Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22499

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Washington is

amended by removing Channel 245A at

Naches and adding Channel 245C2 at

Naches, and by removing Sunnyside,

Channel 244A, and adding Benton City,

Channel 244A.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 01–11174 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01–1022; MM Docket No. 01–94; RM–

10086]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Corinth,

Scotia and Hudson Falls, New York

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition for rule making

filed by Vox New York, LLC, licensee of

Stations WHTR(FM), Corinth, New

York, and WFFG–FM, Hudson Falls,

New York, proposing the substitution of

Channel 229A for Channel 228A at

Corinth, New York, the reallotment of

Channel 229A from Corinth to Scotia,

New York, as the community’s first

local service, and the reallotment of

Channel 296A from Hudson Falls, New

York, to Corinth. Channel 229A is

reallotted from Corinth to Scotia at a site

9.9 kilometers (6.2 miles) northwest of

the community at coordinates 42–54–27

NL, and 74–00–57 WL. Channel 296A

can be reallotted from Hudson Falls to

Corinth at petitioner’s licensed site 5

kilometers (3.1 miles) east of the

community at coordinates 43–14–40 NL

and 73–46–18 WL.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 11, 2001, and reply

comments on or before June 26, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission,

Washington, DC 20554. In addition to

filing comments with the FCC,

interested parties should serve the

petitioner, as follows: Jonathan E. Allen,

Rini, Coran, and Lancellotta, P.C., 1350

Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite

900,Washington, DC 20036–0551

(Counsel to Petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Victoria M. McCauley, Mass Media

Bureau, at (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

01–94 adopted April 11, 2001 and

released April 20, 2001. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC

Reference Information Center (Room

CY–A257), 445 12th Street, SW,

Washington, DC. The complete text of

this decision may also be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20036.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding. Members of the public

should note that from the time a Notice

of Proposed Rule Making is issued until

the matter is no longer subject to

Commission consideration or court

review, all ex parte contacts are

prohibited in Commission proceedings,

such as this one, which involve channel

allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for

rules governing permissible ex parte

contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Federal Communications

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR

part 73 as follows:

PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST

SERVICES

1. The authority citation for part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under New York, is

amended by removing Channel 228A at

Corinth and adding Channel 296A at

Corinth, by removing Channel 296A at

Hudson Falls, and by adding Scotia,

Channel 229A.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 01–11172 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration

49 CFR Parts 383, 384, and 390

[Docket No. FMCSA–00–7382]

RIN 2126–AA55

Commercial Driver’s License

Standards; Requirements and

Penalties; Noncommercial Motor

Vehicle Violations

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM); request for comments.

SUMMARY: The FMCSA proposes

disqualification regulations for drivers

subject to the Commercial Motor

Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA).

Sections 201(b) and 202(h) of the Motor

Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999

(MCSIA) amended the CMVSA by

adding disqualification requirements for

a commercial driver’s license (CDL)

holder convicted of committing

violations while operating a

noncommercial motor vehicle (nonCMV). Each State would be required to

disqualify the CDL upon conviction by

revoking, suspending, or canceling it.

Each employer would be required to

stop using a driver from driving a

commercial motor vehicle (CMV) upon

the State’s disqualification. The purpose

of this proposal is to enhance the safety

of CMV operations on our nation’s

highways.

DATES: You must submit comments on

or before August 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: You can mail, hand deliver,

fax, or electronically submit written

comments to the Docket Management

Facility, U.S. Department of

Transportation, Room PL–401, 400

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC

20590–0001; FAX: (202) 493–2251, online at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. 

Please include the docket number that

appears in the heading of this document

in your comment. You can examine and

copy all comments from 9 a.m. to 5

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

except Federal holidays at the docket

facility. You can also examine the

docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov. If you want us to notify

you of receipt of your comments, please

include a self-addressed, stamped

envelope or postcard, or after submitting

comments electronically, print the

acknowledgment page.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Robert Redmond, (202) 366–9579, and

22500 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

for legal issues, Mr. Charles Medalen,

(202) 366–1354. Both individuals are at

the FMCSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20590. Office hours

are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal

holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We will

consider all comments received before

the close of business on the comment

closing date indicated in the DATES

section. We will file comments received

after the comment closing date in the

docket and will consider late comments

to the extent practicable. The FMCSA

may, however, issue a final rule at any

time after the close of the comment

period.

This proposed rule uses plain

language so those individuals

unfamiliar with FMCSA regulations will

find it easier to follow. We have made

the text clearer, standardizing terms,

changing to the active voice,

reorganizing material for added clarity,

inserting or revising headings to reflect

content accurately, and correcting

typographical, punctuation, and

grammatical errors.

This NPRM focuses on changes to

parts 383 and 384 that are required by

the MCSIA (Public Law 106–159,

December 9, 1999, 113 Stat. 1749).

These parts relate to commercial driver

licensing standards that affect States,

employers, and employees. Part 391

addresses the qualifications that motor

carriers must meet in selecting drivers

to operate in interstate commerce. These

three parts necessarily interact. The

FMCSA is interested in any comments

on possible changes to part 391 that it

should consider in order to increase our

stakeholders’ understanding of the

statutory and regulatory requirements

imposed upon them.

Background

For the purposes of this document,

the term CMV refers to the definition of

a CMV in the CMVSA and codified at

49 U.S.C. 31301 et seq. Generally, a

CMV is a motor vehicle used in

commerce to transport passengers or

property that meets any one of the

following three conditions.

(1) The motor vehicle has a gross

vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle

weight (whichever is greater) of at least

26,001 pounds (11,794 kilograms).

(2) The motor vehicle is designed to

transport at least 16 passengers

including the driver.

(3) The motor vehicle is used to

transport material required to be

placarded under 49 CFR part 172

subpart F.

For the purposes of this document,

the term non-CMV refers to vehicles not

covered by this definition of CMV.

Noncommercial Motor Vehicle

Violations

The CMVSA disqualifications section,

codified at 49 U.S.C. 31310, has

specified offenses related to operating a

CMV requiring specific periods a State

must disqualify a driver from operating

a CMV. The MCSIA amended the

CMVSA disqualifications at section

31310 by adding specific offenses

related to operating a non-CMV. The

Secretary may also specify

disqualification periods the State must

use when disqualifying a driver from

operating a CMV.

For example, a CDL holder operates a

non-CMV and refuses to take an alcohol

test as required by a State’s implied

consent laws, as defined in 49 CFR

383.72. Under this proposal, a State

must disqualify the CDL holder from

operating a CMV for one year based on

the first conviction for refusing to take

an alcohol test after operating the nonCMV.

A second example would be if a CDL

holder uses a non-CMV in the

commission of a felony involving

dispensing a controlled substance.

Under this proposal, a State must

disqualify the CDL holder from

operating a CMV for life even though

the conviction involved the operation of

a non-CMV. The State may never

reinstate the person’s privilege to

operate a CMV because the CMVSA

does not provide reinstatement

privileges for felonies related to

dispensing controlled substances.

A third example would be a CDL

holder who has been convicted of three

serious traffic violations in a CMV

within a 3-year period. The CDL holder

makes erratic or improper traffic lane

changes while operating a non-CMV.

Under this proposal, a State must

disqualify the CDL holder from

operating a CMV for 120 days based on

a fourth conviction in separate incidents

within a 3-year period while operating

either a CMV or non-CMV.

This document proposes to

implement parts of Sec. 201(b) and all

of Sec. 202(h) of the MCSIA. These

sections amend 49 U.S.C. 31310 and

31311 to require the disqualifications of

CDL holders for certain offenses

committed in non-CMVs—typically

private automobiles, motorcycles, and

light-duty and medium-duty trucks.

Background of CDLIS

This proposed rule would also modify

and clarify the FMCSA’s Commercial

Driver’s License Information System

(CDLIS). The Secretary of

Transportation must maintain an

information system that serves as the

clearinghouse and depository of

information about any person who

operates CMVs and his/her

identification, licensing history, and

disqualification history. 49 U.S.C.

31309. The CDLIS also includes

information about a person required to

have a CDL who has violated the

requirement to obtain a CDL before

operating a CMV.

In 1988, the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) entered into an

agreement under Sec. 31309(b) with the

American Association of Motor Vehicle

Administrators and its affiliate

AAMVAnet, Inc. (AAMVAnet), to use

its system as the CDLIS. The agreement

made AAMVAnet the CDLIS operator.

Under Section 106(b) of MCSIA, the

agreement transferred to the FMCSA

and remains in effect until the FMCSA

modifies or terminates it. A copy of the

1988 agreement is in the public docket.

The agreement states that AAMVAnet

will ‘‘cooperate fully with FHWA

[FMCSA] with respect to the operation

of CDLIS including, but not limited to,

information content and the

development of standards relating to

access to CDLIS by States and various

employers and employees.’’ The

FMCSA informs AAMVAnet of the

specific driver records and driver

identification data necessary to the

implementation and enforcement of the

disqualifications called for in 49 CFR

383.51. In the State compliance

regulations, § 384.231(d) Recordkeeping

requirements requires each State to

maintain driver records and cause

driver identification data to be retained

on the CDLIS which are necessary to the

implementation and enforcement of the

disqualifications called for in §§ 384.215

through 384.219. Cross-references in

these sections refer to § 383.51

disqualifications.

CMV Offenses

Ensuring that only safe drivers are

operating CMVs is an important part of

the FMCSA’s safety strategy. Section

383.51 specifies that a driver must be

disqualified for specific periods for

specific disqualifying offenses involving

the operation of a CMV. The CMVSA,

specifically 49 U.S.C. 31310(b), (c), (d),

and (e), requires federally-mandated

disqualifications for the following eight

offenses:

1. Driving drunk in a CMV.

2. Leaving the scene of an accident in

a CMV.

3. Committing general felonies in a

CMV.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22501

4. Committing controlled substancerelated felonies in a CMV.

5. Speeding excessively in a CMV.

6. Driving recklessly in a CMV.

7. Violating motor vehicle traffic

control laws in a CMV and causing an

accident resulting in a fatality.

8. Violating other laws or regulations

in a CMV that the FMCSA may specify

by regulation as serious.

Section 4009 of the Motor Carrier

Safety Act of 1991, codified at 49 U.S.C.

31310(i), requires CDL disqualifications

for driver violations of out-of-service

orders. Section 403 of the ICC

Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA)

codified at 49 U.S.C. 31310(j) and

31311(a)(17)), requires CDL

disqualifications for CMV drivers who

are convicted of violating laws or

regulations pertaining to railroadhighway grade crossings.

As part of this rulemaking, several

amendments are also proposed to clarify

our regulations in §§ 383.5, 383.71, and

383.73 about disqualifying offenses. In

addition, an amendment to § 384.231(d)

would add an incorporation by

reference requiring States to conform to

the recordkeeping requirements of

AAMVAnet’s ‘‘Commercial Driver’s

License Information System (CDLIS)

State Procedures,’’ Version 2.0, October

1998. This amendment would also add

cross-references to §§ 384.221 through

384.224.

Non-CMV Offenses

The MCSIA amendments proposed in

this action prohibit the holder of a CDL

from operating a CMV if the CDL holder

commits certain offenses while

operating a non-CMV. In addition, the

amendment to Sec. 31311 requires each

State to adopt and enforce the Federal

sanctions prescribed by Sec. 31310(g).

The FMCSA believes that a record of

convictions for serious traffic violations

and other offenses while operating a

non-CMV is just as important as a

conviction in a CMV in determining

whether a driver should retain his or her

CDL. This is the essence of our proposal

in § 383.51.

While a CDL holder repeatedly

convicted of violations in non-CMVs

usually does not have a record of similar

convictions while operating CMVs, this

does not necessarily mean that his/her

driving habits in CMVs are superior.

The FHWA conducted a study for

Congress about the CDL program’s

effectiveness. The report is entitled

‘‘Commercial Driver’s License

Effectiveness Study,’’ (Volume I,

Executive Summary, NTIS# PB99–

139792; Volume II, Technical Report,

NTIS# PB99–139800; September 1998)

(Study). The study documented that

many CDL holders receive citations for

serious violations in CMVs. (See the

docket for a copy of this study.) Many

of these violations are not entered into

their records as such, because they are

either reduced through plea-bargaining

and deferral programs or ‘‘masked’’ from

public view on their record.

Furthermore, a high percentage of the

convictions of CDL holders list the type

of vehicle being driven at the time of a

violation as ‘‘unknown’’ or ‘‘no.’’ The

‘‘unknown’’ indicator is used when a

State licensing agency cannot determine

whether the conviction occurred in a

CMV, based on the information

provided to them with the conviction

document. Some States, rather than list

the vehicle type as ‘‘unknown,’’ assume

that an unknown vehicle is not a CMV

and use the indicator ‘‘no’’ meaning

‘‘not in a CMV.’’ This proposal and a

subsequent proposal (RIN 2126-AA60)

to be published in the Federal Register

in the near future would attempt to

solve 16 CDL-related problems,

including:

1. Disqualifying drivers for non-CMV

convictions.

2. Defining an imminent hazard.

3. Creating an emergency

disqualification of drivers posing an

imminent hazard.

4. Creating a new school bus

endorsement.

5. Providing emergency grants to

States in noncompliance with CDL

requirements.

6. Withholding MCSAP funds from

States in noncompliance with CDL

requirements.

7. Upgrading disqualifications for

driving while revoked, suspended, or

canceled, or the driver is disqualified

from operating a CMV.

8. Upgrading disqualifications for

committing homicide by motor vehicle,

manslaughter, negligent homicide, or

causing a fatality through the criminal

operation of a CMV.

9. Creating three new serious traffic

violations for driving a CMV when the

driver has not obtained a CDL, driving

a CMV without a CDL in the driver’s

possession, and driving a CMV without

the driver having met the minimum

testing standards for the specific class of

CMV being operated or for the type of

cargo being transported on the vehicle.

10. Expanding driver record checks.

11. Adding new State notifications

between the licensing agency and the

judicial system.

12. Prohibiting hardship licenses to a

driver who loses his/her base license.

13. Adopting penalties for violating

licensing requirements.

14. Maintaining records of all

violations.

15. Prohibiting the masking of

convictions.

16. Decertifying a State CDL program

for noncompliance.

Non-CMV Alcohol Offenses

The National Highway Transportation

Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the

FHWA promote an alcohol standard of

0.08 for all non-CMV drivers at 23 CFR

Part 1225. Most of the non-CMVs

subject to the new MCSIA

disqualification amendment in this

proposal are motorcycles, cars, pickups,

and sport utility vehicles also covered

by 23 CFR Part 1225. Other non-CMVs

covered by the new MCSIA

disqualifications amendment in this

proposal include commercial vehicles

with a gross vehicle weight rating of

11,794 kilograms (26,000 pounds) or

less, which are subject to the FMCSA’s

zero tolerance alcohol standard under

49 CFR 392.5.

The FMCSA is proposing one

exception to the non-CMV alcoholrelated disqualifying offenses listed

under § 383.51. Current

§ 383.51(b)(2)(i)(A), requiring

disqualification for an alcohol

concentration of 0.04 or more, is not

included in the proposed non-CMV

alcohol offenses because it would be

difficult to enforce in most States. While

all States support the higher standard of

0.04 or more alcohol concentration

(‘‘under the influence’’) for all drivers

operating large CMVs, their standard for

non-CMV drivers is an alcohol

concentration of 0.08 to 0.10 percent

(‘‘intoxication’’ or ‘‘impairment’’).

Requiring states to use two different

alcohol standards for drivers of these

vehicles—one for CDL holders, one for

all other license holders—would be

difficult to implement and enforce. CDL

holders, virtually all of whom drive

private cars or light trucks, constitute

less than 5 percent of the total number

of drivers licensed to operate nonCMVs. The FMCSA believes that safety,

in this situation, would be better served

by the strong enforcement of existing

intoxication and impairment laws for all

non-CMV drivers. Under the proposed

requirements, if a CDL holder is

convicted of ‘‘being under the

influence,’’ ‘‘intoxicated,’’ or

‘‘impaired’’ while operating a non-CMV

and his or her license is suspended,

revoked, or canceled, the driver would

also be disqualified from operating a

CMV.

Non-CMV Railroad-Highway Grade

Crossing Violations

The FMCSA proposes to designate a

railroad-highway grade crossing

violation in a non-CMV as a serious

22502 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

offense, as permitted by MCSIA. Section

31310(g) of title 49 U.S.C. permits the

Secretary of Transportation to disqualify

from operating a CMV a person who has

been convicted of ‘‘a serious offense

involving a motor vehicle (other than a

[CMV]) that has resulted in the

revocation, cancellation, or suspension

of the individual’s license * * *’’ In its

report on a predecessor bill which

included a disqualification provision

virtually identical to 49 U.S.C. 31310(g),

as amended by MCSIA, the House

Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure said ‘‘[t]he Committee

expects the Department, in determining

the appropriate disqualifying offenses

by rulemaking, will focus on serious

offenses, such as driving while

intoxicated and reckless driving. The

Committee does not intend for this rule

to include minor traffic citations.’’ H.R.

Rep. No. 106–333, at 16 (1999). In

section 403 of the ICCTA, codified at 49

U.S.C. 31310(j), Congress added

railroad-highway grade crossing

violations to the other disqualification

offenses. The Conference Report on the

ICCTA ‘‘directs the Secretary to issue

regulations establishing sanctions and

fines for operators of [CMVs] who

violate railroad-highway crossing laws

and regulations.’’ H.R Rep. No. 104–422,

at 238 (1995), reprinted in 1995

U.S.C.C.A.N. 850, 923.

In considering the MCSIA, the House

report states the Secretary is required to

issue regulations establishing criteria for

disqualifying from operating a CMV an

individual who holds a CDL and who

has been convicted of serious offenses

involving a vehicle other than a CMV.

The Congress, therefore, directed the

Secretary to conduct a rulemaking to

determine the appropriate non-CMV

offenses and minimum periods for

which a CDL holder should be

disqualified. The statute, however,

provided that in no case would the

types of non-CMV offenses or the time

periods for which CDL holders are

disqualified for such offenses be more

stringent than the offenses and

disqualification periods involving a

CMV. The FMCSA believes railroadhighway grade crossing violations in

non-CMVs are serious offenses that can

and do lead to fatalities, bodily injuries,

and significant property damage.

The FMCSA is therefore proposing

that CDL holders who violate railroadhighway grade crossing regulations in

non-CMVs be disqualified from

operating a CMV.

Number of CDL Citations

The FMCSA requires AAMVAnet to

have in the CDLIS, and each State to

maintain on each violation, information

on whether the vehicle being operated

at the time of the violation was a CMV.

Each State accomplishes this

requirement by indicating on each

traffic citation whether the vehicle being

operated at the time of the violation is

a CMV. Because of this proposed rule,

AAMVAnet must modify the CDLIS and

would add a requirement for each State

to indicate for every violation whether

the driver’s license is a CDL. The

FMCSA believes each State will

accomplish this requirement by

indicating on the citation whether the

driver’s license is a CDL. This proposed

new requirement is necessary to identify

a CDL holder when he or she is cited for

a violation while operating a non-CMV

because the violation may result in a

serious traffic violation conviction and

the revocation, suspension, or

cancellation of the CDL.

Once the State records the conviction

on the CDL record, the CDL holder

would then be disqualified from

operating a CMV during the period of

suspension, revocation, or cancellation.

Without this indicator, there is no way

of identifying a CDL holder in CDLIS

with any of the information currently

captured on a citation. The FMCSA will

later propose (in RIN 2126–AA60) a

maximum period from violation and

conviction to recording on the driver’s

record in the State of domicile.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),

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. The

FMCSA must estimate the additional

paperwork burden that would be

required by this proposal to identify

CDL holders on the citation. The

FMCSA has a cooperative agreement

with TML Services (TML) to perform

certain commercial driver licensing

functions. In its analysis conducted for

the FMCSA, TML used a 1996 sample

database of CDL holder records with

conviction data from 1992 through

1996. This data was compiled for the

Commercial Motor Vehicle Effectiveness

Study (discussed earlier in this

document). Using Study data, the

FMCSA estimated that there were about

1.82 million convictions per year over

the 4-year period. In 1996, 1.82 million

convictions were tied to 8.3 million CDL

records. The FMCSA does not know

how many of the 1.82 million

convictions were in CMVs and how

many were in non-CMVs. Projecting an

increase in the number of CDL records

at a rate of 40,000 per month through

the middle of 2004, the FMCSA

estimates that 11.5 million CDL records

will generate 2.53 million convictions

per year.

Based on the survey of States

conducted as part of the Study, the

FMCSA concluded that some States

were not sending and/or posting all outof-State convictions. TML assumed that

25 to 75 percent of roughly 600,000 outof-State convictions were either not sent

to the home State or not posted by the

home State during the 1992 to 1996

period. If this assumption is correct, an

increase in the projected number of

convictions must be made. TML

calculates that the projected 2.53

million convictions per year should be

increased to 2.7 to 3.0 million per year

by the year 2004.

The number of convictions is clearly

smaller than the number of citations

issued to CDL holders. The FMCSA

asked AAMVAnet for help determining

the conviction rate. The AAMVAnet

asked its State members for help. Only

Texas was able to provide us with

needed information. Based on calendar

years 1998 and 1999 data, Texas

concluded that 95 percent of CDL

holder citations issued in the State

resulted in convictions. Using this rate,

the FMCSA made national estimates

that between 2.84 and 3.16 million

citations would be issued in 2004.

Incorporation by Reference

Paragraph (d) of § 384.231 currently

has ambiguous language stating that

each ‘‘* * State shall maintain such

driver records and cause such driver

identification data to be retained on the

CDLIS as the operator of the CDLIS

specifies are necessary to the

implementation and enforcement of the

disqualifications called for in §§ 384.215

through 384.219.’’ This implies that

each State must conform their

information collection and

recordkeeping requirements to what the

AAMVAnet specifies is necessary. The

FMCSA, however, requires AAMVAnet,

as the CDLIS operator under the 1988

designation agreement, to have certain

information collected by States with

respect to the operation of CDLIS. The

numerous pieces of information

collected include, but are not limited to,

information content and the

development of standards relating to

access to CDLIS by each State,

employer, and employee. Thus,

AAMVAnet is acting as a third party in

collecting information on behalf of the

FMCSA by passing on to each State the

information collection requirements

specified by the FMCSA as necessary

under the 1988 designation agreement.

The FMCSA believes AAMVAnet’s

CDLIS State Procedures manual should

be incorporated by reference to ensure

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22503

each State uses it. The Version 2.0

published in October 1998 is the most

recent version of the AAMVAnet

manual. AAMVAnet plans to update

this manual to implement MCSIA

amendments to the CDL system.

Incorporating the manual by reference,

however, should ensure that each State

complies with the specific version

required by AAMVAnet and the

FMCSA.

The FMCSA is providing the public

an opportunity to comment on the

incorporation by reference of this

AAMVAnet manual. In addition, the

FMCSA would provide additional

opportunity for comment on updates to

Version 2.0 before any State would be

required to comply with any newer

AAMVAnet manual in the future.

Incorporating the AAMVAnet

standards by reference allows the

FMCSA to comply with the

requirements in 5 U.S.C. 552 to publish

rules in the Federal Register by

referring to materials already published

elsewhere. Section 552 authorizes

incorporation by reference with the

approval of the Director of the Federal

Register to reduce the volume of

material published in the Federal

Register and the CFR. The legal effect of

incorporation by reference is that the

material is treated as if it were

published in the Federal Register. This

material, like any other properly issued

rule, would then have the force and

effect of law.

Substantial Compliance

Each State must comply substantially

with 24 specific requirements of the

CDL program to avoid the withholding

of a certain percentage of Federal

highway funds otherwise apportioned

for its Surface Transportation Program,

National Highway System, and

Interstate Maintenance System

components. See 49 U.S.C. 31311 and

31314. Section 103(e) of the MCSIA

added that if a State does not comply

substantially with the 24 specific

requirements of the CDL program, a

State’s entire allocation in supplemental

funding which the MCSIA added to the

Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program

(MCSAP) might be withheld by FMCSA.

The requirement to adopt and enforce

the disqualifications applicable to a CDL

holder who is convicted of serious

offenses in a non-CMV was added by

section 202(h) of the MCSIA and

codified at 49 U.S.C. 31311(a)(20). This

requirement adds another condition

necessary for states to achieve

substantial compliance with the

CMVSA of 1986. The FMCSA

understands the complexity of revising

State statutes and establishing

procedures to incorporate the new

requirements into existing systems. The

FMCSA, therefore, proposes to set a

deadline of 3 years after the effective

date of this rule for states to achieve

substantial compliance with these

requirements.

Section Analysis

Section 383.5 Definitions

The FMCSA proposes to revise the

current definition of ‘‘Disqualification’’

in § 383.5 to clarify the original intent

that disqualification of a CDL holder is

only required for driver convictions

related to motor vehicle traffic control

offenses.

The FMCSA proposes to remove

current paragraph (c) that automatically

disqualifies a driver from operating a

CMV upon conviction of any offense

listed in § 383.51. The current paragraph

(c) conflicts with standard adjudication

practices in most states. Convicting and

disqualifying a driver generally involves

two separate processes administered by

two separate agencies. In most cases,

only a court has the authority to convict

the driver, while the State licensing

agency has the separate authority to

suspend, revoke, or cancel the driver’s

license based upon the court conviction.

In addition, a driver has the right to

appeal a conviction. Pending the

decision of the appellate court, the

effect of the conviction is stayed. The

conviction, therefore, is not posted by

the State licensing agency and no

disqualifying action is taken. This

conflicts with paragraph (c) of the

current definition of Disqualification.

Moreover, disqualifying a driver who

had filed an appeal, in defiance of a

court order staying the conviction,

would bring a State licensing agency

into serious conflict with the judicial

system. Appeals are not the only source

of delay. A driver can be convicted of

an offense listed in § 383.51—and thus

automatically disqualified from driving

a CMV for a certain period after that

date—but the court may fail to notify

the State licensing agency of that fact,

usually because the court system and

licensing agency have not perfected

their electronic data transfer systems.

‘‘Diversion’’ programs are even more

serious. In many States, courts suspend

a conviction, seal or ‘‘mask’’ the driver’s

record, and purge the conviction

completely within some period if no

further violations occur. Therefore, the

licensing agencies, and thus motor

carriers, sometimes learn of a driver’s

conviction (if at all) only after the

disqualification period automatically

started by current paragraph (c) is

completed. Removal of paragraph (c)

will correct some of these problems. As

discussed earlier in this document

under the heading ‘‘Non-CMV

Offenses,’’ the FMCSA will address

related issues in an NPRM (RIN 2126–

AA60) to be published in the Federal

Register in the future.

The original intent of the CMVSA and

its implementing regulations in parts

383 and 384 was to require the

disqualification of a CDL holder only for

convictions related to motor vehicle

traffic control offenses. In fact, however,

States have begun to suspend CDLs for

failure to pay child support, failure to

pay parking tickets, and other matters

not directly related to unsafe or criminal

behavior in a CMV. In order to restore

the original intent of the CMVSA, new

paragraph (b) in the definition of

Disqualification would include ‘‘any

withdrawal of a person’s privileges to

drive a CMV by a State or other

jurisdiction as the result of a violation

of State or local law relating to motor

vehicle traffic control (other than

parking, vehicle weight or vehicle defect

violations).’’ The phrase ‘‘motor vehicle

traffic control’’ is taken directly from the

CMVSA. The FMCSA recognizes that

driving while under the influence of

alcohol or controlled substances may

not be a ‘‘motor vehicle traffic control’’

offense in the same way as speeding or

illegal lane changes, but Congress used

that phrase in the CMVSA and clearly

intended drug-and alcohol-related

offenses to be covered by the CDL

disqualification regulations.

This change would not prevent States

from including in CDLIS or NHTSA’s

National Driver Register (NDR)—which

also depends on a distributed

database—driver convictions and

disqualifications for offenses that are

not related to motor vehicle traffic

control, should they wish to do so.

We are proposing to add to § 383.5 a

new definition for ‘‘non-CMV.’’ A nonCMV would be any motor vehicle or

combination of motor vehicles not

covered by the definition of a CMV in

Part 383.

Section 383.51 Disqualification of

Drivers

The FMCSA would revise the entire

section by using an if-then table format

that we believe is more readily

understandable than the current

regulatory text. The FMCSA would also

propose to reserve rows within the table

for the proposal to be published in the

Federal Register in the near future

under RIN 2126–AA60.

The revised § 383.51 would combine

the non-CMV and CMV convictions of

CDL holders for the original offenses

under the CMVSA and other offenses

22504 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

added in subsequent statutory

amendments. In addition, the FMCSA

would clarify that a person who

operates a CMV must obtain a CDL and

is subject to the same disqualifications.

This circumstance has always been clear

to States and the FMCSA, but employers

and drivers have frequently

misunderstood this point.

While the MCSIA addresses the type

of offenses that must result in a

disqualification, it is silent regarding the

length of the CMV disqualification. The

Congress included both the type of

offense and the length of the CMV

disqualification in the CMVSA and each

of the previous amendments before

1999. The MCSIA, however, only

requires that the disqualification period

be no longer than for the same or similar

offenses that occur while operating a

CMV. The FMCSA proposes that CDL

holders convicted of serious traffic

violations and other offenses in either a

non-CMV or a CMV serve the same

period of disqualification. The FMCSA

invites the public to comment.

Although current regulations

disqualify a CDL holder convicted of

driving a CMV with an alcohol

concentration of 0.04 percent or more

[§ 383.51(b)(2)(i)(A)], that standard

would not be included in the list of

alcohol-related disqualifying offenses

committed while operating a non-CMV.

The reasons are explained earlier in the

preamble section under the heading

‘‘Non-CMV Alcohol Offenses.’’

The FMCSA is also proposing to add

railroad-highway grade crossing

violations in a non-CMV as a serious

traffic violation, as permitted by 49

U.S.C. 31301(12)(G) and 31310(g). See

the discussion of the rationale for this

proposal earlier in this preamble under

the heading ‘‘Non-CMV RailroadHighway Grade Crossing Violations.’’

Paragraph (f) would be recodified as

§ 384.203 paragraphs (b) and (c). The

FMCSA would also make conforming

amendments by correcting § 383.51

cross-references in §§ 383.3(f)(3)(i)(C),

383.53(b), 383.72, 383.77, 384.215,

384.217, 384.218, 384.219, 384.224, and

cross references in the two definitions of

the term ‘‘driving a CMV’’ in §§ 383.5

and 390.5.

Sections 383.71 Driver Application

Procedures and 383.73 State

Procedures

Section 383.71(a)(6) requires selfcertification, and § 383.73(a)(3) requires

each State to check, that a CDL

applicant is not subject to any

disqualification, revocation, or

cancellation ‘‘as contained in § 383.51.’’

The FMCSA regulatory interpretation

for § 383.73, Question 3, published in

the Federal Register on April 4, 1997

(62 FR 16396) provides a question and

answer that reads as follows:

To what does the phrase ‘‘* * * as

contained in § 383.51’’ refer to in

§ 383.73(a)(3)?

Guidance: The phrase refers only to the

word ‘‘disqualification.’’ Thus the State must

check the applicant’s record to ensure that

he/she is not subject to any suspensions,

revocations, or cancellations for any reason,

and is not subject to any disqualifications

under § 383.51.

In the phrase ‘‘any disqualification,

revocation, or cancellation as contained

in § 383.51’’ the phrase ‘‘as contained in

§ 383.51’’ was intended to modify only

the word ‘‘disqualification.’’ The

FMCSA has no authority to suspend,

revoke, or cancel a driver’s CDL. The

agency therefore proposes to amend

§§ 383.71(a)(6) and 383.73(a)(3) to refer

to ‘‘any disqualification under § 383.51,

or any license suspension, revocation,

or cancellation under State law * * * ’’

Section 384.107 Matter Incorporated

by Reference

The FMCSA is proposing to

incorporate by reference the AAMVAnet

publication under § 384.231(d)

Recordkeeping requirements. See the

section analysis for § 384.231 for a

complete description of the document

and the reasons the FMCSA is

proposing its incorporation.

Section 384.203 Driving While Under

the Influence

The FMCSA would amend this

section to re-codify § 383.51(f)

Substantial compliance by States at this

location. Paragraph (f) fits more

appropriately with § 384.203. Both

concern the 0.04 alcohol concentration

standard and the State substantial

compliance issue.

Section 384.222 Violation of Out-ofService Orders

This section would be added to

require each State to have and enforce

all necessary laws and regulations

applicable to drivers of CMVs and their

employers who violate out-of-service

orders, which meet the minimum

requirements of §§ 383.51(e), 383.37(c),

and 383.53(b).

Part 384, State Compliance with

Commercial Driver’s License Program,

was created by an FHWA final rule

published on May 18, 1994 [59 FR

26029]. States were not required to

disqualify drivers convicted of violating

out-of-service (OOS) orders because,

according to the preamble, the FHWA

‘‘has not yet issued a final rule’’ on that

subject. However, § 384.222 was

reserved for such a State requirement

when the rule prohibiting violation of

OOS orders was completed. In fact, a

second final rule which did exactly that

was published the same day in the same

issue of the Federal Register [May 18,

1994, 59 FR 26022] and codified at

§ 383.51(d). Because of this error, the

State requirement to disqualify violators

of OOS orders has never been added to

§ 384.222. The FMCSA is now

proposing to correct that oversight.

Section 384.224 Noncommercial Motor

Vehicle Violations

As required by section 202(h) of the

MCSIA, the FMCSA proposes a new

section that would require the States to

adopt and enforce the sanctions that are

applicable to holders of CDLs who are

convicted of offenses in a non-CMV.

Section 384.231 Satisfaction of State

Disqualification Requirements

All paragraphs would be amended be

replacing the word ‘‘shall’’ with the

word ‘‘must.’’

The FMCSA would amend paragraph

(a) by including cross references to the

disqualifications resulting from railroadhighway grade crossing violations

added to § 384.223 by a final rule

published in 64 FR 48104, September 2,

1999, and the proposed §§ 384.222 and

384.224 in this document.

Paragraph (b)(2) would be amended

by removing the May 18, 1997,

compliance date from the heading of the

paragraph. The FMCSA also proposes

replacing the undefined term ‘‘non-CDL

holder’’ with ‘‘a person required to have

a CDL’’ within the heading and body of

paragraph (b)(2). The intent of this

paragraph was to require each State to

disqualify any person required to have

a CDL who was convicted of a

disqualifying offense under § 383.51.

The term ‘‘non-CDL holder,’’ however,

could include a person who is not even

required to have a CDL. The FMCSA

would correct this potential problem.

Paragraph (d) would be amended to

incorporate by reference the AAMVAnet

State Procedures Manual. This

paragraph does not clearly state that the

FMCSA imposes recordkeeping

requirements upon AAMVAnet, its

designated CDLIS operator, and that

each State must conform its

recordkeeping information systems to

the AAMVAnet system manuals. Each

State licensing agency has a copy of the

most recent version of the CDLIS State

Procedures Manual. A copy of the 1998

CDLIS State Procedures Manual is in the

public docket.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22505

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory

Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The FMCSA has determined that this

regulatory action is not significant

within the meaning of Executive Order

12866. The FMCSA has determined this

proposal is not a significant regulatory

action under section 3(f) of Executive

Order 12866 and does not require an

assessment of potential costs and

benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that

Order.

This regulatory action also is not

significant under the regulatory policies

and procedures of the DOT (44 FR

11034, February 26, 1979). The FMCSA

believes a full Regulatory Evaluation is

unnecessary under paragraph 10e of the

regulatory policies and procedures of

DOT, because the economic impact of

this rule will be minimal.

Estimated Costs

The FMCSA believes the costs of this

rule include the following:

1. Information system

implementation, modification, and

maintenance costs to state government

agencies.

2. Labor costs to the state government

agencies to handle new data collection

and processing.

3. Wage losses (costs) to CDL holders

who are suspended or disqualified for

committing the new serious traffic

violations and disqualifying offenses

addressed under this proposed rule.

First-year costs for this proposed rule

should total approximately $1.73

million (present value); most of these

are for information system

developments and modifications by

state government agencies. The FMCSA

obtained these first-year cost estimates

by extrapolating results of an

AAMVAnet survey of State motor

vehicle administrations on the potential

implementation costs of MCSIA.

AAMVAnet conducted the survey in

2000. AAMVAnet results are based on

data from nine States. The FMCSA used

the AAMVAnet survey estimates and

calculated the costs to all fifty states and

the District of Columbia. A copy of the

AAMVAnet report is in the docket.

Total costs occurring between 2004

and 2013 are estimated at $168.7

million (present value); most of these

costs are wages lost by CDL holders who

would be suspended or disqualified

from this proposal’s implementation.

FMCSA estimates that an average of

9,661 CMV drivers would have their

CDLs revoked, suspended, or canceled

(withdrawals) annually because of this

proposal. In an analysis conducted for

the FMCSA using data from the FHWA

Study, TML estimated that in calendar

year 2000 there were approximately

38,643 CDL withdrawals required by 49

U.S.C. 31310 and 49 CFR 383.51

(CMVSA-required withdrawals). Also,

using sample data from the CDLIS for

the Commercial Driver’s License

Effectiveness Study, TML estimated that

of all the out-of-state CDL convictions

logged, 49 percent noted that the CDL

holder was either not operating a CMV

at the time of the citation, or that the

type of vehicle being driven was not

known (e.g., not marked on the citation).

For in-state CDL convictions, the ratio of

CDL holders either not driving a CMV

at the time of the citation, or having an

‘‘unknown’’ status, was even higher, at

88 percent.

For the purposes of estimating the

number of ‘‘new’’ CDL withdrawals

resulting from this proposal, the FMCSA

used a conservative estimate. The

FMCSA estimated that annual CMVSArequired withdrawals of CDL holders

would increase by 25 percent (or by

9,661 CDL holders annually). The

FMCSA conducted an analysis of CDLIS

data from the Commercial Drivers

License Effectiveness Study on the

distribution of convictions for various

serious traffic violations (e.g., excessive

speeding) and disqualifying (e.g.,

alcohol-related) offenses and data on the

disqualification periods defined for each

under § 383.51. Based on this analysis,

the FMCSA estimates that the average

disqualification period per CDL holder

would be 317 days.

The unemployment rate was 4.2

percent in January 2001 and the FMCSA

estimates the driver shortage in the

motor carrier industry to be 80,000. The

FMCSA estimates that those CDL

holders who would be disqualified

because of this proposal would quickly

find alternative work within the

industry (or in closely-related

industries), albeit at a 10-percent

reduction in hourly wages. All the

estimates discussed here were used to

calculate the wage reduction costs to the

9,661 CDL holders annually

disqualified, for an average of 317 days,

over the 10-year analysis period.

The FMCSA estimates the total cost of

this proposal to industry and

government agencies to be

approximately $170.4 million (present

value) over the ten-year analysis period

from 2004 through 2013, using a

discount rate of 7 percent.

Estimated Benefits

The primary societal benefits from

this proposal are the CMV-related

crashes expected to be avoided when

high-risk CDL holders are disqualified.

Effectively, CDL holders who are

convicted of serious traffic violations

and disqualifying offenses (as defined

under § 383.51) while operating a nonCMV will now have their CDL

suspended or withdrawn or be

disqualified because of this rule.

The FMCSA estimates conservatively

that, on average, approximately 9,661

CDL holders are likely to be disqualified

annually between the years 2004 and

2013 if this proposal is made effective.

The FMCSA believes no

disqualifications would occur in the

first full year of implementation since

no State would be held to the standard

until 2004. Table VM–1 in the FHWA’s

Highway Statistics 1999 publication

contains data on the number of

combination trucks registered (e.g.,

those likely driven by CDL holders) in

the United States and the vehicle-milestraveled (VMT) by these vehicles in

1999. A copy of Table VM–1 is in the

docket. A copy is also available on the

Internet at. htt://www.fhwa.dot.gov./

ohim/hs99/tables/vm1.pdf.

The average distance traveled in 1999

per combination truck was 65,261 miles.

The FMCSA estimated one driver per

vehicle, an average of 9,661 CDL

disqualifications each year, and an

average disqualification period of close

to one year (specifically, 317 working

days within 365 calendar days). Using

these conditions, the FMCSA estimated

the total VMT foregone in combination

trucks by these CDL holders would be

630.5 million miles in each year from

2004 through 2013. The involvement

rate in police-reported crashes for

combination unit trucks is 225.32 per

100 million VMT based on ‘‘The

Dimensions of Motor Vehicle Crash

Risk’’ by Wang, Knipling, and Blincoe

(Journal of Transportation and Statistics,

Volume 2, Number 1, BTS Journal,

1999). A copy is in the docket. A copy

is also available on the Internet at. htt:/

/www.bts.gov./jts/V2N1/3wang.pdf.

Using this data, the FMCSA estimates

the initial crash reduction benefit of this

proposal to be 1,422 CMV-related

crashes per year (e.g., 630.5 million

VMT times 225.32 crashes per 100

million VMT).

The FMCSA believes CMV operators

who have been disqualified are likely to

find alternative work within the motor

carrier industry or closely related

industries. Many of these drivers would

switch to driving vehicles not

specifically defined as CMVs in § 383.5

(and thus not requiring a CDL). Since

many of these drivers will continue to

face exposure to motor vehicle crashes,

the FMCSA’s initial crash reduction

benefit estimate should be reduced. For

the purposes of this analysis, the

22506 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

FMCSA conservatively estimated that

two-thirds of disqualified CDL holders

would continue to drive as some part of

their alternative employment, so that

only one-third would eliminate their

crash exposure during the 317-day

disqualification period. The number of

CMV-related crashes avoided resulting

from this proposal would be about 474

per year (or one third of the original

1,422 CMV-combination-related

crashes).

The FMCSA estimates no reduction in

CMV-related crashes during the first

year of implementation (2004).

Therefore, the FMCSA expects that at

least 474 CMV-related crashes will be

avoided annually during the years 2004

through 2013 because of the additional

CDL holder disqualifications. The

FMCSA used a recent comprehensive

study to estimate the costs of highway

crashes involving large trucks and buses

by severity. In Zaloshnja, E., Miller, T.,

and Spicer, R., ‘‘The Costs of Large

Truck- and Bus-Involved Crashes,’’

FMCSA, December 14, 2000, they

estimated that the average cost of all

police-reported crashes (i.e., fatal,

injury, and property-damage-only (PDO)

crashes) involving trucks with a gross

weight rating of more than 10,000

pounds is $75,637 (in 1999 dollars). A

copy of the study by Zaloshnja, et al. is

in the docket. A copy of the study is

also available on the Internet at: htt://

ai.volpe.dot.gov./CarrieResearchResults/

CarrierResearchResults.asp?file=PDFs/

CCT FinalReport.pdf

The average cost per large truck crash

involving a fatality is $3.54 million, for

crashes involving injuries $217,000, and

for those involving property damage

only $11,300. The FMCSA adjusted

these average costs to year 2000 dollars

using the Consumer Price Index to yield

$3.66 million per fatal crash, $224,378

per injury-related crash, and $11,684

per property-damage-only (PDO) crash.

The Large Truck Crash Profile Study

(1999) indicates that fatal crashes

represented one percent of all truckrelated crashes in 1999, injury-related

crashes represented 21 percent, and

PDO crashes represented the remaining

78 percent. A copy of a report entitled

‘‘Trends in Motor Vehicle Crashes; Fatal

Crashes 1975–1999 Injury and PropertyDamage-Only Crashes 1988–1999’’

(December 2000) is in the docket. It has

the same data as the Large Truck Crash

Profile Study. Using this information,

the FMCSA estimates annual

(unadjusted) crash reduction benefits

from this proposal to be approximately

$44 million using 474 crashes avoided.

The FMCSA estimates total 2004

through 2013 CMV-related crash

reduction benefits from this proposal to

equal $268 million (present value),

using a discount rate of 7 percent.

Examining the total (present value) costs

of this proposal, equal to $170.4 million,

this proposal’s implementation yields a

net benefit of $97.6 million over the 10-

year analysis period from 2004 through

2013.

The FMCSA invites you to submit

comments to the docket about these cost

and benefit estimates.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

In compliance with the Regulatory

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

FMCSA has considered whether this

proposal would have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. We have

determined that such entities would not

be adversely affected by this rule, either

in absolute terms or relative to larger

carriers. The term ‘‘small entities’’

comprises small businesses, not-forprofit organizations that are

independently owned and operated and

are not dominant in their fields, and

governmental jurisdictions with

populations less than 50,000.

In the motor carrier industry, the

Small Business Administration (SBA)

defines small entities as those firms

earning less than $18.5 million in gross

receipts annually. The FMCSA

examined U.S. Census Bureau data from

the 1997 Economic Census, in particular

the revenue size of firms in the ‘‘General

Freight Trucking’’ sector (North

American Industry Classification

System Code 4841). The vast majority of

firms represented in the sample fall

below the SBA annual revenue

threshold. While these small entities

represent over 90 percent of the firms in

the sample, they employ roughly 58

percent of the workers.

The primary focus of this proposal is

to improve motor carrier safety by

expanding the list of serious traffic

violations and other offenses for which

a CDL holder can be disqualified to

those occurring in non-CMVs. The

proposal potentially affects all active

CDL holders (estimated from 3.2 million

to 8.3 million, with a midpoint of 5.75

million), since all would be subject to

the proposal. The 3.2 million CDL

holders comes from an estimate of

‘‘active’’ CDL holders reported for

calendar year 1999 in the FMCSA’s

1999 Drug & Alcohol Survey, OMB No.

2126–0012. This sample-based survey

measures the percentage of CDL holders

that test positive for controlled

substances and/or alcohol, but in so

doing, provides a count of CDL holders

who have been employed as a driver

and operated a CMV within the past

year, and therefore provides an estimate

of the number of ‘‘active’’ CDL holders

nationwide.

The CDL Effectiveness Study reported

8.3 million CDL holder records in the

CDLIS. Please note that the number of

‘‘records’’ will not match the number of

‘‘current’’ or ‘‘active’’ CDL holders

operating a CMV, since there are many

CDL holders who have other jobs as

their primary employment. Examples

include those workers employed in nondriving positions within trucking

companies, and those CDL holders,

presumably owner-operators, who may

suspend operation of CMV services and

take alternative employment outside of

the trucking industry. The CDLIS does

not differentiate among these different

types of CDL holders, so one must be

cautious when examining this total

number of CDL holders within CDLIS.

The FMCSA invites the public to

comment on whether the agency should

use the median of 5.75 million active

CDL holders this proposal will

potentially affect.

The FMCSA does not currently have

evidence that CDL holders employed by

small entities are more likely to be

disqualified under this rule than those

employed by larger entities. Lastly, the

number of new driver disqualifications

expected annually from this proposal

(approximately 9,661) represents only

one-tenth to three-tenths of one percent

of all active CDL holders (depending on

the specific estimate of active CDL

records used). Therefore, the number of

CDL holders likely to be disqualified

annually because of this proposal is

very small and should keep it from

adversely affecting any entity, large or

small.

Therefore, the FMCSA, in compliance

with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601–612), has considered the

economic impacts of these requirements

on small entities and certifies that this

rule would not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Comments on

this conclusion are welcome and should

be submitted to the docket.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

This proposal would not impose a

Federal mandate resulting in the

expenditure by State, local, and tribal

governments, taken together, or by the

private sector, of $100 million or more

in any one year over the period

analyzed. (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

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 proposed

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22507

action is not economically significant

and does not concern an environmental

risk to health or safety that would

disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of

Private Property)

This proposed rule would not affect a

taking of private property or otherwise

have taking implications under

Executive Order 12630, Governmental

Actions and Interference with

Constitutionally Protected Property

Rights.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

This proposed action has been

analyzed in accordance with the

principles and criteria contained in

Executive Order 13132, dated August 4,

1999 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

The MCSIA requires this rulemaking

action. Consultation with States is not

required when a rule is required by

statute. The FMCSA, however, has

determined that this action would not

have significant Federalism

implications or limit the policymaking

discretion of the States. Comments on

this conclusion are welcome and should

be submitted to the docket.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice

Reform)

This action meets applicable

standards in Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform, to minimize litigation,

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce

burden.

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 et seq.),

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. The

FMCSA has determined that this action,

if promulgated as a final rule, would

have an impact upon an existing

currently approved information

collection.

The information collection

requirements relating to Commercial

Driver Licensing and Test Standards

have been approved by OMB and

assigned the OMB control number

2126–0011. This proposed action would

require AAMVAnet to amend its state

procedures manual to add one

additional data element: whether the

driver’s license is a CDL.

Many States have implemented

former AAMVAnet state procedure

manual requirements by requiring

police officers within those States to

note on traffic citations whether a motor

vehicle is a CMV. The FMCSA believes

States would implement a similar

requirement in response to an

AAMVAnet amendment resulting from

sections 201(b) and 202(h) of the MCSIA

and this rulemaking.

The FMCSA estimates that between

2,840,000 and 3,160,000 traffic citations

are issued annually to CDL holders. It

would take an enforcement official

approximately 2 seconds to record the

additional data element. Adding the

data element would increase the current

time burden estimate by 1578 to 1756

hours [(2,840,000 to 3,160,000 citations)

(2 seconds) = (5,680,000 to 6,320,000

sec.) / 3600 sec./hr. = 1578 to 1756 hr.],

resulting in a revised estimated annual

time burden of 691,877 to 692,055

hours.

OMB Control Number: 2126–0011.

Title: Commercial Driver Licensing

and Test Standards.

Affected Public: Each State

government, the District of Columbia

government, and approximately 500,000

motor carriers using approximately 10

million drivers who operate CMVs in

interstate and intrastate commerce.

Estimated Annual Hour Burden: 1,578

to 1,756 burden hours.

The FMCSA believes these proposed

requirements meet the principles of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 by

ensuring—

(1) The information collection is the

least burdensome necessary for the

proper performance of the FMCSA’s

safety and licensing mandates.

(2) The information collection does

not duplicate information collected by

other agencies.

(3) The information collection has

practical utility. The FMCSA has sought

to minimize the cost to itself of

collecting, processing, and using the

information, but would not accomplish

this by shifting disproportionate costs or

burdens onto the public.

The FMCSA seeks public comment on

this proposed information collection

requirement. Interested parties are

invited to send comments regarding any

aspect of these information collection

requirements, including, but not limited

to:

(1) Evaluating whether the collection

of information is necessary for the

proper performance of the functions of

the agency, including whether the

information will have a practical use;

(2) Evaluating the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

collection of information, including the

validity of the methodology and

assumptions used;

(3) Enhancing the quality, usefulness,

and clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(4) Minimizing the burden of

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including using

appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology, such as

permitting electronic submission of

responses.

National Environmental Policy Act

The agency has analyzed this

proposal for the purpose of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined

under DOT Order 5610.1C (September

18, 1979) that this action does not

require any environmental assessment.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 383

Administrative practice and

procedure, Alcohol abuse, Commercial

driver’s license, Commercial motor

vehicles, Drug abuse, Highway safety,

Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety.

49 CFR Part 384

Administrative practice and

procedure, Alcohol abuse, Commercial

driver’s license, Commercial motor

vehicles, Drug abuse, Highway safety,

Intergovernmental relations, Motor

carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 390

Highway safety, Intermodal

transportation, Motor carriers, Motor

vehicle safety, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

In consideration of the foregoing, the

FMCSA proposes to amend title 49,

Code of Federal Regulations, chapter III,

parts 383, 384, and 390 as set forth

below:

PART 383—[AMENDED]

1. Revise the authority citation for 49

CFR part 383 to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31301 et seq.,

and 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73.

2. Amend § 383.3(f)(3)(i)(C) by

revising the cross-reference

‘‘§ 383.51(b)(2)’’ to read ‘‘§ 383.51’’.

3. Amend § 383.5 to revise the

definitions for ‘‘Disqualification’’ and

‘‘Driving a commercial motor vehicle

22508 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

while under the influence of alcohol,’’

to add a definition for ‘‘Non-CMV,’’ and

to place the definitions in alphabetical

order, to read as follows:

§ 383.5 Definitions.

* * * * *

Disqualification means any of the

following three actions:

(1) The suspension, revocation, or

cancellation of a CDL by the State of

issuance.

(2) Any withdrawal of a person’s

privileges to drive a CMV by a State or

other jurisdiction as the result of a

violation of State or local law relating to

motor vehicle traffic control (other than

parking, vehicle weight or vehicle defect

violations).

(3) A determination by the FMCSA

that a person is no longer qualified to

operate a commercial motor vehicle

under part 391 of this chapter.

* * * * *

Driving a commercial motor vehicle

while under the influence of alcohol

means committing any one or more of

the following acts in a CMV: driving a

CMV while the person’s alcohol

concentration is 0.04 or more; driving

under the influence of alcohol, as

prescribed by State law; or refusal to

undergo such testing as is required by

any State or jurisdiction in the

enforcement of § 383.51(b) or

§ 392.5(a)(2) of this subchapter.

* * * * *

Non-CMV means a motor vehicle or

combination of motor vehicles not

defined by the term ‘‘commercial motor

vehicle (CMV)’’ in this section.

* * * * *

4. Revise § 383.51 to read as follows:

§ 383.51 Disqualifications of drivers.

(a) General. (1) A driver or holder of

a CDL who is disqualified must not

drive a CMV.

(2) An employer must not knowingly

allow, require, permit, or authorize a

driver who is disqualified to drive a

CMV.

(3) A driver is subject to

disqualification sanctions designated in

paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this

section, if the driver drives a CMV or

non-CMV and is convicted of the

violations.

(4) Determining first and subsequent

violations. For purposes of determining

first and subsequent violations of the

offenses specified in this subpart, each

conviction for any offense listed in each

Table in this section resulting from a

separate incident, whether committed in

a CMV or non-CMV, must be counted.

(5) Reinstatement after lifetime

disqualification. A State may reinstate

any driver disqualified for life for

offenses described in paragraphs (b)(1)

through (b)(6) of this section (Table 1)

after 10 years if that person has

voluntarily entered and successfully

completed an appropriate rehabilitation

program approved by the State. Any

person who has been reinstated in

accordance with this provision who is

subsequently convicted of a

disqualifying offense described in

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) of this

section (Table 1) must not be reinstated.

(6) Non-CMV enforcement. A State

may apply the disqualification sanctions

required by paragraph (b)(3) of this

section (Table 1) to convictions of a CDL

holder who operates a non-CMV with an

alcohol concentration of 0.04. Note,

however, that the State is not required

to do so.

(b) Disqualification for major offenses.

Table 1 to § 383.51 of this subpart

contains a list of the offenses and period

for which a driver must be disqualified,

depending upon the type of vehicle the

driver is operating at the time of the

violation, as follows:

TABLE 1 TO § 383.51

If a driver operates a

motor vehicle and—

For a first conviction or

refusal to be tested while

operating a CMV, a person required to have a

CDL and a CDL holder

must be disqualified from

operating a CMV for—

For a first conviction or

refusal to be tested while

operating a non-CMV, a

CDL holder must be disqualified from operating a

CMV for—

For a first conviction or

refusal to be tested while

operating a CMV transporting hazardous materials required to be placarded under the Hazardous materials Regulations (49 CFR part 172,

subpart F), a person required to have a CDL

and a CDL holder must

be disqualified from operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction

or refusal to be tested in

a separate incident of

any offense in this Table

while operating a CMV, a

person required to have

a CDL and a CDL holder

must be disqualified from

operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction

or refusal to be tested in

a separate incident of

any offense in this Table

while operating a CMV or

a non-CMV, a CDL holder must be disqualified

from operating a CMV

for—

(1) Is under the influence

of alcohol as prescribed

by state law.

1 year ............................. 1 year ............................. 3 years ............................ Life .................................. Life.

(2) Is under the influence

of a controlled substance.

1 year ............................. 1 year ............................. 3 years ............................ Life .................................. Life.

(3) Has an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or

greater while operating

a CMV.

1 year ............................. Not applicable ................. 3 years ............................ Life .................................. Not applicable.

(4) Refuses to take an alcohol test as required

by a State or jurisdiction

under its implied consent laws or regulations

as defined in § 383.72.

1 year ............................. 1 year ............................. 3 years ............................ Life .................................. Life.

(5) Leaves the scene of

an accident.

1 year ............................. 1 year ............................. 3 years ............................ Life .................................. Life.

(6) Uses the vehicle to

commit a felony, other

than a felony described

in paragraph (b)(9) of

this section.

1 year ............................. 1 year ............................. 3 years ............................ Life .................................. Life.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22509

TABLE 1 TO § 383.51—Continued

If a driver operates a

motor vehicle and—

For a first conviction or

refusal to be tested while

operating a CMV, a person required to have a

CDL and a CDL holder

must be disqualified from

operating a CMV for—

For a first conviction or

refusal to be tested while

operating a non-CMV, a

CDL holder must be disqualified from operating a

CMV for—

For a first conviction or

refusal to be tested while

operating a CMV transporting hazardous materials required to be placarded under the Hazardous materials Regulations (49 CFR part 172,

subpart F), a person required to have a CDL

and a CDL holder must

be disqualified from operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction

or refusal to be tested in

a separate incident of

any offense in this Table

while operating a CMV, a

person required to have

a CDL and a CDL holder

must be disqualified from

operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction

or refusal to be tested in

a separate incident of

any offense in this Table

while operating a CMV or

a non-CMV, a CDL holder must be disqualified

from operating a CMV

for—

(7) [Reserved].

(8) [Reserved].

(9) Uses the vehicle in the

commission of a felony

involving manufacturing,

distributing, or dispensing a controlled

substance.

Life—not eligible for 10-

year reinstatement.

Life—not eligible for 10-

year reinstatement.

Life—not eligible for 10-

year reinstatement.

Life—not eligible for 10-

year reinstatement.

Life—not eligible for 10-

year reinstatement.

(c) Disqualification for serious traffic violations. Table 2 to § 383.51 contains a list of the offenses and the periods

for which a driver must be disqualified, depending upon the type of vehicle the driver is operating at the time of

the violation, as follows:

TABLE 2 TO § 383.51

If the driver operates a motor

vehicle and—

For a second conviction of any

offense in this Table in a separate incident within a 3-year

period while operating a CMV,

a pereson required to have a

CDL must be disqualified from

operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction of any

offsense in this Table in a separate incident within a 3-year

period while operating a CMV

or non-CMV, a CDL holder

must be disqualified from operating a CMV for—

For a third or subsequent conviction of any offense in this

Table in a separate incident

within a 3-year period while

operating a CMV, a person required to have a CDL must be

disqualified from operating a

CMV for—

For a third or subsequent conviction of any offense in this

Table in a separate incident

within a 3-year period while

operating a CMV or non-CMV,

a CDL holder must be disqualified from operating a CMV

for—

(1) Speeds excessively, involving any speed of 24.1 kmph

(15 mph) or more above the

posted speed limit.

60 days .................................... 60 days .................................... 120 days .................................. 120 days.

(2) Drives recklessly, as defined by State or local law or

regulation, including but not

limited to offenses of driving

a motor vehicle in willful or

wanton disregard for the

safety of persons or property.

60 days .................................... 60 days .................................... 120 days .................................. 120 days.

(3) Makes improper or erratic

traffic lane changes.

60 days .................................... 60 days .................................... 120 days .................................. 120 days.

(4) Follows the vehicle ahead

too closely.

60 days .................................... 60 days .................................... 120 days .................................. 120 days.

(5) Violates State or local law

relating to motor vehicle traffic control (other than a parking violation) arising in connection with a fatal accident.

60 days .................................... 60 days .................................... 120 days .................................. 120 days.

(d) Disqualification for railroad-highway grade crossing offenses. Table 3 to § 383.51 contains a list of the offenses

and the periods for which a driver must be disqualified, depending upon the type of vehicle the driver is operating

at the time of the violation, as follows:

22510 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 3 TO § 383.51

If the driver operates a motor vehicle in violation of

a federal, state or local law and—

For a first conviction

while operating a CMV,

a person required to

have a CDL must be disqualified from operating

a CMV for—

For a first conviction

while operating a CMV

or non-CMV, a CDL

holder must be disqualified from operating a

CMV for—

For a second conviction

of any offense in this

Table in a separate incident within a 3-year period while operating a

CMV, a person required

to have a CDL must be

disqualified from operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction

of any offense in this

Table in a separate incident within a 3-year period while operating a

CMV or non-CMV, a

CDL holder must be disqualified from operating

a CMV for—

For a third or subsequent conviction of any

offense in this Table in a

separate incident within

a 3-year period while operating a CMV, a person

required to have a CDL

must be disqualified from

operating a CMV for—

For a third or subsequent conviction of any

offense in this Table in a

separate incident within

a 3-year period while operating a CMV or nonCMV, a CDL holder must

be disqualified from operating a CMV for—

(1) The driver is not required to always stop,

but fails to slow down

and check that tracks are

clear of an approaching

train.

No less than 60 days ..... No less than 60 days ..... No less than 120 days ... No less than 120 days ... No less than 1 year ....... No less than 1 year.

(2) The driver is not required to always stop,

but fails to stop before

reaching the crossing, if

the tracks are not clear.

No less than 60 days ..... No less than 60 days ..... No less than 120 days ... No less than 120 days ... No less than 1 year ....... No less than 1 year.

(3) The driver is always required to stop, but fails to

stop before driving onto

the crossing.

No less than 60 days ..... No less than 60 days ..... No less than 120 days ... No less than 120 days ... No less than 1 year ....... No less than 1 year.

(4) The driver fails to have

sufficient space to drive

completely through the

crossing without stopping.

No less than 60 days ..... No less than 60 days ..... No less than 120 days ... No less than 120 days ... No less than 1 year ....... No less than 1 year.

(5) The driver fails to obey

a traffic control device or

the directions of an enforcement official at the

crossing.

No less than 60 days ..... No less than 60 days ..... No less than 120 days ... No less than 120 days ... No less than 1 year ....... No less than 1 year.

(6) The driver fails to negotiate a crossing because

of insufficient undercarriage clearance.

No less than 60 days ..... No less than 60 days ..... No less than 120 days ... No less than 120 days ... No less than 1 year ....... No less than 1 year.

(e) Disqualification for violating out-of-service orders. Table 4 to § 383.51 contains a list of the offenses and periods

for which a driver must be disqualified when the driver is operating a CMV at the time of the violation, as follows:

TABLE 4 TO § 383.51

If the driver operates a CMV and—

For a first conviction while operating a

CMV, a person required to have a CDL

and a CDL holder must be disqualified

from operating a CMV for—

For a second conviction in a separate

incident within a 10-year period operating a CMV, a person required to

have a CDL and a holder must be disqualified from operating a CMV for—

For a third or subsequent conviction in

a separate incident within a 10-year

period while operating a CMV, a person required to have a CDL and a CDL

holder must be disqualified from operating a CMV for—

(1) Violates a driver or vehicle out-ofservice order while transporting nonhazardous materials.

No less than 90 days or more than 1

year.

No less than 1 year or more than 5

years.

No less than 3 years or more than 5

years.

(2) Violates a driver or vehicle out-ofservice order while transporting hazardous materials required to be placarded under part 172, subpart F of

this title.

No less than 180 days or more than 2

years.

No less than 3 years or more than 5

years.

No less than 3 years or more than 5

years.

(3) Violates a driver or vehicle out-ofservice order while operating a vehicle designed or used to transport 16

or more passengers, including the

driver.

No less than 180 days or more than 2

years.

No less than 3 years or more than 5

years.

No less than 3 years or more than 5

years.

5. Amend § 383.53(b)(1) by revising

the cross-reference ‘‘§ 383.51(d)’’ to read

‘‘§ 383.51(e)’’.

6. Revise § 383.71(a)(6) to read as

follows:

§ 383.71 Driver application procedures.

(a) * * *

(6) Certify that he/she is not subject to

any disqualification under § 383.51, or

any license suspension, revocation, or

cancellation under State law, and that

he/she does not have a driver’s license

from more than one state or jurisdiction.

* * * * *

7. Amend § 383.72 by revising the

cross-reference ‘‘§ 383.51(b)(2)(i)’’ to

read ‘‘§ 383.51(b)’’.

8. Revise the introductory text of

paragraph (a)(3) in § 383.73 to read as

follows:

§ 383.73 State procedures.

(a) * * *

(3) Initiate and complete a check of

the applicant’s driving record to ensure

that the person is not subject to any

disqualification under § 383.51, or any

license suspension, revocation, or

cancellation under State law, and that

the person does not have a driver’s

license from more than one State or

jurisdiction. The record check must

include, but not be limited to the

following:

* * * * *

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules 22511

9. Amend § 383.77(a)(3) by revising

the cross-reference ‘‘§ 383.51(b)(2)’’ to

read ‘‘§ 383.51(b)’’.

PART 384—[AMENDED]

10. Revise the authority citation for 49

CFR part 384 to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31136, 31301 et seq.,

and 31502; and 49 CFR 1.73.

11. Add § 384.107 to subpart A to read

as follows:

§ 384.107 Matter incorporated by

reference.

(a) Incorporation by reference. This

part includes references to certain

matter or materials. The text of the

materials is not included in the

regulations contained in this part. The

materials are hereby made a part of the

regulations in this part. The Director of

the Federal Register has approved the

materials incorporated by reference in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1

CFR part 51. For materials subject to

change, only the specific version

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register and specified in the regulation

are incorporated. Material is

incorporated as it exists on the date of

the approval and a notice of any change

in these materials will be published in

the Federal Register.

(b) Materials incorporated. The

AAMVAnet, Inc.’’s ‘‘Commercial

Driver’s License Information System

(CDLIS) State Procedures,’’ Version 2.0,

October 1998.

(c) Addresses. (1) All of the materials

incorporated by reference are available

for inspection at:

(i) The Department of Transportation

Library, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590 in Room 2200.

These documents are also available for

inspection and copying as provided in

49 CFR part 7.

(ii) The Office of the Federal Register,

800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 700,

Washington, DC.

(2) Information and copies of all of the

materials incorporated by reference may

be obtained by writing to: American

Association of Motor Vehicle

Administrators, Inc., 4301 Wilson Blvd,

Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22203.

12. Revise § 384.203 to read as

follows:

§ 384.203 Driving while under the

influence.

(a) The State must have in effect and

enforce through licensing sanctions the

disqualifications prescribed in

§ 383.51(b) of this subchapter for driving

a CMV with a 0.04 alcohol

concentration.

(b) Nothing in this section shall be

construed to require a State to apply its

criminal or other sanctions for driving

under the influence to a person found

to have operated a CMV with an alcohol

concentration of 0.04, except licensing

sanctions including suspension,

revocation, or cancellation.

(c) A State that enacts and enforces

through licensing sanctions the

disqualifications prescribed in

§ 383.51(b) of this subchapter for driving

a CMV with a 0.04 alcohol

concentration and gives full faith and

credit to the disqualification of CMV

drivers by other States shall be deemed

in substantial compliance with section

12009(a)(3) of the Commercial Motor

Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (49 U.S.C.

31311(a)).

13. Revise § 384.215(a) to read as

follows:

§ 384.215 First offenses.

(a) General rule. The State must

disqualify from operating a CMV each

person who is convicted, as defined in

§ 383.5 of this subchapter, in any State

or jurisdiction, of a disqualifying offense

specified in § 383.51(b)(1) through (6) of

this subchapter, for no less than one

year.

* * * * *

14. Revise § 384.216 to read as

follows:

§ 384.216 Second offenses.

(a) General rule. The State must

disqualify for life from operating a CMV

each person who is convicted, as

defined in § 383.5 of this subchapter, in

any State or jurisdiction, of a

subsequent offense as described in

§ 383.51(b) of this subchapter.

(b) Special rule for certain lifetime

disqualifications. The State where the

disqualified driver resides after 10 years

of disqualification have elapsed may

reduce the lifetime disqualification of a

person disqualified for life under

§ 383.51(b) of this subchapter, to a

minimum of ten years in accordance

with § 383.51(a)(5) of this subchapter.

15. Revise § 384.217 to read as

follows:

§ 384.217 Drug offenses.

The State must disqualify from

operating a CMV for life each person

who is convicted, as defined in § 383.5

of this subchapter, in any State or

jurisdiction, of using a CMV in the

commission of a felony described in

§ 383.51(b)(9) of this subchapter. The

State shall not apply the special rule in

§ 384.216(b) to lifetime disqualifications

imposed for controlled substance

felonies as detailed in § 383.51(b)(9) of

this subchapter.

16. Revise § 384.218 to read as

follows:

§ 384.218 Second serious traffic violation.

The State must disqualify from

operating a CMV for a period of not less

than 60 days each person who, in a

three-year period, is convicted, as

defined in § 383.5 of this subchapter, in

any State(s) or jurisdiction(s), of two

serious traffic violations involving a

CMV operated by such person, as

specified in § 383.51(c) of this

subchapter.

17. Revise § 384.219 to read as

follows:

§ 384.219 Third serious traffic violation.

The State must disqualify from

operating a CMV for a period of not less

than 120 days each person who, in a

three-year period, is convicted, as

defined in § 383.5 of this subchapter, in

any State(s) or jurisdiction(s), of three

serious traffic violations involving a

CMV operated by such person, as

specified in § 383.51(c) of this

subchapter. This disqualification period

must be in addition to any other

previous period of disqualification.

18. Add § 384.222 to read as follows:

§ 384.222 Violation of out-of-service

orders.

The State must have and enforce laws

and/or regulations applicable to drivers

of CMVs and their employers, as

defined in § 383.5 of this subchapter,

which meet the minimum requirements

of §§ 383.51(e), 383.37(c), and 383.53(b)

of this subchapter.

19. Revise § 384.223 to read as

follows:

§ 384.223 Railroad-highway grade

crossing violation.

The State must have and enforce laws

and/or regulations applicable to CMV

drivers and their employers, as defined

in § 383.5 of this subchapter, which

meet the minimum requirements of

§§ 383.37(d), 383.51(d), and 383.53(c) of

this subchapter.

20. Add § 384.224 to read as follows:

§ 384.224 Noncommercial motor vehicle

violations.

The State must have and enforce laws

and/or regulations applicable to drivers

of CMVs, as defined in § 383.5 of this

subchapter, which meet the minimum

requirements of § 383.51(b) through (d)

of this chapter.

21. Revise § 384.231 to read as

follows:

§ 384.231 Satisfaction of State

disqualification requirement.

(a) Applicability. The provisions of

§§ 384.203, 384.206(b), 384.210,

384.213, 384.215 through 384.219,

384.221 through 384.224, and 384.231

apply to the State of licensure of the

22512 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Proposed Rules

person affected by the provision. The

provisions of § 384.210 also apply to

any State to which a person makes

application for a transfer CDL.

(b) Required action.—(1) CDL holders.

A State must satisfy the requirement of

this part that the State disqualify a

person who holds a CDL by, at a

minimum, suspending, revoking, or

canceling the person’s CDL for the

applicable period of disqualification.

(2) A person required to have a CDL.

A State must satisfy the requirement of

this subpart that the State disqualify a

person required to have a CDL who is

convicted of an offense or offenses

necessitating disqualification under

§ 383.51 of this subchapter. At a

minimum, the State must implement the

limitation on licensing provisions of

§ 384.210 and the timing and

recordkeeping requirements of

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

as to prevent such a person from legally

obtaining a CDL from any State during

the applicable disqualification period(s)

specified in this subpart.

(c) Required timing. The State must

disqualify a driver as expeditiously as

possible.

(d) Recordkeeping requirements. The

State must conform to the requirements

of the October 1998 edition of the

AAMVAnet, Inc.’s ‘‘Commercial

Driver’s License Information System

(CDLIS) State Procedures,’’ Version 2.0.

(See § 384.107.) These requirements

include the maintenance of such driver

records and driver identification data on

the CDLIS as the FMCSA finds are

necessary to the implementation and

enforcement of the disqualifications

called for in §§ 384.215 through

384.219, and 384.221 through 384.224.

PART 390—[AMENDED]

22. The authority citation for 49 CFR

part 390 continues to read as follows:

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

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

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

701 note); and 49 CFR 1.73.

23. Amend § 390.5 to revise the

definition for ‘‘Driving a commercial

motor vehicle while under the influence

of alcohol’’ to read as follows:

§ 390.5 Definitions.

* * * * *

Driving a commercial motor vehicle

while under the influence of alcohol

means committing any one or more of

the following acts in a CMV: Driving a

CMV while the person’s alcohol

concentration is 0.04 or more; driving

under the influence of alcohol, as

prescribed by State law; or refusal to

undergo such testing as is required by

any State or jurisdiction in the

enforcement of § 383.51(b) or

§ 392.5(a)(2) of this subchapter.

* * * * *

Issued on: April 23, 2001.

Brian M. McLaughlin,

Acting Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 01–10583 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P