[Federal Register: March 30, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 61)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 16722-16738]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30mr04-21]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 380 and 391

[Docket FMCSA-97-2176]
RIN 2126-AA08

 
Minimum Training Requirements for Longer Combination Vehicle 
(LCV) Operators and LCV Driver-Instructor Requirements

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) 
establishes standards for minimum training requirements for the 
operators of longer combination vehicles (LCVs) and requirements for 
the instructors who train these operators. This action is in response 
to section 4007 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
of 1991, which directed that training for the operators of LCVs include 
certification of an operator's proficiency by an instructor who has met 
the requirements established by the Secretary of Transportation 
(Secretary). The purpose of this final rule is to enhance the safety of 
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) operations on our Nation's highways.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Redmond, Office of Safety 
Programs, (202) 366-9579, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20590. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST, Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sec. 4007(b) of the Motor Carrier Act of 
1991 [Title IV of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 
of 1991 (ISTEA), Public Law 102-240, 105 Stat. 1914, 2152; 49 U.S.C. 
31307] directs the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to establish 
Federal minimum training requirements for drivers of LCVs. The ISTEA 
also requires that the certification of these drivers' proficiency be 
accomplished by instructors who meet certain Federal minimum 
requirements to ensure an acceptable degree of quality control and 
uniformity. Sec. 4007(f) of the ISTEA defines an LCV as ``any 
combination of a truck tractor and 2 or more trailers or semi-
trailers'' that has a gross vehicle weight (GVW) greater than 80,000 
pounds (36,288 kilograms) and is operated on the Interstate Highway 
System. This final rule implements the requirements of Sec. 4007.

Background

    In the early 1980s, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 
determined that a need existed for technical guidance in the area of 
truck driver training. FHWA is the predecessor agency to FMCSA within 
DOT. Research at that time had shown that many driver-training schools 
offered little or no structured curricula or uniform training programs 
for any type of CMV.
    To help correct this problem, FHWA developed the Model Curriculum 
for Training Tractor-Trailer Drivers, issued in 1985 (GPO Stock No. 
050-001-00293-1). The Model Curriculum, as it is known in the industry, 
incorporated the agency's ``Proposed Minimum Standards for Training 
Tractor Trailer Drivers'' (1984). The Model Curriculum is a broad set 
of recommendations that incorporates standardized minimum core 
curriculum guidelines and training materials, as well as guidelines 
pertaining to vehicles, facilities, instructor hiring practices, 
graduation requirements, and student placement. Curriculum content 
includes the following areas: basic operation, safe operating 
practices, advanced operating practices, vehicle maintenance, and 
nonvehicle activities.
    The Professional Truck Driver Institute (PTDI) was created in 1986 
by the motor carrier industry to certify training programs offered by 
truck driver training schools. Originally named the Professional Truck 
Driver Institute of America, the group changed its name in November 
1998 to reflect the addition of Canada to the organization. PTDI 
derived its certification criteria from the Model Curriculum, and, in 
mid-1988, began certifying truck-driver training programs across the 
country. As of February 2003, approximately 64 schools in 27 States and 
Canada have received the PTDI certification. Although many schools have 
a number of truck driving courses, most have only one course that is 
certified by PTDI.
    The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA) (49 U.S.C. 
31301 et seq.), although not directly targeted at driver training, was 
intended to improve highway safety. Its goal was to ensure that drivers 
of large trucks and buses possess the knowledge and skills necessary to 
operate these vehicles safely on public highways. The CMVSA established 
the commercial driver's license (CDL) program and directed the agency 
to establish minimum Federal standards that States must meet when 
licensing CMV drivers. The CMVSA applies to virtually anyone who 
operates a commercial motor vehicle in interstate or intrastate 
commerce, including employees of Federal, State, and local governments. 
As defined by the implementing regulation, a CMV is a motor vehicle or 
combination of motor vehicles used in commerce to transport passengers 
or property if the vehicle meets one or more of the following criteria:
    (a) Has a gross combination weight rating (GCWR) of 11,794 or more 
kilograms (26,001 or more pounds) inclusive of a towed unit with a 
gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of more than 4,536 kilograms (10,000 
pounds).
    (b) Has a GVWR of 11,794 or more kilograms (26,001 or more pounds).

[[Page 16723]]

    (c) Is designed to transport 16 or more passengers, including the 
driver.
    (d) Is of any size and used in the transportation of hazardous 
materials as defined in this section [49 CFR 383.5].
    In accordance with the CMVSA, all drivers of commercial motor 
vehicles must possess a valid CDL in order to be properly qualified to 
operate the vehicle(s) they drive. In addition to passing the CDL 
knowledge and skills tests required for the basic vehicle group, all 
persons who operate or expect to operate any of the following vehicles, 
which have special handling characteristics, must obtain endorsements 
under 49 CFR 383.93(b):
    (a) Double/triple trailers;
    (b) Passenger vehicles;
    (c) Tank vehicles;
    (d) Vehicles required to be placarded for hazardous materials.
    For all endorsements, the driver is required to pass a knowledge 
test that gauges the person's familiarity with the special handling 
characteristics of the specific vehicle type. To obtain a passenger 
endorsement, the driver also must pass a skills test.
    The CDL standards do not require the comprehensive driver training 
proposed in the Model Curriculum, since the CDL is a licensing standard 
as opposed to a training standard. Accordingly, there are no 
prerequisite Federal or State training requirements to obtain a CDL.
    In 1990, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 
recommended to FHWA (Safety Recommendation H-90-3) that drivers of 
specialized vehicles, including multiple-trailer vehicles, receive 
training in the special handling characteristics and other variables 
that influence the controllability and maneuverability of these 
vehicles. On September 12, 1990, NTSB voided this Safety Recommendation 
as ``Closed--Reconsidered.'' NTSB determined that the knowledge and 
skills necessary for the operation of multiple-trailer combination 
vehicles are covered in the CDL requirements under 49 CFR subpart C as 
well as in the ``the model driver manual and the model knowledge and 
skills tests,'' and that the trucking industry provided adequate 
training in these requirements.
    In February 1991, FHWA awarded a contract to PTDI to develop 
voluntary criteria for training drivers in the safe operation of twin 
8.534-meter (28-foot) trailer combination vehicles. The resulting 
``Twin Trailer Driver Curriculum'' outlines how drivers should be 
trained in the safe operation of these vehicles. Subject matter experts 
from motor carrier fleets, industry associations, training 
institutions, and governmental organizations assisted in developing the 
curriculum, which consists of 115 clock hours of direct driver 
participation including a minimum of 56 hours of behind-the-wheel 
training. The ``Twin Trailer Driver Curriculum'' is available for 
review in the public docket for this rulemaking.
    The agency awarded two additional contracts to the PTDI to develop 
curriculum outlines addressing triple-trailer combination vehicles and 
Rocky Mountain/Turnpike Double combination vehicles. Ultimately, the 
curriculum outlines for twin trailers, Rocky Mountain/Turnpike Doubles, 
and triple-trailer combinations were merged into a single document, 
entitled ``Multiple Trailer Combination Vehicle (MTCV) Driver Training 
Guide: Suggested Units of Instruction and Curriculum Outline.'' The 
PTDI was selected to develop a composite modular training curriculum 
outline embracing both the LCV driver and the LCV instructor.
    Upon completion of the curricula, the agency coordinated with the 
U.S. Department of Education to ensure that the proposed training 
requirements were in concert with its accreditation requirements. 
Representatives from both agencies agreed that the proposed training 
requirements would be eligible for accreditation by any group meeting 
the criteria and procedures described in the publication Nationally 
Recognized Accrediting Agencies and Associations, Criteria and 
Procedures for Listing by the U.S. Secretary of Education and Current 
List. This document is available for review in the public docket for 
this rulemaking.
    During this period, two additional FHWA initiatives--a series of 
highway-safety focus groups in December 1994, and FHWA's first National 
Truck and Bus Safety Summit, held in March 1995--contributed to an 
enhanced understanding of driver training. Although neither project 
specifically focused on driver training methods or minimum training 
standards, they nevertheless provided perspective on the importance of 
driver training and the need for minimum training requirements. The 
``Focus Group Report'' on the 1994 initiative and the ``1995 Truck and 
Bus Safety Summit, Report of Proceedings'' are available for review in 
the rulemaking docket.
    On January 15, 1993, FHWA's Office of Motor Carriers published an 
advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register 
(58 FR 4638) seeking comments and responses to 13 specific questions. 
The agency received 24 comments, which were summarized in the notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) discussed below.

Summary of the NPRM

    The agency used the results of the projects mentioned above, the 
research conducted over the past several years, and the comments to the 
1993 ANPRM to develop the proposals in the NPRM, published in the 
Federal Register on August 12, 2003 (68 FR 47890).
    The NPRM proposed standards for minimum training requirements for 
the operators of LCVs and requirements for the instructors who train 
these operators. It also outlined procedures for determining compliance 
with the proposed rule by operators, instructors, training 
institutions, and employers.
    As agency research and crash data have not indicated that multiple-
trailer combination vehicle operations pose a significant safety 
problem, FMCSA proposed to limit the training requirement to operators 
of LCVs, as defined in Sec. 4007(f) of the ISTEA, rather than extend it 
to multiple-trailer combinations weighing less than 80,000 pounds.
    As for the training, the NPRM proposed general requirements 
pertaining to an LCV driver-training test--consisting of both a 
knowledge and skills assessment--for all students wishing to obtain an 
LCV Driver-Training Certificate. FMCSA believes that specialized 
vehicle combinations require somewhat different training requirements 
because of differing operating characteristics. Therefore, we proposed 
two separate training courses for LCV drivers: LCV Doubles and LCV 
Triples. Although the proposed minimum curricula would be identical, 
the training entity would tailor each course to the unique operational 
and handling characteristics of the specific LCV category. Specialized 
commodity training could be addressed as necessary by training 
institutions or carriers.
    The NPRM also established guidelines as to which drivers must 
comply with the proposed rule. The individual seeking LCV training 
would have to possess a valid CDL with a double/triple trailer 
endorsement, have only one driver's license, have a good driving 
record, and provide evidence of experience operating the category of 
combination vehicle designated as a prerequisite for the desired LCV 
training. Evidence of driving experience would consist of a statement 
from one or more employers indicating the type and amount of driving 
experience while employed by that motor carrier.
    In addition, FMCSA believes that for many current LCV drivers, the 
combination of a good driving record

[[Page 16724]]

and experience with an LCV double or triple indicates that the 
individual has the minimum knowledge and driving skills to operate such 
a vehicle. Accordingly, we proposed to allow certain drivers to 
substitute a good driving record and experience for the completion of 
the LCV driver-training requirements. The driver would have to provide 
the employing motor carrier with evidence that he or she had operated 
LCVs safely during the 2-year period prior to application. FMCSA 
believes that grandfathering such drivers will not diminish public 
safety or the overall safe operation of CMVs.
    Regarding the training program, each instructor employed by a 
training institution offering LCV training would be required to meet 
all State requirements for a vocational education instructor. FMCSA 
believes that, initially, persons currently conducting double/triple 
trailer combination vehicle training would become qualified LCV 
instructors under the proposed grandfather requirements. Subsequently, 
when the need for new instructors arises, those qualified 
(grandfathered) LCV instructors would train new instructors, who would 
then be qualified to train drivers.
    While the States assume varying degrees of control over education, 
institutions of postsecondary education are permitted to operate with 
considerable autonomy. As a consequence, educational institutions can 
vary widely in the quality and adequacy of their programs. To ensure a 
basic level of quality and adequacy, the U.S. Department of Education 
has established accreditation requirements. FMCSA therefore proposed 
that any entity--whether for-profit or not-for-profit, private or 
public--that meets these accreditation requirements would be allowed to 
offer the training.
    As for employer responsibilities, the proposed rule expressly 
prohibits a motor carrier from employing an individual to operate an 
LCV unless he or she has first met the requirements under the proposal. 
FMCSA or Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) State 
enforcement officials would verify compliance with the LCV driver 
training and driver-instructor requirements at the carrier's place of 
business during the compliance review, rather than at the roadside. For 
this reason, carriers would be required to maintain proof of 
qualification of LCV drivers and LCV driver-instructors in the 
qualification files for these individuals. This enforcement approach 
emphasizes that the motor carrier and driver each have a responsibility 
for the LCV training requirement. The driver would have to obtain the 
necessary LCV training, and the carrier would be required to prohibit a 
driver from operating an LCV without that training. Although 
enforcement officials would not be burdened with trying to determine at 
roadside whether a CMV driver is subject to the LCV training 
requirement, they could still check the CDL to determine whether the 
driver has the required doubles/triples endorsement.
    Based on some of the public comments received in response to the 
NPRM, the agency made certain changes to the proposal as reflected in 
today's final rule. These are included in the discussion of comments 
below.

Discussion of Comments to the NPRM

    FMCSA received nine comments on the NPRM. Five comments were from 
associations, two from individuals, one from a public interest group, 
and one from a motor carrier.

General Support

    Several commenters praise FMSCA for taking this action. For 
example, the United Parcel Service (UPS) ``commends the FMCSA for their 
efforts to promote commercial vehicle safety, particularly driver 
training standards.'' Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (AHAS) 
supports the main framework of the proposed training regimen. The Motor 
Freight Carriers Association (MFCA) also commends FMCSA for closely 
following the training guidelines used by unionized less-than-truckload 
motor carriers.

General Opposition

    Several commenters criticized this action. The American Trucking 
Associations (ATA) argues that the proposed mandatory training for LCV 
drivers is unlikely to result in safer LCV operations. ATA suggests 
that, rather than the proposed regulations, the agency adopt ``a set of 
performance-based rules for training LCV drivers and driver-instructors 
that could result in enhanced public safety and will not impact the 
flow of freight on the nation's highways.'' Nonetheless, ATA provides 
recommendations to enhance the proposal. The chairman of the Montana 
Logging Association's Professional Log Haulers Committee opposes the 
new training rules for operators of LCVs, citing four points of 
contention: first, training would be a burden to rural log haulers; 
second, the proposed rule would compound the driver shortage; third, 
this highly specialized form of truck transportation needs particular 
skills; and fourth, a trainee already goes through an extensive 
orientation with a trainer until both are satisfied about the new 
driver's skills. An individual commenter also expressed criticism of 
the proposed rule, explaining that insurance entities will make sure 
that motor carriers comply with industry standards.
    Finally, the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) commented:

    [CVSA is] concerned that the limited resources of both States 
and the FMCSA may be expended unnecessarily if this proposed 
rulemaking becomes regulation. Currently LCV operations have a crash 
rate lower than other commercial motor vehicle types and, at a time 
when State agencies are struggling financially, [CVSA does] not 
support an effort to expend substantive resources in an area that 
already operates in an overall safe manner.

    FMCSA Response: Under section 4007(b) of the ISTEA, Congress 
expressly mandated the development of minimum training standards for 
operators of LCVs and requirements for those who instruct these 
drivers. Many of those who responded to the proposal, including 
dissenters, made useful recommendations for enhancing the proposal. 
FMCSA particularly appreciates information about how the industry 
currently trains LCV drivers and what entities offer this training. The 
agency has considered all comments and revised the final rule to 
reflect several recommended improvements.
    One way in which the Montana Logging Association might meet the 
challenges of complying with this rule, as outlined in its comments, is 
for the association to provide the LCV driver-training program to the 
drivers of its member carriers.

Exclusion of Non-LCVs From Training Requirement

    AHAS discusses at some length a series of studies and reports 
dealing with the relative safety of LCV operations. It quotes the 
Transportation Research Board's Special Report 211 (1986), which found 
that ``[t]wins [i.e., Western Doubles, usually a tractor pulling two 
28-foot trailers] probably have slightly more crash involvements per 
mile traveled than tractor-semi-trailers operated under identical 
conditions at highway speeds.'' AHAS believes this information and 
related data compel FMCSA to subject drivers of Western Doubles 
weighing less than 80,000 pounds to the training requirements of this 
rule. AHAS argues that FMCSA ``has no adequate foundation in the 
administrative record of this rulemaking'' for excluding Western 
Doubles ``and, therefore, continued reliance upon the arguments 
advanced in the notice * * * would

[[Page 16725]]

constitute arbitrary and capricious agency action.''
    FMCSA Response: Sec. 4007(b) of ISTEA requires training for drivers 
of LCVs, which subsection (f) defines as ``any combination of a truck 
tractor and 2 or more trailers or semi-trailers which operate on the 
National System of Interstate and Defense Highways with a gross vehicle 
weight [GVW] greater than 80,000 pounds.'' This rule does not address 
drivers of Western Doubles, which normally operate at or below 80,000 
pounds GVW, because Sec. 4007(b) is not applicable to them by its 
terms.

Definitions

Training institution

    Two commenters questioned the definitions used in the proposed 
rule.
    UPS and ATA remark that the definition of training institution is 
unclear. Section 380.105 would define a training institution as any 
technical or vocational school accredited by an accrediting institution 
recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. Sections 380.301(b) and 
380.303(a) would require an LCV driver-instructor to ``meet all State 
requirements for a vocational instructor, if employed by a training 
institution.'' Specifically, UPS asks for clarification about the 
process by which an employer's internal training school [such as the 
UPS Driver Training School (DTS) or others] becomes accredited. ATA 
urges the agency to publish a clarification stating that training 
programs that are managed directly by a motor carrier or provide 
exclusive service to a motor carrier are not considered to be training 
institutions.
    In a related comment, MFCA said it is unaware of any driver 
training school that trains instructors for triples, or, for that 
matter, triples drivers. Until now, individual motor carriers have 
filled that role, with State regulators providing oversight.
    FMCSA Response: In the NPRM, the establishment of requirements for 
training institutions was not intended to be interpreted as a mandate 
to use these training institutions. The rule does not require a motor 
carrier to employ a training institution to provide the LCV driver 
training described in the appendix to part 380. Conversely, a motor 
carrier's internal training school is not a training institution, as 
defined in Sec.  380.105, unless it also accepts students from other 
motor carriers and charges them for training. However, if a motor 
carrier opts to use training institutions, the schools must be 
accredited, and the training institute employee must meet State 
vocational instructor guidelines.
    In today's rule, FMCSA has clarified the definition of training 
institution under Sec.  380.105(b) by stating that neither a motor 
carrier's training school for its drivers nor an entity that 
exclusively offers services to a single motor carrier is a training 
institution. Accordingly, in-house trainers who are not affiliated with 
a training institution must comply with the standards under subpart C 
to part 380, except Sec. Sec.  380.301(a)(2), 380.301(b)(2), or 
380.303(b)(4). A motor carrier's in-house training school for its 
drivers does not require accreditation.

LCV Double and LCV Double subcategories

    ATA and CVSA question the definition of the term longer combination 
vehicle (Sec.  380.105(b)). The NPRM defines a longer combination 
vehicle as ``any combination of a truck-tractor and two or more 
trailers or semi-trailers, which operate on the National System of 
Interstate and Defense Highways with a gross vehicle weight (GVW) 
greater than 36,288 kilograms (80,000 pounds.).'' An LCV double is 
defined as a Turnpike Double or a Rocky Mountain Double, and both terms 
are defined to include trailer-length specifications. ATA points out 
that the trailer-length specifications create the possibility that 
doubles weighing more than 80,000 pounds, whose two trailers are of 
equal length but less than 45 feet, would qualify as an LCV, but that 
the drivers of these vehicles would not have training requirements 
because the definition of an LCV double is length-specific. ATA and 
CVSA suggest that FMCSA clarify this issue or simply omit the trailer-
length specification.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA agrees that the proposed definition of an LCV 
double (and the LCV double subcategories) would inadvertently exclude 
certain vehicles that Congress clearly intended be covered under the 
LCV training requirements, according to the LCV definition in section 
4007(f). For example, the NPRM's definition of Rocky Mountain double 
creates an applicability loophole for a vehicle that meets the weight 
and configuration thresholds established under section 4007(f) of ISTEA 
but exceeds the length specification for one of its components. To 
correct this error, the agency has in today's final rule removed the 
terms ``Rocky Mountain double,'' ``Turnpike double,'' ``twin 
trailers,'' and ``Western double'' from the list of definitions under 
Sec.  380.105. The definition of an LCV double has been modified to 
eliminate references to LCV subcategories defined by trailer length. An 
LCV double is redefined to mean ``an LCV consisting of a truck-tractor 
in combination with two trailers and/or semi-trailers.''

Qualified LCV Driver-Instructor

    ATA and CVSA suggest that the definition of qualified LCV driver-
instructor should properly refer to Subpart C, not Subpart B. 
Additionally, ATA comments that it is assumed that classroom 
instructors would not be included under this definition. ATA believes 
that classroom instruction activities need no driving prerequisites. 
Therefore, they request the rule clearly note that classroom 
instruction personnel need not meet any of the requirements of a 
``qualified LCV driver-instructor.''
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA agrees. Under the definition of Qualified LCV 
driver-instructor in the section ``Sec.  380.105 Definitions'' of 
today's final rule, we have corrected the erroneous cross-reference to 
read ``subpart C of this part.'' See the section ``Driver-Instructor 
Requirement'' for a complete discussion of substantive changes to the 
definition of classroom instructor.

Driver Training Program

    UPS believes the proposed rule would alter the way its training 
programs are currently operated. The UPS Driver Training School 
initially qualifies UPS drivers for twin trailers only. UPS does not 
have a separate school for LCV training but provides this special 
training to the driver at his or her work location, depending on the 
local State-by-State regulatory conditions that exist for LCV 
operations. After the extra training has occurred, a revised DOT road 
test form is prepared to indicate that the driver is qualified to drive 
LCVs. UPS asserts that the proposed rule would require the carrier to 
substantially modify its current training curriculum to include the 
requirements contained in the appendix to part 380, or to create a 
separate school specifically for LCV training away from the driver's 
work location. UPS is not convinced that generic training and testing 
will accommodate the unique aspects of different regional operations 
(such as mountainous terrain versus turnpikes, or eastern U.S. versus 
western U.S.).
    UPS also asserts that the terms of the proposed training and 
certification program assume that a driver operates a particular type 
of LCV combination exclusively, whereas ``[i]n reality, UPS drivers may 
operate one or more of the LCV combinations in any given day, week or 
month.''

[[Page 16726]]

    FMCSA Response: This rule establishes an LCV driver-training 
program and standards for driver instructors. The LCV driver-training 
program need not be offered in a different school from that used for 
other CMV training. Neither is the agency requiring UPS or any other 
carrier to incur the extra expense of training all drivers in the 
operation of an LCV; the rule applies only to those drivers who must 
operate an LCV as defined under Sec.  380.105. However, UPS 
acknowledges that it already provides separate training for its drivers 
who operate LCVs. This training should be modified to include those 
requirements described in the appendix to part 380.
    FMCSA has removed the definitions of LCV double subcategories in 
order to make clear that, while the rule applies to all LCV doubles, it 
does not require separate training for every conceivable subcategory of 
LCV double. Furthermore, the driver-training certificate will indicate 
the general LCV type(s) that a driver is authorized to operate: LCV 
doubles, LCV triples, or both.

Requirements To Qualify for Driver Training

    Proposed Sec. Sec.  380.203 and 380.205 would require drivers to 
have a doubles/triples endorsement on their CDLs for 6 months before 
applying for LCV doubles or triples training. ATA argues that it is 
likely that the knowledge and/or skills required to obtain the 
endorsement will be no more stringent than those required to obtain the 
LCV Driver-Training Certificate in this rule. Therefore, ATA believes 
that this requirement is duplicative, unnecessary, and not relevant. 
ATA explains that job opportunities occur randomly and a driver does 
not have the luxury of preparing for job changes ahead of time. The ATA 
urges FMCSA to remove the prerequisite to have a doubles/triples 
endorsement 6 months before applying for LCV doubles or triples 
training.
    UPS and MFCA are concerned about the employer's responsibilities to 
provide evidence of a driver's experience. For example, MFCA asks if a 
verbal (i.e., oral) statement from the employer would suffice as 
evidence when requested by an authorized FMCSA, State, or local 
official in the course of a compliance review. UPS strongly believes 
that further clarification is needed regarding the obligations and 
responsibilities of an employer to seek information regarding a 
driver's experience or, conversely, to provide such information to 
another employer.
    FMCSA Response: The doubles/triples CDL endorsement is obtained by 
passing a knowledge test without a skills component. The purpose of the 
requirement that a driver-candidate possess this endorsement for at 
least 6 months prior to taking LCV training is to give the driver 
adequate time and opportunity to gain experience in operating 
combination vehicles having a GVW of less than 80,000 pounds. The 
doubles/triples endorsement qualifies drivers to operate combinations 
weighing less than 80,000 pounds (e.g., Western doubles). The 
endorsement does not qualify drivers to operate either doubles or 
triples above the 80,000-pound threshold, and it cannot be substituted 
for the LCV Driver-Training Certificate. Drivers possessing the 
doubles/triples endorsement may not operate doubles and triples over 
80,000 pounds until they successfully complete the required training 
and receive the LCV Driver-Training Certificate.
    FMCSA believes it is important that drivers acquire this 
operational experience with lighter combination vehicles before being 
trained in the operation of LCVs. We concluded that the safety benefit 
of progressing from combination-vehicle experience to LCV training 
justifies the requirement that drivers hold the endorsement for 6 
months. Today's rule clarifies that a written--but not an oral--
statement from a previous employer is sufficient evidence of 6 months 
of combination-vehicle driving experience.

Substitute for Driver Training--Grandfathering

General

    AHAS disputes the statement in the NPRM that ``the combination of a 
good driving record and experience with a representative vehicle of the 
specific LCV category is an appropriate indication that the individual 
has the minimum knowledge and driving skills to operate such a 
vehicle.'' AHAS contends that FMCSA has ``no grounds for grandfathering 
the vast majority of LCV drivers'' and is thus ``forswearing 
significant crash reduction benefits.'' AHAS also argues that the 
agency has no authority under Sec. 4007(b) to grandfather any LCV 
drivers.
    FMCSA Response: The argument that the agency has no authority to 
grandfather drivers is contradicted by the broadly discretionary nature 
of the statutory mandate. Sec. 4007(b) simply directed the agency to 
``establish minimum training requirements'' [emphasis added], i.e., 
requirements sufficient in the judgment of the agency to improve the 
safety of LCV operations. Congress did not specify classroom versus on-
the-road instruction, or the degree of crash reduction to be achieved; 
nor did it require universal training. In view of the small population 
of LCV drivers subject to the rule, the far smaller number of crashes 
involving LCVs, the fact that most current LCV drivers have undergone 
LCV training, and the shortcomings of available data on the relative 
safety of LCV operations, FMCSA has concluded that grandfathering safe, 
experienced LCV drivers is an effective means of reducing the costs of 
this rule while retaining its safety benefits. The agency has therefore 
placed training requirements on the drivers most in need of 
instruction--those with no experience in LCVs and current LCV drivers 
with flawed safety records. This is entirely consistent with the 
Congressional mandate.
    FMCSA indicated the strict preconditions for grandfathering in its 
proposal, and these conditions are retained in today's rule. A driver 
will be eligible only if, during the last two years immediately before 
applying for the exemption, he or she had no suspension, revocation, or 
cancellation of his or her CDL; no convictions for a major offense 
committed while operating a CMV; no convictions for a railroad-highway 
grade crossing violation while operating a CMV; no convictions for 
violating an out-of-service order; and, above all, no convictions for 
violating a State or local traffic law in connection with a CMV crash 
[Sec.  380.111(b)(3), (4), (5), (6), and (8), respectively]. The agency 
estimates that 1,750 of the 35,000 current LCV drivers will not qualify 
for grandfathering. Involvement in CMV crashes, however, will not 
automatically bar a driver from being grandfathered, nor does FMCSA 
believe it should. A 1996 report from the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration (NHTSA) shows that in 71 percent of two-vehicle 
fatal crashes involving a large truck and another type of vehicle, the 
behavior of the other driver was a causative factor while that of the 
truck driver was not (``Traffic Safety Facts 1996: Large Trucks''). 
There is no reason to believe that the distribution of fault in LCV 
crashes is significantly different. In short, current LCV drivers 
convicted of a wide range of reckless or irresponsible behaviors will 
be required to take the training set forth in today's rule, leaving 
only those drivers eligible for grandfathering who have actual 
experience operating LCVs and a driving record clear of the most 
serious violations. AHAS presented no evidence that good, experienced 
LCV drivers pose

[[Page 16727]]

a significant crash risk requiring mitigation through training.

At-Fault Crash Involvement While Operating a CMV

    Under the proposed rule, drivers who meet certain criteria may be 
grandfathered from the new driver training. One such criterion is that, 
during the past 2 years, a driver had ``[n]o accident in which he/she 
was found to be at fault, while operating a CMV'' [Sec.  
380.111(b)(9)]. MFCA, CVSA, and ATA remark that the term at-fault 
accident is never defined, nor does the NPRM state who determines fault 
when a crash occurs. ATA urges FMCSA to define an at-fault accident to 
mean an accident for which a truck driver has been convicted of an 
offense that contributed to the crash. FMCSA also should provide 
guidance, either in the preamble or in an interpretation, regarding 
what types of offenses would generally be considered as contributing to 
a crash. MFCA asks whether ``at-fault'' simply means a citation of any 
kind relating to a CMV accident. MFCA suggests following the criteria 
in Sec.  383.51, Disqualification of drivers. CVSA recommends that 
FMCSA define the term and then use it throughout the regulation.
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA has eliminated Sec. Sec.  380.111(b)(9), 
380.203(a)(10), and 380.205(a)(10), which referred to fault, because 
States do not uniformly define or assess fault in crashes. The agency 
believes that the requirement under Sec. Sec.  380.111(b)(8), 
380.203(a)(9), and 380.205(a)(9) for ``no convictions for a violation 
of State or local law relating to motor vehicle traffic control arising 
in connection with any traffic crash while operating a CMV'' 
sufficiently addresses the issue of a CMV driver's crash involvement.

Two-Year Driving Experience for Grandfathering

    The NPRM proposed that a driver must have 2 years of driving 
experience, immediately preceding the date of application for a 
``Certificate of Grandfathering,'' in the type of LCV he or she seeks 
to continue operating. ATA comments that the phrase ``immediately 
preceding'' would present a major problem for motor carriers operating 
LCVs because many drivers who are currently qualified could not meet 
the proposed qualification requirement. ATA explains that many drivers 
have several years of experience driving doubles and/or triples and are 
currently qualified to do so. For one reason or another, however, they 
are now driving a tractor-trailer combination or Western Doubles, or 
are teaching driver training instead of driving. Disqualifying these 
individuals would be a hardship on them, and counterproductive for both 
motor carrier and employee. Therefore, ATA strongly recommends that 
FMCSA revise Sec.  380.111(c)(2) to allow grandfathering of any driver 
who currently holds a CDL with a doubles/triples endorsement and is 
authorized by a State to operate LCVs. CVSA agrees, stating that ``any 
driver who currently holds a CDL with a double/triples endorsement, has 
no CDL disqualifications, has not been involved in a preventable crash, 
and is authorized by a State to operate LCVs should be grandfathered.''
    FMCSA Response: FMCSA has retained the 2-year driving experience 
requirement for grandfathered LCV drivers. However, in today's rule the 
driver is not required to have operated an LCV continuously during the 
previous 2 years, nor must he or she have operated LCVs exclusively. 
The driver is required only to have operated LCVs periodically within 
the previous 2 years. Drivers often take the tests for endorsement 
classes they have no immediate intention of using. Grandfathering 
virtually anyone holding a double/triple trailer endorsement could 
exempt from training some individuals who had never driven an LCV at 
all, despite their having the requisite endorsement. This would change 
grandfathering into a simple exemption. The agency rejects that 
approach.

Driver-Instructor Requirements

    UPS believes the issue of driver-instructor requirements is perhaps 
the most problematic portion of the entire proposed rule. UPS requests 
that the agency outline the process for driver-instructors to become 
certified. UPS also believes it would be most practical to allow UPS 
Driver Training School instructors to be able, in turn, to train other 
UPS management personnel.
    One requirement of the NPRM is that an LCV driver-instructor have 
at least 2 years' driving experience in the type of vehicle (LCV double 
or triple) for which he or she will provide training, as well as a 
Class A CDL with a doubles/triples endorsement. This requirement 
presents a major concern for UPS and ATA, which consider it infeasible. 
UPS states that, while it operates one of the Nation's safest 
commercial vehicle fleets, some of its LCV training personnel have not 
had at least 2 years of LCV driving experience. UPS does not believe 
that 2 years' experience operating an LCV is a relevant prerequisite 
for becoming a highly skilled LCV driver-trainer. All UPS LCV driver-
trainers have successfully completed the UPS Driver Training School but 
have not necessarily driven twin trailers or LCV Triples for 2 years. 
UPS's position seems to be that driving experience in an LCV is less 
important than skill as an instructor. ATA agrees, and comments that 
the rule would make a large number of existing driver-instructors 
ineligible to continue their training duties. ATA also explains that 
motor carriers currently use driver-instructors who have never driven 
an LCV but have had a great deal of success training others to drive 
LCVs. ATA and UPS agree that the enactment of this provision would 
result in significant financial and administrative hardship to motor 
carriers.
    Additionally, ATA assumes that classroom instructors would not be 
included under the definition of a qualified LCV driver-instructor. ATA 
comments that classroom instruction activities need no driving 
prerequisites. Therefore, ATA believes the rule should clearly state 
that classroom instruction personnel need not meet any of the 
requirements of a ``qualified LCV driver-instructor.''
    FMCSA Response: Based on the information that motor carriers 
routinely use nondrivers to teach training courses, FMCSA has revised 
the requirements for a qualified LCV driver-instructor in Sec. Sec.  
380.105(b), 380.109(a), 380.301, 380.303, 391.53, and the appendix to 
part 380. The definition of a qualified LCV driver-instructor now 
includes a distinction between (1) classroom instructors and (2) skills 
instructors. Motor carriers may use an individual who does not possess 
a CDL, a doubles/triples endorsement, or recent CMV driving experience 
to instruct or test LCV drivers in knowledge and skills that do not 
require the actual operation of an LCV or one of its components. 
However, only a skills instructor may train or test driver-candidates 
in those skills requiring the operation of an LCV or one of its 
components.

Driver Testing

    UPS seeks additional guidance and clarification from FMCSA on 
proposed requirements for testing methods, proficiency determinations, 
and automatic test failure in order to determine if its Driver Training 
School meets the standards contemplated by FMCSA regarding these 
driver-testing provisions.
    ATA directs its comment to Sec.  380.109(a) in the NPRM, which 
discusses the administration of driver-student knowledge and skills 
tests. This paragraph would require a qualified LCV driver-instructor 
to administer

[[Page 16728]]

knowledge and skills tests to driver-students. ATA notes that knowledge 
tests could be administered by almost anyone since there is no need for 
interaction between the driver-student and the instructor. Skills tests 
are generally taken on private property on a ``closed course.'' 
Therefore, a qualified LCV driver-instructor would not be needed. ATA 
strongly suggests that FMCSA remove the requirement that a ``qualified 
driver-instructor'' administer the knowledge and skills tests to 
driver-students and replace the term ``a qualified driver-instructor'' 
with the term ``an authorized motor carrier or training institution 
employee.''
    FMCSA Response: Motor carriers needing guidance for testing methods 
and proficiency determinations are referred to the ``Examiner's Manual 
for Commercial Driver's License Tests.'' You may obtain a copy of the 
document from the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators 
(AAMVA), 4300 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 400, Arlington, Virginia 22203. 
Automatic test failure determinations are made at the sole discretion 
of the qualified LCV driver-instructor.
    Today's rule retains the requirement that only qualified LCV 
driver-instructors administer knowledge and skills tests. We anticipate 
that a number of small carriers will conduct in-house training to meet 
the rule's provisions. As most such training programs will be small, 
allowing test administration by persons other than qualified driver-
instructors could open the door to driver-trainees administering tests 
to one another. Under the rule, a qualified LCV classroom instructor 
may administer knowledge tests (as well as skills tests not involving 
actual operation of an LCV or one of its components), while only a 
qualified skills instructor may administer skills tests based on actual 
operation of an LCV. These standards protect the integrity of knowledge 
and skills testing and increase assurances that only qualified LCV 
driver-candidates will receive certification.

Merging the LCV Driver-Training Program With the Commercial Driver's 
License Program

    The National Private Truck Council, Inc. (NPTC) supports the 
additional training requirements for LCV drivers and the general 
categories of instruction outlined in Sec.  380.201(a). However, NPTC 
advocates incorporating the four general LCV training areas into the 
CDL testing program rather than creating separate training requirements 
with which a motor carrier must comply. NPTC believes integrating the 
LCV training areas into the CDL testing program would assist a motor 
carrier in attempting to demonstrate the adequacy of driver training in 
court cases for crash-related litigation involving its drivers. In 
addition the driver's training certification, like the CDL, would 
follow the driver from carrier to carrier.
    FMCSA Response: LCVs are allowed to operate in fewer than half the 
States, and relatively small numbers of CDL drivers are covered under 
the LCV training requirements. FMCSA believes that requiring the State 
to administer, and enforce at roadside inspections, the LCV training 
requirements would add an unnecessary complication to the CDL program. 
FMCSA believes the Driver-Training Certificate is sufficient 
documentation that a driver has met the LCV training requirement.

Compliance Enforcement

    CVSA believes that if an LCV operator is required to obtain 
additional training, this should be reflected on the CDL. CVSA is 
concerned about the lack of information provided for the roadside 
officer, since an additional endorsement will not be added to the CDL. 
The officer at roadside will not have access to any of the information 
concerning the LCV training, thus making this requirement unenforceable 
during a safety inspection. Therefore, any noncompliance will be 
discovered only through auditing the recordkeeping requirements for 
drivers and motor carriers, and not during a driver/vehicle safety 
inspection.
    CVSA also questions why the proposed regulation is located in part 
380 rather than parts 383 and 391, where other driver-related 
regulations are found. CVSA believes codifying this regulation in 
another part adds confusion with regard to compliance, both for the 
enforcement community and for the industry. CVSA recommends adding the 
proposed regulations to part 383 since they are applicable to CDL 
drivers.
    FMCSA Response: By placing the LCV driver training and related 
requirements in part 380, FMCSA is emphasizing that these requirements 
are a training responsibility and that compliance would be checked at 
the carrier's place of business during a compliance review. Because the 
requirement is not a driver licensing issue to be administered by the 
State licensing agency, enforcement officials will not check for 
compliance at roadside. (Roadside enforcement officials may, however, 
check an LCV driver's CDL to verify the presence of a doubles/triples 
endorsement.)

Appendix--Knowledge and Skills Training (Appendix to Part 380)

    ATA comments that many of the knowledge and skills requirements are 
already required for obtaining a CDL, and would therefore simply be 
repeated during LCV training. Like a postgraduate course, the training 
should build upon knowledge already acquired, not repeat it. 
Additionally, ATA strongly suggests that FMCSA eliminate the 
requirements already specified in part 383, subpart G, which would 
include units 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 2.1.
    ATA also remarks that some requirements proposed in the appendix to 
part 380 would be imposed on LCV drivers, but not on other CDL holders, 
even though the situations addressed are not unique to LCVs. ATA states 
that security issues (Unit 3.5) are not unique to LCV drivers and asks 
why FMCSA finds it necessary to propose this requirement for LCV 
drivers when no other CDL holder is required to have this instruction. 
Also, ATA states that the proposed maintenance and trouble-shooting 
requirements in Unit 4.3 go beyond those currently required for other 
CDL holders. ATA does not understand why FMCSA believes that only LCV 
drivers should have these skills. Furthermore, some motor carriers 
prohibit LCV driver-employees from performing maintenance or emergency 
repairs to their complex and high-technology vehicles. Therefore, ATA 
also suggests that units 3.5 and 4.3 be eliminated.
    FMCSA Response: Although many of the knowledge and skills topics 
covered in the LCV training program may be similar to those in the CDL 
Licensing Test, the licensing test measures general knowledge and 
familiarity with best practices. The LCV training program is intended 
to cover topics much more comprehensively and tailor the instruction to 
the unique characteristics of an LCV. The proficiency development unit 
will allow the driver to apply what is learned in class and to perfect 
skills under the supervision of a qualified instructor.
    In response to ATA's request, FMCSA has eliminated Unit 2.1--
Inspection, because these skills are adequately covered under Unit 
4.3--Maintenance and Trouble-shooting. Unit 3.5--Security has been 
revised to refer to Federal and State security requirements including 
those of the Transportation Security Administration and the Research 
and Special Programs Administration. The agency has also revised the 
Unit 4.3 description to include knowledge of certain maintenance 
functions and how to

[[Page 16729]]

communicate vehicle malfunctions. The rule does not compel a motor 
carrier to allow an LCV driver to perform maintenance, but the agency 
believes it would be beneficial for LCV drivers to have basic 
maintenance and trouble-shooting skills. In some circumstances, it may 
be necessary to make temporary repairs that would allow the driver to 
move the vehicle to a safer location before permanent repairs are made.

Comments on the Cost-Benefit Analysis

    ATA states that FMCSA inadvertently omitted ``the opportunity cost 
to the motor carrier.'' A few ATA members have furnished cost figures 
for their LCV operations. Using these figures, ATA estimates that the 
annual cost to motor carriers of compliance with the rule ``would be 
$4,995,650 while the 10-year cost would be $49,956,500.'' Therefore, 
ATA estimates that the 10-year cost ``would exceed the 10-year benefits 
by $25,556,500 when you consider a 10 percent crash rate reduction; for 
a five percent accident rate reduction, costs would exceed benefits by 
$12,778,250.''
    In addition, ATA believes that ``because LCVs have such an 
exemplary safety record, FMCSA would be hard-pressed to develop a 
prescriptive training requirement that would pass a cost-benefit 
analysis. ATA, therefore, seriously questions the need for mandatory 
LCV training.'' Recognizing, however, that the agency is under 
Congressional direction to develop an LCV training requirement, ``ATA 
encourages the agency to develop a training requirement that is 
performance-based, with at-fault crash rates as the measure of 
performance for motor carriers.''
    FMCSA Response: ATA is correct that FMCSA should have explicitly 
included the opportunity cost to motor carriers of requiring some of 
their drivers to undergo training. FMCSA implicitly recognized this 
cost by including drivers' wages in its NPRM estimate of the cost of 
LCV training, but did not include the profits motor carriers would 
forgo. We have added these costs to the regulatory evaluation for 
today's rule. However, in the above-quoted calculations based on 
figures provided by specific carriers, ATA overestimates the cost of 
compliance with the LCV training requirements by including motor 
carriers' entire LCV operating costs. Although carriers will forfeit 
some revenue as a result of LCV driver training, those losses will be 
partly offset by reduced costs: Motor carriers will not have hourly 
operating costs (e.g., fuel, wear and tear, tires) for drivers being 
trained. See the regulatory evaluation for a detailed comparison of 
costs and benefits.

Comments on the Federalism Assessment

    ATA asks why FMCSA did not include an implementation date for State 
adoption of the proposed rule. According to ATA, 22 States allow the 
operation of LCVs within their borders, and many of those States have 
driver and vehicle requirements for LCV operations. Because FMCSA 
asserts that nothing in the NPRM preempts any State law or regulation, 
motor carriers and drivers that operate LCVs could be required to 
comply with two sets of training requirements. This would be confusing 
to the regulated motor carriers and would be considered 
counterproductive. ATA argues that the trucking industry needs a 
standardized rule that applies nationwide, and recommends that FMCSA 
review its Federalism assessment, revise it, and include an 
implementation date for State adoption.
    FMCSA Response: Under the MCSAP, States have up to 3 years to adopt 
regulations compatible with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations [49 CFR 350.331(d)]. In any case, a State with special LCV 
requirements must continue to enforce them pursuant to the ISTEA freeze 
on the length and weight of LCVs and long doubles and triples [49 
U.S.C. 31112(d)(1) and 23 U.S.C. 127(d)(1)(B), implemented by 23 CFR 
658.21]. Failure to do so would force FHWA, our sister agency within 
DOT, to withhold some of that State's Federal-aid highway funds or to 
take injunctive action against the State in Federal court. For both 
these reasons, it would be inappropriate to preempt current State 
regulations.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    FMCSA has determined that this action is a significant regulatory 
action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866, and is significant 
within the meaning of the Department of Transportation's regulatory 
policies and procedures (DOT Order 2100.5 dated May 22, 1980; 44 FR 
11034, February 26, 1979) because of significant public interest in the 
issues relating to CMV safety and training of certain CMV drivers. The 
Office of Management and Budget has completed its review of this rule 
under Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Evaluation

    Following is a summary of the regulatory evaluation. The complete 
evaluation has been placed in the docket.
    Approximately 35,000 drivers currently operate LCVs; most are 
expected to be grandfathered. Approximately 1,200 LCV drivers are 
estimated to require training annually. ANPRM docket comments and 
conversation with industry representatives and analysts suggest that 
LCV drivers are currently obtaining about half the amount of training 
we estimate would be needed to cover the topics outlined in this rule, 
approximately 50 hours. The net cost of training (including drivers' 
wages) is $45.50 an hour. This results in a 10-year cost of 
approximately $29 million.
    Precisely quantifying the benefits of this rule is difficult. 
Congress clearly assumed that increased training reduces crash rates, 
and many analysts agree with this position. However, quantitative data 
examining the relationship between training and crash rates is not 
plentiful, and those studies we have located have not found a strong 
and consistent relationship. Therefore, we performed sensitivity 
analysis, estimating the benefits from a range of reductions in 
drivers' crash rates for drivers who have received training. Net 
benefits ranged from -$12 million for a 5 percent reduction in the 
crash rate to +40 million for a 20 percent reduction.
    Table 1 presents the results for a number of possible deterrence 
levels.

    Table 1.--Benefit Cost Ratio With Different Crash Rate Reductions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Crash reduction               5%      10%      15%      20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B/C Ratio...........................     0.6      1.2      1.8      2.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 16730]]

    Table 2 shows costs, benefits, and the number of crashes and 
drivers that would be affected by these proposals, with an assumed 10 
percent reduction in crashes.

                                                Table 2.--Summary Results With 10% Crash Rate Reductions
                                                                  [millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Trained annually              10-year costs     10-year benefits      Net benefits          B/C ratio       Crashes prevented
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,172...............................................         $28.8               $34.4                $5.6                 1.2                 315
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This analysis assumes that, under the rule, prospective LCV drivers 
will obtain an additional 50 hours of training. This is a conservative 
estimate, in that it is on the high end of the range of likely training 
time. Nonetheless, because of uncertainty over how many hours of 
training will be needed, we performed sensitivity analysis for 
different assumed hours of training. As expected, the sensitivity 
analysis shows that net benefits move in the opposite direction of the 
number of hours.
    All costs and benefits are over a 10-year period, and are 
discounted at a 7 percent rate.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601-612), as 
amended, requires Federal agencies to ``* * *endeavor, consistent with 
the objectives of the rule and of applicable statutes, to fit 
regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the 
businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions subject to 
regulation.'' Accordingly, DOT policy requires an analysis of the 
impact of all regulations (or proposals) on small entities, and 
mandates that agencies shall strive to lessen any adverse effects on 
these businesses. The following sections contain the FMCSA regulatory 
flexibility analysis.

Need and Objective for the Rule

    This action is being promulgated in response to Congressional 
direction. Specifically, Sec. 4007(b) of ISTEA directed the Secretary 
to promulgate regulations requiring training for LCV drivers. Congress 
mandated this action because of concern over the number of LCV crashes. 
The objective of this rule is to reduce the number of LCV crashes 
through better training of LCV drivers.

Significant Issues Raised in Response to IRFA

    Commenters to the NPRM docket did not raise any significant issues 
concerning the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. None of the 
eight commenters addressed any small business concerns.

Number of Small Entities to Which the Action Will Apply

    This action will apply to all small entities regulated by FMCSA 
that own or operate LCVs. Using the number of drivers as a proxy for 
size, the majority of carriers can reasonably be described as small. As 
of April 2002, there were 610,000 motor carriers on the FMCSA Motor 
Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) census file. Of the 
500,000 carriers for which we have driver data, 435,000 (87 percent) 
have six or fewer drivers. Assuming that 87 percent of the 110,000 
carriers with no driver information are also small, the total number of 
carriers with six or fewer drivers would exceed half a million.

Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements

    This action will impose a very modest burden on small entities, 
since it largely regulates the actions of drivers rather than motor 
carriers. Nonetheless, this action does impose some recordkeeping 
requirements on motor carriers. The primary carrier requirement would 
be to verify drivers' eligibility before allowing them to operate an 
LCV. In addition, carriers must maintain a copy of the required driver-
training certificate in each driver qualification (DQ) file. Carriers 
are currently required to maintain a DQ file for each driver, as 
outlined in part 391 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. 
No special skills are required to verify eligibility to operate an LCV 
or to place a driver-training certificate in a DQ file.

Agency Steps To Minimize Impacts on Small Entities

    As discussed above, while this rule will affect a significant 
number of small entities, the impact on any individual small carrier 
will be minimal. Therefore, FMCSA certifies that this regulation will 
not have a significant impact on the small businesses subject to 
today's final rule.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. It has been determined 
that this rulemaking does not have a substantial direct effect on 
States, nor would it limit the policy-making discretion of the States. 
Nothing in this document preempts any State law or regulation.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor 
Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 
regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and 
activities do not apply to this rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (49 U.S.C. 3501-
3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they 
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. FMCSA has determined 
that this final rule creates a new collection of information requiring 
OMB's approval. This PRA section addresses the information collection 
burden for certifying new LCV drivers and current, non-grandfathered 
LCV drivers; the burden associated with grandfathering those current 
LCV drivers who are eligible for certification; and the burden 
associated with certifying that driver-instructors satisfy the 
qualification requirements of Sec.  380.301.
    FMCSA estimates that 35,000 drivers currently operate LCVs. Ninety-
five percent of these drivers (or 33,250 LCV drivers) are expected to 
be eligible to be grandfathered during the first year after the rule 
becomes effective. The agency also estimates that approximately 1,200 
new LCV drivers would require training each year, with an additional 
1,750 non-grandfathered LCV drivers (or 5 percent of LCV drivers 
currently operating) requiring training during the first year. In 
addition, there would be a burden to the motor carrier or other 
training entity to complete, photocopy, and file the training 
certification form for LCV operation. FMCSA estimates that 10

[[Page 16731]]

minutes would be required for this paperwork activity, resulting in a 
first-year information collection burden of 491.7 hours, or rounded to 
the nearest tenth, 492 burden hours [1,200 new LCV drivers + 1,750 LCV 
drivers x 10 minutes per motor carrier/training entity, divided by 60 
minutes = 492 hours] and an annual information collection burden in 
subsequent years of 200 hours [1,200 LCV drivers x 10 minutes divided 
by 60 minutes = 200 hours].
    For grandfathering 33,250 LCV drivers, there would be a one-time, 
one-year-only information collection burden of 16,625 hours, since LCV 
drivers can be grandfathered only during the first year after the rule 
becomes effective. There are two parts to the burden for grandfathered 
drivers: (1) the burden for the driver to collect and provide the 
information to the motor carrier, and (2) the burden for the motor 
carrier to review the documents and to complete, duplicate, and file 
the certification form. FMCSA estimates that it would take 
approximately 15 minutes for the driver to collect the necessary 
information and provide the documentation to the motor carrier, and 15 
minutes for the motor carrier to review the information, complete the 
certification, and duplicate and file the document. Therefore, the 
burden associated with grandfathering the 33,250 LCV drivers would be 
16,625 burden hours [(33,250 LCV drivers x 15 minutes per driver, 
divided by 60 minutes = 8,312.5 hours) + (33,250 LCV drivers x 15 
minutes per motor carrier, divided by 60 minutes = 8,312.5 hours) = 
16,625 hours].
    FMCSA estimates that the burden associated with driver-instructor 
certification would be 70 burden hours during the first year after the 
rule becomes effective and 3 annual burden hours thereafter. The agency 
based these estimates on the following.
    We estimate that during the first year, training 1,200 new LCV 
drivers and 1,750 non-grandfathered LCV drivers would require 148 
driving-instructors teaching four classes of five students each [2,950 
drivers, divided by five students per class, divided by four classes 
per year = 147.5 LCV driving instructors, or rounded to the nearest 
tenth, 148 burden hours]. Approximately one-third (or 49) of the 
instructors would be classroom instructors and two-thirds (99) would be 
skills instructors. Instructors would provide to the training school 
(or to the training entity of the motor carrier) documentation 
certifying their qualifications under Sec.  380.301.
    FMCSA estimates that a classroom instructor would take 10 minutes 
to collect this instructor documentation and provide it to the 
certifying training school or motor carrier, while the skills 
instructor would require 15 minutes to collect and provide this 
documentation. The training school or motor carrier would require an 
estimated 15 minutes to review the documentation, complete the 
instructor certification, and duplicate and file the document. 
Therefore, the first-year burden associated with instructor 
certification would be 70 burden hours [(49 classroom instructors x 10 
minutes per instructor = 490 minutes, divided by 60 minutes = 8.1 
hours, or rounded to the nearest tenth, 8 burden hours) + (99 skills 
instructors x 15 minutes per instructor = 1,485 minutes, divided by 60 
minutes = 24.75 hours, or rounded to the nearest tenth, 25 burden 
hours) + (148 total instructors x 15 minutes' administrative burden per 
instructor certification = 2,220 minutes, divided by 60 minutes = 37 
burden hours) = 70 hours].
    As the specialized nature of LCV training correlates with low 
instructor turnover, FMCSA estimates an annual turnover rate of 10 
percent. Based on an estimated annual instructor pool of 60 instructors 
to train 1,200 new LCV drivers (with each instructor teaching four 
classes of five students), six new instructors (two classroom 
instructors and four skills instructors) would need to be certified 
each year after the first year. Therefore, the estimated subsequent-
year annual burden associated with instructor certification would be 
2.8 burden hours, or rounded to the nearest tenth, 3 burden hours [(two 
classroom instructors x 10 minutes = 20 minutes) + (four skills 
instructors x 15 minutes = 60 minutes) + (six new instructors x 15 
minutes' administrative burden per instructor certification = 90 
minutes) = 170 minutes/60 minutes = 3 hours].
    Thus, the total first-year burden associated with this rule, when 
promulgated, is estimated to be 17,187 burden hours [492 + 16,625 + 70 
= 17, 187 hours]. The information collection burden for subsequent 
years would drop to 203 burden hours [200 + 3 = 203 hours].

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity--Burden to complete and process
  the annual Certification form for LCV     First-year     Burden hours
     drivers and to certify driver-        burden hours   for subsequent
               instructors                                     years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 First-year training               492  ..............
 of 1,200 new LCV drivers + 1,750 non-
 grandfathered LCV drivers..............
 First-year instructor              70  ..............
 certification for 1,200 new LCV drivers
 + 1,750 non-grandfathered LCV drivers..
 Training & instructor  ..............             203
 certification in subsequent years--
 1,200 new LCV drivers annually.........
Grandfathering 33,250 LCV drivers                 16,625  ..............
 currently operating in the first year..
                                         -----------------
    Total...............................          17,187             203
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OMB Control Number: 2126-(new).
    Title: Training Certification for Drivers of Longer Combination 
Vehicles.
    Respondents: 36,348 during the first year; 1,260 in subsequent 
years.
    Estimated Annual Hour Burden for the Information Collection: Year 1 
= 17,187 hours; subsequent years = 203 hours.
    Interested parties are invited to send comments regarding any 
aspect of these information collection requirements, including but not 
limited to: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for 
the performance of the functions of FMCSA, including whether the 
information has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the estimated 
burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
collected information; and (4) ways to minimize the collection burden 
without reducing the quality of the information collected.
    You may submit any additional comments on the information 
collection burden addressed by this final rule to the Office of 
Management and Budget. The OMB must receive your comments by April 29, 
2004. You must mail or hand deliver your comments to: Attention: Desk 
Officer for the Department of Transportation, Docket Library, Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
Room 10102, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The agency analyzed this final rule for the purpose of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969

[[Page 16732]]

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined under our environmental 
procedures Order 5610.1 (published in the March 1, 2004 Federal 
Register at 69 FR 9680 with an effective date of March 30, 2004), that 
this action is categorically excluded (CE) under Appendix 2, paragraph 
6.d of the Order from further environmental documentation. That CE 
relates to establishing regulations and actions taken pursuant to these 
regulations that concern the training, qualifying, licensing, 
certifying, and managing of personnel. In addition, the agency believes 
that the action includes no extraordinary circumstances that will have 
any effect on the quality of the environment. Thus, the action does not 
require an environmental assessment or an environmental impact 
statement.
    We have also analyzed this 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 involves policy development and civil enforcement 
activities, such as, investigations, inspections, examinations, and the 
training of law enforcement personnel. See 40 CFR 93.153(c)(2). It will 
not result in any emissions increase nor will it have any potential to 
result in emissions that are above the general conformity rule's de 
minimis emission threshold levels. Moreover, it is reasonably 
foreseeable that the rule change will not increase total CMV mileage, 
change the routing of CMVs, how CMVs operate or the CMV fleet-mix of 
motor carriers. This action merely establishes standards for minimum 
training requirements for operators of LCVs and requirements for the 
instructors who train them.

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    The agency has analyzed this action under Executive Order 13211, 
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use. This action is not a significant energy action 
within the meaning of Section 4(b) of the Executive Order because it is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. This rule establishes training 
requirements for operators of LCVs and sets forth requirements for 
trainers of such operators. This action has no effect on the supply or 
use of energy, nor do we believe it will cause a shortage of drivers 
qualified to distribute energy, such as gasoline, fuel oil, or other 
fuels.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This rule does not impose a Federal mandate resulting in the 
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year (2 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Under this rule, there are no costs to States, 
and costs to the private sector should be minimal. This action 
establishes minimum training standards for operators of LCVs.
    Although not required to do so under the FMCSRs, motor carriers 
routinely provide similar training to their drivers who operate LCVs. 
The rule does not stipulate that motor carriers must provide such 
training, but requires them to use only those drivers and driver-
instructors who have met the standards established by the rule.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental 
Actions and Interference with Constitutional Protected Property Rights.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This action meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of E.0. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate 
ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    The agency has analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045, 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks. This rule sets forth training requirements for LCV drivers and 
sets standards for instructors of such drivers. Therefore, FMCSA 
certifies that this action is not an economically significant rule and 
does not concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 380

    Driver training, instructor requirements.

49 CFR Part 391

    Highways and roads, Motor vehicle safety.


0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration amends 49 CFR chapter III as set forth below:
0
1. Chapter III is amended by adding part 380 to read as follows:

PART 380--SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

Subpart A--Longer Combination Vehicle (LCV) Driver-Training and Driver-
Instructor Requirements--General
Sec.
380.101 Purpose and scope.
380.103 Applicability.
380.105 Definitions.
380.107 General requirements.
380.109 Driver testing.
380.111 Substitute for driver training.
380.113 Employer responsibilities.
Subpart B--LCV Driver-Training Program
380.201 General requirements.
380.203 LCV Doubles.
380.205 LCV Triples.
Subpart C--LCV Driver-Instructor Requirements
380.301 General requirements.
380.303 Substitute for instructor requirements.
380.305 Employer responsibilities.
Subpart D--Driver-Training Certification
380.401 Certification document.
Appendix to Part 380--LCV Driver Training Programs, Required 
Knowledge and Skills

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31307, and 31502; Sec. 4007(b) of 
Pub. L. 102-240 (105 Stat. 2152); 49 CFR 1.73.

Subpart A--Longer Combination Vehicle (LCV) Driver-Training and 
Driver-Instructor Requirements--General


Sec.  380.101  Purpose and scope.

    (a) Purpose. The purpose of this part is to establish minimum 
requirements for operators of longer combination vehicles (LCVs) and 
LCV driver-instructors.
    (b) Scope. This part establishes:
    (1) Minimum training requirements for operators of LCVs;
    (2) Minimum qualification requirements for LCV driver-instructors; 
and
    (3) Procedures for determining compliance with this part by 
operators, instructors, training institutions, and employers.


Sec.  380.103  Applicability.

    The rules in this part apply to all operators of LCVs in interstate 
commerce, employers of such persons, and LCV driver-instructors.


Sec.  380.105  Definitions.

    (a) The definitions in part 383 of this subchapter apply to this 
part, except where otherwise specifically noted.
    (b) As used in this part:
    Classroom instructor means a qualified LCV driver-instructor who 
provides knowledge instruction that

[[Page 16733]]

does not involve the actual operation of a longer combination vehicle 
or its components. Instruction may take place in a parking lot, garage, 
or any other facility suitable for instruction.
    Longer combination vehicle (LCV) means any combination of a truck-
tractor and two or more trailers or semi-trailers, which operate on the 
National System of Interstate and Defense Highways with a gross vehicle 
weight (GVW) greater than 36,288 kilograms (80,000 pounds).
    LCV Double means an LCV consisting of a truck-tractor in 
combination with two trailers and/or semi-trailers.
    LCV Triple means an LCV consisting of a truck-tractor in 
combination with three trailers and/or semi-trailers.
    Qualified LCV driver-instructor means an instructor meeting the 
requirements contained in subpart C of this part. There are two types 
of qualified LCV driver-instructors: (1) classroom instructor and (2) 
skills instructor.
    Skills instructor means a qualified LCV driver-instructor who 
provides behind-the-wheel instruction involving the actual operation of 
a longer combination vehicle or its components outside a classroom.
    Training institution means any technical or vocational school 
accredited by an accrediting institution recognized by the U.S. 
Department of Education. A motor carrier's training program for its 
drivers or an entity that exclusively offers services to a single motor 
carrier is not a training institution.


Sec.  380.107  General requirements.

    (a) Except as provided in Sec.  380.111, a driver who wishes to 
operate an LCV shall first take and successfully complete an LCV 
driver-training program that provides the knowledge and skills 
necessary to operate an LCV. The specific types of knowledge and skills 
that a training program shall include are outlined in the appendix to 
this part.
    (b) Before a person receives training:
    (1) That person shall present evidence to the LCV driver-instructor 
showing that he/she meets the general requirements set forth in subpart 
B of this part for the specific type of LCV training to be taken.
    (2) The LCV driver-instructor shall verify that each trainee 
applicant meets the general requirements for the specific type of LCV 
training to be taken.
    (c) Upon successful completion of the training requirement, the 
driver-student shall be issued an LCV Driver Training Certificate by a 
certifying official of the training entity in accordance with the 
requirements specified in subpart D of this part.


Sec.  380.109  Driver testing.

    (a) Testing methods. The driver-student must pass knowledge and 
skills tests in accordance with the following requirements, to 
determine whether a driver-student has successfully completed an LCV 
driver-training program as specified in subpart B of this part. The 
written knowledge test may be administered by any qualified driver-
instructor. The skills tests, based on actual operation of an LCV, must 
be administered by a qualified LCV skills instructor.
    (1) All tests shall be constructed to determine if the driver-
student possesses the required knowledge and skills set forth in the 
appendix to this part for the specific type of LCV training program 
being taught.
    (2) Instructors shall develop their own tests for the specific type 
of LCV-training program being taught, but those tests must be at least 
as stringent as the requirements set forth in paragraph (b) of this 
section.
    (3) LCV driver-instructors shall establish specific methods for 
scoring the knowledge and skills tests.
    (4) Passing scores must meet the requirements of paragraph (b) of 
this section.
    (5) Knowledge and skills tests shall be based upon the information 
taught in the LCV training programs as set forth in the appendix to 
this part.
    (6) Each knowledge test shall address the training provided during 
both theoretical and behind-the-wheel instruction, and include at least 
one question from each of the units listed in the table to the appendix 
to this part, for the specific type of LCV training program being 
taught.
    (7) Each skills test shall include all the maneuvers and operations 
practiced during the Proficiency Development unit of instruction 
(behind-the-wheel instruction), as described in the appendix to this 
part, for the specific type of LCV training program being taught.
    (b) Proficiency determinations. The driver-student must meet the 
following conditions to be certified as an LCV driver:
    (1) Answer correctly at least 80 percent of the questions on each 
knowledge test; and
    (2) Demonstrate that he/she can successfully perform all of the 
skills addressed in paragraph (a)(7) of this section.
    (c) Automatic test failure. Failure to obey traffic laws or 
involvement in a preventable crash during the skills portion of the 
test will result in automatic failure. Automatic test failure 
determinations are made at the sole discretion of the qualified LCV 
driver-instructor.
    (d) Guidance for testing methods and proficiency determinations. 
Motor carriers should refer to the Examiner's Manual for Commercial 
Driver's License Tests for help in developing testing methods and 
making proficiency determinations. You may obtain a copy of this 
document by contacting the American Association of Motor Vehicle 
Administrators (AAMVA), 4300 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 400, Arlington, 
Virginia 22203.


Sec.  380.111  Substitute for driver training.

    (a) Grandfather clause. The LCV driver-training requirements 
specified in subpart B of this part do not apply to an individual who 
meets the conditions set forth in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this 
section. A motor carrier must ensure that an individual claiming 
eligibility to operate an LCV on the basis of this section meets these 
conditions before allowing him/her to operate an LCV.
    (b) An individual must certify that, during the 2-year period 
immediately preceding the date of application for a Certificate of 
Grandfathering, he/she had:
    (1) A valid Class A CDL with a ``double/triple trailers'' 
endorsement;
    (2) No more than one driver's license;
    (3) No suspension, revocation, or cancellation of his/her CDL;
    (4) No convictions for a major offense while operating a CMV as 
defined in Sec.  383.51(b) of this subchapter;
    (5) No convictions for a railroad-highway grade crossing offense 
while operating a CMV as defined in Sec.  383.51(d) of this subchapter;
    (6) No convictions for violating an out-of-service order as defined 
in Sec.  383.51(e) of this subchapter;
    (7) No more than one conviction for a serious traffic violation, as 
defined in Sec.  383.5 of this subchapter, while operating a CMV; and
    (8) No convictions for a violation of State or local law relating 
to motor vehicle traffic control arising in connection with any traffic 
crash while operating a CMV.
    (c) An individual must certify and provide evidence that he/she:
    (1) Is regularly employed in a job requiring the operation of a CMV 
that requires a CDL with a double/triple trailers endorsement; and
    (2) Has operated, during the 2 years immediately preceding the date 
of application for a Certificate of Grandfathering, vehicles 
representative

[[Page 16734]]

of the type of LCV that he/she seeks to continue operating.
    (d) A motor carrier must issue a Certificate of Grandfathering to a 
person who meets the requirements of this section and must maintain a 
copy of the certificate in the individual's Driver Qualification file.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30MR04.000

    (e) An applicant may be grandfathered under this section only 
during the year following June 1, 2004.


Sec.  380.113  Employer responsibilities.

    (a) No motor carrier shall:
    (1) Allow, require, permit or authorize an individual to operate an 
LCV unless he/she meets the requirements in Sec. Sec.  380.203 or 
380.205 and has been issued the LCV driver-training certificate 
described in Sec.  380.401. This provision does not apply to 
individuals who are eligible for the substitute for driver training 
provision in Sec.  380.111.
    (2) Allow, require, permit, or authorize an individual to operate 
an LCV which the LCV driver-training certificate, CDL, and CDL 
endorsement(s) do not authorize the driver to operate. This provision 
applies to individuals employed by or under contract to the motor 
carrier.
    (b) A motor carrier that employs or has under contract LCV drivers 
shall provide evidence of the certifications required by Sec.  380.401 
or Sec.  380.111 of this part when requested by an authorized FMCSA, 
State, or local official in the course of a compliance review.

Subpart B--LCV Driver-Training Program


Sec.  380.201  General requirements.

    (a) The LCV Driver-Training Program that is described in the 
appendix to this part requires training using an LCV Double or LCV 
Triple and must include the following general categories of 
instruction:
    (1) Orientation;
    (2) Basic operation;
    (3) Safe operating practices;
    (4) Advanced operations; and
    (5) Nondriving activities.
    (b) The LCV Driver-Training Program must include the minimum topics 
of training set forth in the appendix to this part and behind-the-wheel 
instruction that is designed to provide an opportunity to develop the 
skills outlined under the Proficiency Development unit of the training 
program.


Sec.  380.203  LCV Doubles.

    (a) To qualify for the training necessary to operate an LCV Double, 
a driver-student shall, during the 6 months immediately preceding 
application for training, have:
    (1) A valid Class A CDL with a double/triple trailer endorsement;
    (2) Driving experience in a Group A vehicle as described in Sec.  
383.91 of this subchapter. Evidence of driving experience shall be an 
employer's written statement that the driver has, for at least 6 months 
immediately preceding application, operated a Group A vehicle while 
under his/her employ;
    (3) No more than one driver's license;
    (4) No suspension, revocation, or cancellation of his/her CDL;
    (5) No convictions for a major offense, as defined in Sec.  
383.51(b) of this subchapter, while operating a CMV;

[[Page 16735]]

    (6) No convictions for a railroad-highway grade crossing offense, 
as defined in Sec.  383.51(d) of this subchapter, while operating a 
CMV;
    (7) No convictions for violating an out-of-service order as defined 
in Sec.  383.51(e) of this subchapter;
    (8) No more than one conviction for a serious traffic violation, as 
defined in Sec.  383.5 of this subchapter, while operating a CMV; and
    (9) No convictions for a violation of State or local law relating 
to motor vehicle traffic control arising in connection with any traffic 
crash while operating a CMV.
    (b) Driver-students meeting the preliminary requirements in 
paragraph (a) of this section shall successfully complete a training 
program that meets the minimum unit requirements for LCV Doubles as set 
forth in the appendix to this part.
    (c) Driver-students who successfully complete the Driver Training 
Program for LCV Doubles shall be issued a certificate, in accordance 
with subpart D of this part, indicating the driver is qualified to 
operate an LCV Double.


Sec.  380.205  LCV Triples.

    (a) To qualify for the training necessary to operate an LCV Triple, 
a driver-student shall, during the 6 months immediately preceding 
application for training, have:
    (1) A valid Class A CDL with a double/triple trailer endorsement;
    (2) Experience operating the vehicle listed under paragraph 
(a)(2)(i) or (a)(2)(ii) of this section. Evidence of driving experience 
shall be an employer's written statement that the driver has, during 
the 6 months immediately preceding application, operated the applicable 
vehicle(s):
    (i) Group A truck-tractor/semi-trailer combination as described in 
Sec.  383.91 of this subchapter; or
    (ii) Group A truck-tractor/semi-trailer/trailer combination that 
operates at a gross vehicle weight of 80,000 pounds or less;
    (3) No more than one driver's license;
    (4) No suspension, revocation, or cancellation of his/her CDL;
    (5) No convictions for a major offense, as defined in Sec.  
383.51(b) of this subchapter, while operating a CMV;
    (6) No convictions for a railroad-highway grade crossing offense, 
as defined in Sec.  383.51(d) of this subchapter, while operating a 
CMV;
    (7) No convictions for violating an out-of-service order, as 
defined in Sec.  383.51(e) of this subchapter;
    (8) No more than one conviction for a serious traffic violation, as 
defined in Sec.  383.5 of this subchapter, while operating a CMV; and
    (9) No convictions for a violation of State or local law relating 
to motor vehicle traffic control arising in connection with any traffic 
crash, while operating a CMV.
    (b) Driver-students meeting the preliminary requirements in 
paragraph (a) of this section shall successfully complete a training 
program that meets the minimum unit requirements for LCV Triples as set 
forth in the appendix to this part.
    (c) Driver-students who successfully complete the Driver Training 
Program for LCV Triples shall be issued a certificate, in accordance 
with subpart D of this part, indicating the driver is qualified to 
operate an LCV Triple.

Subpart C--LCV Driver-Instructor Requirements


Sec.  380.301  General requirements.

    There are two types of LCV driver-instructors: Classroom 
instructors and Skills instructors. Except as provided in Sec.  
380.303, you must meet the conditions under paragraph (a) or paragraph 
(b) of this section to qualify as an LCV driver-instructor.
    (a) Classroom instructor. To qualify as an LCV Classroom 
instructor, a person shall:
    (1) Have audited the driver-training course that he/she intends to 
instruct.
    (2) If employed by a training institution, meet all State 
requirements for a vocational instructor.
    (b) Skills instructor. To qualify as an LCV skills instructor, a 
person shall:
    (1) Provide evidence of successful completion of the Driver-
Training Program requirements, as set forth in subpart B of this part, 
when requested by employers and/or an authorized FMCSA, State, or local 
official in the course of a compliance review. The Driver-Training 
Program must be for the operation of CMVs representative of the subject 
matter that he/she will teach.
    (2) If employed by a training institution, meet all State 
requirements for a vocational instructor;
    (3) Possess a valid Class A CDL with all endorsements necessary to 
operate the CMVs applicable to the subject matter being taught (LCV 
Doubles and/or LCV Triples, including any specialized variation 
thereof, such as a tank vehicle, that requires an additional 
endorsement); and
    (4) Have at least 2 years' CMV driving experience in a vehicle 
representative of the type of driver training to be provided (LCV 
Doubles or LCV Triples).


Sec.  380.303  Substitute for instructor requirements.

    (a) Classroom instructor. The requirements specified under Sec.  
380.301(a) of this part for a qualified LCV driver-instructor are 
waived for a classroom instructor-candidate who has 2 years of recent 
satisfactory experience teaching the classroom portion of a program 
similar in content to that set forth in the appendix to this part.
    (b) Skills instructor. The requirements specified under Sec.  
380.301(b) of this part for a qualified LCV driver-instructor are 
waived for a skills instructor-candidate who:
    (1) Meets the conditions of Sec.  380.111(b);
    (2) Has CMV driving experience during the previous 2 years in a 
vehicle representative of the type of LCV that is the subject of the 
training course to be provided;
    (3) Has experience during the previous 2 years in teaching the 
operation of the type of LCV that is the subject of the training course 
to be provided; and
    (4) If employed by a training institution, meets all State 
requirements for a vocational instructor.


Sec.  380.305  Employer responsibilities.

    (a) No motor carrier shall: (1) Knowingly allow, require, permit or 
authorize a driver-instructor in its employ, or under contract to the 
motor carrier, to provide LCV driver training unless such person is a 
qualified LCV driver-instructor under the requirements of this subpart; 
or
    (2) Contract with a training institution to provide LCV driver 
training unless the institution:
    (i) Uses instructors who are qualified LCV driver-instructors under 
the requirements of this subpart;
    (ii) Is accredited by an accrediting institution recognized by the 
U.S. Department of Education;
    (iii) Is in compliance with all applicable State training school 
requirements; and
    (iv) Identifies drivers certified under Sec.  380.401 of this part, 
when requested by employers and/or an authorized FMCSA, State, or local 
official in the course of a compliance review.
    (b) A motor carrier that employs or has under contract qualified 
LCV driver-instructors shall provide evidence of the certifications 
required by Sec.  380.301 or Sec.  380.303 of this part, when requested 
by an authorized FMCSA, State, or local official in the course of a 
compliance review.

Subpart D--Driver-Training Certification


Sec.  380.401  Certification document.

    (a) A student who successfully completes LCV driver training shall 
be

[[Page 16736]]

issued a Driver-Training Certificate that is substantially in 
accordance with the following form.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30MR04.001

    (b) An LCV driver must provide a copy of the Driver-Training 
Certificate to his/her employer to be filed in the Driver Qualification 
File.

Appendix to Part 380--LCV Driver Training Programs, Required Knowledge 
and Skills

    The following table lists topics of instruction required for 
drivers of longer combination vehicles pursuant to 49 CFR part 380, 
subpart B. The training courses for operators of LCV Doubles and LCV 
Triples must be distinct and tailored to address their unique 
operating and handling characteristics. Each course must include the 
minimum topics of instruction, including behind-the-wheel training 
designed to provide an opportunity to develop the skills outlined 
under the Proficiency Development unit of the training program. Only 
a skills instructor may administer behind-the-wheel training 
involving the operation of an LCV or one of its components. A 
classroom instructor may administer only instruction that does not 
involve the operation of an LCV or one of its components.

          Table to the Appendix--Course Topics for LCV Drivers
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Section 1: Orientation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.1.............................  LCVs in Trucking
1.2.............................  Regulatory Factors
1.3.............................  Driver Qualifications
1.4.............................  Vehicle Configuration Factors
---------------------------------
                       Section 2: Basic Operation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1.............................  Coupling and Uncoupling
2.2.............................  Basic Control and Handling
2.3.............................  Basic Maneuvers
2.4.............................  Turning, Steering and Tracking
2.5.............................  Proficiency Development
---------------------------------
                   Section 3: Safe Operating Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.1.............................  Interacting with Traffic
3.2.............................  Speed and Space Management
3.3.............................  Night Operations
3.4.............................  Extreme Driving Conditions
3.5.............................  Security Issues
3.6.............................  Proficiency Development
---------------------------------
                     Section 4: Advanced Operations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.1.............................  Hazard Perception
4.2.............................  Hazardous Situations
---------------------------------
4.3.............................  Maintenance and Troubleshooting
---------------------------------
                    Section 5: Non-Driving Activities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.1.............................  Routes and Trip Planning
5.2.............................  Cargo and Weight Considerations
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 1--Orientation

    The units in this section must provide an orientation to the 
training curriculum and must cover the role LCVs play within the

[[Page 16737]]

motor carrier industry, the factors that affect their operations, 
and the role that drivers play in the safe operation of LCVs.
    Unit 1.1--LCVs in Trucking. This unit must provide an 
introduction to the emergence of LCVs in trucking and must serve as 
an orientation to the course content. Emphasis must be placed upon 
the role the driver plays in transportation.
    Unit 1.2--Regulatory factors. This unit must provide instruction 
addressing the Federal, State, and local governmental bodies that 
propose, enact, and implement the laws, rules, and regulations that 
affect the trucking industry. Emphasis must be placed on those 
regulatory factors that affect LCVs, including 23 CFR 658.23 and 
Appendix C to part 658.
    Unit 1.3--Driver qualifications. This unit must provide 
classroom instruction addressing the Federal and State laws, rules, 
and regulations that define LCV driver qualifications. It also must 
include a discussion on medical examinations, drug and alcohol 
tests, certification, and basic health and wellness issues. Emphasis 
must be placed upon topics essential to physical and mental health 
maintenance, including (1) diet, (2) exercise, (3) avoidance of 
alcohol and drug abuse, and caution in the use of prescription and 
nonprescription drugs, (4) the adverse effects of driver fatigue, 
and (5) effective fatigue countermeasures. Driver-trainees who have 
successfully completed the Entry-level training segments at Sec.  
380.503(a) and (c) are considered to have satisfied the requirements 
of Unit 1.3.
    Unit 1.4--Vehicle configuration factors. This unit must provide 
classroom instruction addressing the key vehicle components used in 
the configuration of longer combination vehicles. It also must 
familiarize the driver-trainee with various vehicle combinations, as 
well as provide instruction about unique characteristics and factors 
associated with LCV configurations.

Section 2--Basic Operation

    The units in this section must cover the interaction between the 
driver and the vehicle. They must teach driver-trainees how to 
couple and uncouple LCVs, ensure the vehicles are in proper 
operating condition, and control the motion of LCVs under various 
road and traffic conditions.
    During the driving exercises at off-highway locations required 
by this section, the driver-trainee must first familiarize himself/
herself with basic operating characteristics of an LCV. Utilizing an 
LCV, students must be able to perform the skills learned in each 
unit to a level of proficiency required to permit safe transition to 
on-street driving.
    Unit 2.1--Coupling and uncoupling. This unit must provide 
instruction addressing the procedures for coupling and uncoupling 
LCVs. While vehicle coupling and uncoupling procedures are common to 
all truck-tractor/semi-trailer operations, some factors are peculiar 
to LCVs. Emphasis must be placed upon preplanning and safe operating 
procedures.
    Unit 2.2--Basic control and handling. This unit must provide an 
introduction to basic vehicular control and handling as it applies 
to LCVs. This must include instruction addressing brake performance, 
handling characteristics and factors affecting LCV stability while 
braking, turning, and cornering. Emphasis must be placed upon safe 
operating procedures.
    Unit 2.3--Basic maneuvers. This unit must provide instruction 
addressing the basic vehicular maneuvers that will be encountered by 
LCV drivers. This must include instruction relative to backing, lane 
positioning and path selection, merging situations, and parking 
LCVs. Emphasis must be placed upon safe operating procedures as they 
apply to brake performance and directional stability while 
accelerating, braking, merging, cornering, turning, and parking.
    Unit 2.4--Turning, steering, and tracking. This unit must 
provide instruction addressing turning situations, steering 
maneuvers, and the tracking of LCV trailers. This must include 
instruction related to trailer sway and off-tracking. Emphasis must 
be placed on maintaining directional stability.
    Unit 2.5--Proficiency development: basic operations. The purpose 
of this unit is to enable driver-students to gain the proficiency in 
basic operation needed to safely undertake on-street instruction in 
the Safe Operations Practices section of the curriculum.
    The activities of this unit must consist of driving exercises 
that provide practice for the development of basic control skills 
and mastery of basic maneuvers. Driver-students practice skills and 
maneuvers learned in the Basic Control and Handling; Basic 
Maneuvers; and Turning, Steering and Tracking units. A series of 
basic exercises is practiced at off-highway locations until students 
develop sufficient proficiency for transition to on-street driving.
    Once the driver-student's skills have been measured and found 
adequate, the driver-student must be allowed to move to on-the-
street driving.
    Nearly all activity in this unit will take place on the driving 
range or on streets or roads that have low-density traffic 
conditions.

Section 3--Safe Operating Practices

    The units in this section must cover the interaction between 
student drivers, the vehicle, and the traffic environment. They must 
teach driver-students how to apply their basic operating skills in a 
way that ensures their safety and that of other road users under 
various road, weather, and traffic conditions.
    Unit 3.1--Interacting with traffic. This unit must provide 
instruction addressing the principles of visual search, 
communication, and sharing the road with other traffic. Emphasis 
must be placed upon visual search, mirror usage, signaling and/or 
positioning the vehicle to communicate, and understanding the 
special situations encountered by LCV drivers in various traffic 
situations.
    Unit 3.2--Speed and space management. This unit must provide 
instruction addressing the principles of speed and space management. 
Emphasis must be placed upon maintaining safe vehicular speed and 
appropriate space surrounding the vehicle under various traffic and 
road conditions. Particular attention must be placed upon 
understanding the special situations encountered by LCVs in various 
traffic situations.
    Unit 3.3--Night operations. This unit must provide instruction 
addressing the principles of Night Operations. Emphasis must be 
placed upon the factors affecting operation of LCVs at night. Night 
driving presents specific factors that require special attention on 
the part of the driver. Changes in vehicle safety inspection, 
vision, communications, speed management, and space management are 
needed to deal with the special problems night driving presents.
    Unit 3.4--Extreme driving conditions. This unit must provide 
instruction addressing the driving of LCVs under extreme driving 
conditions. Emphasis must be placed upon the factors affecting the 
operation of LCVs in cold, hot, and inclement weather and in the 
mountains and desert. Changes in basic driving habits are needed to 
deal with the specific problems presented by these extreme driving 
conditions.
    Unit 3.5--Security issues. This unit must include a discussion 
of security requirements imposed by the Department of Homeland 
Security, Transportation Security Administration; the U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Research and Special Programs 
Administration; and any other State or Federal agency with 
responsibility for highway or motor carrier security.
    Unit 3.6--Proficiency development. This unit must provide 
driver-students an opportunity to refine, within the on-street 
traffic environment, their vehicle handling skills learned in the 
first three sections. Driver-student performance progress must be 
closely monitored to determine when the level of proficiency 
required for carrying out the basic traffic maneuvers of stopping, 
turning, merging, straight driving, curves, lane changing, passing, 
driving on hills, driving through traffic restrictions, and parking 
has been attained. The driver-student must also be assessed for 
regulatory compliance with all traffic laws.
    Nearly all activity in this unit will take place on public 
roadways in a full range of traffic environments applicable to this 
vehicle configuration. This must include urban and rural 
uncontrolled roadways, expressways or freeways, under light, 
moderate, and heavy traffic conditions. There must be a brief 
classroom session to familiarize driver-students with the type of 
on-street maneuvers they will perform and how their performance will 
be rated.
    The instructor must assess the level of skill development of the 
driver-student and must increase in difficulty, based upon the level 
of skill attained, the types of maneuvers, roadways and traffic 
conditions to which the driver-student is exposed.

Section 4--Advanced Operations

    The units in this section must introduce higher level skills 
that can be acquired only after the more fundamental skills and 
knowledge taught in sections two and three have been mastered. They 
must teach the perceptual skills necessary to recognize potential 
hazards, and must demonstrate the procedures needed to handle an LCV 
when faced with a hazard.

[[Page 16738]]

    The Maintenance and Trouble-shooting Unit must provide 
instruction that addresses how to keep the vehicle in safe and 
efficient operating condition. The purpose of this unit is to teach 
the correct way to perform simple maintenance tasks, and how to 
troubleshoot and report those vehicle discrepancies or deficiencies 
that must be repaired by a qualified mechanic.
    Unit 4.1--Hazard perception. This unit must provide instruction 
addressing the principles of recognizing hazards in sufficient time 
to reduce the severity of the hazard and neutralize a possible 
emergency situation. While hazards are present in all motor vehicle 
traffic operations, some are peculiar to LCV operations. Emphasis 
must be placed upon hazard recognition, visual search, and response 
to possible emergency-producing situations encountered by LCV 
drivers in various traffic situations.
    Unit 4.2--Hazardous situations. This unit must address dealing 
with specific procedures appropriate for LCV emergencies. These must 
include evasive steering, emergency braking, off-road recovery, 
brake failures, tire blowouts, rearward amplification, hydroplaning, 
skidding, jackknifing and the rollover phenomenon. The discussion 
must include a review of unsafe acts and the role they play in 
producing hazardous situations.
    Unit 4.3--Maintenance and trouble-shooting. This unit must 
introduce driver-students to the basic servicing and checking 
procedures for the various vehicle components and provide knowledge 
of conducting preventive maintenance functions, making simple 
emergency repairs, and diagnosing and reporting vehicle 
malfunctions.

Section 5--Non-Driving Activities

    The units in this section must cover activities that are not 
directly related to the vehicle itself but must be performed by an 
LCV driver. The units in this section must ensure these activities 
are performed in a manner that ensures the safety of the driver, 
vehicle, cargo, and other road users.
    Unit 5.1--Routes and trip planning. This unit must address the 
importance of and requirements for planning routes and trips. This 
must include classroom discussion of Federal and State requirements 
for a number of topics including permits, vehicle size and weight 
limitations, designated highways, local access, the reasonable 
access rule, staging areas, and access zones.
    Unit 5.2--Cargo and weight considerations. This unit must 
address the importance of proper cargo documentation, loading, 
securing and unloading cargo, weight distribution, load sequencing 
and trailer placement. Emphasis must be placed on the importance of 
axle weight distribution, as well as on trailer placement and its 
effect on vehicle handling.

PART 391--QUALIFICATIONS OF DRIVERS AND LONGER COMBINATION VEHICLE 
(LCV) DRIVER INSTRUCTORS

0
2. The authority citation for 49 CFR part 391 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 504, 31133, 31136 and 31502; Sec. 
4007(b) of Pub. L. 102-240 (105 Stat. 2152); and 49 CFR 1.73.


0
3. Part 391 is amended by revising the title to read as set forth above 
and by adding a new Sec.  391.53 to subpart F to read as follows:


Sec.  391.53  LCV Driver-Instructor qualification files.

    (a) Each motor carrier must maintain a qualification file for each 
LCV driver-instructor it employs or uses. The LCV driver-instructor 
qualification file may be combined with his/her personnel file.
    (b) The LCV driver-instructor qualification file must include the 
information in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section for a 
skills instructor or the information in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section for a classroom instructor, as follows:
    (1) Evidence that the instructor has met the requirements of 49 CFR 
380.301 or 380.303;
    (2) A photographic copy of the individual's currently valid CDL 
with the appropriate endorsements.

    Issued on: March 22, 2004.
Annette M. Sandberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 04-6794 Filed 3-29-04; 8:45 am]