[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 145 (Monday, July 29, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36559-36563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15960]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 395

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0348]
RIN 2126-AC24


Hours of Service of Drivers; Definition of Agricultural Commodity

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FMCSA seeks public comment to assist in determining 
whether, and if so to what extent, the Agency should revise or 
otherwise clarify the definitions of ``agricultural commodity'' or 
``livestock'' in the ``Hours of Service (HOS) of Drivers'' regulations. 
Currently, during harvesting and planting seasons as determined by each 
State, drivers transporting agricultural commodities, including 
livestock, are exempt from the HOS requirements from the source of the 
commodities to a location within a 150-air-mile radius from the source. 
This ANPRM is prompted by indications that the current definition of 
these terms may not be understood or enforced consistently when 
determining whether the HOS exemption applies.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received on or before September 
27, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket 
Management System Docket ID (FMCSA-2018-0348) using any of the 
following methods:

[[Page 36560]]

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
    Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through 
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Fax: (202) 493-2251.
    Submissions Containing Confidential Business Information (CBI): Mr. 
Brian Dahlin, Chief, Regulatory Evaluation Division, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this ANPRM, 
contact Mr. Richard Clemente, Driver and Carrier Operations Division, 
FMCSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4325, 
MCPSD@dot.gov. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material 
to the docket, contact Docket Services at (202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this 
notice (FMCSA-2018-0348), indicate the specific section of this 
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each 
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material 
online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of 
these methods. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a 
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of 
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions 
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and 
put the docket number (FMCSA-2018-0348) in the ``Keyword'' box, and 
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on the ``Comment 
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following 
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual 
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your 
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no 
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic 
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they 
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard 
or envelope.
    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial 
information that is customarily not made available to the general 
public by the submitter. Under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 
552), CBI is eligible for protection from public disclosure. If you 
have CBI that is relevant or responsive to this ANPRM, it is important 
that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Accordingly, 
please mark each page of your submission as ``confidential'' or 
``CBI.'' Submissions designated as CBI meeting the definition noted 
above will not be placed in the public docket of this ANPRM. 
Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Mr. Brian Dahlin, Chief, 
Regulatory Evaluation Division, Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001. 
Any comments not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the 
public docket for this rulemaking. FMCSA will consider all comments and 
material received during the comment period.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the 
docket number (FMCSA-2018-0348) in the ``Keyword'' box and click 
``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and choose 
the document listed to review. If you do not have access to the 
internet, you may view the docket by visiting the Docket Management 
Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT) West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its 
rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including 
any personal information the commenter provides, to 
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL 14--FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy/ privacy/.

II. Legal Basis

    Section 204(a) of the Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (Pub. L. 74-255, 49 
Stat. 543, 546, Aug. 9, 1935), as codified at 49 U.S.C. 31502(b), 
authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) to ``prescribe 
requirements for--(1) qualifications and maximum hours of service of 
employees of, and safety of operation and equipment of, a motor 
carrier; and (2) qualifications and maximum hours of service of 
employees of, and standards of equipment of, a motor private carrier, 
when needed to promote safety of operation.'' This ANPRM specifically 
addresses the maximum HOS of drivers transporting agricultural 
commodities by commercial motor vehicle (CMV).
    The Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 provides concurrent authority 
to regulate drivers, motor carriers, CMVs, and vehicle equipment. 
Section 206(a) of that act (98 Stat. 2834), codified at 49 U.S.C. 
31136(a), grants the Secretary broad authority to issue regulations 
``on commercial motor vehicle safety.'' The regulations must ensure 
that ``(1) commercial motor vehicles are maintained, equipped, loaded, 
and operated safely; (2) the responsibilities imposed on operators of 
commercial motor vehicles do not impair their ability to operate the 
vehicles safely; (3) the physical condition of operators of commercial 
motor vehicles is adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles 
safely . . .; (4) the operation of commercial motor vehicles does not 
have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of the operators; 
and (5) an operator of a commercial motor vehicle is not coerced by a 
motor carrier, shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary to 
operate a commercial motor vehicle in violation of a regulation 
promulgated under this section, or chapter 51 or chapter 313 of this 
title.'' (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(1)-(5)).
    The provisions this ANPRM addresses are connected primarily with 49 
U.S.C. 31136(a)(1)-(2) relating to safety of the vehicle and driver and 
secondarily with (a)(4) relating to the health of the driver. This 
ANPRM does not directly address medical standards for drivers (section 
31136(a)(3)). This ANPRM does not propose any specific regulatory 
requirements; therefore, FMCSA does not anticipate that drivers would 
be coerced (section 31136(a)(5)) as a result of this notice.
    More specifically, this ANPRM is based on a statutory exemption 
from HOS requirements for drivers transporting ``agricultural 
commodities'' ``during planting and harvesting periods, as determined 
by each State.'' The exemption was initially enacted as Sec. 345(a)(1) 
of the National Highway System (NHS) Designation Act of 1995 [Pub. L. 
104-59, 109 Stat. 568, 613, Nov. 28, 1995].
    Section 4115 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 
Transportation Equity

[[Page 36561]]

Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) [Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 
1726, Aug. 10, 2005] retroactively amended the Motor Carrier Safety 
Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA) [Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, Dec. 
9, 1999] by transferring Sec. 345 to new Sec. 229 of MCSIA [113 Stat. 
1773]. Section 4130 of SAFETEA-LU then revised Sec. 229, as transferred 
by Sec. 4115, mainly by adding the current definitions of 
``agricultural commodity'' and ``farm supplies for agricultural 
purposes'' [119 Stat. 1743], as discussed further below. This 
definition is codified at 49 CFR 395.2.
    Section 32101(d) of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st 
Century Act (MAP-21) [Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 778, July 6, 
2012] revised Sec. 229 again, mainly by expanding the 100 air-mile 
radius of the exemption to 150 air miles. This change is reflected in 
49 CFR 395.1.
    The Administrator of FMCSA is delegated authority under 49 CFR 
1.87(f) and (i) to carry out the functions vested in the Secretary by 
49 U.S.C. chapters 311 and 315, respectively, as they relate to CMV 
operators, programs, and safety.

III. Background

A. HOS Regulations

    The HOS rules, set forth in 49 CFR part 395, limit property-
carrying CMV drivers to 11 hours of driving time within a 14-hour 
period after coming on duty following 10 consecutive hours off duty 
(except that drivers who use sleeper berths may combine a period of 2 
hours of off-duty time with a period of 8 consecutive hours in the 
sleeper berth). Drivers must take at least 30 consecutive minutes off 
duty if more than 8 hours have passed since their last off-duty period 
of at least 30 minutes, if they wish to drive or continue driving. 
Drivers may not drive after accumulating 60 hours of on-duty time in 
any 7 consecutive days, or 70 hours in any 8 consecutive days, however, 
drivers of property-carrying CMVs may restart the 60- or 70-hour clock 
by taking 34 consecutive hours off duty (or 24 hours off duty for some 
industries). The Agency is currently preparing an NPRM (RIN 2126-AC19) 
which will propose revisions to certain HOS requirements to provide 
greater flexibility for drivers, without adversely affecting highway 
safety.
    As discussed further below, these limits on maximum driving and on-
duty time do not apply during harvest and planting periods, as 
determined by each State, to drivers transporting agricultural 
commodities (and farm supplies for agricultural purposes) from the 
source of the commodities to a location within a 150-air-mile radius 
from the source.

B. June 2018 Regulatory Guidance--Application of the 150-Air-Mile HOS 
Exemption

    On June 7, 2018, FMCSA issued regulatory guidance on the 
transportation of agricultural commodities as defined in Sec.  395.2 
(83 FR 26374). The guidance addressed various issues related to the 
statutory term ``source of the commodities,'' but it did not directly 
address the scope or meaning of the term ``agricultural commodity.'' 
Specifically, the June 2018 guidance addressed: Drivers operating 
unladen CMVs enroute to pick up an agricultural commodity or returning 
from a delivery point; drivers engaged in trips beyond the 150 air 
miles from the source of the commodity; determining the ``source'' of 
agricultural commodities for purposes of the exemption; and how the 
exemption applies when agricultural commodities are loaded at multiple 
sources during a trip.

C. Statutory Definition of ``Agricultural Commodity''

    Although the HOS exemption enacted by Sec. 345(a)(1) of the NHS 
Designation Act did not define the term ``agricultural commodities,'' 
Sec. 4130 of SAFETEA-LU enacted a definition now codified at 49 CFR 
395.2. In that definition, ``Agricultural commodity'' refers to any 
agricultural commodity, non-processed food, feed, fiber, or livestock 
(including livestock as defined in sec. 602 of the Emergency Livestock 
Feed Assistance Act of 1988 [7 U.S.C. 1471] and insects). FMCSA added 
to Sec.  395.2 the definition of ``livestock'' as set forth in the 
Emergency Livestock Feed Assistance Act of 1988, defining ``Livestock'' 
as cattle, elk, reindeer, bison, horses, deer, sheep, goats, swine, 
poultry (including egg-producing poultry), fish used for food, and 
other animals designated by the Secretary of Agriculture that are part 
of a foundation herd (including dairy producing cattle) or offspring; 
or are purchased as part of a normal operation and not to obtain 
additional benefits under the Emergency Livestock Feed Assistance Act 
of 1988, as amended.
    Congress recently amended the definition of ``livestock'' in the 
Emergency Livestock Feed Assistance Act of 1988 (Section 12104 of the 
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 [Pub. L. 115-334, 132 Stat. 4490, 
December 20, 2018]). Among other things, the 2018 amendment revised the 
definition of ``livestock'' by removing the term ``fish used for food'' 
and adding ``llamas, alpacas, live fish, crawfish, and other animals 
that'' are part of a foundation herd (including dairy producing cattle) 
or offspring; or are purchased as part of a normal operation and not to 
obtain additional benefits [under the Emergency Livestock Feed 
Assistance Act of 1988]''. The 2018 amendment also removed the 
Secretary of Agriculture's discretion to designate animals in addition 
to those specifically listed.
    As explained above, the current definition of the term 
``livestock'' in Sec.  395.2 restates, without change, the definition 
of ``livestock'' as set forth in the Emergency Livestock Feed 
Assistance Act of 1988 when FMCSA initially implemented this statutory 
provision in 2007. The Agency intends to conform the current text of 
the definition of ``livestock'' in Sec.  395.2 to the change made by to 
the text of the 2018 amendment to the Emergency Livestock Feed 
Assistance Act of 1988, as discussed above. That conforming change, 
adding llamas, alpacas, live fish and crawfish, deleting the term 
``fish used for food,'' and removing the reference to the Secretary of 
Agriculture's discretion to designate additional animals, will be made 
at a later date. The Agency notes, however, that a primary sponsor of 
the 2018 amendment stated her intention that transporters of these 
additional species be included within the scope of the HOS exemption 
set forth in Sec.  395.1(k)(1).\1\ FMCSA therefore concludes that the 
2018 changes to the definition of ``livestock'' in the Emergency 
Livestock Feed Assistance Act of 1988 are self-executing for that 
purpose, becoming effective on December 20, 2018.\2\ The Agency intends 
to issue guidance addressing FMCSA's implementation of this statutory 
change in the near future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Senator Deb Fischer, the primary sponsor of the 2018 
amendment, noted her intention that transporters of llamas, alpacas, 
live fish, and crawfish be covered by the HOS exemption for 
agricultural commodities. https://www.fischer.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2018/6/bipartisan-farm-bill-clears-senate-agriculture-committee-with-senator-fischer-s-support.
    \2\ President Trump signed the Agriculture Improvement Act of 
2018 into law on December 20, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion of the ANPRM

A. Ambiguities in the Definition of ``Agricultural Commodity''

    Although the statutory definition of ``agricultural commodity,'' 
set forth in Sec.  395.2, is quite detailed in some respects, it is 
also circular and ambiguous. For example, ``agricultural

[[Page 36562]]

commodity'' is defined in part as ``any agricultural commodity. . .'' 
The definition is thus susceptible to multiple interpretations, 
resulting in potentially inconsistent application of the HOS exemption 
set forth in Sec.  395.1(k)(1). The Agency therefore seeks comment, 
along with relevant quantitative or qualitative data, addressing how 
FMCSA could define or interpret the term ``agricultural commodity'' in 
Sec.  395.2 more clearly, while remaining consistent with Congress's 
intent to provide a limited HOS exemption for CMV drivers who transport 
agricultural commodities. FMCSA is specifically interested in knowing 
what else should be added to the definition of ``agricultural 
commodity.'' The purpose of the definition is to determine which 
agricultural commodities are eligible for the HOS exemption provided in 
Sec.  395.1(k)(1), which is designed to allow additional driving and 
working hours for drivers transporting these commodities. The exemption 
gets the agricultural commodities to market with fewer delays ``during 
planting and harvesting periods, as determined by each State.'' Keeping 
that in mind, and the statutory limitation of using this exemption 
during ``planting and harvesting periods, as determined by each 
State,'' should the Agency establish more specific, but still broad, 
categories of eligible commodities falling within the definition of 
``any agricultural commodity''? Alternatively, should the Agency adopt 
a list of individual commodities (either by name or specified 
agricultural classification) that would fall within the definition?
    In addition to the ambiguous term ``any agricultural commodity,'' 
the definition of ``agricultural commodity'' in Sec.  395.2 also refers 
to ``non-processed food, feed, fiber, or livestock.'' Although FMCSA 
has not issued formal regulatory guidance addressing how the term 
``non-processed'' should be defined or applied, in its June 2018 
guidance concerning the transportation of agricultural commodities the 
Agency provided some guidance by stating that: ``The source may be any 
intermediate storage or handling location away from the original source 
at the farm or field, provided the commodity retains its original form 
and is not significantly changed by any processing or packing'' 
[emphasis added].\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 83 FR 26374, 26376 (June 7, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Agency requests comments on how the term ``non-processed'' is 
currently understood and applied. How can the Agency best determine the 
point at which an agricultural commodity, such as food, feed, or fiber, 
becomes ``processed?'' The Agency welcomes specific examples of 
agricultural commodities that should be considered ``non-processed'' 
within the meaning of Sec.  395.1(k)(1). FMCSA also requests comment on 
the definition of the term ``livestock,'' as discussed further below.

B. USDA's Classification of ``Agricultural Commodities''

    The Agency notes that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) 
statutes and regulations classify and define the term ``agricultural 
commodity'' in a variety of ways, depending on the underlying statutory 
and regulatory framework. The extent to which USDA definitions of the 
term are consistent with the definition in Sec.  395.2 may become 
relevant when transporters of agricultural commodities by CMV are 
subject to certain USDA requirements. For example, USDA administers the 
Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) (7 U.S.C. 449a(1)), 
which establishes a code of fair trading practices for the benefit of 
growers, shippers, distributors, retailers, and others. The PACA is a 
remedial statute, designed to protect those who deal in perishable 
agricultural commodities from unfair and fraudulent practices. The USDA 
enforces PACA through a licensing system. The PACA implementing 
regulations, set forth in 7 CFR subchapter B, part 46, require 
perishable agricultural commodity grocery wholesalers, retailers, 
commission merchants, processors, brokers, and truckers under specified 
circumstances,\4\ to obtain a PACA license. Those agricultural 
transporters subject to PACA requirements are also subject to the 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), including HOS 
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Under 7 CFR 46.2(gg)(3), ``trucker/dealer'' is ``a branch or 
additional business facility'' subject to the PACA licensing 
requirement if ``the driver is authorized to buy, sell, or otherwise 
contract for commodities on behalf of the firm.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The PACA defines ``perishable agricultural commodity'' as ``any of 
the following, whether or not frozen or packed in ice: Fresh fruits and 
fresh vegetables of every kind and character. . .'' (7 U.S.C. 
499a(b)(4)(A)). The PACA regulations state that the term ``fresh fruits 
and vegetables'' ``does not include those perishable fruits and 
vegetables which have been manufactured into articles of food of a 
different kind or character'' (7 CFR 46.2(u)).
    To avoid confusion for both transporters of agricultural 
commodities and enforcement personnel, FMCSA is considering whether it 
would be feasible and desirable to revise the definition of 
``agricultural commodity'' in Sec.  395.2 to make the term more 
compatible with applicable USDA rules and practice. The Agency notes, 
however, that any revisions to its definition of ``agricultural 
commodity'' must remain consistent with statutory intent to allow an 
exemption tailored to the needs of a specific segment of CMV drivers--
those transporting agricultural commodities ``during planting and 
harvesting periods, as determined by each State.'' One possible 
implication of that restriction is that the exemption should apply to 
commodities subject to relatively short-term perishability. 
Accordingly, to the extent that PACA's definition of ``agricultural 
commodity'' includes ``frozen'' fruits and vegetables, it is 
inconsistent with FMCSA's definition of the term. The Agency concludes 
that, because frozen fruits and vegetables are processed and packaged, 
Congress did not intend to include frozen commodities within the scope 
of the definition as codified in Sec.  395.2. On the other hand, there 
may be many non-frozen fruits and vegetables that fall within the scope 
of both FMCSA's definition of ``agricultural commodity'' and USDA's 
definition of ``fresh fruits and vegetables'' set forth in 7 CFR 
46.2(u). One approach might be for FMCSA to cross-reference or 
otherwise incorporate applicable PACA or other USDA definitions or 
interpretations, many of which are already familiar to some 
transporters of agricultural commodities. The Agency requests feedback 
on this approach, particularly from stakeholders subject to regulation 
by both USDA and FMCSA. The Agency would also like to know whether 
enforcement officials would find helpful cross-references to, or 
incorporation of, specified USDA rules and practices.

C. Definition of ``Livestock''

    Finally, the Agency is aware that some stakeholders believe the 
current definition of ``livestock,'' as set forth in Sec.  395.2, is 
incomplete. For example, transporters of animals not currently included 
in the definition have argued that they should be eligible for the HOS 
exemption in Sec.  395.1(k)(1) because such animals are subject to 
risks to health and safety in transit as are cattle, sheep, swine, and 
other ``covered'' animals. FMCSA notes that the NHS Designation Act's 
definition of ``agricultural commodity,'' as discussed above, includes, 
but is not limited to, livestock as defined in the Emergency Livestock 
Feed Assistance Act of 1988. The Agency solicits comments on whether 
the current definition of ``livestock'' in

[[Page 36563]]

Sec.  395.2 should be expanded beyond the animals identified in the 
Emergency Livestock Feed Assistance Act (including, for purposes of 
this discussion, the animals added by Section 12104 of the Agriculture 
Improvement Act of 2018, as discussed above). Another possible approach 
would be to adopt a definition of ``livestock'' broad enough to include 
all eligible animals, including those covered by the Emergency 
Livestock Feed Assistance Act (as amended), without listing them 
individually.

V. Questions

    FMCSA requests that commenters respond to the questions below, but 
the Agency also welcomes comments or questions on any other issues 
related to the definitions of ``agricultural commodity'' and 
``livestock'' as those terms are used in Sec.  395.1(k)(1). Please 
provide specific examples and, to the extent practicable, quantitative 
or qualitative data to support your answers.
    1. The statute and regulation define a term with the same term: 
``Agricultural commodity means ``any agricultural commodity . . . .'' 
Does that lack of detail cause compliance or enforcement problems? 
Should FMCSA consider adopting a list of specific agricultural 
commodities, or clarify its current approach utilizing the more general 
definition? If you wish to suggest that specific commodities (e.g., sod 
or other types of horticulture) be included in the definition, please 
explain how they fit within the statutory definition, and provide 
information about the average and maximum transportation times and the 
extent to which the commodities are perishable.
    2. Should FMCSA define or otherwise clarify the term ``non-
processed,'' as applied in the definition of ``agricultural 
commodity?'' If so, given the context of harvesting and planting 
seasons referenced in the applicable statute, how should that term be 
defined? Please provide examples of ``non-processed'' agricultural 
commodities that should be included and discuss the distinction between 
``processed'' and ``non-processed.''
    3. Would clarification or definition of other terms used in the 
definition of ``agricultural commodity,'' such as ``food,'' ``feed,'' 
or ``fiber,'' be helpful? Please provide recommendations and data to 
support your suggested definition.
    4. Should the definition of ``livestock'' be revised to include 
aquatic animals in addition to live fish and crawfish? Please provide 
data to support your answer, such as how far aquatic animals are 
typically transported and why you believe the HOS exemption would be 
appropriate for the transportation of specific aquatic animals.
    5. Is the list of animals in the definition of ``livestock'' in 
Sec.  395.2 adequate? As noted above, the Agency intends to add llamas, 
alpacas, live fish, and crawfish to the definition, consistent with 
Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 amendment to the Emergency 
Livestock Feed Assistance Act of 1988. Should other animal species be 
included? Please provide data on the average and maximum transportation 
times for additional livestock you believe should be included in the 
definition of ``livestock'' in Sec.  395.2 and the impacts of longer 
transportation times.
    6. Are there cost or safety implications of adding specific 
agricultural commodities or livestock to the current definitions of 
``agricultural commodity'' and ``livestock''? Please provide data to 
support your answer.
    7. Are there benefits of adding specific agricultural commodities 
or livestock to the current definitions of ``agricultural commodity'' 
and ``livestock''? Please provide data to support your answer.
    8. USDA regulations define ``agricultural commodity'' in a variety 
of ways, depending on the underlying statutory authority and regulatory 
purpose. For transporters of agricultural commodities subject to both 
USDA and FMCSA regulations, what are the practical implications of not 
having consistent definitions of that term? Should FMCSA adopt or 
cross-reference any of the definitions applied by USDA, to the extent 
they are compatible with the statutory definitions of ``agricultural 
commodity'' and ``livestock'' incorporated in Sec.  395.2?
    9. If the definitions of ``agricultural commodity'' or 
``livestock'' in Sec.  395.2 were more consistent with applicable USDA 
definitions of the terms, would use of the definition for purposes of 
Sec.  395.1(k)(1) result in cost or benefit impacts to CMV drivers who 
transport such commodities, the motor carriers who employ them, growers 
or distributors of those commodities, or enforcement personnel? Please 
provide data to support your answer.
    10. Are motor carriers being exposed to financial liability in 
situations where their drivers complied with HOS regulations and (1) 
the receiver refused delivery because the shipment did not meet 
contract specifications requiring the driver to deliver to an 
alternative location; and/or (2) the freight claim was not paid or was 
reduced because the grade standard of quality and condition, or 
temperature at destination, was not acceptable due to the driver's 
compliance with HOS regulations; (3) the receiver refused delivery 
because the shipment was late due to the driver's compliance with HOS 
regulations; (4) the receiver made the driver wait to unload because 
the shipment was late and charged a late delivery fee due to the 
driver's compliance with HOS regulations?
    11. Do you believe ambiguities in the current definition of the 
terms ``agricultural commodity'' or livestock,'' as applied to the HOS 
exemption in Sec.  395.1(k)(1), impact highway safety? If so, how?
    Issued under the authority of delegation in 49 CFR 1.87.

    Dated: July 23, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-15960 Filed 7-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


