99-23026. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Definition of Commercial Motor Vehicle  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 171 (Friday, September 3, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 48510-48517]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-23026]
    
    
    
    [[Page 48509]]
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part IV
    
    
    
    
    
    Department of Transportation
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    Federal Highway Administration
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    49 CFR Part 390
    
    
    
    Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Definition of Commercial 
    Motor Vehicle; Interim Final Rule
    
    Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Requirements for Operators of 
    Small Passenger-Carrying Commercial Motor Vehicles; Proposed Rule
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 171 / Friday, September 3, 1999 / 
    Rules and Regulations
    
    [[Page 48510]]
    
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    
    Federal Highway Administration
    
    49 CFR Part 390
    
    [FHWA Docket No. FHWA-97-2858]
    RIN 2125-AE22
    
    
    Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Definition of 
    Commercial Motor Vehicle
    
    AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
    
    ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The FHWA is amending the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
    Regulations (FMCSRs) to adopt the statutory definition of a commercial 
    motor vehicle (CMV) found at 49 U.S.C. 31132. This action is in 
    response to the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-
    21). Section 4008(a) of TEA-21 amended the definition of the term 
    ``commercial motor vehicle'' to cover vehicles ``designed or used to 
    transport more than 8 passengers (including the driver) for 
    compensation.'' The FHWA is revising its regulatory definition of CMV 
    to be consistent with the statute, but is exempting the operation of 
    these small passenger-carrying vehicles from all of the FMCSRs for six 
    months to allow time for the completion of a separate rulemaking action 
    published elsewhere in today's Federal Register. As a result of this 
    action, the applicability of the FMCSRs will be the same as before the 
    enactment of TEA-21 until March 3, 2000. Therefore, entities that were 
    not subject to the FMCSRs prior to the enactment of TEA-21 are not 
    required to make any changes in their operations until that date.
    
    DATES: This rule is effective on September 3, 1999. Comments must be 
    received on or before November 2, 1999.
    
    ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to FHWA Docket No. FHWA-97-
    2858, the Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT Dockets, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh 
    Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. All comments received will be 
    available for examination at the above address from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., 
    e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those desiring 
    notification of receipt of comments must include a self-addressed, 
    stamped envelope or postcard.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Larry W. Minor, Office of Motor 
    Carrier Research and Standards, HMCS-10, (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, 
    D.C. 20590-0001. 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 can access all comments that were submitted to the 
    Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT Dockets, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
    Washington, DC 20590-001, in response to previous rulemaking notices 
    concerning the docket referenced at the beginning of this notice 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 using a modem 
    and suitable communications software from the Government Printing 
    Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 512-1661. Internet 
    users may reach the Office of the Federal Register's home page at 
    http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government Printing Office's 
    database at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
    
    Background
    
        Section 204 of the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (MCSA) (Pub. L. 
    98-554, Title II, 98 Stat. 2832, at 2833) defined a ``commercial motor 
    vehicle'' as one having a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 10,001 
    pounds or more; designed to transport more than 15 passengers, 
    including the driver; or transporting hazardous materials in quantities 
    requiring the vehicle to be placarded. This definition, codified at 49 
    U.S.C. 31132(1), was the basis for the regulatory definition of a CMV 
    in 49 CFR 390.5, which determines the jurisdictional limits and 
    applicability of most of the FMCSRs. The Senate Committee on Commerce, 
    Science and Transportation, in a report which accompanied the MCSA 
    stated: ``The 10,000-pound limit, which is in the current BMCS (Bureau 
    of Motor Carrier Safety, now the FHWA's Office of Motor Carrier and 
    Highway Safety) regulations, is proposed to focus enforcement efforts 
    and because small vans and pickup trucks are more analogous to 
    automobiles than to medium and heavy commercial vehicles, and can best 
    be regulated under State automobile licensing, inspection, and traffic 
    surveillance procedures.'' S. Rep. No. 98-424, at 6-7 (1984), reprinted 
    in 1984 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4785, 4790-91.
        Although the MCSA demonstrated congressional intent to focus the 
    applicability of the FMCSRs on larger vehicles, Congress did not repeal 
    section 204 of the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (Chapter 498, 49 Stat. 
    543, 546). This statute, now codified at 49 U.S.C. 31502, authorizes 
    the FHWA to regulate the safety of all for-hire motor carriers of 
    passengers and property, and private carriers of property without 
    respect to the weight or passenger capacity of the vehicles they 
    operate.
        When the Congress enacted the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act 
    of 1986 (CMVSA) (Pub. L. 99-570, Title XII, 100 Stat. 3207-170) to 
    require implementation of a single, classified commercial driver's 
    license program, it also limited the motor vehicles subject to the 
    program to those designed to transport more than 15 passengers, 
    including the driver (now codified at 49 U.S.C. 31301(4)(B) with 
    slightly different wording). This, too, revealed the congressional 
    policy of applying available Federal motor carrier safety resources to 
    larger vehicles.
        The ICC Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) (Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat. 
    803, 919) changed the MCSA's definition of a commercial motor vehicle. 
    As amended, section 31132(1) defined a commercial motor vehicle, in 
    part, as a vehicle that is ``designed or used to transport passengers 
    for compensation, but exclud(es) vehicles providing taxicab service and 
    having a capacity of not more than 6 passengers and not operated on a 
    regular route or between specified places; (or) is designed or used to 
    transport more than 15 passengers, including the driver, and is not 
    used to transport passengers for compensation.'' The ICCTA authorized, 
    but did not require, the FHWA to change the FMCSRs accordingly; the 
    agency did not incorporate the amended language into the CMV definition 
    in Sec. 390.5. The agency notes that the ICCTA included the phrase 
    ``designed or used'' in specifying the passenger-carrying threshold for 
    the FMCSRs. This change will make the FMCSRs applicable based upon the 
    number of passengers in the vehicle or the number of designated seating 
    positions, whichever is greater. In other words, a bus designed to 
    carry 13 people but actually carrying 18 would be subject to the 
    FMCSRs.
        Section 4008(a)(2) of TEA-21 (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, June 
    9, 1998) again amended the passenger-vehicle component of the CMV 
    definition in 49 U.S.C. 31132(1). Section 4008 also changed the weight 
    threshold in the CMV definition by adding ``gross vehicle weight'' 
    (GVW) to the previous ``gross vehicle weight rating'' (GVWR).
    
    [[Page 48511]]
    
    The agency may now exercise jurisdiction based on the GVW or GVWR, 
    whichever is greater. A vehicle with a GVWR of 9,500 pounds that was 
    loaded to 10,500 pounds GVW would therefore be subject to the FMCSRs if 
    it was operating in interstate commerce. Commercial motor vehicle is 
    now defined (in 49 U.S.C 31132) to mean a self-propelled or towed 
    vehicle used on the highways in interstate commerce to transport 
    passengers or property, if the vehicle--
        (A) Has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross vehicle weight of at 
    least 10,001 pounds, whichever is greater;
        (B) Is designed or used to transport more than 8 passengers 
    (including the driver) for compensation;
        (C) Is designed or used to transport more than 15 passengers, 
    including the driver, and is not used to transport passengers for 
    compensation; or
        (D) Is used in transporting material found by the Secretary of 
    Transportation to be hazardous under section 5103 of this title and 
    transported in a quantity requiring placarding under regulations 
    prescribed by the Secretary under section 5103.
        Under section 4008(b), operators of the CMVs defined by section 
    31132(1)(B) will automatically become subject to the FMCSRs one year 
    after the date of enactment of TEA-21, if they are not already covered, 
    ``except to the extent that the Secretary [of Transportation] 
    determines, through a rulemaking proceeding, that it is appropriate to 
    exempt such operators of commercial motor vehicles from the application 
    of those regulations.''
        The FHWA views section 4008 of TEA-21 as a mandate either to impose 
    the FMCSRs on previously unregulated smaller capacity vehicles, or to 
    exempt through a rulemaking proceeding some or all of the operators of 
    such vehicles. Although the House Conference Report (H.R. Conf. Rep. 
    No. 104-422 (1995)) on the ICCTA definitional change directed the 
    agency not to impose on the States (as grant conditions under the Motor 
    Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP)) the burden of regulating a 
    new population of carriers covered by the definition, no such 
    restriction is included in TEA-21 or its legislative history. The 
    mandate of TEA-21 is thus stricter than that of the ICCTA. Still, the 
    FHWA is authorized to undertake rulemaking to exempt some of these 
    passenger vehicles from the FMCSRs.
    
    FHWA's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
    
        On August 5, 1998 (63 FR 41766), the FHWA published an advance 
    notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) to announce that the agency was 
    considering amending the FMCSRs in response to section 4008(a) of the 
    TEA-21, to seek information about the potential impact of the TEA-21 
    definition, and to request public comment on the question whether any 
    class of vehicles should be exempted. The agency also requested comment 
    on whether the term ``for compensation'' may be interpreted to 
    distinguish among the types of van services currently in existence.
    
    Discussion of Comments to the ANPRM
    
        The FHWA received 733 comments in response to the ANPRM. The 
    commenters included State and local government agencies, transit 
    authorities, vanpool organizations, vanpool members, universities, 
    trade associations, and members of Congress, as well as private 
    citizens. Most (more than 720) of the commenters were opposed to making 
    the FMCSRs applicable to the operation of small passenger-carrying 
    CMVs. However, several commenters believed it is necessary to regulate 
    these vehicles and, in certain cases, identified what they believe are 
    the specific safety issues section 4008(a) was intended to resolve.
    
    Comments Opposed to Making the FMCSRs Applicable to Small CMVs
    
        The majority of the commenters opposed to the rulemaking were 
    organizers and members of vanpools, and State and local agencies and 
    vanpool associations that believe implementing section 4008(a) of TEA-
    21 would adversely impact vanpool participation by imposing more 
    stringent standards on drivers of these vehicles. Some of the 
    commenters argued there was no data to support imposing the FMCSRs on 
    the operators of small CMVs while others emphasized the adverse impacts 
    the rulemaking could have on transportation providers for elderly and 
    disabled citizens.
        Commenting on the issue of commuter transportation, the Southern 
    California Association of Governments stated:
    
        The proposed expanded regulation would reduce the current number 
    of commuters willing to volunteer to serve as vanpool drivers and 
    back-up drivers. Members of a vanpool agree to the obligation on a 
    volunteer basis within the commuting group. Currently, a free or 
    partially subsidized commute and personal use of the vanpool 
    vehicles on evenings and weekends is still not enough of an 
    attraction for a large number of commuters. The proposed additional 
    requirements, which include minimum driver training, written 
    testing, behind-the-wheel testing, medical qualifications, drug and 
    alcohol testing, imposed by the FHWA will result in volunteer 
    vanpool driving to become extremely burdensome.
    
        The Florida Department of Transportation, commenting about the 
    impacts the rulemaking would have on transportation providers for the 
    elderly and disabled, stated:
    
        The proposed amendment to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
    Regulations (FMCSR) would have a significant impact to certain 
    Florida rural transportation providers. These primarily include 
    those operators that are located along or near the state border. 
    These operators provide transportation services for disadvantaged 
    persons needing transportation to and from certain medical and 
    rehabilitation facilities. These transportation entities are either 
    public or private-non-profit senior citizen or mental health 
    facilities and designated as community transportation coordinators 
    by Florida Statutes. [Their] operational areas are primarily rural 
    and it is often necessary for these operators to transport 
    passengers needing special care or treatment across state lines to 
    facilities located in bordering states. These transportation 
    operators receive funding and compensation for their services from 
    local, state and federal funds and have been considered as 
    ``eligible transit operators'' by the FHWA pursuant to the ICC 
    Termination Act of 1995. Vehicles operated by these providers mainly 
    consist of 15 passenger vans. These operators are currently exempted 
    from the FMCSR since the 15 passenger vehicles operated do not meet 
    the definition of a ``commercial motor vehicle'' in 49 U.S.C. 
    Section 31132 . These operators are also exempted from the FHWA 
    insurance requirements for interstate motor vehicles by [49 U.S.C. 
    31138(e)(4)].
    
        The Iowa Department of Transportation expressed concerns that 
    regulating small passenger-carrying CMVs would adversely impact motor 
    carrier safety programs by using limited enforcement resources to 
    regulate the entities operating these vehicles. The agency stated:
    
        State and local enforcement agencies have numerous enforcement 
    demands on the regulation of straight trucks, truck tractors, 
    tractors with semi-trailers, double bottoms, buses, and vehicles 
    transporting hazardous materials. Expanding the motor carriers 
    safety requirements to passenger carrying vehicles will be costly 
    and a strain on inspector availability for what appears to be little 
    public benefit.
        In a period when zero-based regulations are/have been developed 
    and implemented, is it logical to expand the definition of a 
    commercial motor vehicle to include 8-passenger vehicles? If 8-
    passenger vehicles are included, why not 6-passenger vehicles? Are 
    we beginning to over-regulate? Safety is a major issue in conducting 
    inspections. En-route inspections are kept to a minimum for buses. 
    To protect passengers during an inspection requires special 
    considerations and planning. Adding 8-passenger vehicles will 
    continue to complicate inspection procedures with risks to 
    passengers.
    
    
    [[Page 48512]]
    
    
        The Oregon Department of Transportation, Motor Carrier 
    Transportation Branch, also expressed opposition to adopting the new 
    definition of CMV. The Motor Carrier Transportation Branch (MCTB) 
    stated:
    
        The MCTB does not understand why the definition of commercial 
    motor vehicle was amended in the [TEA-21] to include vehicles 
    designed or used to transport more than eight passengers (including 
    the driver) for compensation. Further, the MCTB questions whether 
    including these smaller vehicles will improve highway safety.
        [I]t is not apparent that these smaller vehicles represent a 
    significant danger. In fact, this move to regulate smaller vehicles 
    contradicts the current Motor Carrier Regulatory Relief and Safety 
    Demonstration Project. Little, if any, safety benefit may result in 
    including these smaller vehicles under the jurisdiction of the motor 
    carrier safety regulations. As stated in the advanced notice of 
    proposed rulemaking: request for comment, ``vans and pickup trucks 
    are more analogous to automobiles than to medium and heavy 
    commercial vehicles, and can be best regulated under State 
    licensing, inspection, and traffic surveillance procedures.
    
        The International Taxicab and Livery Association (ITLA) opposed 
    adopting the new definition of CMV and provided estimates of the number 
    of businesses that would be affected by the rulemaking, as well as the 
    number of vehicles and drivers that would be subject to Federal safety 
    requirements if the FHWA implemented section 4008 of the TEA-21. The 
    ITLA stated:
    
        According to information available to ITLA, there are 
    approximately 50,000 limousines in use that would be affected by the 
    definitional change. It should be noted that there are over 9000 
    limousine operators nationwide (also operating premium sedan 
    services), and that the median fleet size is less than 5. In 
    addition, the average annual miles operated by limousines is 
    approximately 23,000 miles.
        ITLA estimates that there are approximately 74,000 vans 
    nationwide `` the breakdown between ``mini-vans'' and those affected 
    by the proposed definition is not available. Van fleets average less 
    than 10 vans, with an approximate annual mileage of 40,000 per 
    vehicle, and an average trip length of less than 8 miles lasting 
    significantly less than 1 hour.
        In September of 1998, the American Business Information (a mailing 
    list sales company) released a sales catalog that reports the following 
    information:
    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Number of
                 SIC code                   Type of service          U.S.
                                                                  companies
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    4111-01..........................  Airport Transportation..        4,752
    4119-01..........................  Handicapped                     1,302
                                        Transportation.
    4119-03..........................  Limousine Transportation        9,482
    4121-01..........................  Taxicab Transportation..        7,348
                                                                ------------
                                           Total...............       22,884
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The ITLA indicated that if the FHWA decides to make the FMCSRs 
    applicable to the operation of small passenger-carrying vehicles, 
    approximately 14,000 companies, 125,000 vehicles, and 165,000 drivers 
    would be covered.
    
    Comments in Support of Making the FMCSRs Applicable to Small CMVs
    
        Of the 733 comments submitted in response to the agency's ANPRM, 
    only a few (less than 13) expressed support for implementing section 
    4008(a). The reasons for supporting the adoption of the revised 
    definition of a CMV varied from the belief that highway safety would be 
    improved if the commercial driver's license and controlled substances 
    and alcohol testing rules were applicable to drivers of small 
    passenger-carrying vehicles, to the belief that applying the safety 
    regulations to these vehicles would improve school bus transportation. 
    None of the commenters in support of regulating small passenger-
    carrying vehicles believed implementing section 4008(a) of the TEA-21 
    would result in adverse impacts to those businesses.
    
        The United Motor Coach Association (UMA) stated:
        UMA's reason for pursuing a legislative change stemmed from the 
    rising tide of uninsured and/or unsafe carriers operating from or 
    through commercial zones (as defined in 49 CFR Part 372), 
    particularly in Texas and the southwestern states. In fact, the 
    problem was so severe in Texas that McAllen City officials 
    petitioned the ICC to severely restrict the motor carrier commercial 
    zone surrounding that city.
        Subsequent research by UMA and its operator member companies 
    indicate that the problem is not simply a southern border issue. It 
    is a growing problem that is National in scope. Exempted passenger 
    carriers recognize that municipal commercial zones provide a safe 
    haven from federal safety regulations. These protected and 
    unregulated interstate bus operators perform identical service to 
    that of the regulated companies that provide bus service using 
    larger vehicles. The unregulated carriers are very aware of their 
    current exempt status. They have generally used large vans or mini-
    buses with a seating capacity of fewer than 15 passengers to escape 
    compliance to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). 
    (Manufacturers of these small buses routinely market the vehicles by 
    highlighting their regulation exempt status in their promotions.) In 
    the majority of instances, unregulated service providers operate out 
    of urban locations that fall within the commercial zone 
    classification. UMA does not consider this exemption to be fair or 
    equitable and believes that passenger safety is compromised.
        Consolidated Safety Services stated:
        During ten years of reviewing the level of compliance with 
    applicable regulations by companies offering passenger travel, we 
    have seen regulatory standards for non-CMV vehicle operations that 
    range from comprehensive to non-existent. We routinely see companies 
    who restrict equipment inventory for the sole purpose of avoiding 
    the costs and efforts associated with compliance with the FMCSRs. 
    Attitudes displayed towards safety in these instances are generally 
    very casual in nature and cause considerable concern. It should be 
    noted that we also see non-CMV carriers whose efforts to provide 
    safe transportation should be commended since they apply the 
    standards published in the FMCSRs even though not required.
        Greyhound stated:
        Commercial van interstate service has grown dramatically in 
    recent years. It is difficult to document the precise size of the 
    population of commercial vans or their growth because the federal 
    government historically has not regulated them and thus has not kept 
    statistics on them. However, reports of Greyhound managers 
    throughout the country have made it clear that commercial van 
    interstate service has grown significantly.
        In 1995, Greyhound documented that growth with a report focusing 
    on one city, Houston. That report, which was shared with DOT and 
    Congress, showed that there were literally dozens of operators 
    performing van and bus service from points in Mexico to destinations 
    throughout the United States. Some of the bus service was licensed 
    as ``charter and tour'' service and thus was regulated, but none of 
    the van service was, or is, subject to any federal safety 
    regulation.
    
        With regard to the impacts section 4008(a) of TEA-21 would have on 
    student transportation, the National School Transportation Association 
    (NSTA) stated:
    
    
    [[Page 48513]]
    
    
        NSTA supports the proposal to revise the definition of 
    ``commercial motor vehicle'' to include vehicles designed to 
    transport more than 8 passengers. NSTA has long held the position 
    that all school-age children deserve the highest standard of safety, 
    regardless of who owns the vehicle, who operates the vehicle, or how 
    many passengers the vehicle will seat. This proposal will bring all 
    vehicles operating in similar capacity under the same regulations.
    
        Among the State agencies that support the TEA-21 provision, the 
    Colorado Highway Patrol indicated there are safety benefits to 
    regulating smaller vehicles. The Colorado Highway Patrol stated:
    
        The Colorado State Patrol supports the revision which would 
    require a ``Commercial vehicle designed or used to transport more 
    than 8 passengers (including the driver) for compensation'' to be 
    subject to the FMCSR's with qualifications identified below. Most of 
    these vehicles were subject to regulation under the ICC prior to its 
    termination in 1995. Why should passenger carriers, subject to prior 
    regulation by the ICC, be released from regulatory requirements 
    under FHWA? In Colorado the Public Utilities Commission (COPUC) 
    already regulates for-hire passenger carriers (including taxi cabs). 
    This rule should not apply to private motor carrier of passengers 
    (PMCP), business and non-business, (as defined in 390.5).
    
    FHWA Response to Comments
    
        The FHWA has considered all of the comments received in response to 
    the ANPRM and determined there is insufficient data concerning the 
    safety performance of motor carriers operating CMVs designed or used to 
    transport 9 to 15 passengers (including the driver) for compensation, 
    to justify making the FMCSRs applicable to them at this time. 
    Commenters to the docket have expressed opinions for and against 
    regulating operators of passenger-carrying vehicles designed to 
    transport 9 to 15 passengers (including the driver) but none of the 
    commenters have presented safety data that could be useful in deciding 
    whether to regulate such motor carriers. While the FHWA acknowledges 
    that there may be safety benefits to extending the applicability of the 
    FMCSRs to the operation of small passenger-carrying CMVs for 
    compensation, a mere assumption does not satisfy the agency's 
    obligation to quantify the benefits of rulemaking and to prove that the 
    benefits exceed the costs to the relevant segment of the industry and 
    U.S. consumers.
    
    Safety Performance Data
    
        The FHWA is not aware of any accident databases that would enable 
    the agency to estimate the annual accident involvement of small 
    passenger-carrying vehicles, operated for compensation in interstate 
    commerce. The absence of such data makes it difficult to determine 
    whether the accident involvement of these vehicles warrants Federal 
    regulation. For example, the agency is unable to determine whether the 
    number of accidents for this population of CMVs suggests these vehicles 
    are over represented in crashes involving fatalities, injuries, or 
    disabling damage to one or more vehicles (i.e., whether the number of 
    accidents is greater than one would expect given the population of 
    vehicles), which in turn may be an indicator of problems with the 
    safety management controls for the motor carriers operating the 
    vehicles. Also, the FHWA does not have information that would enable 
    the agency to examine the causes of or contributing factors to 
    accidents these motor carriers are typically involved in to determine 
    which, if any, of the FMCSRs could have made a difference in the 
    outcome.
        The FHWA has reviewed information from the National Highway Traffic 
    Safety Administration's (NHTSA) Fatality Analysis Reporting System 
    (FARS) and General Estimates System (GES) and determined that there is 
    information concerning the accident involvement of the class of 
    vehicles covered by section 4008 of the TEA-21, but no practical means 
    to distinguish between accidents involving interstate motor carriers of 
    passengers (either private or for-hire) and those involving intrastate 
    motor carriers, or those involving commuter vanpools operated by 
    individuals and not in the furtherance of a commercial enterprise.
        The FHWA also searched for information from the National 
    Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the Customs Service--because 
    some commenters made reference to the operational safety of motor 
    carriers transporting passengers to and from Mexico--to better 
    understand safety issues concerning the operation of small passenger-
    carrying vehicles. The NTSB has no published studies indicating a 
    safety problem with this population of motor carriers. The Customs 
    Service, while maintaining records on the number of vehicles crossing 
    the border, does not have information on either the actual number of 
    Mexican-owned CMVs that enter the U.S., or on how many of each type of 
    CMV enter the country. The Customs Service does not record information 
    on each vehicle, or whether the vehicle is operated by a U.S. or 
    foreign motor carrier. To further complicate matters, many vehicles 
    used in cross-border operations may go through customs more than once a 
    day. Also, the Customs Service does not collect CMV accident 
    statistics.
        The FHWA believes it is inappropriate to make the FMCSRs applicable 
    to the operation of small passenger-carrying vehicles unless there is 
    data to suggest operational safety problems.
    
    Estimating the Population of Motor Carriers, Drivers, and Vehicles
    
        In addition to difficulties in evaluating the safety performance of 
    motor carriers operating small passenger-carrying vehicles, the FHWA 
    has limited information on the number of vehicles and drivers that 
    would be covered by the FMCSRs. The FHWA has reviewed its database of 
    for-hire motor carriers of passengers who have interstate operating 
    authority.
        Although TEA-21 did not define the term ``for compensation'' as 
    used in the amended definition of CMV, the FHWA has, for the purpose of 
    this rulemaking and analysis, focused on for-hire motor carriers of 
    passengers operating vehicles designed to transport less than 16 
    passengers, including the driver. These carriers are currently required 
    to obtain operating authority from the FHWA (49 CFR 365).
        As of April 1999, there are 1,636 for-hire motor carriers of 
    passengers with active authority. Each of these carriers has on file 
    with the FHWA proof of financial responsibility at the minimum level 
    required for the operation of vehicles designed to transport less than 
    16 passengers. This number does not include pending applications for 
    operating authority, passenger carriers shown as inactive because their 
    authority was revoked for failure to maintain evidence of the required 
    minimum levels of financial responsibility, or private motor carriers 
    of passengers. There is no indication that Congress intended the FHWA 
    to consider regulating private motor carriers of passengers (as defined 
    in 49 CFR 390.5) operating vehicles designed to transport less than 16 
    passengers so the agency has not made an effort to estimate the number 
    of such carriers.
        The FHWA has information on the number of for-hire motor carriers 
    of passengers who have complied with the operating authority 
    requirements, but the agency does not have data on the number of 
    drivers employed by these motor carriers. The FHWA cannot determine 
    what percentage of these drivers would meet the applicable requirements 
    of part 391 on driver qualifications or how their typical work 
    schedules would be disrupted by having to comply with part 395 
    concerning hours of service for drivers. Therefore,
    
    [[Page 48514]]
    
    the FHWA can estimate neither the costs nor the benefits of applying 
    the driver-related requirements of the FMCSRs to the vehicle operators 
    based on the information currently in its databases.
        In short, the FHWA believes the ITLA's estimates of the number of 
    small passenger-carrying vehicles (or their drivers) operating in 
    interstate commerce for compensation should be considered, but cannot 
    confirm the accuracy of those estimates. The FHWA cannot estimate with 
    certainty the regulatory burden associated with making parts 391, 395, 
    or 393 applicable to these drivers and CMVs. However, in a separate 
    rulemaking action published elsewhere in today's Federal Register, the 
    agency is proposing certain requirements to improve its ability to 
    gather data about the operators of small passenger-carrying vehicles.
    
    Commercial Driver's License and Controlled Substances and Alcohol 
    Testing
    
        Many of the commenters, both for and against extending the 
    applicability of the FMCSRs to small passenger-carrying CMVs, 
    misconstrued section 4008 as mandating application of the CDL and 
    controlled substances and alcohol testing rules (parts 383 and 382, 
    respectively) to the drivers of such vehicles. Section 4008 does not 
    amend the CMV definition used for those programs (49 U.S.C. 31301). 
    Therefore, the potential benefits that some commenters argued would be 
    associated with imposing the CDL and controlled substances and alcohol 
    regulations can not be achieved. Conversely, commenters who argued 
    against adopting the amended CMV definition on the assumption that it 
    would make parts 382 and 383 applicable, thereby making it more 
    difficult to find vanpool drivers, were also mistaken. Furthermore, 
    since section 4008 is targeted at the operation of passenger-carrying 
    vehicles for compensation, vanpools would generally remain unregulated, 
    as explained below.
    
    Applicability of Section 4008 to Vanpools
    
        The FHWA agrees with commenters that the agency should not make the 
    FMCSRs applicable to vanpools. The agency recognizes the importance of 
    vanpools in reducing traffic congestion and air pollution caused by 
    automobile emissions and agrees that having to comply with the FMCSRs 
    would increase the costs of operating vanpools and could make it more 
    difficult to get people to volunteer to drive vans. The FHWA does not 
    believe Congress intended the agency to regulate commuter vanpools. The 
    use of the phrase ``for compensation'' in section 4008 of TEA-21 
    suggests that the implementing regulations be limited to vans operated 
    in the furtherance of a commercial enterprise, which is generally not 
    the case for commuter vanpools. Certain vanpool services may, depending 
    on whether the FHWA regulates the operation of small passenger-carrying 
    vehicles and how the agency interprets or defines ``for compensation,'' 
    be subject to the safety regulations. However, the agency does not 
    intend to regulate commuter vanpools that are not operated in the 
    furtherance of a commercial enterprise.
        The FHWA considers the phrase ``for compensation'' to be synonymous 
    with ``for hire.'' On April 4, 1997 (62 FR 16370), the FHWA published 
    Regulatory Guidance for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. 
    Page 16407 of that notice includes an interpretation of ``for-hire 
    motor carrier.'' The guidance states:
    
        The FHWA has determined that any business (emphasis added) 
    entity that assesses a fee, monetary or otherwise, directly or 
    indirectly for the transportation of passengers is operating as a 
    for-hire carrier. Thus, the transportation for compensation in 
    interstate commerce of passengers by motor vehicles (except in six-
    passenger taxicabs operating on fixed routes) in the following 
    operations would typically be subject to all parts of the FMCSRs, 
    including part 387: whitewater river rafters; hotel/motel shuttle 
    transporters; rental car shuttle services, etc. These are examples 
    of for-hire carriage because some fee is charged, usually indirectly 
    in a total package charge or other assessment for transportation 
    performed.
    
        The reference to six-passenger taxicabs operating on fixed routes 
    was included in the guidance because of the ICC Termination Act of 1995 
    (ICCTA) (Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat. 803, 919). The ICCTA amended the 
    statutory definition of a CMV prior to TEA-21, adding ``designed or 
    used to transport passengers for compensation, but exclud(es) vehicles 
    providing taxicab service and having a capacity of not more than 6 
    passengers and not operated on a regular route or between specified 
    places.'' The TEA-21 resulted in the removal of this clause from the 
    definition of CMV.
        The FHWA understands that passengers in many vanpools pay a monthly 
    fee to an individual, who either owns or leases the van. The FHWA does 
    not believe this is a business. The individual uses this money not as a 
    source of income or in the furtherance of a commercial enterprise, but 
    to pay for the van, insurance premiums, and maintenance. There may be 
    surplus funds each month that are put in reserve to cover unexpected 
    costs or losses of revenue during periods in which vanpool membership 
    decreases. The FHWA, however, does not believe that this type of 
    arrangement should be considered ``for compensation'' and does not 
    intend to regulate such operations. The agency requests comments on the 
    nature of these operations.
    
    Minimum Levels of Driver Training and Testing
    
        Although numerous commenters argued against adopting the TEA-21 
    definition of CMV because they believe the FMCSRs require a minimum of 
    8 hours of driver training, a written test, and a road test, these 
    arguments are based upon a misunderstanding of the current safety 
    regulations, and an assumption that all driver-related FMCSRs would be 
    applicable to drivers of small passenger-carrying CMVs.
        If the FHWA made the FMCSRs applicable to drivers of small 
    passenger-carrying CMVs, the drivers of such vehicles would, unless an 
    exception were provided, be required to comply with all of the 
    provisions of part 391, Qualifications of Drivers. However, part 391 
    does not require that drivers of CMVs have 8 hours of training. Section 
    391.11 requires that drivers be capable of operating safely the CMV 
    they are assigned, and have a valid operator's license issued by only 
    one State or jurisdiction. The determination of the driver's ability 
    may be based upon experience, training, or both. The regulations do not 
    specify a minimum amount of training or experience.
        Section 391.11(b)(8) requires drivers to successfully complete a 
    road test, or present an operator's license (or a certificate of road 
    test) to the motor carrier for acceptance as equivalent to a road test. 
    Section 391.33, Equivalent of road test, allows motor carriers to 
    accept a CDL in lieu of administering a road test if the driver was 
    required to successfully complete a road test to obtain the license. If 
    the FHWA required drivers of small passenger-carrying vehicles to 
    comply with all the requirements of part 391, the agency could consider 
    allowing motor carriers to accept a license other than a CDL if that 
    license required a road test. Even if the agency required drivers to 
    take road tests, the regulatory burden would be minimal. The operating 
    characteristics of vehicles designed or used to transport 9 to 15 
    passengers, including the driver, are similar to vehicles most drivers 
    are capable of driving (i.e., vans, full-sized sport utility vehicles, 
    commuter vans), and the amount of time and effort needed to conduct the 
    road test (as
    
    [[Page 48515]]
    
    specified in Sec. 391.31) would not be unreasonable.
        With regard to a written test, the FHWA does not require that non-
    CDL drivers be subjected to a written test. The FHWA rescinded the 
    written examination requirements of part 391 on November 23, 1994 (59 
    FR 60319).
    
    Transportation of Children
    
        In response to commenters that believe the adoption of section 4008 
    would either enhance or reduce the transportation safety of school 
    children, the FHWA notes that the FMCSRs include exceptions for all 
    school bus operations (as defined in Sec. 390.5), and transportation 
    performed by the Federal government, a State, or any political 
    subdivision of a State (Sec. 390.3(f)(2)). School bus operation means 
    the use of a school bus to transport school children and/or school 
    personnel from home to school and from school to home. School bus is 
    defined (Sec. 390.5) as a passenger motor vehicle designed to carry 
    more than 10 passengers in addition to the driver, and used primarily 
    for school bus operations. School bus operations are not regulated by 
    the FHWA, even when such operations are conducted by a for-hire motor 
    carrier of passengers. Irrespective of the decision the FHWA ultimately 
    makes concerning the applicability of the TEA-21 definition to small 
    passenger CMVs, vans used to transport children to and from school 
    would not be regulated as a result of that rulemaking.
    
    Applicability of Financial Responsibility and Operating Authority 
    Regulations
    
        In response to commenters who believe the FHWA should make the 
    financial responsibility (49 CFR 387) and operating authority (49 CFR 
    365) requirements applicable to the operators of small passenger-
    carrying vehicles, it should be noted that these requirements are 
    already applicable to for-hire motor carriers of passengers operating 
    vehicles designed to transport less than 16 passengers, with certain 
    exceptions. The financial responsibility exceptions, however, cover 
    many of the operations of interest to commenters, e.g., school bus 
    operations and most vanpools (see Sec. 387.27(b)(1), (3) and (4)). 
    Since these exceptions are statutory (see 49 U.S.C. 31138(e)(1) and 
    (3)), the FHWA has no discretion to rescind them. Subpart B of part 387 
    requires a minimum of $1.5 million in public liability for the 
    operation of vehicles with a seating capacity of 15 passengers or less, 
    unless the vehicles fall into one of the exempt categories. Part 365 
    requires for-hire motor carriers to obtain operating authority and 
    subpart C of part 387 requires them to file proof of financial 
    responsibility.
    
    FHWA Decision
    
        Given the statutory deadline of June 9, 1999, for deciding whether 
    to exempt the operation of small passenger-carrying CMVs from the 
    FMCSRs, the FHWA has decided that it is in the public interest 
    temporarily to limit the applicability of the FMCSRs to the motor 
    carrier operations covered prior to the enactment of TEA-21. The FHWA 
    has no useful data on the relative safety of small passenger CMVs. In 
    the absence of such data, the agency has no rational basis for 
    extending the FMCSRs to this class of vehicles.
        However, the FHWA believes that action must be taken to learn more 
    about the operational safety of motor carriers operating small 
    passenger vehicles for compensation. In a notice of proposed rulemaking 
    published elsewhere in today's Federal Register, the agency is 
    proposing that these motor carriers be required to complete a motor 
    carrier identification report (49 CFR 385.21), and comply with the 
    FHWA's CMV marking requirement (49 CFR 390.21) which would include 
    displaying a USDOT motor carrier identification number on all vehicles 
    designed to transport 9 to 15 passengers for compensation in interstate 
    commerce. The agency would also require that these motor carriers be 
    required to maintain an accident register (49 CFR 390.15).
    
    Discussion of the Interim Final Rule
    
        The FHWA is amending the FMCSRs to adopt the revised statutory 
    definition of CMV provided by section 4008 of TEA-21. The FHWA is 
    revising its definition of CMV found at Sec. 390.5 and adding a new 
    paragraph (f)(6) to Sec. 390.3 giving operators of CMVs designed or 
    used to transport 9 to 15 passengers a six-month exemption from all of 
    the FMCSRs. The FHWA is exempting until March 6, 2000 the operation of 
    small passenger-carrying vehicles from all of the FMCSRs to allow time 
    for the completion of a separate rulemaking action published elsewhere 
    in today's Federal Register. As a result of this action, the 
    applicability of the FMCSRs will be the same as before the enactment of 
    TEA-21 until that date. Therefore, entities that were not subject to 
    the FMCSRs prior to the enactment of TEA-21 are not required to make 
    changes in their operations to comply with the safety regulations.
        The FHWA, however, is adopting the statutory changes to the 
    definition of CMV concerning the use of ``gross vehicle weight'' in 
    addition to ``gross vehicle weight rating,'' and ``designed or used'' 
    to transport passengers instead of ``designed'' to transport 
    passengers.
    
    Rulemaking Analysis and Notices
    
        Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)), an 
    agency may waive the normal notice and comment requirements if it 
    finds, for good cause, that they are impracticable, unnecessary, or 
    contrary to the public interest.
        In this case, notice and comment are unnecessary. The rule adopts 
    the statutory definition of a ``commercial motor vehicle'' and an 
    exemption for passenger vehicles with a capacity of 9 to 15, including 
    the driver, that are operated for compensation in interstate commerce. 
    Because this rule makes the applicability of the FMCSRs the same as 
    before the enactment of TEA-21, and codifies two minor TEA-21 
    amendments that eliminate jurisdictional loopholes from the CMV 
    definition, the FHWA finds good cause to waive prior notice and 
    comment. The current regulations were adopted through notice and 
    comment rulemaking and do not require further procedural review. 
    Nonetheless, the agency's August 5, 1998 ANPRM (63 FR 41766) sought 
    information from operators of small passenger vehicles and other 
    interested parties; the FHWA received more than 700 responses. As 
    explained in the preamble, the commenters were overwhelmingly opposed 
    to the application of the FMCSRs to these vehicles. The most 
    significant conclusion drawn from those comments, and from every other 
    source the agency consulted, is that accident data which would allow 
    the FHWA to determine the relative safety of small passenger CMVs, and 
    thus to perform an analysis of the costs and benefits of subjecting 
    them to the FMCSRs, is not currently available. The FHWA has therefore 
    decided that it could not, consistent with the requirements of the APA 
    and other laws, impose on small passenger CMVs the burdens of complying 
    with the FMCSRs. Because this final rule establishes an exception to 
    make the applicability of the FMCSRs the same as before the enactment 
    of TEA-21, and will remain in effect only for 6 months while the agency 
    solicits and evaluates comments on the companion NPRM published 
    elsewhere in today's issue of the Federal Register, the FHWA finds that 
    there is no need to publish this temporary measure for notice and 
    comment.
        As explained above, however, the FHWA also believes that operators 
    of these vehicles should be required to
    
    [[Page 48516]]
    
    keep accident registers and display a USDOT number. Since these changes 
    are substantive, the agency is publishing an NPRM on that subject 
    elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. Those proposals, if 
    adopted, would enable the agency to collect safety information specific 
    to small passenger CMVs. If the data demonstrate that a serious safety 
    problem exists, the FHWA could then propose to apply some or all of the 
    FMCSRs to passenger vehicles with a capacity of 9 to 15.
        Accordingly, the FHWA finds that there is good cause to waive prior 
    notice and comment for the limited reasons described above. For the 
    same reasons, the FHWA finds, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), that 
    there is good cause for making the interim final rule effective upon 
    publication. Comments received will be considered in evaluating whether 
    any changes to this interim final rule are required. All comments 
    received before the close of business on the comment closing date 
    indicated above will be considered and will be available for 
    examination in the docket at the above address. Comments received after 
    the comment closing date will be filed in the docket and will be 
    considered to the extent practicable. In addition to late comments, the 
    FHWA will also continue to file relevant information in the docket as 
    it becomes available after the comment period closing date, and 
    interested persons should continue to examine the docket for new 
    material.
    
    Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
    Regulatory Policies and Procedures
    
        The FHWA has determined that this action is a significant 
    regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 and 
    significant within the meaning of Department of Transportation 
    regulatory policies and procedures because of the substantial public 
    interest concerning the possible extension of the applicability of the 
    FMCSRs to a larger population of motor carrier operations. This interim 
    final rule exempts temporarily from the FMCSRs the operation of 
    vehicles designed or used to carry between 9 and 15 passengers 
    (including the driver), for compensation in interstate commerce. As a 
    result of this action, the applicability of the FMCSRs is changed to be 
    the same as before the enactment of section 4008. The FHWA is simply 
    establishing an exception until the agency has better information upon 
    which to make a determination of the costs and benefits. The agency is 
    not making any estimate of either the costs or benefits of either using 
    the statutory definition or exempting all, or some, of these 
    operations.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The FHWA has considered the effects of this regulatory action on 
    small entities and determined that this rule will not affect a 
    substantial number of small entities. The FHWA is revising its 
    regulatory definition of CMV, at 49 CFR 390.5, to be consistent with 
    the statute, but exempting temporarily the operation of small 
    passenger-carrying vehicles from all of the FMCSRs for six months to 
    allow the agency to complete a separate rulemaking action published 
    elsewhere in today's Federal Register. As a result of this action, the 
    applicability of the FMCSRs will be the same as before the enactment of 
    TEA-21. Entities that were not subject to the FMCSRs prior to the 
    enactment of TEA-21 are not required to make changes in their 
    operations to comply with the safety regulations. The FHWA, in 
    compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), has 
    considered the economic impacts of this rulemaking on small entities 
    and certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic 
    impact on a substantial number of small entities. The FHWA will 
    reexamine this certification after reviewing the comments to this rule 
    and the companion NPRM.
    
    Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
    
        This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
    criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined 
    that this rulemaking does not have sufficient Federalism implications 
    to warrant the preparation of a Federalism assessment. Nothing in this 
    document preempts any State law or regulation.
    
    Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
    
        Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor 
    Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 
    regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and 
    activities do not apply to this program.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This action does not contain a collection of information 
    requirement for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
    U.S.C. 3501-3520).
    
    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
    
        This rule does not impose an unfunded Federal mandate, as defined 
    by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532 et seq.), 
    that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal 
    governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
    million or more in any one year.
    
    Regulation Identification Number
    
        A regulatory 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 in 49 CFR Part 390
    
        Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle identification and 
    marking, Reporting and record keeping requirements.
    
        Issued on: August 30, 1999.
    Kenneth R. Wykle,
    Federal Highway Administrator.
    
        In consideration of the foregoing, the FHWA amends title 49, Code 
    of Federal Regulations, chapter III, as follows:
    
    PART 390--[AMENDED]
    
        1. The authority citation for 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 1.48.
    
        2. Amend Sec. 390.3 to revise paragraph (f)(5) by replacing the 
    period with a semicolon, and add paragraph (f)(6) to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 390.3  General applicability.
    
    * * * * *
        (f) Exceptions.
    * * * * *
        (6) The operation of commercial motor vehicles designed to 
    transport less than 16 passengers (including the driver) until March 6, 
    2000.
        2. Amend Sec. 390.5 to revise the definition of ``commercial motor 
    vehicle'' to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 390.5  Definitions.
    
    * * * * *
        Commercial motor vehicle means any self-propelled or towed motor 
    vehicle
    
    [[Page 48517]]
    
    used on a highway in interstate commerce to transport passengers or 
    property when the vehicle--
        (1) Has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight 
    rating, or gross vehicle weight or gross combination weight, of 4,536 
    kg (10,001 pounds) or more, whichever is greater; or
        (2) Is designed or used to transport more than 8 passengers 
    (including the driver) for compensation; or
        (3) Is designed or used to transport more than 15 passengers, 
    including the driver, and is not used to transport passengers for 
    compensation; or
        (4) Is used in transporting material found by the Secretary of 
    Transportation to be hazardous under 49 U.S.C. 5103 and transported in 
    a quantity requiring placarding under regulations prescribed by the 
    Secretary under 49 CFR, subtitle B, chapter I, subchapter C.
    
    [FR Doc. 99-23026 Filed 9-2-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
9/3/1999
Published:
09/03/1999
Department:
Federal Highway Administration
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Interim final rule; request for comments.
Document Number:
99-23026
Dates:
This rule is effective on September 3, 1999. Comments must be received on or before November 2, 1999.
Pages:
48510-48517 (8 pages)
Docket Numbers:
FHWA Docket No. FHWA-97-2858
RINs:
2125-AE22: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; Definition of Commercial Motor Vehicle
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2125-AE22/federal-motor-carrier-safety-regulations-definition-of-commercial-motor-vehicle
PDF File:
99-23026.pdf
CFR: (2)
49 CFR 390.3
49 CFR 390.5