82_FR_26999 82 FR 26888 - Commercial Learner's Permit Validity

82 FR 26888 - Commercial Learner's Permit Validity

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 111 (June 12, 2017)

Page Range26888-26894
FR Document2017-12080

FMCSA proposes to amend the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to allow States to issue a commercial learner's permit (CLP) with an expiration date of up to one year from the date of initial issuance. CLPs issued for shorter periods may be renewed but the total period of time between the date of initial issuance and the expiration of the renewed CLP could not exceed one year. This proposed amendment would replace the current regulations, which require the States to issue CLPs initially for no more than 180 days, with the possibility of an additional 180-day renewal at the State's discretion.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 111 (Monday, June 12, 2017)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 111 (Monday, June 12, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26888-26894]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12080]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 383

[Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0346]
RIN 2126-AB98


Commercial Learner's Permit Validity

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

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA proposes to amend the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations (FMCSRs) to allow States to issue a commercial learner's 
permit (CLP) with an expiration date of up to one year from the date of 
initial issuance. CLPs issued for shorter periods may be renewed but 
the total period of time between the date of initial issuance and the 
expiration of the renewed CLP could not exceed one year. This proposed 
amendment would replace the current regulations, which require the 
States to issue CLPs initially for no more than 180 days, with the 
possibility of an additional 180-day renewal at the State's discretion.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received on or before August 11, 
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Docket Number FMCSA-
2016-0346 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Ground 
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building, Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 202-493-2251.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods. 
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting 
comments, including collection of information comments for the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Selden Fritschner, CDL Division, 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue 
SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, by email at selden.fritschner@dot.gov, 
or by telephone at 202-366-0677.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
NPRM (Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0346), indicate the specific section of 
this document to which each section applies, and provide a reason for 
each suggestion or recommendation. 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 that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions 
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, 
put the docket number, FMCSA-2016-0346, in the keyword box, and click 
``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment Now!'' 
button and type your comment into the text box on 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 8\1/2\ 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 change this proposed rule based on your 
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of 
the comment period.
Confidential Business Information
    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial 
information that is customarily not made available to the general 
public by the submitter. Under the Freedom of Information Act, CBI is 
eligible for protection from public disclosure. If you have CBI that is 
relevant or responsive to this NPRM, it is important that you clearly 
designate the submitted comments as CBI. Accordingly, please mark each 
page of your submission as ``confidential'' or ``CBI.'' Submissions 
designated as CBI and meeting the definition noted above will not be 
placed in the public docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI 
should be sent to Brian Dahlin, Chief, Regulatory Analysis Division, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Any commentary that 
FMCSA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be 
placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the 
comment period.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this 
preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2016-0346, in the 
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket 
Folder'' button and choose the document to review. If you do not have 
access to the

[[Page 26889]]

Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket 
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West 
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

C. 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.

D. Waiver of Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    Under the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) 
(Pub. L. 114-94), FMCSA is required to publish an advance notice of 
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) or conduct a negotiated rulemaking ``if a 
proposed rule is likely to lead to the promulgation of a major rule'' 
(49 U.S.C. 31136(g)(1)). As this proposed rule is not likely to result 
in the promulgation of a major rule, the Agency is not required to 
issue an ANPRM or to proceed with a negotiated rulemaking.

E. Comments on the Collection of Information

    If you have comments on the collection of information discussed in 
this NPRM, you must send those comments to the Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs at OMB. To ensure that your comments are 
received on time, the preferred methods of submission are by email to 
oira_submissions@omb.eop.gov (include docket number ``FMCSA-2016-0346'' 
and ``Attention: Desk Officer for FMCSA, DOT'' in the subject line of 
the email) or fax at 202-395-6566. An alternative, though slower, 
method is by U.S. Mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer, FMCSA, DOT.

II. Executive Summary

Purpose and Summary of the Major Provisions

    This NPRM would allow States to issue a CLP for no more than one 
year from the date of initial issuance, with or without renewal within 
that one-year period. After one year from the date of initial issuance, 
a CLP, or renewed CLP, would no longer be valid. Accordingly, if the 
applicant does not obtain a CDL within one year from the date the CLP 
was first issued, he/she must reapply for a CLP. This approach would 
replace the current requirements of Sec. Sec.  383.25(c) and 
383.73(a)(2)(iii), under which a CLP is valid for no more than 180 days 
from the date of issuance, with an option for the State to renew the 
CLP for an additional 180 days without requiring the general and 
endorsement knowledge tests, as applicable. The proposed change 
provides an improved process for CLP issuance that FMCSA believes will 
save time and money for both States and CLP applicants, as discussed 
below, without affecting safety.

Benefits and Costs

    The primary entities affected by this proposed rule would be State 
Driver Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) and CLP holders. FMCSA is unable to 
estimate the number of SDLAs that may choose to issue a CLP that is 
valid for up to one year or the number of CLP holders that would be 
affected. Nonetheless, potential benefits of this proposed rule would 
include reduced costs to CLP holders, including reductions in the 
opportunity cost of time that, in the absence of this proposed rule, 
would be spent by CLP holders traveling to and from an SDLA office and 
at an SDLA office, renewing a CLP that is valid for no more than 180 
days. SDLAs that choose under this proposed rule to issue a CLP that is 
valid for up to one year may benefit from the elimination of costs 
associated with processing renewals of CLPs. FMCSA does not expect 
there would be any costs imposed upon CLP holders as a result of this 
rule. Under this proposed rule SDLAs that choose to offer a CLP that is 
valid for up to one year may incur costs related to information 
technology (IT) system upgrades that may be necessary.
    Although potential reductions in CLP renewal fees collected by 
SDLAs may appear to be a cost of this proposed rule to SDLAs, and the 
commensurate potential savings to CLP holders of CLP renewal fees may 
appear to be a benefit to CLP holders, any such changes in renewal fee 
amounts are best classified as transfer payments and not as a cost to 
SDLAs (in the form of forgone fee revenue) or as a benefit to CLP 
holders (in the form of CLP renewal fees no longer expended). If an 
SDLA were to increase its fee for the issuance of a CLP in order to 
offset any reduction in revenue resulting from the elimination of CLP 
renewals and associated fees, a transfer would occur from those CLP 
holders who, in the absence of the rule, would not have renewed their 
CLP to CLP holders who would have renewed their CLP.

III. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    This rulemaking is based on the broad authority of the Commercial 
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA), as amended, codified at 49 
U.S.C. chapter 313 and implemented by 49 CFR parts 383 and 384. The 
CMVSA provides that ``[a]fter consultation with the States, the 
Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe regulations on minimum 
uniform standards for the issuance of commercial drivers' licenses and 
learner's permits by the States . . .'' (49 U.S.C. 31308).

IV. Background

    On September 1, 2015, the Oregon Department of Transportation 
(ODOT) requested an exemption from Sec.  383.25(c) to allow a CLP to be 
issued for one year. Currently the regulation provides that the CLP 
must be valid for no more than 180 days from the date of issuance. 
However, under Sec. Sec.  383.25(c) and 383.73(a)(2)(iii), the State 
may renew the CLP for an additional 180 days without requiring the CLP 
holder to retake the general and endorsement knowledge tests. In its 
request for the exemption, ODOT stated that ``[a]dding the bureaucratic 
requirement for a CLP holder to visit a DMV office and pay a fee in 
order to get a second six months of CLP validity will add unnecessary 
workload to offices already stretched to the limit.''
    On November 27, 2015, FMCSA published notice of ODOT's application 
for exemption and requested public comments (80 FR 74199). The Agency 
received 10 comments in response to the proposed exemption. The Alabama 
Law Enforcement Agency; Colorado Department of Revenue CDL Unit; New 
York Department of Motor Vehicles; Oregon Trucking Associations, Inc.; 
and two individuals supported the exemption. The Commercial Vehicle 
Training Association (CVTA) and three individuals opposed the 
exemption.
    In a notice published on April 5, 2016 (81 FR 19703), FMCSA stated 
that the exemption requested by the ODOT would maintain a level of 
safety equivalent to or greater than the level of safety that would be 
achieved without the exemption, as required by 49 CFR 381.305(a). The 
Agency therefore approved ODOT's application for exemption and allowed 
all SDLAs nationwide to use the exemption at their discretion. However, 
the exemption did not change the language of Sec.  383.25(c) and the 
exemption remains effective for 2 years from the date of approval, 
expiring on April 5, 2018. Subsequent to

[[Page 26890]]

FMCSA's approval of ODOT's application, the Agency amended its Notice 
of Final Disposition to also include exemption from the parallel 
requirements of Sec.  373.73(a)(2)(iii) (81 FR 86067 (November 29, 
2016)).

V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking

Requiring States To Issue a CLP for No More Than One Year, With or 
Without Renewal

    This proposed rule would amend Sec. Sec.  383.25 (c) and 
383.73(a)(2)(iii) to allow States to issue a CLP for no more than one 
year, without requiring the CLP holder to retake the general and 
endorsement knowledge tests. The Agency proposes a maximum period of 
CLP validity of one year, rather than the 360-day maximum currently 
permitted under Sec. Sec.  383.25(c) and 383.73(a)(2)(iii). The 
principal reason for this proposed change, as noted above and discussed 
further below, is to increase efficiency in the licensing system and to 
reduce costs to drivers and administrative burdens to SDLAs. FMCSA is 
also proposing the rule, however, in order to account for the fact 
that, in practice, some States allow a ``grace period'' between the 
initial CLP issuance period of 180 days and the 180-day renewal period 
currently allowed, thus resulting in a total period of time which may 
exceed 360 days from the time of initial issuance of the CLP. States 
that choose to issue a CLP for an initial period of less than one year 
may provide for renewal, as long as the renewed CLP is not valid for 
more than one year from the date of initial issuance of the original 
CLP. For example, under the proposed change, a State could issue a CLP 
that is valid for nine months. If that State chose to allow the CLP 
holder to renew the CLP, the renewal could not be valid for longer than 
three months, up to a total period of one year from the date of initial 
issuance.
    The Agency invites States and other interested parties to identify 
potential costs (e.g., necessary changes in CLP-related IT systems), 
savings and process efficiencies that may result from the proposed 
change, along with any supporting data.

VI. Section-By-Section Analysis

    FMCSA proposes to amend part 383 in the following ways:

Section 383.25 Commercial Learner's Permit (CLP)

    In Sec.  383.25(c) FMCSA makes minor changes to the text and 
replaces ``180 days'' with ``one year'' to reflect the proposed 
extended period of time that a CLP can be valid before a CLP holder 
would have to re-test. FMCSA also provides for renewal of CLPs that 
have been issued for a period of less than a year.

Section 383.73 State Procedures

    In Sec.  383.73(a)(2)(iii) FMCSA makes minor changes to the text 
and replaces ``180 days'' with ``one year'' to clarify in the 
instructions to States the proposed extended period of time that a CLP 
can be valid before a CLP holder would have to re-test. FMCSA also 
provides for renewal of CLPs that have been issued for a period of less 
than a year.

VII. Regulatory Analyses

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

    This NPRM is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) 
of Executive Order (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, 
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits 
under section 6(a)(4) of 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, February 26, 1979). Accordingly, the 
Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it under these Orders. 
This proposed rule would amend existing procedures and practices 
governing the issuance of commercial learner's permits.
Costs and Benefits
    This proposed rule allows States to issue a CLP that is valid for 
no more than one year from the date of initial issuance, with or 
without renewal during that one-year period. This approach would 
replace the current requirements, as set forth in Sec. Sec.  383.25(c) 
and 383.73(a)(2)(iii), which require that a CLP must be valid for no 
more than 180 days from the date of issuance, with an additional 180-
day renewal possible at the State's discretion.
    The primary entities affected by this proposed rule would be SDLAs 
and CLP holders. FMCSA is unable to estimate how many of the 51 SDLAs 
may choose under this proposed rule to issue a CLP that is valid for up 
to one year. The number of SDLAs that have thus far chosen to issue a 
CLP that is valid for one year from the date of issuance without 
renewal, consistent with the exemption to Sec.  383.25(c) issued on 
April 5, 2016 (81 FR 19703), is unknown.\1\ FMCSA seeks any information 
available in this regard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Driver and Motor Vehicle Services Division (DMV) of the 
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) currently offers a CLP 
that is valid for one year and cannot be renewed. See https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/DMV/pages/driverid/cdlget.aspx (accessed 
February 9, 2017). ODOT requested the limited exemption from the CLP 
requirements in 49 CFR 383.25(c), which FMCSA issued on April 5, 
2016, and which is applicable to all SDLAs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FMCSA estimates that approximately 476,000 CLPs are issued annually 
nationwide. This estimate is based primarily on information from the 
Commercial Driver's License Information System (CDLIS), a nationwide 
computer system that enables SDLAs to ensure that each commercial 
driver has only one driver's license and one complete driver record. 
Data provided by the American Association of Motor Vehicle 
Administrators (AAMVA) for the three calendar years 2013 through 2015 
indicate that approximately 476,000 new Master Pointer Records (MPRs) 
were added annually to CDLIS during that time.\2\ An MPR is typically 
added to CDLIS within 10 days of issuing a CLP to a driver who is 
believed to have never held one previously, or when a non-commercial 
driver is convicted of a violation in a commercial motor vehicle (CMV). 
FMCSA believes that the number of MPRs added to CDLIS for drivers 
without a CLP or CDL but that were convicted of a violation while 
driving a CMV is very small. To the extent this may occur, the 476,000 
value noted above may slightly overestimate the actual number of CLPs 
issued annually. Conversely, due to certain record retention 
requirements of CDLIS, it may be possible that a CLP applicant already 
could have an MPR present in CDLIS (from a previous CDL or CLP that was 
held by that applicant and for which the MPR created remains in CDLIS 
for some time after the CLP or CDL has expired or otherwise is no 
longer in force). To the extent this occurs, the 476,000 value noted 
above may slightly underestimate the actual number of CLPs issued 
annually. Despite these potential sources of minor uncertainty, FMCSA 
believes that the estimate of approximately 476,000 CLPs currently 
issued annually nationwide is

[[Page 26891]]

a reasonable one. The Agency specifically invites comment on the 
accuracy of this estimate. Of the estimated 476,000 CLPs issued 
annually, there is no readily available source of information regarding 
how many are renewed. We therefore seek comment and supporting 
information regarding the number of CLPs issued annually nationwide 
that are currently renewed. Because the Agency cannot currently 
quantify the number of CLPs issued annually that are renewed, nor the 
number of SDLAs that would choose to issue a CLP that is valid for up 
to one year from the date of issuance, FMCSA is unable to quantify the 
number of CLP holders who would be affected by this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This estimate excludes data for the month of October 2015, 
which appeared to be an anomalous outlier figure of about twice the 
typical monthly figure for the 35 other months during the three year 
time period of 2013 through 2015 for which data was obtained. It is 
believed that this may be due in part to the requirement under MAP-
21 Section 32305 (Commercial Driver's License Program) that States 
must be in compliance with all CDL requirements by September 30, 
2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although FMCSA is unable to quantify the number of SDLAs that may 
choose to issue a CLP that is valid for up to one year or the number of 
CLP holders that would be affected by this proposed rule, there are 
certain types of benefits, costs, and transfers that may occur as a 
result of this rule.
    The potential benefits of this proposed rule would include reduced 
costs to CLP holders, including reductions in the opportunity cost of 
time that in the absence of this proposed rule would be spent by CLP 
holders traveling to and from an SDLA office and at an SDLA office, 
renewing a CLP that is valid for no more than 180 days. Though 
potential savings to CLP holders of CLP renewal fees may also appear to 
be a benefit of this proposed rule, any such changes in renewal fee 
amounts are best classified as a transfer, which is discussed further 
below. SDLAs may also realize potential benefits. For example, for 
SDLAs that chose under this proposed rule to issue a CLP that is valid 
for up to one year, costs associated with processing renewals of CLPs 
would be eliminated. However, there may be transfer payments as 
discussed below. FMCSA seeks comment and any supporting information 
regarding the potential benefits of this proposed rule.
    FMCSA does not expect there to be any costs imposed upon CLP 
holders as a result of this proposed rule. However, there may be 
transfer payments as discussed below. The potential costs of this 
proposed rule to SDLAs include information technology (IT) system 
upgrade costs for those SDLAs that choose to issue a CLP that is valid 
for up to one year. Such IT system upgrades may include software 
programming changes necessary to reflect a change from a CLP that is 
valid for up to 180 days to a CLP that is valid for up to one year. The 
State of Colorado noted the potential for such IT system costs to SDLAs 
in its comments to the November 27, 2015, notice of ODOT's application 
for exemption (80 FR 74199), as discussed in the Agency's grant of 
application for exemption published on April 5, 2016 (81 FR 19703). 
Under the proposed rule, the decision by an SDLA to issue a CLP that is 
valid for up to one year would be discretionary. Accordingly, the 
Agency expects that SDLAs will choose to make this change only to the 
extent that such IT system upgrade costs would be less than the reduced 
costs associated with no longer having to process renewals of CLPs, 
thus resulting in a net benefit to the SDLA.
    Finally, though potential reductions in CLP renewal fees collected 
by SDLAs may appear to be a cost of this proposed rule to SDLAs, any 
such changes in renewal fee amounts are best classified as a transfer, 
which is discussed further below. FMCSA seeks comment on supporting 
information regarding the potential costs of this proposed rule.
    In addition to the potential benefits and costs of the rule 
discussed above, there are also certain transfer payment effects that 
may occur as a result of this rule. Transfer payments are monetary 
payments from one group to another that do not affect total resources 
available to society, and therefore do not represent actual costs or 
benefits to society. Because of the potential elimination of CLP 
renewal fees, and the potential for changes to CLP issuance fees, there 
are transfer effects that may result from this rule. These potential 
transfer effects include a transfer of CLP renewal fee amounts from 
SDLAs to CLP holders, and a transfer of CLP renewal fee amounts from 
one set of CLP holders to another set of CLP holders. In cases where an 
SDLA maintains the same fee for issuance of a CLP, a transfer would 
occur from SDLAs to CLP holders. This transfer represents the total 
amount of CLP renewal fees that in the absence of this proposed rule 
CLP holders renewing their CLP would have paid SDLAs.\3\ Such 
reductions in CLP renewal fee amounts to SDLAs are properly classified 
as a transfer, rather than as a cost to SDLAs (in the form of forgone 
fee revenue) or as a benefit to CLP holders (in the form of CLP renewal 
fees no longer expended). There is no aggregate change in social 
welfare resulting from this impact, as it is a simple transfer of value 
from one set of entities to another. Alternatively, in cases where an 
SDLA were to increase its fee for the issuance of a CLP in order to 
offset any reduction in revenue resulting from the elimination of CLP 
renewals and associated fees, a transfer would occur from those CLP 
holders who in the baseline would not have renewed their CLP to CLP 
holders who in the baseline would have renewed their CLP.\4\ Here too 
there is no aggregate change in social welfare resulting from this 
impact, as again it is a simple transfer of value from one set of 
entities to another. In any case, the extent to which SDLAs that choose 
under this proposed rule to issue a CLP that is valid for up to one 
year may increase their fee for issuance of a CLP is unknown.\5\ The 
incentive for an SDLA to do so, however, is likely low due in part to 
the fact that CLP renewal fees are expected to be a relatively small 
proportion of the overall fee revenue collected by any given SDLA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In some States, no fee is charged for CLP renewal, and 
therefore this type of transfer would not occur if CLP renewals were 
eliminated.
    \4\ As an example of this type of transfer effect, consider a 
scenario in which in the baseline 10,000 CLPs are issued annually by 
a State. Of these 10,000 CLP holders, assume half (5,000) renew 
their CLP, and the remaining half do not. Finally, assume the fee 
for initial issuance of a CLP in this State is $25, and that the fee 
for renewal of a CLP in this State is $20. Under this scenario, the 
total fee revenue collected by the SDLA would be $350,000 in the 
baseline (calculated as 10,000 CLPs issued at $25 each, plus 5,000 
renewals at $20 each). Under the rule, with CLP renewal fee revenue 
now eliminated, for the SDLA to receive the same $350,000 of fee 
revenue as before the rule, the fee for CLP issuance would need to 
increase from $25 to $35. Therefore, the 5,000 drivers who in the 
baseline would not have renewed their CLP would incur an increase in 
their fees from $25 to $35. However, the other 5,000 drivers who in 
the baseline would have had to renew their CLP would realize a 
reduction in their total fees from $45 (for CLP issuance plus CLP 
renewal) to $35. This would amount to a transfer from the former set 
of drivers (who in the baseline would not have renewed their CLPs) 
to the latter set of drivers (who in the baseline would have renewed 
their CLPs).
    \5\ Under the limited exemption from the CLP requirements in 49 
CFR 383.25(c) that was issued on April 5, 2016, the Driver and Motor 
Vehicle Services Division (DMV) of the Oregon Department of 
Transportation (ODOT) did subsequently choose to offer a CLP that is 
valid for one year and cannot be renewed. See https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/DMV/pages/driverid/cdlget.aspx (accessed October 
13, 2016). Based on a review of both the 2016-2017 Oregon Commercial 
Driver Manual (pg. 1-6, available at http://www.odot.state.or.us/forms/dmv/36.pdf), and the 2012-2013 Oregon Commercial Driver Manual 
(pg. 1-5, available at http://www.e-gears.com/manuals/or_cdl_manual.pdf), it appears that the fee charged by ODOT for 
issuance of a CLP was not changed when ODOT chose to offer a CLP 
that is valid for one year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. 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 proposals on small 
entities, analyze

[[Page 26892]]

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.\6\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Available 
at: https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/regulatory-flexibility-act 
(accessed February 13, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When an agency issues a rulemaking proposal, the RFA requires the 
agency to ``prepare and make available for public comment an initial 
regulatory flexibility analysis'' which will ``describe the impact of 
the proposed rule on small entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605 of 
the RFA allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu of preparing an 
analysis, if the proposed rulemaking is not expected to have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The primary entities affected by this proposed rule would be SDLAs 
and CLP holders. Under the standards of the RFA, as amended by the 
SBREFA, neither SDLAs nor CLP holders are small entities. SDLAs are not 
considered small entities because they do not meet the definition of a 
small entity in Section 601 of the RFA. Specifically, States are not 
considered small governmental jurisdictions under Section 601(5) of the 
RFA, both because State government is not included among the various 
levels of government listed in Section 601(5), and because, even if 
this were the case, no State nor the District of Columbia has a 
population of less than 50,000, which is the criterion by which a 
governmental jurisdiction is considered small under Section 601(5) of 
the RFA. CLP holders are not considered small entities because they too 
do not meet the definition of a small entity in Section 601 of the RFA. 
Specifically, CLP holders 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. Therefore, this proposed rule will not 
have an impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    In any case, this rule provides SDLAs the flexibility to choose 
whether to adopt the one-year CLP validity. As described in more detail 
earlier, because the decision by an SDLA to issue a CLP that is valid 
for up to one year is discretionary, the Agency expects that SDLAs will 
choose to make this change only to the extent that there is a net 
benefit to the SDLA. Furthermore, though there may be some transfer 
payment effects between certain types of CLP holders, these effects 
will not be significant. The Agency does not believe that there will be 
any costs imposed upon CLP holders as a result of this rule, and CLP 
holders would benefit from reductions in the opportunity cost of time 
that in the absence of this proposed rule would be spent by CLP holders 
traveling to and from an SDLA office and at an SDLA office renewing a 
CLP. Accordingly, I hereby certify that this proposed rule, if 
promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. FMCSA invites comment from anyone 
who believes there will be a significant impact on small entities from 
this action.

C. 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 proposed rule so that they can better evaluate 
its effects on themselves and participate in the rulemaking initiative. 
If the proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or 
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its 
provisions or options for compliance, please consult the FMCSA point of 
contact, Selden Fritschner, listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this proposed rule.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal 
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal 
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and 
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small 
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these 
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small 
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call 
1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). DOT has a policy regarding the rights 
of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an explicit 
policy against retaliation for exercising these rights.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) 
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary 
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may 
result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $156 million (which is the 
value equivalent of $100 million in 1995, adjusted for inflation to 
2015 levels) or more in any one year. This proposed rule, which is a 
discretionary regulatory action, would not result in such an 
expenditure. Nevertheless, the Agency discusses the potential effects 
of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

F. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)

    A rule has implications for Federalism under Section 1(a) of E.O. 
13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.''
    FMCSA determined that this proposal would not have substantial 
direct costs on or for States, nor would it limit the policymaking 
discretion of States. This proposed rule does not preempt any State law 
or regulation. Therefore, this proposed rule does not have sufficient 
Federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism 
Impact Statement.

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

    This proposed 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.

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

    E.O. 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 proposed rule is not 
economically significant. Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on 
children is required. In any event, this regulatory action does not in 
any respect present an environmental health or safety risk that could 
disproportionately affect children.

[[Page 26893]]

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

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

J. Privacy

    The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, (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. Because this proposed rule does not require the 
collection of personally identifiable information (PII), the Agency is 
not required to conduct a PIA.
    The E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347, Sec.  208, 116 
Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires Federal agencies to conduct 
a PIA for new or substantially changed technology that collects, 
maintains, or disseminates information in an identifiable form. No new 
or substantially changed technology would collect, maintain, or 
disseminate information as a result of this rule. Accordingly, FMCSA 
has not conducted a PIA.

K. 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

O. Environment (NEPA, CAA, Environmental Justice)

    FMCSA analyzed this NPRM 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.t.(2). The Categorical Exclusion (CE) in 
paragraph 6.t.(2) includes regulations to ensure that the States comply 
with the provisions of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. 
The requirements in this proposed rule are covered by this CE and the 
proposed action does not have a significant effect on the quality of 
the human environment. The CE determination is available for inspection 
or copying in the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    FMCSA also analyzed this proposed rule under the Clean Air Act, as 
amended (CAA), section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), and 
implementing regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection 
Agency. Approval of this action is exempt from the CAA's general 
conformity requirement since it does not affect direct or indirect 
emissions of criteria pollutants.
    Under E.O. 12898, each Federal agency must identify and address, as 
appropriate, ``disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on 
minority populations and low-income populations'' in the United States, 
its possessions, and territories. FMCSA evaluated the environmental 
justice effects of this proposed rule in accordance with the E.O., and 
has determined that no environmental justice issue is associated with 
this proposed rule, nor is there any collective environmental impact 
that would result from its promulgation.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR 383

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, 
Highway safety, Motor carriers.

    In consideration of the foregoing, FMCSA proposes to amend 49 CFR 
chapter 3, part 383 to read as follows:

PART 383--COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STANDARDS; REQUIREMENTS AND 
PENALTIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 383 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502; 
secs. 214 and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1766, 1767; 
sec. 1012(b) of Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 297; sec. 4140 of 
Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1746; sec. 32934 of Pub. L. 112-141, 
126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 7208 of Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, 
1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.

0
2. Amend Sec.  383.25 to revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  383.25  Commercial learner's permit (CLP).

* * * * *
    (c) The CLP must be valid for no more than one year from the date 
of issuance without requiring the CLP holder to retake the general and 
endorsement knowledge tests. CLPs issued for a period of less than one 
year may be renewed as long as the renewed CLP is valid for no more 
than one year from the date of initial issuance of the original CLP.
0
3. Amend Sec.  383.73 to revise paragraph (a)(2)(iii) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  383.73  State procedures.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Make the CLP valid for no more than one year from the date of 
issuance without requiring the CLP holder to retake the general and 
endorsement knowledge tests. CLPs issued for a period of less than one 
year may be renewed as long as the renewed CLP is valid for no more 
than one year from the date of initial issuance of the original CLP.
* * * * *


[[Page 26894]]


    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87 on: June 6, 
2017.
Daphne Y. Jefferson,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-12080 Filed 6-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P



                                                      26888                    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules

                                                      public inspection and copying during                    period of time between the date of                     are questions regarding your
                                                      normal business hours in the FCC’s                      initial issuance and the expiration of the             submission.
                                                      Reference Information Center at Portals                 renewed CLP could not exceed one year.                   To submit your comment online, go to
                                                      II, CY–A257, 445 12th Street SW.,                       This proposed amendment would                          http://www.regulations.gov, put the
                                                      Washington, DC, 20554. This document                    replace the current regulations, which                 docket number, FMCSA–2016–0346, in
                                                      will also be available via ECFS (http://                require the States to issue CLPs initially             the keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’
                                                      fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/). To request                    for no more than 180 days, with the                    When the new screen appears, click on
                                                      materials in accessible formats for                     possibility of an additional 180-day                   the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type
                                                      people with disabilities (braille, large                renewal at the State’s discretion.                     your comment into the text box on the
                                                      print, electronic files, audio format),                 DATES: Comments on this notice must be                 following screen. Choose whether you
                                                      send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call                 received on or before August 11, 2017.                 are submitting your comment as an
                                                      the Consumer & Governmental Affairs                                                                            individual or on behalf of a third party
                                                                                                              ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
                                                      Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–                                                                           and then submit.
                                                                                                              identified by Docket Number FMCSA–                       If you submit your comments by mail
                                                      418–0432 (tty).                                         2016–0346 using any of the following
                                                         This document does not contain                                                                              or hand delivery, submit them in an
                                                                                                              methods:                                               unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
                                                      information collection requirements                        • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
                                                      subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act                                                                         11 inches, suitable for copying and
                                                                                                              www.regulations.gov. Follow the online                 electronic filing. If you submit
                                                      of 1995, Public Law 104–13. In addition,                instructions for submitting comments.
                                                      therefore, it does not contain any                                                                             comments by mail and would like to
                                                                                                                 • Mail: Docket Management Facility,                 know that they reached the facility,
                                                      information collection burden ‘‘for                     U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
                                                      small business concerns with fewer than                                                                        please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
                                                                                                              New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building,                  postcard or envelope.
                                                      25 employees,’’ pursuant to the Small                   Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
                                                      Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,                                                                           FMCSA will consider all comments
                                                                                                              Washington, DC 20590–0001.                             and material received during the
                                                      Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.                          • Hand Delivery or Courier: West
                                                      3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory                                                                       comment period and may change this
                                                                                                              Building, Ground Floor, Room W12–                      proposed rule based on your comments.
                                                      Flexibility Act of 1980, see 5 U.S.C.                   140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
                                                      601–612, do not apply to this                                                                                  FMCSA may issue a final rule at any
                                                                                                              Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5                   time after the close of the comment
                                                      proceeding.                                             p.m., Monday through Friday, except
                                                         The Commission will send a copy of                                                                          period.
                                                                                                              Federal holidays.
                                                      this Report and Order in a report to be                    • Fax: 202–493–2251.                                Confidential Business Information
                                                      sent to Congress and the Government                        To avoid duplication, please use only
                                                      Accountability Office pursuant to the                                                                             Confidential Business Information
                                                                                                              one of these four methods. See the                     (CBI) is commercial or financial
                                                      Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.                  ‘‘Public Participation and Request for
                                                      801(a)(1)(A).                                                                                                  information that is customarily not
                                                                                                              Comments’’ portion of the                              made available to the general public by
                                                      List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73                      SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for                  the submitter. Under the Freedom of
                                                        Television.                                           instructions on submitting comments,                   Information Act, CBI is eligible for
                                                                                                              including collection of information                    protection from public disclosure. If you
                                                      Federal Communications Commission.                      comments for the Office of Information                 have CBI that is relevant or responsive
                                                      Barbara A. Kreisman,                                    and Regulatory Affairs, OMB.                           to this NPRM, it is important that you
                                                      Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.                    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.                   clearly designate the submitted
                                                      [FR Doc. 2017–11947 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am]              Selden Fritschner, CDL Division,                       comments as CBI. Accordingly, please
                                                      BILLING CODE 6712–01–P                                  Federal Motor Carrier Safety                           mark each page of your submission as
                                                                                                              Administration, 1200 New Jersey                        ‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘CBI.’’ Submissions
                                                                                                              Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–                      designated as CBI and meeting the
                                                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION                            0001, by email at selden.fritschner@                   definition noted above will not be
                                                                                                              dot.gov, or by telephone at 202–366–                   placed in the public docket of this
                                                      Federal Motor Carrier Safety                            0677.                                                  NPRM. Submissions containing CBI
                                                      Administration                                                                                                 should be sent to Brian Dahlin, Chief,
                                                                                                              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                                                                                                                                                     Regulatory Analysis Division, 1200 New
                                                      49 CFR Part 383                                         I. Public Participation and Request for                Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
                                                      [Docket No. FMCSA–2016–0346]                            Comments                                               20590. Any commentary that FMCSA
                                                                                                              A. Submitting Comments                                 receives which is not specifically
                                                      RIN 2126–AB98                                                                                                  designated as CBI will be placed in the
                                                                                                                If you submit a comment, please                      public docket for this rulemaking.
                                                      Commercial Learner’s Permit Validity                    include the docket number for this                        FMCSA will consider all comments
                                                      AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety                    NPRM (Docket No. FMCSA–2016–                           and material received during the
                                                      Administration (FMCSA), DOT.                            0346), indicate the specific section of                comment period.
                                                      ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking                   this document to which each section
                                                                                                              applies, and provide a reason for each                 B. Viewing Comments and Documents
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                      (NPRM), request for comments.
                                                                                                              suggestion or recommendation. You                        To view comments, as well as any
                                                      SUMMARY:   FMCSA proposes to amend                      may submit your comments and                           documents mentioned in this preamble
                                                      the Federal Motor Carrier Safety                        material online or by fax, mail, or hand               as being available in the docket, go to
                                                      Regulations (FMCSRs) to allow States to                 delivery but please use only one of these              http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the
                                                      issue a commercial learner’s permit                     means. FMCSA recommends that you                       docket number, FMCSA–2016–0346, in
                                                      (CLP) with an expiration date of up to                  include your name and a mailing                        the keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’
                                                      one year from the date of initial                       address, an email address, or a phone                  Next, click the ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’
                                                      issuance. CLPs issued for shorter                       number in the body of your document                    button and choose the document to
                                                      periods may be renewed but the total                    so that FMCSA can contact you if there                 review. If you do not have access to the


                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00030   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1


                                                                               Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules                                             26889

                                                      Internet, you may view the docket                       if the applicant does not obtain a CDL                 CLP holders who would have renewed
                                                      online by visiting the Docket                           within one year from the date the CLP                  their CLP.
                                                      Management Facility in Room W12–140                     was first issued, he/she must reapply for
                                                                                                                                                                     III. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
                                                      on the ground floor of the DOT West                     a CLP. This approach would replace the
                                                      Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,                   current requirements of §§ 383.25(c) and                  This rulemaking is based on the broad
                                                      Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.                    383.73(a)(2)(iii), under which a CLP is                authority of the Commercial Motor
                                                      and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,                      valid for no more than 180 days from                   Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA), as
                                                      except Federal holidays.                                the date of issuance, with an option for               amended, codified at 49 U.S.C. chapter
                                                                                                              the State to renew the CLP for an                      313 and implemented by 49 CFR parts
                                                      C. Privacy Act                                                                                                 383 and 384. The CMVSA provides that
                                                                                                              additional 180 days without requiring
                                                        In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c),                   the general and endorsement knowledge                  ‘‘[a]fter consultation with the States, the
                                                      DOT solicits comments from the public                   tests, as applicable. The proposed                     Secretary of Transportation shall
                                                      to better inform its rulemaking process.                change provides an improved process                    prescribe regulations on minimum
                                                      DOT posts these comments, without                       for CLP issuance that FMCSA believes                   uniform standards for the issuance of
                                                      edit, including any personal information                will save time and money for both                      commercial drivers’ licenses and
                                                      the commenter provides, to                              States and CLP applicants, as discussed                learner’s permits by the States . . .’’ (49
                                                      www.regulations.gov, as described in                    below, without affecting safety.                       U.S.C. 31308).
                                                      the system of records notice (DOT/ALL–
                                                                                                              Benefits and Costs                                     IV. Background
                                                      14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
                                                      www.dot.gov/privacy.                                       The primary entities affected by this                 On September 1, 2015, the Oregon
                                                                                                              proposed rule would be State Driver                    Department of Transportation (ODOT)
                                                      D. Waiver of Advance Notice of                                                                                 requested an exemption from § 383.25(c)
                                                                                                              Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) and CLP
                                                      Proposed Rulemaking                                                                                            to allow a CLP to be issued for one year.
                                                                                                              holders. FMCSA is unable to estimate
                                                        Under the Fixing America’s Surface                    the number of SDLAs that may choose                    Currently the regulation provides that
                                                      Transportation Act (FAST Act) (Pub. L.                  to issue a CLP that is valid for up to one             the CLP must be valid for no more than
                                                      114–94), FMCSA is required to publish                   year or the number of CLP holders that                 180 days from the date of issuance.
                                                      an advance notice of proposed                           would be affected. Nonetheless,                        However, under §§ 383.25(c) and
                                                      rulemaking (ANPRM) or conduct a                         potential benefits of this proposed rule               383.73(a)(2)(iii), the State may renew
                                                      negotiated rulemaking ‘‘if a proposed                   would include reduced costs to CLP                     the CLP for an additional 180 days
                                                      rule is likely to lead to the promulgation              holders, including reductions in the                   without requiring the CLP holder to
                                                      of a major rule’’ (49 U.S.C. 31136(g)(1)).              opportunity cost of time that, in the                  retake the general and endorsement
                                                      As this proposed rule is not likely to                  absence of this proposed rule, would be                knowledge tests. In its request for the
                                                      result in the promulgation of a major                   spent by CLP holders traveling to and                  exemption, ODOT stated that ‘‘[a]dding
                                                      rule, the Agency is not required to issue               from an SDLA office and at an SDLA                     the bureaucratic requirement for a CLP
                                                      an ANPRM or to proceed with a                           office, renewing a CLP that is valid for               holder to visit a DMV office and pay a
                                                      negotiated rulemaking.                                  no more than 180 days. SDLAs that                      fee in order to get a second six months
                                                      E. Comments on the Collection of                        choose under this proposed rule to issue               of CLP validity will add unnecessary
                                                      Information                                             a CLP that is valid for up to one year                 workload to offices already stretched to
                                                                                                              may benefit from the elimination of                    the limit.’’
                                                         If you have comments on the                          costs associated with processing                         On November 27, 2015, FMCSA
                                                      collection of information discussed in                  renewals of CLPs. FMCSA does not                       published notice of ODOT’s application
                                                      this NPRM, you must send those                          expect there would be any costs                        for exemption and requested public
                                                      comments to the Office of Information                   imposed upon CLP holders as a result                   comments (80 FR 74199). The Agency
                                                      and Regulatory Affairs at OMB. To                       of this rule. Under this proposed rule                 received 10 comments in response to
                                                      ensure that your comments are received                  SDLAs that choose to offer a CLP that                  the proposed exemption. The Alabama
                                                      on time, the preferred methods of                       is valid for up to one year may incur                  Law Enforcement Agency; Colorado
                                                      submission are by email to oira_                        costs related to information technology                Department of Revenue CDL Unit; New
                                                      submissions@omb.eop.gov (include                        (IT) system upgrades that may be                       York Department of Motor Vehicles;
                                                      docket number ‘‘FMCSA–2016–0346’’                       necessary.                                             Oregon Trucking Associations, Inc.; and
                                                      and ‘‘Attention: Desk Officer for                          Although potential reductions in CLP                two individuals supported the
                                                      FMCSA, DOT’’ in the subject line of the                 renewal fees collected by SDLAs may                    exemption. The Commercial Vehicle
                                                      email) or fax at 202–395–6566. An                       appear to be a cost of this proposed rule              Training Association (CVTA) and three
                                                      alternative, though slower, method is by                to SDLAs, and the commensurate                         individuals opposed the exemption.
                                                      U.S. Mail to the Office of Information                  potential savings to CLP holders of CLP                  In a notice published on April 5, 2016
                                                      and Regulatory Affairs, Office of                       renewal fees may appear to be a benefit                (81 FR 19703), FMCSA stated that the
                                                      Management and Budget, 725 17th                         to CLP holders, any such changes in                    exemption requested by the ODOT
                                                      Street NW., Washington, DC 20503,                       renewal fee amounts are best classified                would maintain a level of safety
                                                      ATTN: Desk Officer, FMCSA, DOT.                         as transfer payments and not as a cost                 equivalent to or greater than the level of
                                                      II. Executive Summary                                   to SDLAs (in the form of forgone fee                   safety that would be achieved without
                                                                                                              revenue) or as a benefit to CLP holders                the exemption, as required by 49 CFR
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                      Purpose and Summary of the Major                        (in the form of CLP renewal fees no                    381.305(a). The Agency therefore
                                                      Provisions                                              longer expended). If an SDLA were to                   approved ODOT’s application for
                                                         This NPRM would allow States to                      increase its fee for the issuance of a CLP             exemption and allowed all SDLAs
                                                      issue a CLP for no more than one year                   in order to offset any reduction in                    nationwide to use the exemption at their
                                                      from the date of initial issuance, with or              revenue resulting from the elimination                 discretion. However, the exemption did
                                                      without renewal within that one-year                    of CLP renewals and associated fees, a                 not change the language of § 383.25(c)
                                                      period. After one year from the date of                 transfer would occur from those CLP                    and the exemption remains effective for
                                                      initial issuance, a CLP, or renewed CLP,                holders who, in the absence of the rule,               2 years from the date of approval,
                                                      would no longer be valid. Accordingly,                  would not have renewed their CLP to                    expiring on April 5, 2018. Subsequent to


                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00031   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1


                                                      26890                    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules

                                                      FMCSA’s approval of ODOT’s                              would have to re-test. FMCSA also                      5, 2016 (81 FR 19703), is unknown.1
                                                      application, the Agency amended its                     provides for renewal of CLPs that have                 FMCSA seeks any information available
                                                      Notice of Final Disposition to also                     been issued for a period of less than a                in this regard.
                                                      include exemption from the parallel                     year.                                                     FMCSA estimates that approximately
                                                      requirements of § 373.73(a)(2)(iii) (81 FR                                                                     476,000 CLPs are issued annually
                                                                                                              Section 383.73        State Procedures
                                                      86067 (November 29, 2016)).                                                                                    nationwide. This estimate is based
                                                                                                                 In § 383.73(a)(2)(iii) FMCSA makes                  primarily on information from the
                                                      V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking
                                                                                                              minor changes to the text and replaces                 Commercial Driver’s License
                                                      Requiring States To Issue a CLP for No                  ‘‘180 days’’ with ‘‘one year’’ to clarify in           Information System (CDLIS), a
                                                      More Than One Year, With or Without                     the instructions to States the proposed                nationwide computer system that
                                                      Renewal                                                 extended period of time that a CLP can                 enables SDLAs to ensure that each
                                                         This proposed rule would amend                       be valid before a CLP holder would have                commercial driver has only one driver’s
                                                      §§ 383.25 (c) and 383.73(a)(2)(iii) to                  to re-test. FMCSA also provides for                    license and one complete driver record.
                                                      allow States to issue a CLP for no more                 renewal of CLPs that have been issued                  Data provided by the American
                                                      than one year, without requiring the                    for a period of less than a year.                      Association of Motor Vehicle
                                                      CLP holder to retake the general and                                                                           Administrators (AAMVA) for the three
                                                                                                              VII. Regulatory Analyses                               calendar years 2013 through 2015
                                                      endorsement knowledge tests. The
                                                      Agency proposes a maximum period of                     A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and                 indicate that approximately 476,000
                                                      CLP validity of one year, rather than the               Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving                         new Master Pointer Records (MPRs)
                                                      360-day maximum currently permitted                     Regulation and Regulatory Review), and                 were added annually to CDLIS during
                                                      under §§ 383.25(c) and 383.73(a)(2)(iii).               DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures                 that time.2 An MPR is typically added
                                                      The principal reason for this proposed                                                                         to CDLIS within 10 days of issuing a
                                                                                                                 This NPRM is not a significant                      CLP to a driver who is believed to have
                                                      change, as noted above and discussed                    regulatory action under section 3(f) of
                                                      further below, is to increase efficiency                                                                       never held one previously, or when a
                                                                                                              Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR                    non-commercial driver is convicted of a
                                                      in the licensing system and to reduce                   51735, October 4, 1993), Regulatory
                                                      costs to drivers and administrative                                                                            violation in a commercial motor vehicle
                                                                                                              Planning and Review, as supplemented                   (CMV). FMCSA believes that the
                                                      burdens to SDLAs. FMCSA is also                         by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
                                                      proposing the rule, however, in order to                                                                       number of MPRs added to CDLIS for
                                                                                                              2011), Improving Regulation and                        drivers without a CLP or CDL but that
                                                      account for the fact that, in practice,                 Regulatory Review, and does not require
                                                      some States allow a ‘‘grace period’’                                                                           were convicted of a violation while
                                                                                                              an assessment of potential costs and                   driving a CMV is very small. To the
                                                      between the initial CLP issuance period                 benefits under section 6(a)(4) of that
                                                      of 180 days and the 180-day renewal                                                                            extent this may occur, the 476,000 value
                                                                                                              Order. It is also not significant within               noted above may slightly overestimate
                                                      period currently allowed, thus resulting                the meaning of DOT regulatory policies
                                                      in a total period of time which may                                                                            the actual number of CLPs issued
                                                                                                              and procedures (DOT Order 2100.5                       annually. Conversely, due to certain
                                                      exceed 360 days from the time of initial                dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR 11034,
                                                      issuance of the CLP. States that choose                                                                        record retention requirements of CDLIS,
                                                                                                              February 26, 1979). Accordingly, the                   it may be possible that a CLP applicant
                                                      to issue a CLP for an initial period of                 Office of Management and Budget has
                                                      less than one year may provide for                                                                             already could have an MPR present in
                                                                                                              not reviewed it under these Orders. This               CDLIS (from a previous CDL or CLP that
                                                      renewal, as long as the renewed CLP is                  proposed rule would amend existing
                                                      not valid for more than one year from                                                                          was held by that applicant and for
                                                                                                              procedures and practices governing the                 which the MPR created remains in
                                                      the date of initial issuance of the                     issuance of commercial learner’s
                                                      original CLP. For example, under the                                                                           CDLIS for some time after the CLP or
                                                                                                              permits.                                               CDL has expired or otherwise is no
                                                      proposed change, a State could issue a
                                                      CLP that is valid for nine months. If that              Costs and Benefits                                     longer in force). To the extent this
                                                      State chose to allow the CLP holder to                                                                         occurs, the 476,000 value noted above
                                                                                                                 This proposed rule allows States to                 may slightly underestimate the actual
                                                      renew the CLP, the renewal could not be                 issue a CLP that is valid for no more
                                                      valid for longer than three months, up                                                                         number of CLPs issued annually.
                                                                                                              than one year from the date of initial                 Despite these potential sources of minor
                                                      to a total period of one year from the                  issuance, with or without renewal
                                                      date of initial issuance.                                                                                      uncertainty, FMCSA believes that the
                                                                                                              during that one-year period. This                      estimate of approximately 476,000 CLPs
                                                         The Agency invites States and other                  approach would replace the current
                                                      interested parties to identify potential                                                                       currently issued annually nationwide is
                                                                                                              requirements, as set forth in §§ 383.25(c)
                                                      costs (e.g., necessary changes in CLP-                  and 383.73(a)(2)(iii), which require that                 1 The Driver and Motor Vehicle Services Division
                                                      related IT systems), savings and process                a CLP must be valid for no more than                   (DMV) of the Oregon Department of Transportation
                                                      efficiencies that may result from the                   180 days from the date of issuance, with               (ODOT) currently offers a CLP that is valid for one
                                                      proposed change, along with any                         an additional 180-day renewal possible
                                                                                                                                                                     year and cannot be renewed. See https://
                                                      supporting data.                                                                                               www.oregon.gov/ODOT/DMV/pages/driverid/
                                                                                                              at the State’s discretion.                             cdlget.aspx (accessed February 9, 2017). ODOT
                                                      VI. Section-By-Section Analysis                            The primary entities affected by this               requested the limited exemption from the CLP
                                                                                                                                                                     requirements in 49 CFR 383.25(c), which FMCSA
                                                        FMCSA proposes to amend part 383                      proposed rule would be SDLAs and CLP
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                                                                                                                                     issued on April 5, 2016, and which is applicable to
                                                      in the following ways:                                  holders. FMCSA is unable to estimate                   all SDLAs.
                                                                                                              how many of the 51 SDLAs may choose                       2 This estimate excludes data for the month of

                                                      Section 383.25       Commercial Learner’s               under this proposed rule to issue a CLP                October 2015, which appeared to be an anomalous
                                                      Permit (CLP)                                                                                                   outlier figure of about twice the typical monthly
                                                                                                              that is valid for up to one year. The                  figure for the 35 other months during the three year
                                                        In § 383.25(c) FMCSA makes minor                      number of SDLAs that have thus far                     time period of 2013 through 2015 for which data
                                                      changes to the text and replaces ‘‘180                  chosen to issue a CLP that is valid for                was obtained. It is believed that this may be due
                                                                                                              one year from the date of issuance                     in part to the requirement under MAP–21 Section
                                                      days’’ with ‘‘one year’’ to reflect the                                                                        32305 (Commercial Driver’s License Program) that
                                                      proposed extended period of time that                   without renewal, consistent with the                   States must be in compliance with all CDL
                                                      a CLP can be valid before a CLP holder                  exemption to § 383.25(c) issued on April               requirements by September 30, 2015.



                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00032   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1


                                                                               Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules                                                       26891

                                                      a reasonable one. The Agency                            SDLAs in its comments to the November                  of a CLP in order to offset any reduction
                                                      specifically invites comment on the                     27, 2015, notice of ODOT’s application                 in revenue resulting from the
                                                      accuracy of this estimate. Of the                       for exemption (80 FR 74199), as                        elimination of CLP renewals and
                                                      estimated 476,000 CLPs issued                           discussed in the Agency’s grant of                     associated fees, a transfer would occur
                                                      annually, there is no readily available                 application for exemption published on                 from those CLP holders who in the
                                                      source of information regarding how                     April 5, 2016 (81 FR 19703). Under the                 baseline would not have renewed their
                                                      many are renewed. We therefore seek                     proposed rule, the decision by an SDLA                 CLP to CLP holders who in the baseline
                                                      comment and supporting information                      to issue a CLP that is valid for up to one             would have renewed their CLP.4 Here
                                                      regarding the number of CLPs issued                     year would be discretionary.                           too there is no aggregate change in
                                                      annually nationwide that are currently                  Accordingly, the Agency expects that                   social welfare resulting from this
                                                      renewed. Because the Agency cannot                      SDLAs will choose to make this change                  impact, as again it is a simple transfer
                                                      currently quantify the number of CLPs                   only to the extent that such IT system                 of value from one set of entities to
                                                      issued annually that are renewed, nor                   upgrade costs would be less than the                   another. In any case, the extent to which
                                                      the number of SDLAs that would choose                   reduced costs associated with no longer                SDLAs that choose under this proposed
                                                      to issue a CLP that is valid for up to one              having to process renewals of CLPs,                    rule to issue a CLP that is valid for up
                                                      year from the date of issuance, FMCSA                   thus resulting in a net benefit to the                 to one year may increase their fee for
                                                      is unable to quantify the number of CLP                 SDLA.                                                  issuance of a CLP is unknown.5 The
                                                      holders who would be affected by this                      Finally, though potential reductions                incentive for an SDLA to do so,
                                                      proposed rule.                                          in CLP renewal fees collected by SDLAs                 however, is likely low due in part to the
                                                         Although FMCSA is unable to                          may appear to be a cost of this proposed               fact that CLP renewal fees are expected
                                                      quantify the number of SDLAs that may                   rule to SDLAs, any such changes in                     to be a relatively small proportion of the
                                                      choose to issue a CLP that is valid for                 renewal fee amounts are best classified                overall fee revenue collected by any
                                                      up to one year or the number of CLP                     as a transfer, which is discussed further              given SDLA.
                                                      holders that would be affected by this                  below. FMCSA seeks comment on
                                                      proposed rule, there are certain types of                                                                      B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
                                                                                                              supporting information regarding the
                                                      benefits, costs, and transfers that may                 potential costs of this proposed rule.                   The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
                                                      occur as a result of this rule.                            In addition to the potential benefits               (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended
                                                         The potential benefits of this                       and costs of the rule discussed above,                 by the Small Business Regulatory
                                                      proposed rule would include reduced                     there are also certain transfer payment                Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
                                                      costs to CLP holders, including                         effects that may occur as a result of this             (SBREFA) (Pub. L. 104–121, 110 Stat.
                                                      reductions in the opportunity cost of                   rule. Transfer payments are monetary                   857), requires Federal agencies to
                                                      time that in the absence of this proposed               payments from one group to another                     consider the impact of their regulatory
                                                      rule would be spent by CLP holders                      that do not affect total resources                     proposals on small entities, analyze
                                                      traveling to and from an SDLA office                    available to society, and therefore do not
                                                      and at an SDLA office, renewing a CLP                   represent actual costs or benefits to                     4 As an example of this type of transfer effect,

                                                      that is valid for no more than 180 days.                                                                       consider a scenario in which in the baseline 10,000
                                                                                                              society. Because of the potential                      CLPs are issued annually by a State. Of these 10,000
                                                      Though potential savings to CLP holders                 elimination of CLP renewal fees, and the               CLP holders, assume half (5,000) renew their CLP,
                                                      of CLP renewal fees may also appear to                  potential for changes to CLP issuance                  and the remaining half do not. Finally, assume the
                                                      be a benefit of this proposed rule, any                 fees, there are transfer effects that may              fee for initial issuance of a CLP in this State is $25,
                                                      such changes in renewal fee amounts                                                                            and that the fee for renewal of a CLP in this State
                                                                                                              result from this rule. These potential                 is $20. Under this scenario, the total fee revenue
                                                      are best classified as a transfer, which is             transfer effects include a transfer of CLP             collected by the SDLA would be $350,000 in the
                                                      discussed further below. SDLAs may                      renewal fee amounts from SDLAs to                      baseline (calculated as 10,000 CLPs issued at $25
                                                      also realize potential benefits. For                    CLP holders, and a transfer of CLP                     each, plus 5,000 renewals at $20 each). Under the
                                                      example, for SDLAs that chose under                     renewal fee amounts from one set of                    rule, with CLP renewal fee revenue now eliminated,
                                                      this proposed rule to issue a CLP that                                                                         for the SDLA to receive the same $350,000 of fee
                                                                                                              CLP holders to another set of CLP                      revenue as before the rule, the fee for CLP issuance
                                                      is valid for up to one year, costs                      holders. In cases where an SDLA                        would need to increase from $25 to $35. Therefore,
                                                      associated with processing renewals of                  maintains the same fee for issuance of                 the 5,000 drivers who in the baseline would not
                                                      CLPs would be eliminated. However,                      a CLP, a transfer would occur from                     have renewed their CLP would incur an increase in
                                                      there may be transfer payments as                                                                              their fees from $25 to $35. However, the other 5,000
                                                                                                              SDLAs to CLP holders. This transfer                    drivers who in the baseline would have had to
                                                      discussed below. FMCSA seeks                            represents the total amount of CLP                     renew their CLP would realize a reduction in their
                                                      comment and any supporting                              renewal fees that in the absence of this               total fees from $45 (for CLP issuance plus CLP
                                                      information regarding the potential                     proposed rule CLP holders renewing                     renewal) to $35. This would amount to a transfer
                                                      benefits of this proposed rule.                                                                                from the former set of drivers (who in the baseline
                                                                                                              their CLP would have paid SDLAs.3                      would not have renewed their CLPs) to the latter
                                                         FMCSA does not expect there to be                    Such reductions in CLP renewal fee                     set of drivers (who in the baseline would have
                                                      any costs imposed upon CLP holders as                   amounts to SDLAs are properly                          renewed their CLPs).
                                                      a result of this proposed rule. However,                classified as a transfer, rather than as a                5 Under the limited exemption from the CLP

                                                      there may be transfer payments as                       cost to SDLAs (in the form of forgone fee
                                                                                                                                                                     requirements in 49 CFR 383.25(c) that was issued
                                                      discussed below. The potential costs of                                                                        on April 5, 2016, the Driver and Motor Vehicle
                                                                                                              revenue) or as a benefit to CLP holders                Services Division (DMV) of the Oregon Department
                                                      this proposed rule to SDLAs include                     (in the form of CLP renewal fees no                    of Transportation (ODOT) did subsequently choose
                                                      information technology (IT) system
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                                                                              longer expended). There is no aggregate                to offer a CLP that is valid for one year and cannot
                                                      upgrade costs for those SDLAs that                      change in social welfare resulting from
                                                                                                                                                                     be renewed. See https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/
                                                      choose to issue a CLP that is valid for                                                                        DMV/pages/driverid/cdlget.aspx (accessed October
                                                                                                              this impact, as it is a simple transfer of             13, 2016). Based on a review of both the 2016–2017
                                                      up to one year. Such IT system upgrades                 value from one set of entities to another.             Oregon Commercial Driver Manual (pg. 1–6,
                                                      may include software programming                        Alternatively, in cases where an SDLA                  available at http://www.odot.state.or.us/forms/dmv/
                                                      changes necessary to reflect a change                   were to increase its fee for the issuance
                                                                                                                                                                     36.pdf), and the 2012–2013 Oregon Commercial
                                                      from a CLP that is valid for up to 180                                                                         Driver Manual (pg. 1–5, available at http://www.e-
                                                                                                                                                                     gears.com/manuals/or_cdl_manual.pdf), it appears
                                                      days to a CLP that is valid for up to one                 3 In some States, no fee is charged for CLP          that the fee charged by ODOT for issuance of a CLP
                                                      year. The State of Colorado noted the                   renewal, and therefore this type of transfer would     was not changed when ODOT chose to offer a CLP
                                                      potential for such IT system costs to                   not occur if CLP renewals were eliminated.             that is valid for one year.



                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00033   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1


                                                      26892                     Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules

                                                      effective alternatives that minimize                     the decision by an SDLA to issue a CLP                 their discretionary regulatory actions. In
                                                      small entity impacts, and make their                     that is valid for up to one year is                    particular, the Act addresses actions
                                                      analyses available for public comment.                   discretionary, the Agency expects that                 that may result in the expenditure by
                                                      The term ‘‘small entities’’ means small                  SDLAs will choose to make this change                  State, local, or tribal governments, in the
                                                      businesses and not-for-profit                            only to the extent that there is a net                 aggregate, or by the private sector, of
                                                      organizations that are independently                     benefit to the SDLA. Furthermore,                      $156 million (which is the value
                                                      owned and operated and are not                           though there may be some transfer                      equivalent of $100 million in 1995,
                                                      dominant in their fields, and                            payment effects between certain types of               adjusted for inflation to 2015 levels) or
                                                      governmental jurisdictions with                          CLP holders, these effects will not be                 more in any one year. This proposed
                                                      populations under 50,000.6                               significant. The Agency does not believe               rule, which is a discretionary regulatory
                                                      Accordingly, DOT policy requires an                      that there will be any costs imposed                   action, would not result in such an
                                                      analysis of the impact of all regulations                upon CLP holders as a result of this                   expenditure. Nevertheless, the Agency
                                                      on small entities, and mandates that                     rule, and CLP holders would benefit                    discusses the potential effects of this
                                                      agencies strive to lessen any adverse                    from reductions in the opportunity cost                proposed rule elsewhere in this
                                                      effects on these entities.                               of time that in the absence of this                    preamble.
                                                         When an agency issues a rulemaking                    proposed rule would be spent by CLP
                                                                                                               holders traveling to and from an SDLA                  E. Paperwork Reduction Act
                                                      proposal, the RFA requires the agency to
                                                      ‘‘prepare and make available for public                  office and at an SDLA office renewing                    This proposed rule would call for no
                                                      comment an initial regulatory flexibility                a CLP. Accordingly, I hereby certify that              new collection of information under the
                                                      analysis’’ which will ‘‘describe the                     this proposed rule, if promulgated, will               Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
                                                      impact of the proposed rule on small                     not have a significant economic impact                 U.S.C. 3501–3520).
                                                      entities’’ (5 U.S.C. 603(a)). Section 605                on a substantial number of small
                                                                                                                                                                      F. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
                                                      of the RFA allows an agency to certify                   entities. FMCSA invites comment from
                                                      a rule, in lieu of preparing an analysis,                anyone who believes there will be a                      A rule has implications for
                                                      if the proposed rulemaking is not                        significant impact on small entities from              Federalism under Section 1(a) of E.O.
                                                      expected to have a significant economic                  this action.                                           13132 if it has ‘‘substantial direct effects
                                                      impact on a substantial number of small                                                                         on the States, on the relationship
                                                                                                               C. Assistance for Small Entities                       between the national government and
                                                      entities.
                                                         The primary entities affected by this                    In accordance with section 213(a) of                the States, or on the distribution of
                                                      proposed rule would be SDLAs and CLP                     the Small Business Regulatory                          power and responsibilities among the
                                                      holders. Under the standards of the                      Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,                      various levels of government.’’
                                                      RFA, as amended by the SBREFA,                           FMCSA wants to assist small entities in                  FMCSA determined that this proposal
                                                      neither SDLAs nor CLP holders are                        understanding this proposed rule so that               would not have substantial direct costs
                                                      small entities. SDLAs are not considered                 they can better evaluate its effects on                on or for States, nor would it limit the
                                                      small entities because they do not meet                  themselves and participate in the                      policymaking discretion of States. This
                                                      the definition of a small entity in                      rulemaking initiative. If the proposed                 proposed rule does not preempt any
                                                      Section 601 of the RFA. Specifically,                    rule would affect your small business,                 State law or regulation. Therefore, this
                                                      States are not considered small                          organization, or governmental                          proposed rule does not have sufficient
                                                      governmental jurisdictions under                         jurisdiction and you have questions                    Federalism implications to warrant the
                                                      Section 601(5) of the RFA, both because                  concerning its provisions or options for               preparation of a Federalism Impact
                                                      State government is not included among                   compliance, please consult the FMCSA                   Statement.
                                                      the various levels of government listed                  point of contact, Selden Fritschner,
                                                                                                               listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION                  G. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
                                                      in Section 601(5), and because, even if
                                                                                                               CONTACT section of this proposed rule.                   This proposed rule meets applicable
                                                      this were the case, no State nor the
                                                                                                                  Small businesses may send comments                  standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
                                                      District of Columbia has a population of
                                                                                                               on the actions of Federal employees                    E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
                                                      less than 50,000, which is the criterion
                                                                                                               who enforce or otherwise determine                     minimize litigation, eliminate
                                                      by which a governmental jurisdiction is
                                                                                                               compliance with Federal regulations to                 ambiguity, and reduce burden.
                                                      considered small under Section 601(5)
                                                                                                               the Small Business Administration’s
                                                      of the RFA. CLP holders are not                                                                                 H. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
                                                                                                               Small Business and Agriculture
                                                      considered small entities because they                                                                             E.O. 13045, Protection of Children
                                                                                                               Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
                                                      too do not meet the definition of a small                                                                       from Environmental Health Risks and
                                                                                                               and the Regional Small Business
                                                      entity in Section 601 of the RFA.                                                                               Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
                                                                                                               Regulatory Fairness Boards. The
                                                      Specifically, CLP holders are considered                                                                        1997), requires agencies issuing
                                                                                                               Ombudsman evaluates these actions
                                                      neither a small business under Section                                                                          ‘‘economically significant’’ rules, if the
                                                                                                               annually and rates each agency’s
                                                      601(3) of the RFA, nor are they                                                                                 regulation also concerns an
                                                                                                               responsiveness to small business. If you
                                                      considered a small organization under                                                                           environmental health or safety risk that
                                                                                                               wish to comment on actions by
                                                      Section 601(4) of the RFA. Therefore,                                                                           an agency has reason to believe may
                                                                                                               employees of FMCSA, call 1–888–REG–
                                                      this proposed rule will not have an                                                                             disproportionately affect children, to
                                                                                                               FAIR (1–888–734–3247). DOT has a
                                                      impact on a substantial number of small                                                                         include an evaluation of the regulation’s
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                                                                               policy regarding the rights of small
                                                      entities.                                                                                                       environmental health and safety effects
                                                         In any case, this rule provides SDLAs                 entities to regulatory enforcement
                                                                                                               fairness and an explicit policy against                on children. The Agency determined
                                                      the flexibility to choose whether to                                                                            this proposed rule is not economically
                                                      adopt the one-year CLP validity. As                      retaliation for exercising these rights.
                                                                                                                                                                      significant. Therefore, no analysis of the
                                                      described in more detail earlier, because                D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of                     impacts on children is required. In any
                                                                                                               1995                                                   event, this regulatory action does not in
                                                        6 Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

                                                      Available at: https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/
                                                                                                                 The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act                     any respect present an environmental
                                                      regulatory-flexibility-act (accessed February 13,        of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires                  health or safety risk that could
                                                      2017).                                                   Federal agencies to assess the effects of              disproportionately affect children.


                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014    16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00034   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1


                                                                               Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules                                               26893

                                                      I. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private                        responsibilities between the Federal                   populations and low-income
                                                      Property)                                               Government and Indian tribes.                          populations’’ in the United States, its
                                                         FMCSA reviewed this proposed rule                                                                           possessions, and territories. FMCSA
                                                                                                              N. National Technology Transfer and
                                                      in accordance with E.O. 12630,                                                                                 evaluated the environmental justice
                                                                                                              Advancement Act (Technical
                                                      Governmental Actions and Interference                                                                          effects of this proposed rule in
                                                                                                              Standards)
                                                      with Constitutionally Protected Property                                                                       accordance with the E.O., and has
                                                                                                                The National Technology Transfer                     determined that no environmental
                                                      Rights, and has determined it will not
                                                                                                              and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15                        justice issue is associated with this
                                                      effect a taking of private property or
                                                                                                              U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use               proposed rule, nor is there any
                                                      otherwise have taking implications.
                                                                                                              voluntary consensus standards in their                 collective environmental impact that
                                                      J. Privacy                                              regulatory activities unless the agency                would result from its promulgation.
                                                         The Consolidated Appropriations Act,                 provides Congress, through OMB, with
                                                                                                              an explanation of why using these                      List of Subjects in 49 CFR 383
                                                      2005, (Pub. L. 108–447, 118 Stat. 2809,
                                                      3268, 5 U.S.C. 552a note) requires the                  standards would be inconsistent with                     Administrative practice and
                                                      Agency to conduct a privacy impact                      applicable law or otherwise impractical.               procedure, Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse,
                                                      assessment (PIA) of a regulation that                   Voluntary consensus standards (e.g.,                   Highway safety, Motor carriers.
                                                      will affect the privacy of individuals.                 specifications of materials, performance,
                                                                                                              design, or operation; test methods;                      In consideration of the foregoing,
                                                      Because this proposed rule does not
                                                                                                              sampling procedures; and related                       FMCSA proposes to amend 49 CFR
                                                      require the collection of personally
                                                                                                              management systems practices) are                      chapter 3, part 383 to read as follows:
                                                      identifiable information (PII), the
                                                      Agency is not required to conduct a PIA.                standards that are developed or adopted
                                                                                                              by voluntary consensus standards                       PART 383—COMMERCIAL DRIVER’S
                                                         The E-Government Act of 2002,                                                                               LICENSE STANDARDS;
                                                      Public Law 107–347, § 208, 116 Stat.                    bodies. This proposed rule does not use
                                                                                                              technical standards. Therefore, FMCSA                  REQUIREMENTS AND PENALTIES
                                                      2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires
                                                      Federal agencies to conduct a PIA for                   did not consider the use of voluntary
                                                                                                              consensus standards.                                   ■ 1. The authority citation for part 383
                                                      new or substantially changed
                                                                                                                                                                     continues to read as follows:
                                                      technology that collects, maintains, or                 O. Environment (NEPA, CAA,
                                                      disseminates information in an                                                                                   Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et
                                                                                                              Environmental Justice)
                                                      identifiable form. No new or                                                                                   seq., and 31502; secs. 214 and 215 of Pub. L.
                                                      substantially changed technology would                    FMCSA analyzed this NPRM for the                     106–159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1766, 1767; sec.
                                                      collect, maintain, or disseminate                       purpose of the National Environmental                  1012(b) of Pub. L. 107–56, 115 Stat. 272, 297;
                                                                                                              Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et                  sec. 4140 of Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144,
                                                      information as a result of this rule.                                                                          1746; sec. 32934 of Pub. L. 112–141, 126 Stat.
                                                      Accordingly, FMCSA has not conducted                    seq.) and determined this action is
                                                                                                              categorically excluded from further                    405, 830; sec. 7208 of Pub. L. 114–94, 129
                                                      a PIA.                                                                                                         Stat. 1312, 1593; and 49 CFR 1.87.
                                                                                                              analysis and documentation in an
                                                      K. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental                        environmental assessment or                            ■ 2. Amend § 383.25 to revise paragraph
                                                      Review)                                                 environmental impact statement under                   (c) to read as follows:
                                                        The regulations implementing E.O.                     FMCSA Order 5610.1(69 FR 9680,
                                                                                                              March 1, 2004), Appendix 2, paragraph                  § 383.25   Commercial learner’s permit
                                                      12372 regarding intergovernmental                                                                              (CLP).
                                                      consultation on Federal programs and                    6.t.(2). The Categorical Exclusion (CE) in
                                                      activities do not apply to this program.                paragraph 6.t.(2) includes regulations to              *      *      *    *      *
                                                                                                              ensure that the States comply with the                    (c) The CLP must be valid for no more
                                                      L. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply,                           provisions of the Commercial Motor                     than one year from the date of issuance
                                                      Distribution, or Use)                                   Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The                        without requiring the CLP holder to
                                                         FMCSA has analyzed this proposed                     requirements in this proposed rule are                 retake the general and endorsement
                                                      rule under E.O. 13211, Actions                          covered by this CE and the proposed                    knowledge tests. CLPs issued for a
                                                      Concerning Regulations That                             action does not have a significant effect              period of less than one year may be
                                                      Significantly Affect Energy Supply,                     on the quality of the human                            renewed as long as the renewed CLP is
                                                      Distribution, or Use. The Agency has                    environment. The CE determination is                   valid for no more than one year from the
                                                      determined that the rule is not a                       available for inspection or copying in                 date of initial issuance of the original
                                                      ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that                the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://                CLP.
                                                      order because it is not a ‘‘significant                 www.regulations.gov.                                   ■ 3. Amend § 383.73 to revise paragraph
                                                      regulatory action’’ likely to have a                      FMCSA also analyzed this proposed                    (a)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
                                                      significant adverse effect on the supply,               rule under the Clean Air Act, as
                                                      distribution, or use of energy. Therefore,              amended (CAA), section 176(c) (42                      § 383.73   State procedures.
                                                      it does not require a Statement of Energy               U.S.C. 7401 et seq.), and implementing                   (a) * * *
                                                      Effects under E.O. 13211.                               regulations promulgated by the
                                                                                                                                                                       (2) * * *
                                                                                                              Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                      M. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal                            Approval of this action is exempt from                   (iii) Make the CLP valid for no more
                                                      Governments)                                            the CAA’s general conformity                           than one year from the date of issuance
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                         This proposed rule does not have                     requirement since it does not affect                   without requiring the CLP holder to
                                                      tribal implications under E.O. 13175,                   direct or indirect emissions of criteria               retake the general and endorsement
                                                      Consultation and Coordination with                      pollutants.                                            knowledge tests. CLPs issued for a
                                                      Indian Tribal Governments, because it                     Under E.O. 12898, each Federal                       period of less than one year may be
                                                      would not have a substantial direct                     agency must identify and address, as                   renewed as long as the renewed CLP is
                                                      effect on one or more Indian tribes, on                 appropriate, ‘‘disproportionately high                 valid for no more than one year from the
                                                      the relationship between the Federal                    and adverse human health or                            date of initial issuance of the original
                                                      Government and Indian tribes, or on the                 environmental effects of its programs,                 CLP.
                                                      distribution of power and                               policies, and activities on minority                   *      *    *      *    *


                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00035   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1


                                                      26894                    Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 111 / Monday, June 12, 2017 / Proposed Rules

                                                        Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR            Administration, 1200 New Jersey                        are questions regarding your
                                                      1.87 on: June 6, 2017.                                  Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–                      submission.
                                                      Daphne Y. Jefferson,                                    0001, by email at Selden.fritschner@                     To submit your comment online, go to
                                                      Deputy Administrator.                                   dot.gov, or by telephone at 202–366–                   http://www.regulations.gov, put the
                                                      [FR Doc. 2017–12080 Filed 6–9–17; 8:45 am]              0677. If you have questions on viewing                 docket number, FMCSA–2017–0047, in
                                                      BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P                                  or submitting material to the docket,                  the keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’
                                                                                                              contact Docket Services, telephone (202)               When the new screen appears, click on
                                                                                                              366–9826.                                              the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ button and type
                                                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION                            SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                                                                                                                                                     your comment into the text box on the
                                                                                                                                                                     following screen. Choose whether you
                                                      Federal Motor Carrier Safety                              This notice of proposed rulemaking
                                                                                                                                                                     are submitting your comment as an
                                                      Administration                                          (NPRM) is organized as follows:
                                                                                                                                                                     individual or on behalf of a third party
                                                                                                              I. Public Participation and Request for                and then submit.
                                                      49 CFR Part 383, 384                                          Comments                                           If you submit your comments by mail
                                                                                                                 A. Submitting Comments                              or hand delivery, submit them in an
                                                      [Docket No. FMCSA–2017–0047]                               B. Viewing Comments and Documents
                                                                                                                                                                     unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
                                                                                                                 C. Privacy Act
                                                      RIN 2126–AB99                                                                                                  11 inches, suitable for copying and
                                                                                                                 D. Waiver of Advance Notice of Proposed
                                                                                                                    Rulemaking                                       electronic filing. If you submit
                                                      Military Licensing and State                                                                                   comments by mail and would like to
                                                                                                              II. Executive Summary
                                                      Commercial Driver’s License                             III. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking                    know that they reached the facility,
                                                      Reciprocity                                             IV. Regulatory Background                              please enclose a stamped, self-addressed
                                                      AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety                       A. Current Standards                                postcard or envelope.
                                                                                                                 B. Recent Activity                                    FMCSA will consider all comments
                                                      Administration (FMCSA), DOT.                            V. Discussion of Proposed Rulemaking                   and material received during the
                                                      ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.                  VI. Removal of Regulatory Guidance                     comment period and may change this
                                                                                                              VII. International Impacts
                                                      SUMMARY:   This proposed rule would                     VIII. Section-by-Section
                                                                                                                                                                     proposed rule based on your comments.
                                                      allow State Driver Licensing Agencies                   IX. Regulatory Analyses                                FMCSA may issue a final rule at any
                                                      (SDLAs) to waive the requirements for                      A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866                     time after the close of the comment
                                                      the commercial driver’s license (CDL)                         (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O.           period.
                                                      knowledge tests for certain individuals                       13563 (Improving Regulation and
                                                                                                                                                                     B. Viewing Comments and Documents
                                                      who are, or were, regularly employed                          Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory
                                                      within the last year in a military                            Policies and Procedures)                           To view comments, as well as any
                                                      position that requires/required, the                       B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (Small                documents mentioned in this preamble
                                                                                                                    Entities)                                        as being available in the docket, go to
                                                      operation of a commercial motor vehicle                    C. Assistance for Small Entities
                                                      (CMV).                                                                                                         http://www.regulations.gov. Insert the
                                                                                                                 D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995             docket number, FMCSA–2017–0047, in
                                                      DATES: Comments on this notice must be                     E. Paperwork Reduction Act (Collection of
                                                                                                                    Information)
                                                                                                                                                                     the keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’
                                                      received on or before August 11, 2017.
                                                                                                                 F. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)                          Next, click the ‘‘Open Docket Folder’’
                                                      ADDRESSES: You may submit comments                                                                             button and choose the document to
                                                                                                                 G. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
                                                      identified by Docket Number FMCSA–                                                                             review. If you do not have access to the
                                                                                                                 H. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
                                                      2017–0047 using any of the following                       I. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)          Internet, you may view the docket
                                                      methods:                                                   J. Privacy                                          online by visiting the Docket
                                                         • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://                   K. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)            Management Facility in Room W12–140
                                                      www.regulations.gov. Follow the online                     L. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution,         on the ground floor of the DOT West
                                                      instructions for submitting comments.                         or Use)                                          Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
                                                         • Mail: Docket Management Facility,                     M. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
                                                                                                                                                                     Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
                                                      U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200                    N. National Technology Transfer and
                                                                                                                    Advancement Act (Technical Standards)            and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
                                                      New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building,                                                                          except Federal holidays.
                                                      Ground Floor, Room W12–140,                                O. Environment (NEPA, CAA,
                                                                                                                    Environmental Justice)                           C. Privacy Act
                                                      Washington, DC 20590–0001.
                                                         • Hand Delivery or Courier: West                     I. Public Participation and Request for                  In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c),
                                                      Building, Ground Floor, Room W12–                       Comments                                               DOT solicits comments from the public
                                                      140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,                                                                               to better inform its rulemaking process.
                                                      Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5                    A. Submitting Comments
                                                                                                                                                                     DOT posts these comments, without
                                                      p.m., Monday through Friday, except                       If you submit a comment, please                      edit, including any personal information
                                                      Federal holidays.                                       include the docket number for this                     the commenter provides, to
                                                         • Fax: 202–493–2251.                                 NPRM (Docket No. FMCSA–2017–                           www.regulations.gov, as described in
                                                         To avoid duplication, please use only                0047), indicate the specific section of                the system of records notice (DOT/ALL–
                                                      one of these four methods. See the                      this document to which each section                    14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
                                                      ‘‘Public Participation and Request for                  applies, and provide a reason for each
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS




                                                                                                                                                                     www.dot.gov/privacy.
                                                      Comments’’ portion of the                               suggestion or recommendation. You
                                                      SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for                   may submit your comments and                           D. Waiver of Advance Notice of
                                                      instructions on submitting comments,                    material online or by fax, mail, or hand               Proposed Rulemaking
                                                      including collection of information                     delivery, but please use only one of                     Under section 5202 of the Fixing
                                                      comments for the Office of Information                  these means. FMCSA recommends that                     America’s Surface Transportation Act,
                                                      and Regulatory Affairs, OMB.                            you include your name and a mailing                    Public Law 114–94 (FAST Act), if a
                                                      FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.                    address, an email address, or a phone                  regulatory proposal is likely to lead to
                                                      Selden Fritschner, CDL Division,                        number in the body of your document                    the promulgation of a major rule,
                                                      Federal Motor Carrier Safety                            so that FMCSA can contact you if there                 agencies are required to start the process


                                                 VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:49 Jun 09, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00036   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\12JNP1.SGM   12JNP1



Document Created: 2017-06-10 01:40:45
Document Modified: 2017-06-10 01:40:45
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionNotice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), request for comments.
DatesComments on this notice must be received on or before August 11, 2017.
ContactMr. Selden Fritschner, CDL Division, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001, by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 202-366-0677.
FR Citation82 FR 26888 
RIN Number2126-AB98

2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR