Minimum Training Requirements for Entry-Level

Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators

Briefing for Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC)

December 3, 2012

Rich Clemente Transportation Specialist

FMCSA Driver/Carrier Operations

History

1985 – Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued “Model Curriculum for Training Tractor-Trailer Drivers” for voluntary adoption.

1986 - Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986: Established Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) program with tests for knowledge/skills, but required no specific training. NTSB further recommended, as part of new “national driver license program for commercial drivers” that “a requirement for formal training should be included in the prerequisites for obtaining a national license.”

2

History

1991 – Motor Carrier Act of 1991 – ISTEA Section 4007(a) – DOT “shall commence a rulemaking proceeding on the need to require training of all entry level drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs).

1993 – Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)

1996 – FHWA Study: “Assessing the Adequacy of CMV Driver Training”… “Adequacy Report.”

3

History

“Adequacy Report” – Two major conclusions:

• Of the 3 private sectors (heavy trucks; motor coaches, and school buses), none is “effectively providing adequate training.”

• Study found no evidence of a relationship between adequacy of the training the driver reported receiving and his/her frequency of accidents.

4

5

Entry Level Driver Training (ELDT) NPRM (2003) & Final Rule (2004)

• Writ of mandamus (2003) Public Citizen v. FMCSA for Agency to issue long overdue rulemakings – one was ELDT.

• FMCSA published Final Rule (2004) intended to avoid duplication of topics in CDL testing; training provided through motor carrier.

• Topics: Driver Qualifications; Hours of Service; Driver Wellness; & Whistleblower Protection.

6

• U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. Circuit remanded existing training rule to FMCSA for further consideration (Decided 12/2/05). Rule was not vacated.

• FMCSA “inexplicably ignores the Adequacy Report and the regulatory prescriptions contained in that report… adequate must include ‘on street hours’ of training.”

• Agency’s action was thus “arbitrary and capricious” under Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

Federal Court Decision

ELDT NPRM 2007

• Published December 26, 2007

• “Key” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) provisions: • New interstate CDL holders;

• Hours-based training approach;

• Mandated curriculum;

• Accredited schools; and

• 3-year implementation from Final Rule publication.

7

Who Must Complete Training?

• Any person applying to a State for an interstate CDL for the first time, upgrading to a Class A CDL from a Class B, or from an intrastate to an interstate CDL (including school bus drivers).

• Any person not having completed the training who is reapplying for a CDL:

• After revocation for highway safety reasons or after lapse in CDL status for 4 years.

8

9

NPRM Minimum Training Hours Proposed

CLASS A APPLICANTS

Minimum Hours CLASSROOM BTW TOTAL

TOTAL 76 44 120 Percentage 63% 37% 100%

CLASS B APPLICANTS

Minimum Hours CLASSROOM BTW TOTAL

TOTAL 58 32 90 Percentage 64% 36% 100%

BTW = Behind the Wheel

NOTE: Does not include training for endorsements

Accreditation

• Where must training be obtained?

• Accredited program/institution. Accrediting Agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) or the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).

• Agency has no authority over most training programs and institutions.

10

NPRM 2007 Comments

• Over 700 sets of comments filed to NPRM.

• Around 175 substantive comments – most all industry “major players” filed comments.

• Most commentors do not oppose driver training; HOW the NPRM would be implemented is the contentious issue.

11

“Key” NPRM Comments• Rule costs;• Lack of quantitative safety benefit data from training; • Accreditation; • Performance-based vs. minimum hours training

approach; • Implementation period length; • Length and details of curriculum;• Separate motor coach curriculum necessary;• Availability of training in geographic areas;• Effect on supply of new drivers; • Intrastate exclusion.

12

NPRM Unique Aspects

• Most extensive Federal program to require specific training to enter an occupation.

• Fairly high rule cost; benefits are only “intuitive.”

• 2007 NPRM “lite” with 13 major requests for comments; regulatory text was not fully developed in proposal.

13

Major Issues

• Lack of research/data proving correlation between increased driver training and increased safety benefits.

• Uncertainty on new driver population relating to overall rule cost.

• Lack of data on benefits to offset rule cost.

14

MAP-21 Legislation

• Moving Ahead For Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21); Signed 7/6/12; effective date 10/1/12 (Public Law 112-141).

• Two year bill -- provides funding for Agency programs; rules; enforcement.

• Mandates 29 new rulemakings within 27 months.

• Mandate for ELDT final rule within 12 months.

15

MAP-21 Section 32304

• Sec. 32304. Commercial motor vehicle operator training.

This section requires the Secretary to issue regulations to establish minimum entry-level training requirements for all CMV operators within 12 months of enactment of MAP-21. This section requires that the training regulations address knowledge and skills for motor vehicle operation, specific requirements for hazmat and passenger endorsements, create a certificate system for meeting requirements, and require training providers to demonstrate that their training meets uniform federal standards.

16

MAP-21 PROVISIONS

• Section 32308 – Program to assist veterans to acquire CDLs.

• Section 32708 – Report on feasibility, benefits, and costs of establishing a system of certification of [motor coach] training programs.

• Section 32709 – CDL passenger endorsement testing requirements.

17

ELDT/“What’s Next”?

• Future rulemaking action?

• Interpretation of driver training research data/potential future policy action.

• MCSAC recommendations/assistance in moving rulemaking process forward.

• Discussion/Q&A on “where do we go from here?”

18