Hours of Service of Drivers: Application for Exemption; Small Business in Transportation Coalition, 20562-20564 [2020-07730]

Download as PDF 20562 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 71 / Monday, April 13, 2020 / Notices the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad– 22(e)(15)(i)–(ii) Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15)(i) requires a covered clearing agency to establish, implement, maintain and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed, as applicable, to, among other things, (i) determine the amount of liquid net assets funded by equity based upon its general business risk profile and the length of time required to achieve a recovery or orderly wind-down, as appropriate, of its critical operations and services if such action is taken, and (ii) provide for holding liquid net assets funded by equity equal to the greater of either six months of its current operating expenses or the amount determined by the board of directors to be sufficient to ensure a recovery or orderly wind-down of critical operations and services of the covered clearing agency, as contemplated by the plans established under Rule 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii). As noted above, LCH SA proposes to update its WDP with new estimated wind-down costs, which are less than the amount that LCH SA holds as liquid resources corresponding to 6 months of expenses that are the minimum required by EMIR. The Commission believes that by updating its WDP with this information after its annual review allows LCH SA to maintain procedures reasonably designed to determine winddown costs and to ensure they remain under the amount of capital held for that purpose. Therefore, the Commission believes that this aspect of the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15)(i). Similarly, the Commission believes that by updating these costs, LCH SA would be able to assess whether it holds liquid net assets sufficient to ensure an orderly wind-down of critical operations and services. Therefore, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Rule 17Ad–22(e)(15)(ii). khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES IV. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act, and in particular, with the requirements of Rules 17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii), 17Ad– 22(e)(15)(i) and (ii).12 12 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(e)(3)(ii), (e)(15)(i), and (e)(15)(ii). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:57 Apr 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act 13 that the proposed rule change (SR–LCH SA– 2020–001), be, and hereby is, approved.14 comments, please contact Yvonne Jamison at (202) 395–3475. Direct all other questions to Alan Treat, Deputy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Africa, at (202) 395–9514. For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.15 J. Matthew DeLesDernier, Assistant Secretary. Edward Gresser, Chair of the Trade Policy Staff Committee, Office of the United States Trade Representative. [FR Doc. 2020–07651 Filed 4–10–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3290–F0–P [FR Doc. 2020–07743 Filed 4–10–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Docket Number USTR–2020–0011] Hearing Cancellation and Extension of Comment Period on Negotiating Objectives for a United StatesRepublic of Kenya Trade Agreement Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Cancellation of public hearing and extended deadline to submit comments. AGENCY: On March 23, 2020, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) solicited comments and announced that the Trade Policy Staff Committee would hold a public hearing on a proposed U.S.-Republic of Kenya trade agreement. Consistent with guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concerning COVID–19, USTR is cancelling the public hearing. USTR is extending the deadline for written comments. DATES: Hearing: The hearing scheduled for April 28, 2020, is cancelled. Comments: USTR is extending the deadline for written comments until April 28, 2020, and encourages interested persons to file comments and supporting documentation via www.regulations.gov, using docket number USTR–2020–0011. The instructions for submission are in sections II and III of the notice published on March 23, 2020 (85 FR 16450). For alternatives to on-line submissions, please contact Yvonne Jamison at (202) 395–3475 in advance of the deadline and before transmitting a comment. SUMMARY: For procedural questions concerning written FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). approving the proposed rule change, the Commission considered the proposal’s impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 15 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 14 In PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA–2019–0239] Hours of Service of Drivers: Application for Exemption; Small Business in Transportation Coalition Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Application for exemption; final determination. AGENCY: FMCSA announces its decision to deny the Small Business in Transportation Coalition’s (SBTC) request for reconsideration of its application for exemption from the electronic logging device (ELD) rule that was denied by the Agency on July 17, 2019. SBTC has resubmitted its application for exemption from the ELD requirements for all motor carriers with fewer than 50 employees, including, but not limited to, one-person private and for-hire owner-operators of commercial motor vehicles used in interstate commerce. SBTC believes that the exemption would not have any adverse impacts on operational safety as motor carriers and drivers would remain subject to the hours-of-service (HOS) regulations, as well as the requirements to maintain paper records of duty status (RODs). FMCSA has analyzed SBTC’s petition for reconsideration and the public comments received and has determined that neither the applicant nor the commenters provided information that would change the Agency’s previous decision to deny the exemption. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. La Tonya Mimms, Chief, FMCSA Driver and Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards; Telephone: (202) 366–4325; Email: MCPSD@dot.gov. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366–9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM 13APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 71 / Monday, April 13, 2020 / Notices I. Legal Basis FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the request. The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted, and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)). When the Agency denied a request for an exemption, the applicant may be allowed to resubmit the application, if the applicant can reasonably address the basis for denial. 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(3). khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES II. Background On December 16, 2015, FMCSA published the Electronic Logging Devices and Hours of Service Supporting Documents final rule (80 FR 78292). The ELD rule applies to most motor carriers and drivers who are required to keep RODS. The compliance date for the ELD requirement was December 18, 2017. On June 5, 2018, FMCSA published SBTC’s application for exemption and requested public comment (83 FR 26140). SBTC reports it is a non-profit trade organization with more than 8,000 members. SBTC states that it ‘‘represents, promotes, and protects the interest of small businesses in the transportation industry. Through the exemption application, SBTC sought relief from the ELD requirements for small private, common and contract motor carriers with fewer than 50 employees. SBTC argued: ‘‘[T]he ELD rule is not a ‘‘safety regulation’’ per se as the FMCSA has concluded. Rather it is a mechanism intended to enforce a safety VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:57 Apr 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 regulation by regulating the manner in which a driver records and communicates his compliance. That is, it is merely a tool to determine compliance with an existing rule that regulates over-the-road drivers’ driving and on duty time, namely the actual safety regulation: the [hours-of- service] regulations codified at 49 CFR 395.3 and 395.5. However, the ELD rule is not a safety regulation itself. Therefore, it is our position that this rule does not itself impact safety, and that the level of safety will not change based on whether or not our exemption application is approved. That would require a change to the [hours-of-service rules].’’ On July 9, 2018, FMCSA extended the public comment period at the request of the SBTC (83 FR 31836). The Agency received more than 1,900 comments to the docket [Docket No. FMCSA–2018– 0180]. Most of the comments favored granting the exemption. On July 17, 2019, the Agency published notice of its decision to deny SBTC’s application for exemption (84 FR 34250) and listed the following reasons for the denial: • Failing to provide the name of the individual or motor carrier that would be responsible for the use or operation of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) under the exemption [49 CFR 381.310(b)(2)]; • Failing to provide an estimate of the total number of drivers and CMVs that would be operated under the terms and conditions of the exemption [§ 381.310(c)(3)]; and • Failing to explain how an equivalent level of safety would be achieved [§ 381.310(c)(5)]. III. Request for Reconsideration of Agency Decision SBTC requested FMCSA to reconsider its denial of the ELD exemption. According to SBTC, the reason for not providing an estimate of the number of drivers and CMVs that would be operating under the exemption is that SBTC is a trade group, not a single carrier. SBTC argues that a trade group would not know the number of employees eligible for the exemption. Regarding that question, SBTC deferred to the Agency because FMCSA is the custodian of MCS–150 industry data. SBTC believes that it has identified the percentage of carriers that would be affected by the exemption but does not know a way to extrapolate the number of drivers from the estimated 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. without deferring to FMCSA for that information. IV. Equivalent Level of Safety To ensure an equivalent level of safety, SBTC suggests a return to paper logs. According to SBTC, ‘‘Paper logs were deemed sufficient to ensure PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 20563 adequate levels of safety for generations, more than 80 years. And the FMCSA has already issued numerous exemptions that require carriers to revert to tracking their hours of service using paper logs in lieu of ELDs . . .’’ SBTC argues that ELDs have caused reckless speeding and pose a national security threat. SBTC urges FMCSA to look carefully at the unintended consequences of the ELD rule when deciding whether or not to grant the exemption. SBTC also suggests that FMCSA temporarily grant the exemption ‘‘if for no other reason than to press the pause button while [FMCSA] studies these unintended consequences and their adverse effects on safety. We contend this would indeed achieve a greater level of overall safety than the current status quo.’’ V. Public Comments On October 29, 2019, FMCSA published SBTC’s petition for reconsideration and requested public comment (84 FR 57932). The Agency received approximately 355 comments, more than 300 of which favored the exemption. For example, Mr. Michael Garrison said, ‘‘I support the ELD exemption application. Please grant the exemption. The 14-hour rule is forcing drivers to drive when they are tired and is a major safety concern.’’ Mr. Dahl Warren wrote, ‘‘I support the ELD exemption especially for small carriers. There is no need for these carriers to have the expense burden that the ELDs create.’’ Only a few commenters opposed the exemption: the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) and Mr. Michael Millard. CVSA wrote, ‘‘In their request for reconsideration, SBTC reiterates the same claims about paper logs and does not provide any additional method of ensuring an equivalent level of safety.’’ TCA stated, ‘‘In comments submitted to the Agency in July 2018, TCA opposed the Small Business in Transportation Coalition’s (SBTC) initial request for an exemption from the ELD requirements and we now oppose the group’s petition for reconsideration.’’ Mr. Millard said, ‘‘The FMCSA should again deny the SBTC’s request to assure a level platform among all carriers large and small in following the HOS. Removing the ELD from the HOS equation allows those using paper RODS an upper hand and questionable HOS compliance.’’ VI. FMCSA Decision The FMCSA carefully reviewed SBTC’s petition for reconsideration, as well as the public comments. The E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM 13APN1 20564 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 71 / Monday, April 13, 2020 / Notices Agency has concluded that SBTC provided no additional information that would alter its decision to deny SBTC’s 2018 exemption application. For example, instead of providing the information required by subpart C of 49 CFR part 381 for reconsideration, SBTC presented arguments for not providing the information. SBTC’s application still does not provide the number of drivers and CMVs that would be covered by the exemption, nor does SBTC explain how an equivalent level of safety would be achieved by continuing to use paper logs. Therefore, the Agency denies this application for exemption from the ELD rule and reaffirms its previous denial. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy. [FR Doc. 2020–07730 Filed 4–10–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA–2020–0112] Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application for an Exemption From Samsara Networks Inc. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments. AGENCY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) requests public comment on an application for exemption from Samsara Networks Inc. (Samsara) to allow its AI Dash Cam to be mounted lower in the windshield on commercial motor vehicles than is currently permitted. DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 13, 2020. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA– 2020–0112 using any of the following methods: • Website: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the Federal electronic docket site. • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. • Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590–0001. • Hand Delivery of Courier: Bring comments to Docket Operations in Room W12–140 of the West Building khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:57 Apr 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 Ground Floor, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday–Friday, except Federal holidays. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and docket number for this notice. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the exemption process, see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ heading below. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please see the ‘‘Privacy Act’’ heading for further information. Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http:// www.regulations.gov or to Docket Operations in Room W12–140, U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 366–9317 or (202) 366– 9826 before visiting Docket Operations. 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. Public participation: The http:// www.regulations.gov website is generally available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You may find electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the ‘‘help’’ section of the http://www.regulations.gov website as well as the DOT’s http:// docketsinfo.dot.gov website. If you would like notification that we received your comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgment page that appears after submitting comments online. Mr. Jose´ R. Cestero, Vehicle and Roadside Operations Division, Office of Carrier, Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC–PSV, (202) 366–5541, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 0001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 I. Public Participation and Request for Comments FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and related materials. Submitting Comments If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this notice (FMCSA–2020–0112), indicate the specific section of this document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions regarding your submission. To submit your comments online, go to www.regulations.gov and put the docket number, ‘‘FMCSA–2020–0112’’ in the ‘‘Keyword’’ box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ When the new screen appears, click on ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type your comment into the text box in the following screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and may grant or not grant this application based on your comments. II. Legal Basis FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b) to grant exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant to the application, including any safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public comment on the request. The Agency reviews 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 E:\FR\FM\13APN1.SGM 13APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 71 (Monday, April 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20562-20564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07730]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0239]


Hours of Service of Drivers: Application for Exemption; Small 
Business in Transportation Coalition

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

ACTION: Application for exemption; final determination.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to deny the Small Business in 
Transportation Coalition's (SBTC) request for reconsideration of its 
application for exemption from the electronic logging device (ELD) rule 
that was denied by the Agency on July 17, 2019. SBTC has resubmitted 
its application for exemption from the ELD requirements for all motor 
carriers with fewer than 50 employees, including, but not limited to, 
one-person private and for-hire owner-operators of commercial motor 
vehicles used in interstate commerce. SBTC believes that the exemption 
would not have any adverse impacts on operational safety as motor 
carriers and drivers would remain subject to the hours-of-service (HOS) 
regulations, as well as the requirements to maintain paper records of 
duty status (RODs). FMCSA has analyzed SBTC's petition for 
reconsideration and the public comments received and has determined 
that neither the applicant nor the commenters provided information that 
would change the Agency's previous decision to deny the exemption.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. La Tonya Mimms, Chief, FMCSA 
Driver and Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and 
Vehicle Safety Standards; Telephone: (202) 366-4325; Email: 
[email protected]. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material 
to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

[[Page 20563]]

I. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant 
exemptions from certain parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption 
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must 
provide the public an opportunity to inspect the information relevant 
to the application, including any safety analyses that have been 
conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public 
comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted, 
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a 
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be 
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of 
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR 
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application 
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving 
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is 
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period and explain 
the terms and conditions of the exemption. The exemption may be renewed 
(49 CFR 381.300(b)).
    When the Agency denied a request for an exemption, the applicant 
may be allowed to resubmit the application, if the applicant can 
reasonably address the basis for denial. 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(3).

II. Background

    On December 16, 2015, FMCSA published the Electronic Logging 
Devices and Hours of Service Supporting Documents final rule (80 FR 
78292). The ELD rule applies to most motor carriers and drivers who are 
required to keep RODS. The compliance date for the ELD requirement was 
December 18, 2017.
    On June 5, 2018, FMCSA published SBTC's application for exemption 
and requested public comment (83 FR 26140). SBTC reports it is a non-
profit trade organization with more than 8,000 members. SBTC states 
that it ``represents, promotes, and protects the interest of small 
businesses in the transportation industry. Through the exemption 
application, SBTC sought relief from the ELD requirements for small 
private, common and contract motor carriers with fewer than 50 
employees. SBTC argued:

    ``[T]he ELD rule is not a ``safety regulation'' per se as the 
FMCSA has concluded. Rather it is a mechanism intended to enforce a 
safety regulation by regulating the manner in which a driver records 
and communicates his compliance. That is, it is merely a tool to 
determine compliance with an existing rule that regulates over-the-
road drivers' driving and on duty time, namely the actual safety 
regulation: the [hours-of- service] regulations codified at 49 CFR 
395.3 and 395.5. However, the ELD rule is not a safety regulation 
itself. Therefore, it is our position that this rule does not itself 
impact safety, and that the level of safety will not change based on 
whether or not our exemption application is approved. That would 
require a change to the [hours-of-service rules].''

    On July 9, 2018, FMCSA extended the public comment period at the 
request of the SBTC (83 FR 31836). The Agency received more than 1,900 
comments to the docket [Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0180]. Most of the 
comments favored granting the exemption. On July 17, 2019, the Agency 
published notice of its decision to deny SBTC's application for 
exemption (84 FR 34250) and listed the following reasons for the 
denial:
     Failing to provide the name of the individual or motor 
carrier that would be responsible for the use or operation of 
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) under the exemption [49 CFR 
381.310(b)(2)];
     Failing to provide an estimate of the total number of 
drivers and CMVs that would be operated under the terms and conditions 
of the exemption [Sec.  381.310(c)(3)]; and
     Failing to explain how an equivalent level of safety would 
be achieved [Sec.  381.310(c)(5)].

III. Request for Reconsideration of Agency Decision

    SBTC requested FMCSA to reconsider its denial of the ELD exemption. 
According to SBTC, the reason for not providing an estimate of the 
number of drivers and CMVs that would be operating under the exemption 
is that SBTC is a trade group, not a single carrier. SBTC argues that a 
trade group would not know the number of employees eligible for the 
exemption. Regarding that question, SBTC deferred to the Agency because 
FMCSA is the custodian of MCS-150 industry data. SBTC believes that it 
has identified the percentage of carriers that would be affected by the 
exemption but does not know a way to extrapolate the number of drivers 
from the estimated 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. without 
deferring to FMCSA for that information.

IV. Equivalent Level of Safety

    To ensure an equivalent level of safety, SBTC suggests a return to 
paper logs. According to SBTC, ``Paper logs were deemed sufficient to 
ensure adequate levels of safety for generations, more than 80 years. 
And the FMCSA has already issued numerous exemptions that require 
carriers to revert to tracking their hours of service using paper logs 
in lieu of ELDs . . .'' SBTC argues that ELDs have caused reckless 
speeding and pose a national security threat. SBTC urges FMCSA to look 
carefully at the unintended consequences of the ELD rule when deciding 
whether or not to grant the exemption. SBTC also suggests that FMCSA 
temporarily grant the exemption ``if for no other reason than to press 
the pause button while [FMCSA] studies these unintended consequences 
and their adverse effects on safety. We contend this would indeed 
achieve a greater level of overall safety than the current status 
quo.''

V. Public Comments

    On October 29, 2019, FMCSA published SBTC's petition for 
reconsideration and requested public comment (84 FR 57932). The Agency 
received approximately 355 comments, more than 300 of which favored the 
exemption. For example, Mr. Michael Garrison said, ``I support the ELD 
exemption application. Please grant the exemption. The 14-hour rule is 
forcing drivers to drive when they are tired and is a major safety 
concern.'' Mr. Dahl Warren wrote, ``I support the ELD exemption 
especially for small carriers. There is no need for these carriers to 
have the expense burden that the ELDs create.''
    Only a few commenters opposed the exemption: the Commercial Vehicle 
Safety Alliance (CVSA), Truckload Carriers Association (TCA) and Mr. 
Michael Millard. CVSA wrote, ``In their request for reconsideration, 
SBTC reiterates the same claims about paper logs and does not provide 
any additional method of ensuring an equivalent level of safety.'' TCA 
stated, ``In comments submitted to the Agency in July 2018, TCA opposed 
the Small Business in Transportation Coalition's (SBTC) initial request 
for an exemption from the ELD requirements and we now oppose the 
group's petition for reconsideration.'' Mr. Millard said, ``The FMCSA 
should again deny the SBTC's request to assure a level platform among 
all carriers large and small in following the HOS. Removing the ELD 
from the HOS equation allows those using paper RODS an upper hand and 
questionable HOS compliance.''

VI. FMCSA Decision

    The FMCSA carefully reviewed SBTC's petition for reconsideration, 
as well as the public comments. The

[[Page 20564]]

Agency has concluded that SBTC provided no additional information that 
would alter its decision to deny SBTC's 2018 exemption application. For 
example, instead of providing the information required by subpart C of 
49 CFR part 381 for reconsideration, SBTC presented arguments for not 
providing the information. SBTC's application still does not provide 
the number of drivers and CMVs that would be covered by the exemption, 
nor does SBTC explain how an equivalent level of safety would be 
achieved by continuing to use paper logs. Therefore, the Agency denies 
this application for exemption from the ELD rule and reaffirms its 
previous denial.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-07730 Filed 4-10-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P