161 million (which is
the value equivalent of $100,000,000 in 1995, adjusted for inflation to
2017 levels) or more in any one year. Because this rule does not result
in such an expenditure, a written statement is not required. However,
the Agency does discuss the costs and benefits of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) (PRA)
requires Agencies to provide estimates of the information-collection
(IC) burden of its regulations. This rule does not alter the Agency's
estimates of the paperwork burden outlined in the final ELDT rule at 81
FR 88788 (Dec. 8, 2016). Since publication of the ELDT final rule, the
OMB, on April 19, 2017, approved the Agency's estimate of 66,250 hours
for the IC collection titled ``Training Certification for Entry-Level
Commercial Motor Vehicle Drivers'' (2126-0028). The approval expires on
April 30, 2020.

G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)

    A rule has implications for Federalism under Section 1(a) of E.O.
13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' In assessing the federalism implications of the ELDT
final rule, FMCSA stated that, because the CDL program is voluntary, it
does not have preemptive effect on the States. The Agency therefore
concluded that the ELDT final rule would not have substantial direct
costs on or for States, nor would it limit the policymaking discretion
of States.\30\ This final rule does not change that conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See 81 FR 88732, 88788 (Dec. 8, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)

    Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), requires
agencies issuing ``economically significant'' rules, if the regulation
also concerns an environmental health or safety risk that an agency has
reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, to include an
evaluation of the regulation's environmental health and safety effects
on children. The Agency determined this rule is not economically
significant. Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on children is
required. In any event, the Agency does not anticipate that this
regulatory action could in any respect present an environmental or
safety risk that could disproportionately affect children.

J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    FMCSA reviewed this rule in accordance with E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights, and has determined it does not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have taking implications.

K. Privacy

    Section 522 of title I of division H of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, enacted December 8, 2004 (Pub. L. 108-447,
118 Stat. 2809, 3268, 5 U.S.C. 552a note), requires the Agency to
conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment

(PIA) of a regulation that will affect the privacy of individuals. The
assessment considers impacts of the rule on the privacy of information
in an identifiable form and related matters. The FMCSA Privacy Officer
has evaluated the risks and effects the rulemaking might have on
collecting, storing, and sharing personally identifiable information
(PII), as well as protections and alternative information handling
processes to mitigate potential privacy risks. FMCSA determined that,
while this rule does require the collection of individual PII, it does
not result in a change in collection, process, or the data elements
previously identified in the ELDT final rule.
    The privacy analysis of the ELDT final rule, which conforms to the
DOT standard Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), is published on the DOT
website (www.transportation.gov/privacy). It addresses business
processes identified in the ELDT final rule and new or existing
information collection systems to be implemented in support of those
processes. The FMCSA Privacy Office determined that this final rule
does not alter the privacy impact detailed in the PIA for the ELDT
final rule.
    The Agency submitted a Privacy Threshold Assessment (PTA) analyzing
the new rulemaking and the specific process for collection of personal
information to the Department of Transportation's Privacy Office. As
required by the Privacy Act, FMCSA and the Department will be
publishing, with request for comment, a system of records notice (SORN)
addressing the collection of information affected by this rule and the
ELDT final rule. This SORN will be published in the Federal Register
not less than 30 days before the Agency is authorized to collect or use
PII retrieved by unique identifier.

L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this
program.

M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    FMCSA has analyzed this rule under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use. The Agency has determined that it is not a ``significant energy
action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it does not require a
Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211.

N. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)

    This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because
it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

O. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance,
design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related
management systems practices) are standards developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, FMCSA did not consider the use of voluntary
consensus standards.

P. Environment (NEPA)

    FMCSA analyzed this final rule for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
determined this action is categorically excluded from further analysis
and documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental
impact statement under FMCSA Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680, March 1, 2004),
Appendix 2, paragraph (6)(z). The Categorical Exclusion (CE) in
paragraph (6)(z) covers (1) the minimum qualifications for persons who
drive commercial motor vehicles as, for, or on behalf of motor
carriers; and (2) the minimum duties of motor carriers with respect to
the qualifications of their drivers. The requirements in this rule are
covered by this CE and the action does not have the potential to
significantly affect the quality of the environment. The CE
determination is available for inspection or copying in the
regulations.gov website listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 380

    Administrative practice and procedure, Highway safety, Motor
carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, FMCSA amends 49 CFR chapter 3,
part 380, to read as follows:

PART 380--SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 380 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31305, 31307, 31308, and
31502; sec. 4007(a) and (b) of Pub. L. 102-240 (105 Stat. 2151-
2152); sec. 32304 of Pub. L.112-141; and 49 CFR 1.87.

Sec.  380.707  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  380.707, amend paragraph (a) by adding the words ``or Class
A theory instruction upgrade curriculum applicants'' to the end of the
final sentence.
0
3. Amend Appendix A to part 380 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text;
0
b. Revising the undesignated heading ``Theory Instruction'' to read
``Theory Instruction Standard Curriculum;'' and
0
c. Adding a section entitled ``Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum''
to the end of the appendix.
    The revision and addition to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 380--Class A--CDL training curriculum.

    Class A CDL applicants must complete the Class A CDL curriculum
outlined in this Appendix. The curriculum for Class A applicants
pertains to combination vehicles (Group A) as defined in 49 CFR
383.91(a)(1). Class A CDL applicants who possess a valid Class B CDL
may complete the Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum in lieu of the
Theory Instruction Standard Curriculum. There is no required minimum
number of instruction hours for theory training, but the training
instructor must cover all topics set forth in the curriculum. There is
no required minimum number of instruction hours for BTW (range and
public road) training, but the training instructor must cover all
topics set forth in the BTW curriculum. BTW training must be conducted
in a CMV for which a Class A CDL is required. The instructor must
determine and document that each driver-trainee has demonstrated
proficiency in all elements of the BTW curriculum, unless otherwise
noted. Consistent with the definitions of BTW range training and BTW
public road training in Sec.  380.605, a simulation device cannot be
used to conduct such training or to demonstrate proficiency. Training
instructors must document the total number of clock

hours each driver-trainee spends to complete the BTW curriculum. The
Class A curriculum must, at a minimum, include the following:
* * * * *

Theory Instruction Upgrade Curriculum

Section BA1.1 Basic Operation

    This section must cover the interaction between driver-trainees and
the CMV. Driver-trainees will receive instruction in the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) and will be introduced to the basic
CMV instruments and controls. Training providers will teach driver-
trainees the basic operating characteristics of a CMV. This section
must also teach driver-trainees how to properly perform vehicle
inspections, control the motion of CMVs under various road and traffic
conditions, employ shifting and backing techniques, and properly couple
and uncouple combination vehicles. Driver-trainees must familiarize
themselves with the basic operating characteristics of a CMV.

Unit BA1.1.1 Orientation

    This unit must introduce driver-trainees to the combination vehicle
driver training curriculum and the components of a combination vehicle.
The training providers must teach the safety fundamentals, essential
regulatory requirements (e.g., overview of FMCSRs and Hazardous
Materials Regulations), and driver-trainees' responsibilities not
directly related to CMV driving, such as proper cargo securement. This
unit must also cover the ramifications, including driver
disqualification provisions and fines, for non-compliance with parts
380, 382, 383, and 390 through 399 of the FMCSRs. This unit must also
include an overview of the applicability of State and local laws
relating to the safe operation of the CMV, stopping at weigh stations/
scales, hazard awareness of vehicle size and weight limitations, low
clearance areas (e.g., CMV height restrictions), and bridge formulas.

Unit BA1.1.2 Control Systems/Dashboard

    This unit must introduce driver-trainees to vehicle instruments,
controls, and safety components. The training providers must teach
driver-trainees to read gauges and instruments correctly and the proper
use of vehicle safety components, including safety belts and mirrors.
The training providers must teach driver-trainees to identify, locate,
and explain the function of each of the primary and secondary controls
including those required for steering, accelerating, shifting, braking
systems (e.g., ABS, hydraulic, air), as applicable, and parking.

Unit BA1.1.3 Pre- and Post-Trip Inspections

    This unit must teach the driver-trainees to conduct pre-trip and
post-trip inspections as specified in Sec. Sec.  392.7 and 396.11,
including appropriate inspection locations. Instruction must also be
provided on en route vehicle inspections.

Unit BA1.1.4 Basic Control

    This unit must introduce basic vehicular control and handling as it
applies to combination vehicles. This unit must include instruction
addressing basic combination vehicle controls in areas such as
executing sharp left and right turns, centering the vehicle,
maneuvering in restricted areas, and entering and exiting the
interstate or controlled access highway.

Unit BA1.1.5 Shifting/Operating Transmissions

    This unit must introduce shifting patterns and procedures to
driver-trainees to prepare them to safely and competently perform basic
shifting maneuvers. This unit must include training driver-trainees to
execute up and down shifting techniques on multi-speed dual range
transmissions, if appropriate. The training providers must teach the
importance of increased vehicle control and improved fuel economy
achieved by utilizing proper shifting techniques.

Unit BA1.1.6 Backing and Docking

    This unit must teach driver-trainees to back and dock the
combination vehicle safely. This unit must cover ``Get Out and Look''
(GOAL), evaluation of backing/loading facilities, knowledge of backing
set ups, as well as instruction in how to back with the use of
spotters.

Unit BA1.1.7 Coupling and Uncoupling

    This unit must provide instruction for driver-trainees to develop
the skills necessary to conduct the procedures for safe coupling and
uncoupling of combination vehicle units, as applicable.

Section BA1.2 Safe Operating Procedures

    This section must teach the practices required for safe operation
of the combination vehicle on the highway under various road, weather,
and traffic conditions. The training providers must teach driver-
trainees the Federal rules governing the proper use of seat belt
assemblies (Sec.  392.16).

Unit BA1.2.1 Visual Search

    This unit must teach driver-trainees to visually search the road
for potential hazards and critical objects, including instruction on
recognizing distracted pedestrians or distracted drivers.

Unit BA1.2.2 Communication

    This unit must instruct driver-trainees on how to communicate their
intentions to other road users. Driver-trainees must be instructed in
techniques for different types of communication on the road, including
proper use of headlights, turn signals, four-way flashers, and horns.
This unit must cover instruction in proper utilization of eye contact
techniques with other drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians.

Unit BA1.2.3 Distracted Driving

    This unit must instruct driver-trainees in FMCSRs related to
distracted driving and other key driver distraction driving issues,
including improper cell phone use, texting, and use of in-cab
technology (e.g., Sec. Sec.  392.80 and 392.82). This instruction will
include training in the following aspects: visual attention (keeping
eyes on the road); manual control (keeping hands on the wheel); and
cognitive awareness (keeping mind on the task and safe operation of the
CMV).

Unit BA1.2.4 Speed Management

    This unit must teach driver-trainees how to manage speed
effectively in response to various road, weather, and traffic
conditions. The instruction must include methods for calibrating safe
following distances taking into account CMV braking distances under an
array of conditions including traffic, weather, and CMV weight and
length.

Unit BA1.2.5 Space Management

    This unit must teach driver-trainees about the importance of
managing the space surrounding the vehicle under various traffic and
road conditions.

Unit BA1.2.6 Night Operation

    This unit must instruct driver-trainees in the factors affecting
the safe operation of CMVs at night and in darkness. Additionally,
driver-trainees must be instructed in changes in vision,
communications, speed space management, and proper use of lights, as
needed, to deal with the special problems night driving presents.

Unit BA1.2.7 Extreme Driving Conditions

    This unit must teach driver-trainees about the specific problems
presented by extreme driving conditions. The training provider will
emphasize the factors affecting the operation of CMVs in cold, hot, and
inclement weather and on steep grades and sharp curves. The training
provider must teach proper tire chaining procedures.

Section BA1.3 Advanced Operating Practices

    This section must introduce higher-level skills that can be
acquired only after the more fundamental skills and knowledge taught in
the prior two sections have been mastered. The training providers must
teach driver-trainees about the advanced skills necessary to recognize
potential hazards and must teach the driver-trainees the procedures
needed to handle a CMV when faced with a hazard.

Unit BA1.3.1 Hazard Perception

    The unit must teach driver-trainees to recognize potential hazards
in the driving environment in order to reduce the severity of the
hazard and neutralize possible emergency situations. The training
providers must teach driver-trainees to identify road conditions and
other road users that are a potential threat to the safety of the
combination vehicle and suggest appropriate adjustments. The
instruction must emphasize hazard recognition, visual search, adequate
surveillance, and response to possible emergency-producing situations
encountered by CMV drivers in various traffic situations. The training
providers must teach driver-trainees to recognize potential dangers and
the safety procedures that must be utilized while driving in
construction/work zones.

Unit BA1.3.2 Skid Control/Recovery, Jackknifing, and Other Emergencies

    This unit must teach the causes of skidding and jackknifing and
techniques for avoiding and recovering from them. The training
providers must teach the importance of maintaining directional control
and bringing the CMV to a stop in the shortest possible distance while
operating over a slippery surface. This unit must provide instruction
in appropriate responses when faced with CMV emergencies. This
instruction must include evasive steering, emergency braking, and off-
road recovery, as well as the proper response to brake failures, tire
blowouts, hydroplaning, and rollovers. The instruction must include a
review of unsafe acts and the role the acts play in producing or
worsening hazardous situations.

Unit BA1.3.3 Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings

    This unit must teach driver-trainees to recognize potential dangers
and the appropriate safety procedures to utilize at railroad (RR)-
highway grade crossings. This instruction must include an overview of
various Federal/State RR grade crossing regulations, RR grade crossing
environments, obstructed view conditions, clearance around the tracks,
and rail signs and signals. The training providers must instruct
driver-trainees that railroads have personnel available (``Emergency
Notification Systems'') to receive notification of any information
relating to an unsafe condition at the RR-highway grade crossing or a
disabled vehicle or other obstruction blocking a railroad track at the
RR-highway grade crossing.

Section BA1.4 Vehicle Systems and Reporting Malfunctions

    This section must provide entry-level driver-trainees with
sufficient knowledge of the combination vehicle and its systems and
subsystems to ensure that they understand and respect their role in
vehicle inspection, operation, and maintenance and the impact of those
factors upon highway safety and operational efficiency.

Unit BA1.4.1 Identification and Diagnosis of Malfunctions

    This unit must teach driver-trainees to identify major combination
vehicle systems. The goal is to explain their function and how to check
all key vehicle systems, (e.g., engine, engine exhaust auxiliary
systems, brakes, drive train, coupling systems, and suspension) to
ensure their safe operation. Driver-trainees must be provided with a
detailed description of each system, its importance to safe and
efficient operation, and what is needed to keep the system in good
operating condition.

Unit BA1.4.2 Roadside Inspections

    This unit must instruct driver-trainees on what to expect during a
standard roadside inspection conducted by authorized personnel. The
training providers must teach driver-trainees on what vehicle and
driver violations are classified as out-of-service (OOS), including the
ramifications and penalties for operating a CMV when subject to an OOS
order as defined in section 390.5.

Unit BA1.4.3 Maintenance

    This unit must introduce driver-trainees to the basic servicing and
checking procedures for various engine and vehicle components and to
help develop their ability to perform preventive maintenance and simple
emergency repairs.

Section BA1.5 Non-Driving Activities

    This section must teach driver-trainees the activities that do not
involve actually operating the CMV.

Unit BA1.5.1 Hours of Service Requirements

    This unit must teach driver-trainees to understand that there are
different hours-of-service (HOS) requirements applicable to different
industries. The training providers must teach driver-trainees all
applicable HOS regulatory requirements. The training providers must
teach driver-trainees to complete a Driver's Daily Log (electronic and
paper), timesheet, and logbook recap, as appropriate. The training
providers must teach driver-trainees the consequences (safety, legal,
and personal) of violating the HOS regulations, including the fines and
penalties imposed for these types of violations.

Unit BA1.5.2 Fatigue and Wellness Awareness

    This unit must teach driver-trainees about the issues and
consequences of chronic and acute driver fatigue and the importance of
staying alert. The training providers must teach driver-trainees
wellness and basic health maintenance information that affect a
driver's ability to safely operate a CMV.

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87 on February 14,
2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-04044 Filed 3-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P