Commercial Driver's License Standards: Application for Exemption; CRST Expedited, 65696-65698 [2016-22961]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
65696
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Notices
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1)
Issued on: September 12, 2016.
Peter Osborn,
Division Administrator, Federal Highway
Administration, Albany, New York.
[FR Doc. 2016–22700 Filed 9–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0480]
Commercial Driver’s License
Standards: Application for Exemption;
CRST Expedited
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
AGENCY:
Notice of final disposition; grant
of application for exemption.
ACTION:
FMCSA announces its
decision to grant CRST Expedited
(CRST) an exemption from the
regulation that requires a commercial
learner’s permit (CLP) holder to be
accompanied by a commercial driver’s
license (CDL) holder with the proper
CDL class and endorsements, seated in
the front seat of the vehicle while the
CLP holder performs behind-the-wheel
training on public roads or highways.
Under the terms and conditions of this
exemption, a CLP holder who has
documentation of passing the CDL skills
test may drive a commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) for CRST without being
accompanied by a CDL holder in the
front seat of the vehicle. The exemption
enables CLP holders to drive as part of
a team and have the same regulatory
flexibility as CRST team drivers with
CDLs. FMCSA has analyzed the
exemption application and the public
comments and has determined that the
exemption, subject to the terms and
conditions imposed, will achieve a level
of safety that is equivalent to, or greater
than, the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.
SUMMARY:
The exemption is effective from
September 23, 2016 through September
24, 2018.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
Mr.
Tom Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of
Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety
Standards; Telephone: (614) 942–6477.
Email: MCPSD@dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
Background
FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions
from some of the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations. FMCSA must
publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(a)). The Agency must provide
the public an opportunity to inspect the
information relevant to the application,
including any safety analyses that have
been conducted. The Agency must also
provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
The Agency reviews the safety
analyses and the public comments, and
determines whether granting the
exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than,
the level that would be achieved by the
current regulation (49 CFR 381.305).
The decision of the Agency must be
published in the Federal Register (49
CFR 381.315(b)) with the reason for the
grant or denial, and, if granted, the
specific person or class of persons
receiving the exemption, and the
regulatory provision or provisions from
which exemption is granted. The notice
must also specify the effective period of
the exemption, and explain the terms
and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR
381.300(b)).
Request for Exemption
CRST is one of the nation’s largest
transportation companies with a fleet of
more than 4,500 CMVs. CRST seeks an
exemption from 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1)
that would allow CLP holders who have
successfully passed a CDL skills test and
are thus eligible to receive a CDL, to
drive a truck without a CDL holder
being present in the front seat of the
vehicle. CRST indicates that the CDL
holder will remain in the vehicle at all
times while the CLP holder is driving—
just not in the front seat. This would
allow a CLP holder to participate in a
revenue-producing trip back to his or
her State of domicile to obtain the CDL
document, as the CDL can only be
issued by the State of domicile in
accordance with 49 CFR part 383.
CRST noted the trucking industry’s
need for qualified and well-trained
drivers to meet increasing shipping
demands. CRST believes that 49 CFR
383.25(a)(1) limits its ability to
efficiently recruit, train, and employ
new entrants to the industry. Prior to
the implementation of section
385.25(a)(1), States routinely issued
temporary CDLs to drivers who passed
the CDL skills test. The temporary CDL
allowed CRST time to route the new
driver to his or her State of domicile to
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
obtain the permanent CDL and place the
new driver into an on-the-job training
position with a driver-trainer. The
driver-trainer supervised and observed
the new driver, but was not required to
be on duty and in the front seat at all
times. Thus, the new driver became
productive immediately, allowing more
freight movement for CRST and
compensation for the new driver.
CRST contends that compliance with
the CDL rule places them in a very
difficult position regarding how they
return CLP holders who have passed
their skills testing to their State of
domicile to obtain their CDL. According
to CRST, the two possible courses of
action in this scenario are simple, yet
costly: (1) CRST sends CLP holders to
their home State by public
transportation to obtain the CDL and
hopes the drivers return to CRST for
employment; or (2) CRST sends CLP
holders back to their home State as
passengers on one of its trucks. Granting
the exemption would allow the CLP
holder to drive as part of a team on that
trip, resulting in reduced costs and
increased productivity.
CRST asserts that the exemption
would be consistent with the Agency’s
comments in the preamble to the final
rule adopting § 383.25 that ‘‘FMCSA
does not believe that it is safe to permit
inexperienced drivers who have not
passed the CDL skills test to drive
unaccompanied.’’ (76 FR 26854, 26861
May 9, 2011). The exemption sought
would apply only to those CRST drivers
who have passed the CDL skills test and
hold a CLP. CRST believes that the
exemption would result in a level of
safety that is equivalent to or greater
than the level of safety provided under
the rule. The only difference between a
CLP holder who has passed the CDL
skills test and a CDL holder is that the
latter has received the actual CDL
document from a State driver licensing
agency.
Public Comments
On January 5, 2016, FMCSA
published notice of this application and
requested public comment (81 FR 291).
The Agency received 56 comments.
Most of the comments opposed to the
CRST request were from truck drivers,
driver-trainers, and other individuals.
These respondents do not believe that it
is safe for a CLP holder to operate a
CMV without the supervision of a CDL
driver-trainer in the front seat of the
truck.
The Iowa Motor Truck Association
(IMTA) supported the exemption
request, commenting that if CLP holders
are properly trained and tested, the fact
that they have not yet obtained their
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Notices
CDL credential would in no way
compromise the safety of the operation.
IMTA added that granting this
exemption would enhance the
productivity while maintaining the
safety of CRST’s operation. It would also
give the applicant flexibility to allow a
CLP holder who has successfully passed
all CDL exams to operate more freely
and in a way that benefits the driver, the
carrier and the economy as a whole.
According to IMTA, one of the issues
with the current CLP rule is the fact that
it’s not always convenient to allow the
CLP driver to return to their home state
immediately after completing training
and passing their CDL exam. The
exemption would allow these drivers to
join a team operation, and give CRST
the time to get CLP holders through
their State of domicile at a future time
to complete the conversion of the CLP
to a CDL. IMTA is confident in the
safety and performance of CRST and
believe that, if granted, these drivers
would operate safely within the terms of
their exemption.
Opposing the exemption were three
industry groups, the Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates),
the Owner-Operator Independent
Drivers Association (OOIDA), and the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
(IBT).
Advocates commented that ‘‘FMCSA
must reject the CRST application
because it undermines existing Federal
safety regulations, and will usurp the
exclusive authority of states to
determine who should be granted
commercial driving privileges
associated with the issuance of a CDL.
The Application also fails to evaluate
any potential safety risk to the public or
address alternative means of pursuing
the goal of the exemption. The
Application appears to be an obvious
attempt to increase company profits
while ignoring the potentially
significant increase in truck crash risk to
the motoring public.’’
OOIDA believes the exemption sought
by CRST is not in the interest of
highway safety, will put OOIDA
members who share the road with these
poorly trained drivers at risk, and fails
to demonstrate that an exemption would
result in ‘‘a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level
that would be achieved absent such
exemption’’ as set forth in 49 U.S.C.
31315(b). Further, OOIDA states that
CRST does not demonstrate that it is
‘‘significantly burdened’’ by the existing
regulation and rather only demonstrates
a desire to increase productivity and
preserve CRST’s current business
practices. OOIDA finds the request fails
to meet the applicable standards the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
FMCSA must consider and is ill-timed,
considering FMCSA is currently
reviewing entry-level driver training
standards.
In a similar vein, IBT commented, ‘‘It
is clear from CRST’s application that it
is more concerned about saving money
and retaining the investment that it has
made in the training of the driver than
making sure that the CLP holder
receives the proper mentoring and
supervision needed for first time CLP
holders while they gather their behindthe-wheel training. Neither the DOT nor
the FMCSA should entertain the
relaxing of important safety standards so
that motor carriers have a better
opportunity to retain drivers that they
have trained. The idea that a driver may
not return to the company that provided
his/her training has more to do with
overall pay and benefits that the motor
carrier may be offering in the long term
than the time or distance traveled for
the CLP holder to obtain a CDL from the
CLP holder’s home state in the short
term. Neither should it be a goal of the
DOT or FMCSA to ‘promote greater
productivity’ for a motor carrier or allow
CLP holders to ‘actively earn a living
faster.’ The department’s goal should be
safety. Finally, the IBT feels strongly
that there is no substituting the skills
test for behind-the-wheel training of
CLP holders by experienced CDL
holders in the front seat of the CMV.’’
FMCSA Response and Decision
The premise of respondents opposing
the exemption is that CLP holders lack
experience and are safer drivers when
observed by a CDL driver-trainer who is
on duty and in the front seat of the
vehicle. The fact is that CLP holders
who have passed the CDL skills test are
qualified and eligible to obtain a CDL.
If these CLP holders had obtained their
training and CLPs in their State of
domicile, they could immediately
obtain their CDL at the State driver
licensing agency and begin driving a
CMV without any on-board supervision.
There is no data showing that having a
CDL holder accompany a CLP holder
who has passed the skills test improves
safety. Because these drivers have
passed the CDL skills test, the only
thing necessary to obtain the CDL is to
visit the Department of Motor Vehicles
office in their State of domicile.
FMCSA has evaluated CRST’s
application for exemption and the
public comments. The Agency believes
that CRST’s overall safety performance,
as reflected in its ‘‘satisfactory’’ safety
rating, will enable it to achieve a level
of safety that is equivalent to, or greater
than, the level of safety achieved
without the exemption (49 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65697
381.305(a)). The exemption is restricted
to CRST’s CLP holders who have
documentation that they have passed
the CDL skills test. The exemption will
enable these drivers to operate a CMV
as a team driver without requiring the
accompanying CDL holder be on duty
and in the front seat while the vehicle
is moving.
Terms and Conditions of the Exemption
Period of the Exemption
This exemption from the
requirements of 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) is
effective during the period of September
23, 2016 through September 24, 2018.
Extent of the Exemption
The exemption is contingent upon
CRST maintaining USDOT registration,
minimum levels of public liability
insurance, and not being subject to any
‘‘imminent hazard’’ or other out-ofservice (OOS) order issued by FMCSA.
Each driver covered by the exemption
must maintain a valid driver’s license
and CLP with the required
endorsements, not be subject to any
OOS order or suspension of driving
privileges, and meet all physical
qualifications required by 49 CFR part
391.
This exemption from 49 CFR
383.25(a)(1) will allow CRST drivers
who hold a CLP and have successfully
passed a CDL skills test, to drive a CMV
without a CDL holder being present in
the front seat of the vehicle. The CDL
holder must remain in the vehicle at all
times while the CLP holder is driving—
just not in the front seat.
Preemption
During the period this exemption is in
effect, no State may enforce any law or
regulation that conflicts with or is
inconsistent with the exemption with
respect to a person or entity operating
under the exemption (49 U.S.C.
31315(d)).
FMCSA Accident Notification
CRST must notify FMCSA within 5
business days of any accidents (as
defined by 49 CFR 390.5) involving the
operation of any of its CMVs while
utilizing this exemption. The
notification must be by email to
MCPSD@DOT.GOV, and include the
following information:
a. Exemption Identifier: ‘‘CRST’’
b. Date of the accident,
c. City or town, and State, in which the
accident occurred, or which is
closest to the scene of the accident,
d. Driver’s name and driver’s license
number,
e. Vehicle number and State license
number,
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
65698
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2016 / Notices
f. Number of individuals suffering
physical injury,
g. Number of fatalities,
h. The police-reported cause of the
accident,
i. Whether the driver was cited for
violation of any traffic laws, or
motor carrier safety regulations, and
j. The total driving time and the total
on-duty time of the CMV driver at
the time of the accident.
Termination
The FMCSA does not believe the CLPholders covered by the exemption will
experience any deterioration of their
safety record. However, should this
occur, FMCSA will take all steps
necessary to protect the public interest,
including revocation of the exemption.
The FMCSA will immediately revoke
the exemption for failure to comply
with its terms and conditions.
Issued on: September 12, 2016.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016–22961 Filed 9–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
[Docket No. FRA–2010–0002–N–23]
Proposed Agency Information
Collection Activities; Comment
Request
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, FRA seeks
renewal of the following currently
approved information collection
activities. Before submitting the
information collection requirements for
clearance by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), FRA is soliciting
public comment on specific aspects of
the activities identified in this notice.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later than November 22, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments
on the following proposed activities by
mail to either: Mr. Robert Brogan,
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, Office of Railroad Safety,
Regulatory Analysis Division, RRS–21,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 25,
Washington, DC 20590, or Ms. Kim
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Sep 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
Toone, Information Collection Clearance
Officer, Office of Information
Technology, RAD–20, FRA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 35,
Washington, DC 20590. Commenters
requesting that FRA acknowledge
receipt of their respective comments
must include a self-addressed stamped
postcard stating, ‘‘Comments on OMB
Control Number 2130–0590’’ and
should also include the title of the
collection of information. Alternatively,
comments may be faxed to (202) 493–
6216 or (202) 493–6497, or emailed to
Mr. Brogan at Robert.Brogan@dot.gov, or
to Ms. Toone at Kim.Toone@dot.gov.
Please refer to the assigned OMB control
number in any correspondence
submitted. FRA will summarize
comments received in response to this
notice in a subsequent notice and
include them in its information
collection submission to OMB for
approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Robert Brogan, Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Regulatory Analysis
Division, RRS–21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 Jersey Avenue
SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC
20590 (telephone: (202) 493–6292) or
Ms. Kim Toone, Information Collection
Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Technology, RAD–20, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493–6132).
(These telephone numbers are not toll
free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA,
44 U.S.C. 3501–3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, require Federal agencies to
provide 60-days’ notice to the public for
comment on information collection
activities before seeking approval for
reinstatement or renewal by OMB. See
44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A); 5 CFR
1320.8(d)(1), 1320.10(e)(1), 1320.12(a).
Specifically, FRA invites interested
respondents to comment on the
following summary of proposed
information collection activities
regarding: (1) Whether the information
collection activities are necessary for
FRA to properly execute its functions,
including whether the activities will
have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of
FRA’s estimates of the burden of the
information collection activities,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (3) ways for
FRA to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information being
collected; and (4) ways for FRA to
minimize the burden of information
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
collection activities on the public by
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology (e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses). See 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A); 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1). FRA
believes that soliciting public comment
will advance three objectives: (1)
Reduce reporting burdens; (2) ensure
that it organizes information collection
requirements in a ‘‘user friendly’’ format
to improve the use of such information;
and (3) accurately assess the resources
expended to retrieve and produce
information requested. See 44 U.S.C.
3501.
Below is a brief summary of the
currently approved information
collection activities that FRA will be
submitting for clearance by OMB as
required under the PRA:
Title: Alleged Violation Reporting
Form.
OMB Control Number: 2130–0590.
Abstract: The Alleged Violation
Reporting Form is a response to section
307(b) of the Rail Safety Improvement
Act of 2008 that requires FRA to
‘‘provide a mechanism for the public to
submit written reports of potential
violations of Federal railroad safety and
hazardous materials transportation laws,
regulations, and orders to the Federal
Railroad Administration.’’ The Alleged
Violation Reporting Form allows the
general public to submit alleged
violations directly to FRA. The form’s
goal is to allow FRA to collect
information necessary to investigate the
alleged violation and to follow up with
the submitting party.
The Alleged Violation Reporting Form
collects the name, phone number, and
email address of the person submitting
the alleged violation; the preferred
method by which to contact the person;
the railroad or company name that
committed the alleged violation; the
date and time the alleged violation
occurred; the location the alleged
violation occurred; and details about the
violation. All information is voluntary.
FRA will collect the information
through a form on the FRA public Web
site. FRA may share the information
collected with FRA employees, State
department of transportation partners,
and law enforcement agencies.
Form Number(s): FRA F 6180.151.
Affected Public: U.S. Residents.
Respondent Universe: 1,000
individuals.
Frequency of Submission: On
occasion.
Reporting Burden:
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65696-65698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22961]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0480]
Commercial Driver's License Standards: Application for Exemption;
CRST Expedited
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant of application for
exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to grant CRST Expedited (CRST) an
exemption from the regulation that requires a commercial learner's
permit (CLP) holder to be accompanied by a commercial driver's license
(CDL) holder with the proper CDL class and endorsements, seated in the
front seat of the vehicle while the CLP holder performs behind-the-
wheel training on public roads or highways. Under the terms and
conditions of this exemption, a CLP holder who has documentation of
passing the CDL skills test may drive a commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
for CRST without being accompanied by a CDL holder in the front seat of
the vehicle. The exemption enables CLP holders to drive as part of a
team and have the same regulatory flexibility as CRST team drivers with
CDLs. FMCSA has analyzed the exemption application and the public
comments and has determined that the exemption, subject to the terms
and conditions imposed, will achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.
DATES: The exemption is effective from September 23, 2016 through
September 24, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tom Yager, Chief, FMCSA Driver and
Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone: (614) 942-6477. Email: MCPSD@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from some of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.
FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal
Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an
opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the application,
including any safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must
also provide an opportunity for public comment on the request.
The Agency reviews the safety analyses and the public comments, and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reason for the grant or denial, and, if granted,
the specific person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and
the regulatory provision or provisions from which exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the effective period of the exemption, and
explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be
renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).
Request for Exemption
CRST is one of the nation's largest transportation companies with a
fleet of more than 4,500 CMVs. CRST seeks an exemption from 49 CFR
383.25(a)(1) that would allow CLP holders who have successfully passed
a CDL skills test and are thus eligible to receive a CDL, to drive a
truck without a CDL holder being present in the front seat of the
vehicle. CRST indicates that the CDL holder will remain in the vehicle
at all times while the CLP holder is driving--just not in the front
seat. This would allow a CLP holder to participate in a revenue-
producing trip back to his or her State of domicile to obtain the CDL
document, as the CDL can only be issued by the State of domicile in
accordance with 49 CFR part 383.
CRST noted the trucking industry's need for qualified and well-
trained drivers to meet increasing shipping demands. CRST believes that
49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) limits its ability to efficiently recruit, train,
and employ new entrants to the industry. Prior to the implementation of
section 385.25(a)(1), States routinely issued temporary CDLs to drivers
who passed the CDL skills test. The temporary CDL allowed CRST time to
route the new driver to his or her State of domicile to obtain the
permanent CDL and place the new driver into an on-the-job training
position with a driver-trainer. The driver-trainer supervised and
observed the new driver, but was not required to be on duty and in the
front seat at all times. Thus, the new driver became productive
immediately, allowing more freight movement for CRST and compensation
for the new driver.
CRST contends that compliance with the CDL rule places them in a
very difficult position regarding how they return CLP holders who have
passed their skills testing to their State of domicile to obtain their
CDL. According to CRST, the two possible courses of action in this
scenario are simple, yet costly: (1) CRST sends CLP holders to their
home State by public transportation to obtain the CDL and hopes the
drivers return to CRST for employment; or (2) CRST sends CLP holders
back to their home State as passengers on one of its trucks. Granting
the exemption would allow the CLP holder to drive as part of a team on
that trip, resulting in reduced costs and increased productivity.
CRST asserts that the exemption would be consistent with the
Agency's comments in the preamble to the final rule adopting Sec.
383.25 that ``FMCSA does not believe that it is safe to permit
inexperienced drivers who have not passed the CDL skills test to drive
unaccompanied.'' (76 FR 26854, 26861 May 9, 2011). The exemption sought
would apply only to those CRST drivers who have passed the CDL skills
test and hold a CLP. CRST believes that the exemption would result in a
level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level of
safety provided under the rule. The only difference between a CLP
holder who has passed the CDL skills test and a CDL holder is that the
latter has received the actual CDL document from a State driver
licensing agency.
Public Comments
On January 5, 2016, FMCSA published notice of this application and
requested public comment (81 FR 291). The Agency received 56 comments.
Most of the comments opposed to the CRST request were from truck
drivers, driver-trainers, and other individuals. These respondents do
not believe that it is safe for a CLP holder to operate a CMV without
the supervision of a CDL driver-trainer in the front seat of the truck.
The Iowa Motor Truck Association (IMTA) supported the exemption
request, commenting that if CLP holders are properly trained and
tested, the fact that they have not yet obtained their
[[Page 65697]]
CDL credential would in no way compromise the safety of the operation.
IMTA added that granting this exemption would enhance the productivity
while maintaining the safety of CRST's operation. It would also give
the applicant flexibility to allow a CLP holder who has successfully
passed all CDL exams to operate more freely and in a way that benefits
the driver, the carrier and the economy as a whole. According to IMTA,
one of the issues with the current CLP rule is the fact that it's not
always convenient to allow the CLP driver to return to their home state
immediately after completing training and passing their CDL exam. The
exemption would allow these drivers to join a team operation, and give
CRST the time to get CLP holders through their State of domicile at a
future time to complete the conversion of the CLP to a CDL. IMTA is
confident in the safety and performance of CRST and believe that, if
granted, these drivers would operate safely within the terms of their
exemption.
Opposing the exemption were three industry groups, the Advocates
for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates), the Owner-Operator Independent
Drivers Association (OOIDA), and the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters (IBT).
Advocates commented that ``FMCSA must reject the CRST application
because it undermines existing Federal safety regulations, and will
usurp the exclusive authority of states to determine who should be
granted commercial driving privileges associated with the issuance of a
CDL. The Application also fails to evaluate any potential safety risk
to the public or address alternative means of pursuing the goal of the
exemption. The Application appears to be an obvious attempt to increase
company profits while ignoring the potentially significant increase in
truck crash risk to the motoring public.''
OOIDA believes the exemption sought by CRST is not in the interest
of highway safety, will put OOIDA members who share the road with these
poorly trained drivers at risk, and fails to demonstrate that an
exemption would result in ``a level of safety that is equivalent to, or
greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption''
as set forth in 49 U.S.C. 31315(b). Further, OOIDA states that CRST
does not demonstrate that it is ``significantly burdened'' by the
existing regulation and rather only demonstrates a desire to increase
productivity and preserve CRST's current business practices. OOIDA
finds the request fails to meet the applicable standards the FMCSA must
consider and is ill-timed, considering FMCSA is currently reviewing
entry-level driver training standards.
In a similar vein, IBT commented, ``It is clear from CRST's
application that it is more concerned about saving money and retaining
the investment that it has made in the training of the driver than
making sure that the CLP holder receives the proper mentoring and
supervision needed for first time CLP holders while they gather their
behind-the-wheel training. Neither the DOT nor the FMCSA should
entertain the relaxing of important safety standards so that motor
carriers have a better opportunity to retain drivers that they have
trained. The idea that a driver may not return to the company that
provided his/her training has more to do with overall pay and benefits
that the motor carrier may be offering in the long term than the time
or distance traveled for the CLP holder to obtain a CDL from the CLP
holder's home state in the short term. Neither should it be a goal of
the DOT or FMCSA to `promote greater productivity' for a motor carrier
or allow CLP holders to `actively earn a living faster.' The
department's goal should be safety. Finally, the IBT feels strongly
that there is no substituting the skills test for behind-the-wheel
training of CLP holders by experienced CDL holders in the front seat of
the CMV.''
FMCSA Response and Decision
The premise of respondents opposing the exemption is that CLP
holders lack experience and are safer drivers when observed by a CDL
driver-trainer who is on duty and in the front seat of the vehicle. The
fact is that CLP holders who have passed the CDL skills test are
qualified and eligible to obtain a CDL. If these CLP holders had
obtained their training and CLPs in their State of domicile, they could
immediately obtain their CDL at the State driver licensing agency and
begin driving a CMV without any on-board supervision. There is no data
showing that having a CDL holder accompany a CLP holder who has passed
the skills test improves safety. Because these drivers have passed the
CDL skills test, the only thing necessary to obtain the CDL is to visit
the Department of Motor Vehicles office in their State of domicile.
FMCSA has evaluated CRST's application for exemption and the public
comments. The Agency believes that CRST's overall safety performance,
as reflected in its ``satisfactory'' safety rating, will enable it to
achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the
level of safety achieved without the exemption (49 CFR 381.305(a)). The
exemption is restricted to CRST's CLP holders who have documentation
that they have passed the CDL skills test. The exemption will enable
these drivers to operate a CMV as a team driver without requiring the
accompanying CDL holder be on duty and in the front seat while the
vehicle is moving.
Terms and Conditions of the Exemption
Period of the Exemption
This exemption from the requirements of 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) is
effective during the period of September 23, 2016 through September 24,
2018.
Extent of the Exemption
The exemption is contingent upon CRST maintaining USDOT
registration, minimum levels of public liability insurance, and not
being subject to any ``imminent hazard'' or other out-of- service (OOS)
order issued by FMCSA. Each driver covered by the exemption must
maintain a valid driver's license and CLP with the required
endorsements, not be subject to any OOS order or suspension of driving
privileges, and meet all physical qualifications required by 49 CFR
part 391.
This exemption from 49 CFR 383.25(a)(1) will allow CRST drivers who
hold a CLP and have successfully passed a CDL skills test, to drive a
CMV without a CDL holder being present in the front seat of the
vehicle. The CDL holder must remain in the vehicle at all times while
the CLP holder is driving--just not in the front seat.
Preemption
During the period this exemption is in effect, no State may enforce
any law or regulation that conflicts with or is inconsistent with the
exemption with respect to a person or entity operating under the
exemption (49 U.S.C. 31315(d)).
FMCSA Accident Notification
CRST must notify FMCSA within 5 business days of any accidents (as
defined by 49 CFR 390.5) involving the operation of any of its CMVs
while utilizing this exemption. The notification must be by email to
MCPSD@DOT.GOV, and include the following information:
a. Exemption Identifier: ``CRST''
b. Date of the accident,
c. City or town, and State, in which the accident occurred, or which is
closest to the scene of the accident,
d. Driver's name and driver's license number,
e. Vehicle number and State license number,
[[Page 65698]]
f. Number of individuals suffering physical injury,
g. Number of fatalities,
h. The police-reported cause of the accident,
i. Whether the driver was cited for violation of any traffic laws, or
motor carrier safety regulations, and
j. The total driving time and the total on-duty time of the CMV driver
at the time of the accident.
Termination
The FMCSA does not believe the CLP-holders covered by the exemption
will experience any deterioration of their safety record. However,
should this occur, FMCSA will take all steps necessary to protect the
public interest, including revocation of the exemption. The FMCSA will
immediately revoke the exemption for failure to comply with its terms
and conditions.
Issued on: September 12, 2016.
T.F. Scott Darling, III,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-22961 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
