Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 35287

41 CFR Part 51–10

Administrative practice and

procedure, Civil rights, Equal

employment opportunity, Federal

buildings and facilities, Handicapped.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, Parts 51–8, 51–9 and 51–10 of

Title 41, Chapter 51 of the Code of

Federal Regulations are amended as

follows:

PART 51–8—PUBLIC AVAILABILITY

OF AGENCY MATERIALS

1. The authority citation for Part 51–

8 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552.

§§ 51–8.4 and 51–8.5 [Amended]

2. Remove the words ‘‘Crystal

Gateway 3, Suite 310, 1215 Jefferson

Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia

22202–4302’’ and add, in their place,

the words ‘‘Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite

10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259’’ in the

following places:

a. Section 51–8.4; and

b. Section 51–8.5(a).

PART 51–9—PRIVACY ACT RULES

3. The authority citation for Part 51–

9 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a.

§§ 51–9.401 and 51–9.405 [Amended]

4. Remove the words ‘‘Crystal

Gateway 3, Suite 310, 1215 Jefferson

Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia

22202–4302’’ and add, in their place,

the words ‘‘Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite

10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259’’ in the

following places:

a. Section 51–9.401(a); and

b. Section 51–9.405(a).

PART 51–10—ENFORCEMENT OF

NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS

OF HANDICAP IN PROGRAMS OR

ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY THE

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR

SEVERELY DISABLED

5. The authority citation for Part 51–

10 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 29 U.S.C. 794.

§ 51–10.170 [Amended]

6. In § 51–10.170(c), remove the

words ‘‘Crystal Gateway 3, Suite 310,

1215 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, Virginia 22202–4302’’ and

add, in their place, the words ‘‘Jefferson

Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson

Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia

22202–3259’’.

Dated: May 30, 2000.

Leon A. Wilson, Jr.,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 00–13859 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6353–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration

49 CFR Parts 385 and 390

[Docket No. FMCSA–98–3947 (Formerly

Docket No. FHWA–98–3947)]

RIN 2126–AA14 (Formerly 2125–AD49)

Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Regulations; General; Commercial

Motor Vehicle Marking

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The FMCSA is revising its

requirements concerning the marking of

commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) and

for the submission of a Motor Carrier

Identification Report (Form MCS–150)

to the agency. The FMCSA is

eliminating the marking regulations of

the former Interstate Commerce

Commission (ICC), and requiring motor

carriers to apply markings that conform

to the requirements of this final rule.

The agency is also amending its marking

requirements to require that CMVs be

marked with the legal name of the

business entity that owns or controls the

motor carrier operation, or the ‘‘doing

business as’’ (DBA) name, as it appears

on the Form MCS–150. Motor carriers

will be allowed two years to comply

with the requirement to affix the

USDOT number to both sides of their

CMVs, and five years to comply with

the additional requirements to display

the legal name or a single trade name on

the CMVs currently in their fleet. The

FMCSA is redesignating the regulation

that requires motor carriers to submit

the Form MCS–150, and requiring that

all new interstate motor carriers submit

a Form MCS–150 to the FMCSA before

(rather than within 90 days after)

commencing operations. These

revisions are intended to enhance the

ability of the FMCSA, the States, and

the general public to identify motor

carriers. The FMCSA also revises the

listing for locations of motor carrier

safety Service Centers to reflect recent

changes to the agency organizational

structure. They were originally included

in the NPRM concerning safety fitness

procedures [RIN 2126–AA42, formerly

RIN 2125–AE56, Docket No. OMCS–99–

5467 (formerly Docket No. FHWA–99–

5467)] (64 FR 44460, August 16, 1999).

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 3, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Deborah M. Freund, Office of Bus and

Truck Operations, Routing Code MC–

PSV, (202) 366–4009; or Mr. Charles E.

Medalen, Office of the Chief Counsel,

HCC–20, (202) 366–1354, Federal

Highway Administration, 400 Seventh

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15

p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

Internet users may access all

comments received by the U.S. DOT

Dockets, Room PL–401, by using the

universal resource locator (URL):http://

dms.dot.gov. It is available 24 hours

each day, 365 days each year. Please

follow the instructions online for more

information and help.

An electronic copy of this document

may be downloaded by using a

computer, modem and suitable

communication software from the

Government Printing Offices’s

Electronic Bulletin Board Service at

(202) 512–1661. Internet users may

reach the Office of Federal Register’s

home page at: http://www.nara.gov/

fedreg and the Government Printing

Office’s web page at: http://

www.access.gpo.gov/nara.

Background

On January 28, 1992, the FHWA

published a final rule (57 FR 3142)

which required interstate motor carriers

to mark their interstate CMVs with

specific information, including the

USDOT number (see 49 CFR 390.21).

The final rule, however, provided an

exception for motor carriers authorized

by the former ICC to conduct operations

as a for-hire motor carrier. These motor

carriers were required to comply only

with the marking provisions in former

49 CFR part 1058, now redesignated as

49 CFR 390.401, 390.403, 390.405, and

390.407 (61 FR 54706, 54710, October

21, 1996).

The ICC Termination Act of 1995

(ICCTA) (Pub. L. 104–88, 109 Stat. 803)

was enacted on December 29, 1995, and

became effective on January 1, 1996.

The ICCTA abolished the ICC, amended

subtitle IV of title 49, United States

Code, reformed the economic regulation

of transportation, and transferred the

assets, personnel, and many of the

duties and functions of the ICC to the

Secretary of Transportation (Secretary).

On June 16, 1998, the FHWA

published a notice of proposed

35288 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

rulemaking (NPRM) (63 FR 32801) to

amend its regulations concerning the

marking of CMVs and the submission of

the Form MCS–150. The agency

proposed (1) To eliminate the marking

regulations of the former ICC and to

require motor carriers to replace the

vehicle markings specified by those

requirements with markings that

conform to 49 CFR 390.21; (2) to amend

its current rule to require that CMVs be

marked with the legal name of the

business entity that owns or controls the

motor carrier operation, or the ‘‘doing

business as’’ name, and the city and

State for the principal place of business

as they appear on the Form MCS–150;

(3) to allow motor carriers two years to

comply with the marking requirement

(i.e., to display the USDOT number on

both sides of their self-propelled CMVs),

and five years to comply with the

additional requirements to display the

address of the principal place of

business and the legal name, or a single

trade name; (4) to amend the regulations

to require all new interstate motor

carriers submit a Form MCS–150 to the

FMCSA before (rather than within 90

days after) commencing operations; and

(5) to move the regulations that require

motor carriers to submit the Form MCS–

150 from 49 CFR part 385 to part 390.

Discussion of Comments to the NPRM

The FMCSA received 196 comments

in response to the NPRM.

The commenters were: the American

Trucking Associations (ATA) ; the New

York State Motor Truck Association Inc.

(NYSMTA); the National Automobile

Dealers Association (NADA); the

National Automobile Transporters

Association (NATA); Bonanza Bus

Lines; Yellow Corporation; the

Association of Waste Hazardous

Materials Transporters (AWHMT); ATC

Leasing Company; the New Jersey Motor

Truck Association; the Iowa Department

of Transportation; United Parcel Service

(UPS); the Missouri Division of Motor

Carrier and Railroad Safety (Missouri

DMCRS); Consolidated Freightways

(CF); the South Carolina Trucking

Association, Inc.; GROWMARK, Inc.;

the Truck Renting and Leasing

Association (TRALA); the Georgia

Public Service Commission;

Distribution & LTL Carriers Association;

the National Private Truck Council

(NPTC); J.B. Hunt; ConAgra Inc.; North

American Van Lines, Inc. (NAVL); the

Truckload Carriers Association (TCA);

the National Association of Small

Trucking Companies (NASTC); the

Illinois State Police; the Colorado

Department of Public Safety; Roadway

Express; the American Moving and

Storage Association (AMSA); the State

of New York Department of

Transportation; Peninsula Transport,

Inc., and an additional 167 motor

carriers. The following is a summary of

the comments on some of the key items

addressed in the notice.

Relationship to Unified Motor Carrier

Registration System Rulemaking

Although most commenters did not

oppose in principle the FMCSA’s

proposal to require self-propelled CMVs

to be marked with a USDOT number,

several of them, including the ATA,

UPS, and the Distribution & LTL

Carriers Association, recommended that

the FMCSA delay this rulemaking

pending the implementation of the

congressionally mandated Unified

Motor Carrier Registration System

(Unified System). The Unified System is

intended to provide a comprehensive

foundation for registration, insurance,

and safety information. The commenters

asserted that the Unified System would

help solve many of the problems

mentioned in the NPRM, including

matching the motor carrier (MC) and

USDOT numbers. Commenters also

suggest that the Unified System could

be designed to include all of a motor

carrier’s DBA names and other

identifying information.

The New York State DOT notes that

it is participating in discussions with

the U.S. DOT and others concerning the

consolidation of the Unified System and

the Single State Registration System

(SSRS). New York believes there is

conceptual agreement among the

majority of SSRS States concerning

assignment of USDOT numbers for both

interstate and intrastate motor carriers,

and asks that the FMCSA’s regulation

facilitate this approach. The Illinois

State Police believes that many States

already have the infrastructure in place

to support a national motor carrier

identification system.

The NASTC categorically opposes the

NPRM, believing that the MC number is

necessary for State and Federal officials,

and the traveling public, to distinguish

for-hire from private motor carriers.

FMCSA Response

Section 103 of the ICCTA, which,

among other things, added 49 U.S.C.

13908, required the Secretary to initiate

a rulemaking proceeding to replace the

current Department of Transportation

identification number system, the SSRS

under 49 U.S.C. 14504, the registration/

licensing system contained in 49 U.S.C.

13901–13905, and the financial

responsibility information system under

49 U.S.C. 13906 with a single, online

Federal system.

On August 26, 1996, the agency

published an advance notice of

proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on the

Motor Carrier Replacement Information/

Registration System which posed

several questions and requested

comments on all of these issues raised

by the commenters.

The FMCSA agrees there are items

proposed in the Commercial Motor

Vehicle Marking NPRM that are related

to the Registration rulemaking.

However, the FMCSA considers the

requirement to mark a CMV with the

USDOT number as a vehicle

identification issue, not a registration

issue. Therefore, the FMCSA will move

forward with its requirement to mark

CMVs with the USDOT number

assigned to each motor carrier.

The filing of the Form MCS–150 is not

considered a registration issue in the

context of the Motor Carrier

Replacement Information/Registration

System because the agency is not

changing the applicability of the

regulation, only the time the document

must be filed. The current requirement

allows a new motor carrier to file the

Form MCS-150 within 90 days after

beginning operations. The FMCSA

believes it is important that CMVs be

properly marked before they are placed

into service on the highway. Such

markings will assist State officials

conducting roadside inspections and

accident investigations in attributing

important safety data to the correct

motor carrier. It will also ensure the

public has an effective means to identify

motor carriers operating in an unsafe

manner.

The FMCSA has streamlined the

process for filing the Form MCS–150 by

making it available on the Internet.

Motor carriers seeking a copy of Form

MCS–150 may obtain it from the

Internet through the Federal Motor

Carrier Safety Administration web page

at: http://www.mcs.dot.gov/factsfigs/

formspubs.htm under ‘‘DOT Number—

Application Form.’’ Motor carriers may

download the Form MCS–150, complete

it, and submit it by mail or by facsimile.

Motor carriers may also obtain copies of

the form from any of the four FMCSA

Service Centers or the fifty-two Division

Offices. A for-hire motor carrier should

submit the Form MCS–150 along with

its application for operating authority

(Form OP–1) to the appropriate address

referenced on that form or may submit

it separately to the address mentioned

on the web page.

The FMCSA has also made a

determination that the USDOT number

will be the number used to identify all

motor carriers in the information/

registration system of the future.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 35289

Currently, all interstate motor carriers

(both for-hire and private) are assigned

USDOT numbers. Also, several States

require intrastate motor carriers to

complete Form MCS–150 and obtain a

USDOT identification number. These

motor carriers are listed in the Motor

Carrier Management Information System

(MCMIS) as intrastate-only carriers. The

addition of these motor carriers to the

MCMIS enables the States to work

together in determining the number of

active motor carriers operating in the

United States, and to monitor the safety

performance of the motor carriers.

Another reason to use the USDOT

number as the key identifier for all

motor carriers is the role that it plays in

the Performance and Registration

Information Systems Management

(PRISM) project. The PRISM project is a

cooperative Federal/State program that

makes motor carrier safety a

requirement for obtaining and keeping

commercial motor vehicle registration

privileges. The performance of unsafe

motor carriers is improved through a

program of progressively more stringent

sanctions leading to a possible Federal

operations out-of-service order and

suspension of their State issued vehicle

registration privileges. The vehicle

registration records contain the USDOT

number as a unique identifier of the

motor carrier responsible for the safety

of the CMVs.

Single Trade Name

ConAgra, Inc., the ATA, the TCA,

NAVL, and other commenters oppose

the single trade name proposal and

believe the FMCSA should allow small

subsidiaries and divisions of large

national carriers to maintain their own

identities. They contend that local

operations of national carriers want to

maintain the connection to the local

communities they served over the years.

They claim that limiting carriers to a

single trade name will dramatically

impact a number of large carriers in

ways that the FMCSA may not have

fully considered.

FMCSA Response

The FMCSA agrees with the

commenters. The FMCSA will consider

requests for assignment of individual

USDOT numbers to corporate divisions

on a case-by-case basis. While the

FMCSA does not wish to limit an

organization’s flexibility, or its ability to

promote a trade name, we nevertheless

must consider whether the assignment

of multiple USDOT numbers to a single

corporate entity will compromise the

integrity of the collection and

processing of safety data.

Principal Place of Business Address

With regard to the proposed language

concerning the requirement for motor

carriers to display only the location of

their principal place of business, the

ATA, the NPTC, UPS, CF, Roadway

Express, Yellow Corporation, NAVL, the

Georgia Public Service Commission, and

a number of other motor carriers and

associations strongly oppose any change

to the existing regulation. Most argue

that the principal place of business

address, being the third way to identify

the motor carrier (after the USDOT

number and the single trade name), does

not help much if the first two are correct

or incorrect. While most commenters

agree that some type of number is

needed to help match safety records,

they don’t believe that the address of the

principal place of business provides the

same benefit. They believe the cost to

the motor carrier to accomplish the

change definitely outweighs any

perceived advantage.

The New York State DOT opposes the

proposal because it believes that motor

carriers would be prohibited from

displaying the location where a CMV is

customarily based. The agency cited an

example of a motor carrier of passengers

that has acquired various New York

based carriers. New York prefers to

retain the location identification to aid

them in tracking the performance of the

individual subsidiaries.

FMCSA Response

The FMCSA agrees with the

commenters; the motor carrier name and

the unique USDOT number should be

sufficient to properly identify the motor

carrier. The FMCSA does not believe it

is necessary to include in the final rule

the requirement to display the city and

State. As UPS noted, unless there is an

error in the collection of the original

data, there should be no instance in

which two motor carriers have both the

same name and the same USDOT

number. The use of an address does not

ensure the accurate collection of data

and imposes an additional and

unjustified burden on the industry.

As for the comments of the New York

State DOT, the final rule does not

require motor carriers to mark their

motor vehicles with the city and State,

but does not prohibit the practice either.

The FMCSA believes that many motor

carriers will continue to display the city

and State for marketing purposes and to

maintain a connection to the local

communities they serve.

Periodic Update of the Form MCS–150

The ATA, Distribution and LTL

Carriers Association, New York State

DOT, and AWHMT have suggested the

FMCSA require motor carriers to

periodically update the information

contained on the MCS–150. They say

the information initially reported on the

Form MCS–150 may change over time.

Inasmuch as the FMCSA uses this

information to calculate a motor

carrier’s accident rate for safety rating

purposes, the commenters believe the

FMCSA has a vested interest in

requiring a periodic update of Form

MCS–150 to ensure the integrity of the

data.

FMCSA Response

The 1996 ANPRM on the unified

information/registration system (61 FR

43816) addresses this issue. One of the

questions included there was the same

as that asked by the AWHMT, the ATA,

and the New York DOT.

Section 217 of the Motor Carrier

Safety Improvement Act of 1999

requires the FMCSA to require motor

carriers to periodically update the

information they provide in the form

MCS–150. An initial update is required

by December 2000. Periodic updates

would be required not more frequently

than once every two years. The FMCSA

will address this provision in a separate

rulemaking action.

Marking of Foreign and Intrastate Motor

Carriers’ Power Units

The AWHMT requested that the

FMCSA consider if there is a potential

for reciprocity between the CMV

marking requirements of Canada and

Mexico and those currently contained in

and proposed for the FMCSRs.

UPS commented that motor carriers

subject to the FMCSA’s regulations that

operate portions of their fleets within

single jurisdictions are subject to the

additional marking requirements of

those jurisdictions. For example, State

Public Utilities Commissions often

impose their own marking

requirements. UPS stated that it, as well

as other motor carriers and the ATA,

had filed comments in Docket MC 96–

25 [Motor Carrier Replacement

Information/Registration System, now

DOT Docket 1997–2349] recommending

that the USDOT’s marking requirements

be the sole method to identify CMVs

operated by motor carriers under the

FMCSA’s jurisdiction.

The NYSMTA asked the FMCSA to

consider preempting the marking

requirements of State or local

jurisdictions for vehicles bearing

USDOT numbers that are not domiciled

within that jurisdiction. The NYSMTA

noted that a city requires the marking of

a street address. The Missouri DMCRS

requested that States be allowed to

35290 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

continue to require display of additional

information, such as the GVW or the

GVWR, on power units that are

registered solely for intrastate operation.

GROWMARK was concerned that

States may require different timeframes

from the FMCSA for implementing a

marking requirement.

The AWHMT referenced the

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act

(Public Law 101–615, 104 Stat. 3244,

November 16, 1990) safety permit

provisions, not yet implemented by the

FMCSA. It asked if the FMCSA might

consider a requirement for displaying

the USDOT number on the CMVs of

motor carriers engaged in the

transportation of hazardous materials in

intrastate commerce as an initial step

toward implementing the permit

system.

FMCSA Response

Concerning reciprocal marking

requirements among the United States,

Canada, and Mexico, the general

requirements contained in § 390.21 have

been in place since 1954 for for-hire

motor carriers operating in interstate

commerce. They have been in place

since 1988 for private motor carriers

operating in interstate commerce. No

other commenters raised this issue, and

the FMCSA is not aware that the

provisions have caused compliance

difficulties for foreign-based motor

carriers.

Concerning the questions raised by

the NYSMTA about a local jurisdiction’s

requirement for listing a full street

address, and the Missouri DMCSR’s

question about a State’s requirement for

the display of a GVW or GVWR on

intrastate-only CMVs, any other

identifying information may continue to

be displayed, as long as it is not

inconsistent with other § 390.21

requirements. Responding to

GROWMARK’s comment, the marking

requirement proposed will apply only to

motor carriers operating in interstate

commerce. The FMCSA anticipates that

States would allow these motor carriers

the phase-in period established in this

rulemaking action.

Finally, concerning the AWHMT’s

comment concerning the potential for

issuing USDOT numbers to intrastate

motor carriers transporting hazardous

materials, the agency is continuing to

address permitting in a separate

rulemaking action.

Submittal of MCS–150 and Display of

USDOT Number Upon Commencing

Operations

The FMCSA’s current regulation

requires that all new motor carriers

submit a Form MCS–150 to the agency

within 90 days of commencing

operations. The NPRM proposed that all

new motor carriers submit a Form MCS–

150 to the FMCSA before commencing

operations. The NPRM also proposed

that all CMVs added to a motor carrier’s

fleet on or after the effective date of the

rule must display the motor carrier’s

USDOT number before being put into

service.

The FMCSA received no adverse

comments on this provision of the

NPRM. The final rule will implement it

as proposed.

Time to Comply With Regulations

Commenters’ responses pertaining to

the proposed length of time for motor

carriers to comply with the marking

requirements (two years for the USDOT

number and five years for the principal

place of business and single trade name)

varied widely. Commenters suggested

phase-in periods that varied from two

years for some of the smaller motor

carriers to seven years for those carriers

having large fleets. Some commenters

suggested the FMCSA consider a single

date for motor carriers to meet all the

requirements. Yellow Corporation, for

example, suggested a conversion period

of three years, claiming it would reduce

the overall costs to carriers and would

provide adequate time for the training of

enforcement officials. Other

commenters, such as the NPTC and

NAVL, contended that five years was a

more appropriate phase-in period

because many fleets turn over their

equipment over that interval. They did

support the provision in the NPRM

requiring vehicles added to a fleet be

marked with the USDOT number when

placed into service.

FMCSA Response

The FMCSA has decided to proceed

with the original time frames outlined

in the NPRM. The final rule requires the

motor carrier to display its USDOT

number within two years of the effective

date of this rule and its single trade

name or DBA name within five years on

CMVs that are currently in service. All

new CMVs entering the fleet must meet

all the marking requirements before

being put into service. The FMCSA

believes that these time frames will

allow motor carriers to meet the

marking requirements without creating

either an administrative or economic

hardship.

As stated previously, the FMCSA will

eliminate the requirement for motor

carriers to display the city and State on

the side of their vehicles.

Marking of Driveaway and Short-Term

Rental Vehicles

The ATC Leasing Company and the

NATA requested that the provisions of

§ 390.407, which were written

specifically to recognize the unique

operational needs of driveaway

combinations, be left intact. These

commenters claim that the elimination

of this section would not provide any

economic or safety benefit to the public,

but would burden those carriers that

operate driveaway combinations with

unnecessary and costly duplication.

UPS addressed the issue of marking

short-term rental CMVs. UPS noted,

among other things, that § 390.21(e)

does not require the use of a temporary

identification device.

FMCSA Response

The FMCSA agrees with the

comments submitted by ATC Leasing

and the NATA on behalf of the

driveaway industry. The requirements

of § 390.407 concerning removable

devices are being retained and

incorporated into § 390.21. The FMCSA

responds to UPS that the proposed

language for § 390.21(e) is substantially

identical to that of the current

§ 390.23(e), except that the agency will

no longer require display of the lessor’s

city or community and State. Neither

the current nor the proposed regulation

require use of a temporary identification

device on short-term rental vehicles.

Contracts and Certificates of Insurance

The ATA, the NASTC, and

approximately 170 motor carriers

commented that many of their written

contracts and certificates of insurance

made available to the shipping public

identify them by their MC number. They

contend the FMCSA has not estimated

the cost to the shipper and broker

community of changing existing

contracts to use a new system so that

each motor carrier can be identified by

a USDOT number. They also believe it

is important for public warehousing

purposes that the existing ‘‘MC number’’

in their contract appear on the door of

the equipment making pickups. This

allows verification that the freight is

being tendered to the properly licensed

and insured motor carrier with whom a

contract was signed. The majority of the

motor carriers commenting suggested

the FMCSA allow ‘‘for hire’’ carriers to

continue to use the MC number as a

primary identifier for all aspects of their

operation and let the private carriers

continue to use the USDOT number.

FMCSA Response

There is no Federal requirement that

motor carriers display their MC number

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 35291

on contracts or certificates of insurance.

This practice was developed by the

motor carrier industry for its own

purposes and may be continued if the

industry chooses. The regulation

requires motor carriers to display the

USDOT number on both sides of their

power units. It does not require motor

carriers to remove the MC number,

although they are encouraged to refrain

from displaying the MC number on new

or repainted CMVs once the rule

becomes final.

The FMCSA’s use of the USDOT

number for CMV identification is

premised upon its use in a safety

context. The MC number is used by the

FMCSA, process agents, and insurance

companies to track the process of a forhire motor carrier’s application for

registration, status of insurance, and

other requirements. The FMCSA’s

MCMIS includes both the MC and

USDOT numbers, as do many other

records used by motor carriers. Shippers

and others can verify the identification

of a for-hire motor carrier with the

FMCSA online, or via telephone, using

either number. Motor carriers should

also make their clients aware of the

change in the regulations. Taken

together, these measures should aid

them in verifying that the freight is

being tendered to the properly licensed

and insured motor carrier with whom a

contract was signed.

States Assigning USDOT Numbers

The New York and the Iowa

Departments of Transportation both

commented on the States’ issuance of

interstate and intrastate USDOT

numbers. Each State supports the use of

the USDOT number as the unique

identifier essential for tracking motor

carrier safety performance data. In

addition, both States wanted the final

rule to make perfectly clear that States

can issue USDOT numbers to both

interstate and intrastate motor carriers.

New York recommended the FMCSA

provide batch filing to the States to

convert intrastate carriers to a USDOT

numbering system (using a unique State

suffix). The NYDOT argued that the

present system is too cumbersome and

time consuming; it would take five years

to convert all the intrastate carriers in

New York to the USDOT number using

the current mechanisms. New York says

batch processing is an absolute must

and the FMCSA should directly assist

the States in converting intrastate

carriers in as short a time frame as

possible.

FMCSA Response

The States involved in the PRISM

project have been given access to the

MCMIS Census database to issue

USDOT numbers to interstate carriers.

As part of the project, prior to the

issuance of International Registration

Plan (IRP) documents, the entity

registering vehicles is required to have

a USDOT number and each vehicle

must have a USDOT number assigned to

it. If a carrier does not have a USDOT

number at the time of registration, a

Form MCS–150 must be provided so

that the State can issue the USDOT

number necessary to complete the

vehicle registration process.

The FMCSA has given the States an

option to issue USDOT numbers to their

intrastate carriers. Currently, 11 States

are adding the Form MCS–150

information for these carriers

individually through direct access to the

MCMIS Census database. The system

issues a USDOT number as each carrier

is entered into the database.

New York already has existing

databases on their intrastate carriers and

has requested that the FMCSA develop

a process for the batch issuance of

USDOT numbers. The FMCSA has

developed procedures necessary to

support this process and expects to

begin pilot testing by mid-2000. The

agency anticipates that the first test

State will be New York and that the

pilot test will last for several months.

Assuming the pilot test is successful,

other interested States will then be able

to use this process.

Marking of Intermodal Container

Chassis and Trailers

The South Carolina Trucking

Association and the New Jersey Motor

Truck Association requested the

FMCSA to define an intermodal

container chassis as a CMV and its

owner as a motor carrier engaged in

interstate commerce. They believe that

intermodal chassis equipment is unique

enough to require the owners to display

their own USDOT number, and that this

requirement would go a long way

towards establishing responsibility for

the care, maintenance, and condition of

chassis equipment.

Bonanza Bus Lines recommends that

all trailers display a USDOT number on

both sides and on the rear.

FMCSA Response

Maintenance of intermodal container

chassis and trailers is being addressed

in a separate agency action, and will not

be addressed in this final rule. In

response to a petition filed by the ATA

and the ATA Intermodal Conference,

the agency published an ANPRM (64 FR

7849, February 17, 1999). The

petitioners contended that motor

carriers have minimal opportunity to

maintain intermodal container chassis

and that the parties who do have the

opportunity often fail to do so. The

FMCSA agreed to consider revisions to

the requirements in parts 390 and 396

of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Regulations (FMCSRs) that place upon

motor carriers the responsibility for

maintaining this equipment. As part of

this process, the FMCSA held three

public hearings in late 1999 to gather

information on the extent of this

problem and to receive feedback on the

solution proposed by petitioners, i.e., to

mandate joint responsibility between

the ‘‘equipment provider’’ and the

motor carrier for maintaining this type

of intermodal equipment. The FMCSA

will decide these issues and others

raised by the commenters in the

rulemaking involving intermodal

containers, chassis and trailers.

Accordingly, comments of the South

Carolina Trucking Association and the

New Jersey Motor Truck Association

will be submitted to that docket for

consideration.

With respect to Bonanza Bus Lines’

comment, the NPRM did not consider

marking of CMVs other than power

units; extending its provisions to cover

them would be beyond the scope of this

rulemaking. The ICC first required selfpropelled CMVs to be marked in 1954.

The agency has undertaken several

rulemakings concerning CMV marking

in the last 12 years. Although the agency

has occasionally received

correspondence concerning marking of

trailers, the FMCSA does not believe

this additional marking is necessary.

Marking of Small For-Hire Passenger

Vehicles

The Georgia Public Service

Commission requested the FMCSA to

clarify the marking requirements

applicable to smaller for-hire passenger

vehicles (designed to transport 7 to 15

passengers) that are subject to the

FMCSA’s registration requirements, but

not to the remainder of the FMCSRs.

FMCSA Response

On September 3, 1999, the agency

published an NPRM (64 FR 48518)

concerning the applicability of specific

provisions of the FMCSRs to this class

of passenger vehicles. That action

responded to congressional direction

contained in section 4008(a) of the

Transportation Equity Act of the 21st

Century (TEA–21) (Pub. L. 105–178, 112

Stat. 107, June 9, 1999), which amended

the definition of the term ‘‘commercial

motor vehicle’’ found at 49 U.S.C. 31132

to cover vehicles ‘‘designed or used to

transport more than 8 passengers

(including the driver) for

35292 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

compensation.’’ Among other things, the

September 3 NPRM proposed to require

that motor carriers operating CMVs

designed or used to transport between 9

and 15 passengers (including the driver)

for compensation file a motor carrier

identification report and mark their

CMVs with a USDOT number and other

identifying information (i.e., name or

trade name and address of the principal

place of business). In an interim final

rule published that same day, the

agency amended the statutory definition

of a CMV to be consistent with the

TEA–21 definition, but it exempted this

class of motor carriers from the FMCSRs

for six months, to allow the FMCSA

time to gather additional information on

this population of carriers and to

complete the rulemaking action. The

FMCSA is reviewing comments to that

docket and plans to issue a final rule in

the near future.

Marking of Pick-Up Trucks

The Colorado Department of Public

Safety suggested the FMCSA adopt a

rule that it has implemented. Many

pick-up trucks do not meet the

definition of a CMV except when

pulling a trailer. Colorado allows the

trailer, instead of the power unit, to be

marked if the power unit has a GVWR

of 10,000 pounds or less. This allows

some farmers, contractors, and small

businesses to use their vehicles for

personal conveyance, such as vacations

and errands. Many homeowner

associations have covenants prohibiting

commercial vehicles from parking in

their residential areas. In many cases,

this would include a pick-up subject to

the present marking requirements in

§ 390.21.

FMCSA Response

The FMCSA believes that the power

unit should carry the motor carrier

identification. The motor carrier

continues to have the responsibility for

ensuring the trailer it accepts meets the

safety requirements of the FMCSRs.

Motor carriers who use their personal

pick-ups for business purposes can affix

temporary signs and remove them when

necessary.

Vehicles Under Intermittent Lease and

Short-Term Rental

The TRALA stated it supported the

NPRM as written. The AMSA and

NAVL requested the FMCSA to consider

adding a new, unique rule that would

address the household goods,

intermittent lease issue. The main focus

would mirror the concept adopted by

the International Fuel Tax Agreement

(IFTA) in that a vehicle leased

intermittently to a household goods

carrier would be allowed to display both

the agent’s and the motor carrier’s

marking information linked by the

phrase ‘‘Interleased to.’’

FMCSA Response

A special provision in the marking

rule for the household goods industry is

not necessary. If the industry wishes to

display the household goods agent’s

name and authority number, in

conjunction with the household goods

carrier’s name and USDOT number, the

FMCSA would not object. The rule

already allows for other identifying

information to be displayed on the CMV

as long as it is not inconsistent with the

information required in § 390.21.

FMCSA Estimates of the Costs and

Benefits

The FMCSA has completed a final

regulatory evaluation (FRE) comparing

the projected safety benefits of a

retrofitting requirement to the potential

economic impact on the motor carrier

industry. The following discussion

summarizes the FMCSA’s analysis. A

copy of the complete FRE is available

for review in the docket.

Cost

This rule would require all former ICC

motor common and contract carriers to

mark their CMVs with a ‘‘USDOT

Number’’ and the legal name of the

business entity that owns or controls the

motor carrier operation, or the ‘‘doing

business as’’ name, as they appear on

the Form MCS–150. Many carriers with

authority from the former ICC already

include their legal, or DBA name, on the

both sides of their vehicles.

The vast majority of carriers will use

either stencils or decals for marking, as

these are the cheapest methods. The

FMCSA assumed that small carriers will

use individual stencil kits, medium

carriers will use larger kits, and large

carriers will use individually developed

decals. Price estimates are shown in

table 1. We assumed that changing a

name is 50 percent more expensive than

changing a DOT number.

The agency estimates that the average

time to affix a DOT number would be

about 12 minutes. Adding a new name

was also assumed to require 12 minutes.

Because this is a simple procedure,

we assumed that the marking would be

placed by class 3 mechanics, at an

average cost of $15 per hour. Therefore,

the labor cost is $3 to apply a DOT

number and an additional $3 for a name

change. Table 1 displays these figures,

along with the total labor and material

cost.

The FMCSA has determined that the

opportunity cost of this rule is

negligible or nonexistent, for two

reasons. First, vehicles will only be

placed out of service for 12 to 36

minutes, which is too brief a period to

have earned any measurable amount of

revenue. Second, virtually all vehicles

would be available at no opportunity

cost (in non-revenue producing service

and not being serviced) for 12 to 36

minutes sometime in the two-year

phase-in period. Therefore, the FMCSA

does not believe there is an opportunity

cost associated with this rule.

TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED COST OF MARKING, BY CARRIER SIZE

Carrier size, by number of power units

Material cost, per vehicle Labor cost, per vehicle Total cost, per

vehicle DOT number Name DOT number Name

1–6 ............................................................................................... $8 $12 $3 $3 $26

7–20 ............................................................................................. 6 9 3 3 21

21–99 ........................................................................................... 4 6 3 3 16

100–999 ....................................................................................... 2 3 3 3 11

1000+ .......................................................................................... 1 1.50 3 3 9

Unspecified .................................................................................. 6 9 3 3 21

There are 75,737 carriers with

authority from the former ICC, but the

ICC did not collect information about

the number of vehicles operated per

carrier. However, FMCSA’s MCMIS has

information on the number of power

units per carrier.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 35293

Table 2 shows how the agency

estimated the number of power units

per carrier size class. We applied the

MCMIS distribution of carriers by size

to the 75,737 carriers registered by the

former ICC. The first column shows the

breakdown of for-hire carriers by

number of power units from MCMIS.

The term ‘‘unspecified’’ means that the

FMCSA has no information on the

number of vehicles operated by the

motor carrier. The third column from

the left shows the assumed number of

carriers in each size group regulated by

the former ICC. The last column shows

the estimated number of power units in

each size class. We assumed that

unspecified carriers have at least three

vehicles, since the FMCSA tends to

have the least information about the

smaller carriers.

TABLE 2.—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF FOR-HIRE CARRIERS AND VEHICLES REGULATED BY THE FORMER ICC, BY CARRIER

SIZE

Carriers by number of vehicles Percent of MCMIS

carriers

Estimated number

of carriers regulated by former

ICC

Estimated number

of vehicles regulated by former

ICC

1–6 ........................................................................................................................... 55.2 41,800 87,665

7–20 ......................................................................................................................... 10.1 7,624 88,109

21–99 ....................................................................................................................... 5 3,772 158,033

100+ ......................................................................................................................... 1 778 323,636

Unspecified .............................................................................................................. 28.7 21,763 65,289

Total .............................................................................................................. 100 75,737 722,732

Motor carriers are currently required

to place either the MC or the USDOT

number on their vehicles. In addition,

the majority of carriers already display

either their legal names or their DBA

names. We were unable to locate any

information concerning the percent of

vehicles regulated by the former ICC

that currently display a USDOT number

or a legal, or DBA, name. For our

baseline analysis, we conservatively

estimated that only 10 percent of

eligible carriers already display a

USDOT number, while 80 percent

already display their legal, or DBA,

names. Therefore, the FMCSA estimates

that 90 percent of eligible carriers or

650,458 vehicles will require a new

DOT number (.9 × 722,732), and 20

percent of eligible carriers or 144,546

will need a new name (.2 × 722,732). If

a greater percentage of vehicles already

display either a DOT number or a valid

name, the cost of this rule will be lower

than the FMCSA’s estimate.

The total undiscounted cost of this

rule is $5.7 million. With a 7 percent

discount rate and assuming that 1/x of

all vehicles are marked each year (where

x equals the phase-in period—two years

to comply with the requirement to affix

the USDOT number to both sides of

their CMVs, and five years to comply

with the additional requirements to

display the legal name or a single trade

name on the CMVs currently in their

fleet) the total discounted cost equals $5

million. Table 3 shows the breakdown

of costs by carrier size.

TABLE 3.—UNDISCOUNTED COST OF PROPOSAL BY CARRIER SIZE

Size Material Labor Total Percent total

cost Per carrier

1–6 ....................................................................................... $841,587 $289,295 $1,130,882 19.9 $27.05

7–20 ..................................................................................... 634,382 290,759 925,141 16.2 121.35

21–99 ................................................................................... 758,557 521,508 1,280,066 22.5 339.36

100+ ..................................................................................... 607,416 1,067,999 1,675,4152 29.4 2,153.49

Unspecified .......................................................................... 470,079 215,453 685,532 12.0 31.50

Total .............................................................................. 3,312,021 2,385,014 5,697,036 100.0 2,672.75

Not surprisingly, the cost per carrier

increases with carrier size. This rule

would cost the smallest carriers (those

with fewer than six power-units) about

$27 and the largest carriers

approximately $2,150. The same pattern

is evident within each size class (i.e.,

carriers with one vehicle pay less than

those with six). As a result of this, small

carriers, which compose 65 percent of

all carriers regulated by the former ICC,

bear approximately 20 percent of the

total cost of this rule.

Given the relatively modest cost of

this rule, only a small number of

accidents would need to be prevented to

make it cost beneficial. We estimate that

this rule would cost carriers $5.7

million (undiscounted), with the cost

spread through the five years following

promulgation. The DOT guidelines

mandate use of a threshold value per

fatality prevented of $2.7 million. Thus,

the benefits of this rule would

approximately equal the costs if two

fatalities were prevented over five years.

Other combinations of crashes avoided

(fatality, injury, and property-damageonly) could also drive the benefits of

this rule above its costs, with the precise

figures depending on the severity of the

non-fatality accidents. The FMCSA

believes that this rule is based on a

reasoned determination that the benefits

justify the cost. The FMCSA also

believes that this rule could lead to the

prevention of a small number of

accidents, and thus prove cost

beneficial.

Benefits

The benefits of this rule, although

significant, are difficult to quantify. The

primary benefit would be an

improvement in the FMCSA’s ability to

identify problem carriers and take

action to reduce the potential for harm

to the public from these carriers. The

action taken would depend upon the

severity of the problem. Extremely

dangerous carriers, such as those with a

35294 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

consistently high out-of-service (OOS)

rate or with a greater than expected

number of accidents, could be forced to

discontinue operations. Carriers with

less severe problems could be targeted

for educational outreach and other

enforcement actions. While the FMCSA

programs cannot entirely eliminate the

threat from unsafe carriers, we believe

they can help reduce the negligent

behavior that leads to accidents. The

extreme action of taking a carrier out of

business would eliminate the dangerous

behavior of risky carriers entirely.

The FMCSA is not aware of any

alternatives which accomplish the same

goals with less burden. The goal of this

regulation is to improve the agency’s

ability to assign inspections and crashes

to the correct motor carriers. To

accomplish this goal, the agency must

be able to correctly identify the operator

of a motor vehicle during an inspection

or after a crash. High tech identification

methods exist, but they require vehicles

to be equipped with a transponder that

broadcasts a unique ‘‘fingerprint.’’ The

cost of these units is significantly higher

than the cost of adding a USDOT

number or a new name to a power-unit.

In addition, transponder readers would

be needed to identify a vehicle’s owner.

While it would be possible (albeit

expensive) to provide all inspectors

with readers, this would be

prohibitively expensive for accident

investigators, given the large number of

crashes, their geographic dispersion,

and the number of police officers who

report only a small number of crashes.

As an alternative to marking both

sides of the CMV with the USDOT

number, the agency also considered

allowing a driver to maintain the

required information on paper inside

the vehicle. While this would be less

expensive, there were several problems

with this approach. First, drivers

already maintain a number of

documents with similar information,

and they may have an incentive to

provide an investigating officer with the

incorrect document (or maintain that

they do not have the appropriate

document) under some circumstances.

In addition, during crashes investigators

may not have access to an onboard

document due to such things as fires,

jammed doors due to a crash, or a

hazardous material spill.

In order to minimize the impact of

this rule, the FMCSA is requiring a twoyear phase-in period for the USDOT

number requirement and a five-year

phase-in for the legal name or single

trade name requirement. This will give

small carriers (and others) ample time to

comply with the marking rule without

significantly disrupting their operations.

The FMCSA’s intention is not only to

improve safety, but to achieve

consistency and uniformity and lower

the cost of enforcement and compliance

for the government, the motor carrier

industry, and the general public.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory

Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The FMCSA has determined that this

action is a significant regulatory action

within the meaning of Executive Order

12866 and significant within the

meaning of the Department of

Transportation’s regulatory policies and

procedures. The FMCSA has prepared a

final regulatory evaluation of the

economic impact the regulatory changes

will have on the motor carrier industry.

A copy of the final regulatory evaluation

is included in the docket file.

Prior to the elimination of the ICC,

most for-hire motor carriers were

required to obtain ICC authority in order

to operate in interstate commerce.

Carriers which were granted ICC

operating authority were also given an

ICC docket number, which they were

required to display on both sides of each

power unit.

Carriers are also required to display

their name and address (city and State)

on both sides of their power units. A

carrier may display any name under

which it operates. The address must be

the principal place of business or the

terminal where the vehicle is located.

The FMCSA uses the USDOT number

to track carrier performance, primarily

via the MCMIS, a mainframe computer

system. It contains motor carrier data

from a variety of sources: roadside

inspections, accident reports, safety and

compliance reviews, and enforcement

actions.

The MCMIS is the linchpin of a

number of the FMCSA’s programs.

Federal and State field personnel use

the MCMIS to initiate enforcement

actions and educational outreach

programs. By using the data, potentially

unsafe carriers can be targeted for

attention, often including compliance

reviews. Carriers could be flagged as

unsafe if a high percentage of their

vehicles were placed out-of-service

during a roadside safety inspection, or

if they experience an above average

number of accidents. The FMCSA

analysts and managers use the database

for analysis purposes, including

monitoring overall trends and

evaluating program effectiveness.

In order to connect information from

disparate sources, a unique identifier is

required. For MCMIS, the USDOT

number serves as the unique identifier.

Without this number, there is no way to

assign accidents, inspections, and other

events to the correct motor carrier.

The existence of two identification

numbers, the ICC/MC and the USDOT

numbers, combined with a lack of

consistency in the names displayed on

vehicles, limits the effectiveness of the

FMCSA’s safety programs. Identification

problems (such as those listed above)

could result in a failure of the FMCSA

to attribute a crash, or an OOS

inspection, to the correct carrier. In FY

1996, the FMCSA was unable to match

12 percent of roadside inspections to the

correct motor carrier. For accidents, the

non-match rate was 30 percent. This

failure rate means that the FMCSA is

unaware of some carriers’ poor safety

records, and these carriers do not

receive the attention their safety record

merits, such as a safety review or

educational assistance. As a result,

crashes occur that this oversight might

have forestalled.

In order to eliminate these problems

and improve safety and the well-being

of the public, the FMCSA is requiring

all for-hire interstate carriers formerly

regulated by the ICC to display their

USDOT number on their vehicles

(private carriers are already subject to

this requirement). This rule would

require all commercial motor vehicles,

new or used, added to a motor carrier’s

fleet to have a USDOT number

displayed after the effective date of this

final rule. Owners of these vehicles

would also be required to place either

their legal name, or a single trade name,

on their vehicles.

Existing vehicles which do not

undergo a change in ownership would

be required to display a USDOT number

within two years of the effective date of

this rule. Owners of existing vehicles

would have five years to comply with

the name requirements.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In compliance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), the

agency has evaluated the effects of this

rule on small entities. The economic

impacts of this rule are discussed in the

regulatory flexibility analysis, a copy of

which is in the docket. Based on its

analysis, the FMCSA believes that this

rule will affect a substantial number of

small entities, but will not have a

significant economic impact on them. In

compliance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, the FMCSA certifies that

this rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

The FMCSA estimates that 41,800

carriers with six or fewer power units

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 35295

will be covered by this regulation, as

will another 7,600 with 7 to 20 power

units. Our estimates indicate motor

carriers with fewer than six power-units

would absorb about 26 percent of all

costs. This rule would cost the smallest

carriers (those with fewer than six

power-units) about $27 per vehicle.

Those small motor carriers with 7 to 20

vehicles would incur a cost of $21 per

vehicle. As a result of this, the smallest

carriers, which compose 65 percent of

all carriers regulated by the former ICC,

bear approximately 20 percent of

$5,696,036, the total cost of this

proposal. The FMCSA does not see this

as a substantial financial burden on

small entities.

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 policymaking discretion of the

States. Nothing in this document

directly 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 program.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

of 1995 (PRA) (44 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. An analysis

of this rule has been made by the

FMCSA, and it has been determined

that it will affect the approved form

(MCS–150) associated with a currentlyapproved information collection

covered by OMB Control No. 2126–0013

(formerly 2125–0544). The wording in

the Notice section of the MCS–150 will

change; burden hours and numbers of

respondents will not change as a result

of this Final Rule. However, a revised

estimate that reflects more accurate

numbers of respondents and the time to

complete the MCS–150 was done and

submitted to the OMB in June 1999. The

OMB approved that revision to the

information collection on October 4,

1999; the approval period runs through

October 31, 2002.

The NPRM that was published on

June 16, 1998, solicited public

comments on these information

collection requirements as a component

of the NPRM action. A summary of the

comments that addressing the MCS–150

was previously provided to the OMB.

Comments were neutral to favorable; in

fact, several commenters asked the

FMCSA to consider requiring motor

carriers to provide regular updates of

information contained in the MCS–150.

A single State commenter contended

that the MCS–150 contains superfluous

information, discouraging States from

using it to identify intrastate motor

carriers. However, that State did not cite

specific examples of data elements or

information categories it believed to be

confusing or redundant.

Section 390.19(a) changes the

requirement of when Form MCS–150

must be filed from ‘‘within 90 days after

beginning operations’’ to ‘‘before

commencing operations.’’ This change

will be reflected on Form MCS–150 in

the Notice section on the form; however,

it will not affect the burden hours for

this information collection.

The NPRM also included a proposed

requirement that certain motor carriers

submit an updated Form MCS–150 to

the FMCSA within 90 days from the

effective date of the rule. This proposed,

updated form would only have been

required from those motor carriers that

were using a name for their business

that was not one of the two names on

the MCS–150 had filed with the agency.

The FMCSA has eliminated this

proposed requirement from the final

rule, along with the additional burden

hours it would have created.

Estimated Annual Reporting Burden

Number of respondents: 50,000 @ 20

minutes per respondent.

Burden Hours: 16,667.

National Environmental Policy Act

The agency has analyzed this

rulemaking for the purpose of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has

determined that this action does not

have any effect on the quality of the

environment.

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.’’

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of

Private Property)

This rule will not effect a taking of

private property or otherwise have

taking implications under E.O. 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.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

minimize litigation, eliminate

ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of

Children)

We have analyzed this action under

Executive Order 13045, Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not

an economically significant rule and

does not concern an environmental risk

to health or safety that may

disproportionately affect children.

Regulation Identification Number

A regulation identification number

(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory

action listed in the Unified Agenda of

Federal Regulations. The Regulatory

Information Service Center publishes

the Unified Agenda in April and

October of each year. The RIN contained

in the heading of this document can be

used to cross reference this action with

the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 385

Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor

vehicle safety.

49 CFR Part 390

Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor

vehicle identification and marking,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Issued on: May 25, 2000.

Clyde J. Hart, Jr.,

Acting Deputy Administrator.

In consideration of the foregoing, the

FMCSA amends title 49, Code of

Federal Regulations, chapter III, parts

385 and 390, as follows:

PART 385—SAFETY FITNESS

PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 385

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 104, 504, 521(b)(5)(A),

5113, 31136, 31144, 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73.

§§ 385.21 and 385.23 [Removed]

2. Remove §§ 385.21 and 385.23.

35296 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Appendix A to Part 385—[Removed

and Reserved]

3. Remove and reserve appendix A to

part 385, Form MCS–150, Motor Carrier

Identification Report.

PART 390—FEDERAL MOTOR

CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS;

GENERAL [AMENDED]

4. The authority citation for part 390

is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13301, 13902, 31132,

31133, 31136, 31502, 31504; and sec. 204,

Pub. L. 104–88, 109 Stat. 803, 941 (49 U.S.C.

701 note); and 49 CFR 1.73.

§ 390.19 [Redesignated as § 390.17]

5. Redesignate § 390.19 as § 390.17.

6. A New § 390.19 reads as follows:

§ 390.19 Motor carrier identification report.

(a) All motor carriers conducting

operations in interstate commerce shall

file a Motor Carrier Identification

Report, Form MCS–150, before

commencing operations.

(b) The Motor Carrier Identification

Report, Form MCS–150, with complete

instructions, is available from all

FMCSA Service Centers and Division

offices nationwide and from the

FMCSA’s web site at: http://

www.mcs.dot.gov/factsfigs/

formspubs.htm or by calling 1–800–

832–5660.

(c) The completed Motor Carrier

Identification Report, Form MCS–150,

shall be filed with the FMCSA’s Office

of Data Analysis and Information

Systems, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20590. A for-hire motor

carrier should submit the Form MCS–

150 along with its application for

operating authority (Form OP–1) to the

appropriate address referenced on that

form or may submit it separately to the

address mentioned in this section.

(d) Only the legal name or a single

trade name of the motor carrier may be

used on the motor carrier identification

report (Form MCS–150).

(e) A motor carrier that fails to file a

Motor Carrier Identification Report,

Form MCS–150, or furnishes misleading

information or makes false statements

upon Form MCS–150, is subject to the

penalties prescribed in 49 U.S.C.

521(b)(2)(B).

(f) Upon receipt and processing of the

Motor Carrier Identification Report,

Form MCS–150, the FMCSA will issue

the motor carrier an identification

number (USDOT number). The motor

carrier must display the number on each

self-propelled CMV, as defined in

§ 390.5, along with the additional

information required by § 390.21.

[Approved by the Office of Management and

Budget under control number 2126–0013]

7. Revise § 390.21 to read as follows:

§ 390.21 Marking of CMVs.

(a) General. Every self-propelled

CMV, as defined in § 390.5, subject to

subchapter B of this chapter must be

marked as specified in paragraphs (b),

(c), and (d) of this section.

(b) Nature of marking. The marking

must display the following information:

(1) The legal name or a single trade

name of the motor carrier operating the

self-propelled CMV, as listed on the

motor carrier identification report (Form

MCS–150) and submitted in accordance

with § 390.19.

(2) The motor carrier identification

number issued by the FMCSA, preceded

by the letters ‘‘USDOT’’.

(3) If the name of any person other

than the operating carrier appears on the

CMV, the name of the operating carrier

must be followed by the information

required by paragraphs (b)(1), and (2) of

this section, and be preceded by the

words ‘‘operated by.’’

(4) Other identifying information may

be displayed on the vehicle if it is not

inconsistent with the information

required by this paragraph.

(5) Each motor carrier shall meet the

following requirements pertaining to its

operation:

(i) All CMVs that are part of a motor

carrier’s existing fleet on July 3, 2000,

and which are marked with an ICCMC

number must come into compliance

with paragraph (b)(2) of this section by

July 3, 2002.

(ii) All CMVs that are part of a motor

carrier’s existing fleet on July 3, 2000,

and which are not marked with the legal

name or a single trade name on both

sides of their CMVs, as shown on the

Motor Carrier Identification Report,

Form MCS–150, must come into

compliance with paragraph (b)(1) of this

section by July 5, 2005.

(iii) All CMVs added to a motor

carrier’s fleet on or after July 3, 2000,

must meet the requirements of this

section before being put into service and

operating on public ways.

(c) Size, shape, location, and color of

marking. The marking must—

(1) Appear on both sides of the selfpropelled CMV;

(2) Be in letters that contrast sharply

in color with the background on which

the letters are placed;

(3) Be readily legible, during daylight

hours, from a distance of 50 feet (15.24

meters) while the CMV is stationary;

and

(4) Be kept and maintained in a

manner that retains the legibility

required by paragraph (c)(3) of this

section.

(d) Construction and durability. The

marking may be painted on the CMV or

may consist of a removable device, if

that device meets the identification and

legibility requirements of paragraph (c)

of this section, and such marking must

be maintained as required by paragraph

(c)(4) of this section.

(e) Rented CMVs. A motor carrier

operating a self-propelled CMV under a

rental agreement having a term not in

excess of 30 calendar days meets the

requirements of this section if:

(1) The CMV is marked in accordance

with the provisions of paragraphs (b)

through (d) of this section; or

(2) The CMV is marked as set forth in

paragraph (e)(2)(i) through (iv) of this

section:

(i) The legal name or a single trade

name of the lessor is displayed in

accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d)

of this section.

(ii) The lessor’s identification number

preceded by the letters ‘‘USDOT’’ is

displayed in accordance with

paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section;

and

(iii) The rental agreement entered into

by the lessor and the renting motor

carrier conspicuously contains the

following information:

(A) The name and complete physical

address of the principal place of

business of the renting motor carrier;

(B) The identification number issued

the renting motor carrier by the FMCSA,

preceded by the letters ‘‘USDOT,’’ if the

motor carrier has been issued such a

number. In lieu of the identification

number required in this paragraph, the

following may be shown in the rental

agreement:

(1) Information which indicates

whether the motor carrier is engaged in

‘‘interstate’’ or ‘‘intrastate’’ commerce;

and

(2) Information which indicates

whether the renting motor carrier is

transporting hazardous materials in the

rented CMV;

(C) The sentence: ‘‘This lessor

cooperates with all Federal, State, and

local law enforcement officials

nationwide to provide the identity of

customers who operate this rental

CMV’; and

(iv) The rental agreement entered into

by the lessor and the renting motor

carrier is carried on the rental CMV

during the full term of the rental

agreement. See the leasing regulations at

49 CFR 376 for information that should

be included in all leasing documents.

(f) Driveaway services. In driveaway

services, a removable device may be

affixed on both sides or at the rear of a

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 35297

single driven vehicle. In a combination

driveaway operation, the device may be

affixed on both sides of any one unit or

at the rear of the last unit. The

removable device must display the legal

name or a single trade name of the

motor carrier and the motor carrier’s

USDOT number.

8. Revise § 390.27 to read as follows:

§ 390.27 Locations of motor carrier safety

service centers.

Service center Territory included Location of office

Eastern ......... CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NJ, NH, NY, PA, PR, RI, VA, VT,

WV.

City Crescent Building, #10 South Howard Street, Suite 4000,

Baltimore, MD 21201–2819.

Midwestern ... IA, IL, IN, KS, MI, MO, MN, NE, OH, WI ................................... 19900 Governors Drive, Suite 210, Olympia Fields, IL 60461–

1021.

Southern ....... AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS, NC, NM, OK, SC, TN, TX .......... 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 17T75, Atlanta, GA 30303–3104.

Western ........ American Samoa, AK, AZ, CA, CO, Guam, HI, ID, Mariana Islands, MT, ND, NV, OR, SD, UT, WA, WY.201 Mission Street, Suite 2100, San Francisco, CA 94105–

1838.

§§ 390.401, 390.403, 390.405 and 390.407

(Subpart D) [Removed]

9. In part 390, remove subpart D,

consisting of §§ 390.401, 390.403,

390.405 and 390.407.

[FR Doc. 00–13697 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P