Laserfiche WebLink
Federal Register/Vol. 73, No. 231/Monday, December 1, 2008/Rules and Regulations 73109 <br /> unsafe behavior.CVSA expressed York DMV,First Advantage,CVSA, of the compliance date of this rule and <br /> concern that a driver might attempt to Vermont DMV,and an individual CDLIS modernization efforts required by <br /> circumvent providing a medical medical examiner agree that this offense SAFETEA–LU. <br /> examiner's certificate by self-certifying should included under the a.Compliance Date Sooner than 3 <br /> to operate only in excepted or intrastate disqualification rules.Other years.Advocates suggest implementing <br /> commerce.It then asks how commenters,such as J.B.Hunt and a shorter time frame for compliance <br /> enforcement personnel will know what ATA,believe that there should be a with these requirements than the <br /> actions to take.CVSA argues that such penalty severe enough to discourage Agency proposed in the NPRM.They <br /> drivers could circumvent the medical unsafe behavior,but do not specifically describe a need for reforms and <br /> certification requirement and continue suggest making the offense a improvements in CDLIS and note that <br /> to operate CMVs without meeting the disqualification violation in the uncorrected problems adversely impact <br /> qualifications standards of the FMCSRs. FMCSRs.The Teamsters,the Michigan the benefits of the proposal. <br /> At a minimum,CVSA recommends Department of State,Delaware DOT,and Nevertheless,Advocates believe that the <br /> that CDL drivers found operating in Landstar Systems do not support adding proposed integration should not be <br /> non-excepted,interstate commerce with a new disqualifying offense under 49 delayed until CDLIS is upgraded via <br /> a medical certification status of"not- CFR 383.51. CDLIS modernization because some part <br /> certified"should be placed out-of- FMCSA Response:FMCSA agrees of the safety benefits could be achieved <br /> service.J.B.Hunt also advocates that with ATA,J.B.Hunt,and Maryland that if the Agency acts quickly to issue a <br /> operating a CMV with a"not-certified" the enforcement action against an final rule. <br /> status should be made an out-of-service uncertified driver should be sufficiently FMCSA Response:It is FMCSA's <br /> violation,noting that placing a driver severe to discourage the behavior.The established practice to allow States 3 <br /> out-of-service creates a significant Agency also agrees with the commenters years to come into compliance with new <br /> incentive for the motor carrier not to that such driver behavior exists. regulatory requirements in both the CDL <br /> allow the driver to operate a CMV when However,upon careful legal review,the and MCSAP programs.Generally,that <br /> not medically certified.It comments FMCSA determined it does not have the time period allows for any needed <br /> further that making a medical statutory authority to include such legislative changes,CDLIS software <br /> certification status of"not-certified"an conduct as a new serious traffic offense changes,and training of State <br /> out-of-service violation would in§383.51(c). employees for new procedures. <br /> positively influence safety,since e.Intrastate and Excepted Service After States are in compliance with <br /> carriers have a vested interest in Restrictions.The New York DMV the technical requirements of the rule <br /> reducing out-of-service violations.J.B. suggests that the final rule should and are ready to begin receiving the <br /> Hunt points out that management's time require a restriction for drivers who are medical examiner's certificates from the <br /> is consumed by performing an claiming the"excepted"status for any drivers,they will need all CDL drivers <br /> investigation and corrective action— reason and who are not limited to to provide their self-certification of <br /> when a load is delivered late,the intrastate operation.Because the Agency driving type,and will need to collect <br /> carrier's profitability is affected. proposed in the NPRM that drivers and post the medical certificates drivers <br /> FMCSA Response:FMCSA agrees could self-certify to operating CMVs are required to provide them.This rule <br /> with CVSA and J.B.Hunt that CDL only in intrastate commerce,the Oregon establishes a timeframe for CDL drivers <br /> drivers and motor carriers need some DOT recommends using a"K" to make the self-certification of driving <br /> type of deterrent from attempting to restriction to identify drivers licensed type no later than two additional years <br /> circumvent either the medical for"intrastate"driving only. after the State comes into compliance <br /> certification requirement for non- FMCSA Response:FMCSA does not with the rule.These compliance dates <br /> excepted,interstate drivers,or the agree with New York and Oregon's are intended to provide States sufficient <br /> restrictions of excepted and intrastate proposal that drivers who,in time to incrementally add all CDL <br /> self-certification.In response to the accordance with§383.71(a)(1),self- drivers'required status information.To <br /> comments to the docket,including those certify to operate only in either excepted fully implement the rule any faster <br /> from CVSA and J.B.Hunt,FMCSA notes or intrastate commerce should be would create a significant burden on <br /> that the final rule adds explicit restricted.The regulations are clear SDLAs,enforcement personnel,and <br /> requirements at§391.41(a)(3)(i)and(ii), about the type of operations that drivers drivers. <br /> specifying the medical certification may perform;thus the recommended b.Compliance Date Later than 3 <br /> requirements for non-excepted, restriction will not be imposed.There is Years.State agencies in Minnesota and <br /> interstate CDL drivers.There are already no requirement for the SDLA to verify Wisconsin do not believe legislation <br /> civil and criminal sanctions applicable the driver's self-certification.The would be required to implement these <br /> to a driver operating a CMV without a driver's self-certification required by requirements and think that the 3-year <br /> required medical certificate. See 49 CFR §383.71(a)(1)establishes procedures period would%e sufficient,particularly <br /> 390.37.Where there is a substantial that enable enforcement personnel to if adequate funding is received from <br /> likelihood of serious injury or death, detect whether the driver correctly self- FMCSA.Vermont also thought the 3- <br /> such a driver can be ordered out-of- certified and to cite the driver for year implementation window for States <br /> service as an imminent hazard.See also corrective enforcement action,if to achieve compliance would be <br /> 49 CFR 386.72(b). necessary.If a driver who self-certified acceptable. <br /> d.Disqualification Offense.Many to operate only in"excepted"commerce State agencies in California,Delaware, <br /> commenters on the issue of drivers is stopped at the roadside and Louisiana,Michigan,Nebraska,New <br /> operating without the required medical determined to be operating in other than York,Oregon,Pennsylvania,Texas, <br /> certification favored implementing a excepted commerce,the driver could be Vermont,and Virginia indicate that new <br /> disqualifying offense under§383.51. cited and placed out-of-service. legislation might be required for them to <br /> The California DMV,Maryland State implement the new requirements. <br /> Highway Administration,Minnesota 13.Implementation Schedule Delaware,Michigan,Oregon,Texas,and <br /> Department of Public Safety,Wisconsin A number of State agencies and Virginia think that the 3-year <br /> DOT,Oregon DOT,Advocates,New organizations comme ted on the timing implementation timeframe would be <br /> Li <br /> •1 <br />