[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10637-10640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03505]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2021-0174]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Approval of a New 
Information Collection Request: Effectiveness of Third-Party Testing 
and Minimum Standards for Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Knowledge 
and Skills Tests

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FMCSA 
announces its plan to submit the Information Collection Request (ICR) 
described below to the Office of

[[Page 10638]]

Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This ICR is 
related to the collection of information to determine the effectiveness 
of (a) third-party testing programs as they relate to commercial 
driver's license (CDL) skills and knowledge tests and (b) minimum 
testing standards for CDL skills and knowledge tests.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received on or before March 23, 
2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed 
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of 
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this information 
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for 
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Stowe, Research Division, Office 
of Analysis, Research, and Technology, DOT, FMCSA, West Building 6th 
Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001; 617-386-
6807; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Title: Effectiveness of Third-Party Testing and Minimum Standards 
for Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Knowledge and Skills Tests.
    OMB Control Number: 2126-00XX.
    Type of Request: New ICR.
    Respondents: State and local Government employees (management, 
professional and related); one respondent per State and one respondent 
for the District of Columbia.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 51 respondents.
    Estimated Time per Response: 1.42 hours per respondent.
    Expiration Date: N/A. This is a new ICR.
    Frequency of Response: There is a one-time response to the survey 
per respondent.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 72.42 hours (1.42 hours per response 
x 51 respondents).
    Background: The CDL program was enacted through the Commercial 
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 (CMVSA) (Pub. L. 99-570, 100 Stat. 
3207-170) in response to jurisdiction concerns about avoidable 
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) crashes and commercial driver 
qualifications. The CMVSA required the Secretary of Transportation to 
promulgate regulations establishing minimum Federal requirements for 
CMV driver licensing, testing, qualifications, and driver 
classifications depending on the vehicle configuration. CMVSA further 
established the ``one driver, one license'' requirement, prohibiting 
any person who does not hold a valid CDL or learner's permit issued by 
their jurisdiction of domicile from operating a CMV that requires a 
driver with a CDL and established additional requirements for drivers 
who transport hazardous materials. The prohibition further affected 
driver training activities by requiring trainees to receive the 
training and behind-the-wheel experience necessary to acquire their CDL 
in their jurisdiction of domicile. CMVSA's requirements became 
effective in 1992 and the requirements of the Act are implemented in 
Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), parts 383 and 384, with 
section 383.51 establishing disqualifications and penalties for drivers 
convicted of traffic violations.
    In 2005, the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators 
(AAMVA) developed a model testing system that FMCSA approved, thus 
ensuring that jurisdictions using the Test Model maintain compliance 
with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations governing CDL program 
training and licensing standards. In 2011, FMCSA established by 
regulation a requirement that all jurisdictions utilize a testing 
system that substantially conforms with the 2005 AAMVA CDL Test Model 
(76 FR 26854). The Test Model, which was upgraded in 2010 and 2014, is 
currently being used to some degree in all 51 jurisdictions; however, 
the safety benefits and other potential benefits of utilizing the 2005 
AAMVA CDL Test Model have not been fully evaluated.
    In the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act 
legislation signed into law on July 6, 2012, Congress passed a 
requirement for FMCSA to establish an entry level driver training 
(ELDT) program that both enhanced existing training standards and 
established minimum-level CDL requirements consistent across all 
jurisdictions (Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405). FMCSA's goal was to 
raise the standard of training, improve the quality of training, and 
reduce commercial vehicle accidents in every jurisdiction. Implemented 
in 49 CFR part 380, subpart F, the ELDT rule revised the mandatory 
training requirements for entry-level CMV operators who are required to 
possess a Class A or B CDL; seek to upgrade their CDL; or wish to 
obtain a hazardous material, school bus, or passenger endorsement (86 
FR 34631). The ELDT program was implemented beginning February 7, 2022.
    An additional benefit of implementing ELDT is that the training 
standards and minimum-level CDL requirements will apply to both 
jurisdiction and third-party examiners. Many jurisdictions rely 
extensively on third-party entities to provide training and conduct 
knowledge and skills tests. FMCSA currently prohibits the same third-
party entity from serving as both trainer and examiner. Current 
prohibitions limit the ability jurisdictions have to increase training 
capacity. This has resulted in the more frequent use of third-party 
entities to make up shortfalls between the demand for CDLs and a 
jurisdiction's ability to provide training and examinations. There is a 
well-documented driver shortfall in the trucking industry and the use 
of third-party entities to conduct training and examinations helps with 
increasing examiner capacity and reducing delays in drivers being 
issued CDLs. However, a challenge for FMCSA and jurisdictions is that 
to date, there is limited research available correlating driver 
performance with the type of training received (jurisdiction or third 
party).
    An additional challenge that has faced the CDL program since its 
inception has been fraud associated with the current AAMVA CDL Test 
Model. The provisions of 49 CFR 384.228 and 384.229 are intended to 
provide States with a mechanism for detecting potential fraud and 
ensuring that all requirements are being addressed. Maintaining proper 
oversight and auditing third-party training providers remains a 
challenge. The Training Provider Registry requirement for self-
certification of compliance with ELDT and State CMV instruction 
requirements adds to this challenge and will require FMCSA and the 
State Driver Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) to ensure third-party training 
provider self-certifications are accurate and meet all requirements, in 
accordance with 49 CFR part 380 and 49 CFR 383.73(p).
    To address these information gaps, FMCSA is conducting a project 
titled ``Effectiveness of Third-Party Testing and Minimum Standards for 
CDL Knowledge and Skills Tests,'' which will assess the effectiveness 
of the ELDT program, assess third-party training provider performance, 
and verify/validate compliance with ELDT minimum standards. This 
project is intended to address the following research questions:
    1. Is there evidence of increasing or decreasing fraud among third-
party examiners based on the pass rates and subsequent safety history 
of CDL holders who were tested by third-party testers?

[[Page 10639]]

    2. Are there significant differences in the outcomes of third-party 
testing on CDL testing?
    3. Would it be feasible to conduct a future study on the safety 
impacts of delegating CDL knowledge testing to third-party testers 
based on available data?
    4. How do the driving histories of drivers who received behind-the-
wheel training (pre-ELDT requirements) compare to drivers who completed 
the new ELDT requirements?
    5. How do the driving histories of drivers who received theory 
instruction (pre-ELDT requirements) compare to drivers who completed 
the new ELDT requirements?
    6. How do skills test pass rates of drivers pre-ELDT compliance 
compare to pass rates of drivers after the ELDT compliance date?
    7. Are there identifiable safety benefits that have been realized 
by the adoption of the 2005 AAMVA CDL Test Model?
    8. Are there external factors preventing SDLAs and the CDL 
community from achieving the full potential of safety benefits of the 
2005 AAMVA CDL Test Model?
    This one-time survey is necessary to determine institutional and 
programmatic issues in assessing the effectiveness of the ELDT program 
and where improvements should be made; this will ultimately contribute 
to the safety of our transportation system. The survey will allow 
researchers to determine which version of the AAMVA CDL Test Model (or 
equivalent) is being utilized, as required by 49 CFR 383.131 through 
133.

Response to Public Comments

    On September 21, 2022, FMCSA published a 60-day notice in the 
Federal Register seeking public comment on this proposed information 
collection. FMCSA received five comments. Below are summaries of the 
comments received, along with FMCSA's responses.

Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT)

    Comments: Overall, the Iowa DOT was supportive of the study. They 
raised concerns over a reference in the 60-day notice to SDLA 
challenges associated with maintaining proper oversight of third-party 
training providers and allocating resources to ensure third-party 
training providers' self-certifications are accurate and meet all 
requirements (87 FR 57748, 57749-50). The Iowa DOT stated that it is 
not a requirement for SDLAs to audit or oversee the training provided 
by ELDT providers. Separately, the Iowa DOT raised questions about the 
objectives of the planned research effort, the availability of 
necessary data to assess the effectiveness of ELDT and the 2005 AAMVA 
CDL Test Model, and the ability of States to provide specific data 
fields from driving history records. The Iowa DOT also recommended 
future ELDT-related research topics.
    Agency Response: FMCSA or its authorized representative will audit 
ELDT providers' training operations in accordance with 49 CFR part 380, 
to ensure providers are meeting the criteria set forth in the 
regulation. Separately, 49 CFR 383.73(p) states that after February 7, 
2022, States must notify FMCSA that a training provider in the State 
does not meet applicable State requirements for CMV instruction. While 
States are not required to actively investigate training providers, 
when a State does become aware that a training provider conducting 
training in their State does not meet applicable State requirements for 
CMV instruction, the State is required to notify FMCSA. Thus, if a 
State has requirements for CMV instruction (for example, if a State 
requires training providers to provide a minimum number of hours of 
behind-the-wheel training), the State is responsible for ensuring ELDT 
providers in the State are meeting those requirements. If an ELDT 
provider is not meeting the State's CMV instruction requirements, the 
State must notify FMCSA. FMCSA has adjusted the wording in this notice 
to improve clarity around this issue.
    The Iowa DOT raised concerns about the objectives of the study and 
the availability of necessary data to evaluate the effectiveness of 
ELDT. FMCSA has developed specific research questions for the current 
study, outlined in this notice. A broad objective of the study is to 
evaluate the effectiveness of the ELDT program; however, the research 
questions narrow that objective to focus on the effect of the ELDT 
program on driver histories and Safety Measurement System (SMS) scores. 
The Agency will use data from the Training Provider Registry, the 
Commercial Driver's License Information System, the Commercial Skills 
Test Information Management System, AAMVA's Report Out-of-State Test 
Results web application, the Motor Carrier Management Information 
System, and driver history records to answer the ELDT-related research 
questions. The Iowa DOT noted that it may be difficult for States to 
provide specific data fields from driver history records to accommodate 
this study. FMCSA does not anticipate requesting data fields that SDLAs 
are not already providing through the systems listed above. For 
example, FMCSA does not expect SDLAs to provide data regarding the 
training received by their drivers prior to the implementation of ELDT, 
nor does FMCSA expect SDLAs to perform comparisons of training data. 
FMCSA welcomes the State's suggestion to provide bulk driver history 
data so that FMCSA may perform its own analysis of the data.
    Regarding FMCSA's plans to assess the benefits of the 2005 AAMVA 
CDL Test Model, the Iowa DOT questioned whether FMCSA would be able to 
draw comparisons between the 2005 AAMVA CDL Test Model and former 
models, as many States have been using the 2005 AAMVA Test Model for 
many years, and some States (like Iowa) will be implementing a 
modernized version in 2023. FMCSA is not drawing comparisons between 
the 2005 AAMVA CDL Test Model and former test models that States may 
have used prior to adopting the 2005 AAMVA CDL Test Model. Instead, 
FMCSA is interested in assessing the benefits of the AAMVA CDL Test 
Model in general. The Agency will attempt to identify the version of 
the AAMVA CDL Test Model that each State is using by examining the road 
skills test score sheets being used by the State. Each variant of the 
road skills test sheet represents updates to the testing model (e.g., 
2010 score sheet or later) and the way that the skills test was 
conducted. FMCSA plans to look at data related to skills tests from 
various States, including in States that have historically implemented 
each version of the AAMVA CDL Test Model as it was released (including, 
if possible, the modernized version released in 2022).
    Finally, the Iowa DOT recommended several research topics to fully 
assess the effectiveness of the ELDT program. FMCSA acknowledges the 
Iowa DOT's suggested research topics and will consider them in future 
research planning cycles.

Montana Department of Justice (DOJ) Motor Vehicle Division

    Comments: The Montana DOJ Motor Vehicle Division was supportive of 
the study; however, they raised concerns about some of the language in 
the 60-day notice pertaining to the role of SDLAs in the oversight of 
third-party ELDT providers.
    Agency Response: The Iowa DOT identified similar concerns in its 
comments. See FMCSA's response to the Iowa DOT, above.

[[Page 10640]]

New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)

    Comments: The New York State DMV provided responses to the eight 
research questions listed in the 60-day Federal Register notice.
    Agency Response: FMCSA thanks the New York State DMV for its 
responses to the study research questions. The Agency will reach out to 
gather more information once data collection begins.

National School Transportation Association (NSTA)

    Comments: NSTA did not comment on the proposed information 
collection; however, the organization did state that it supports third-
party testing implementation for CDL licensing, due to its potential to 
streamline the CDL process and address the nationwide bus driver 
shortage. Conversely, NSTA raised concerns that ELDT requirements 
negatively affect the ability of school bus contractors to recruit 
drivers, as ``applicants have to learn and be tested in areas not 
germane to their role as a school bus driver.'' NSTA also stated that 
ELDT requirements can be duplicative of State programs already in 
place, which can impede the licensing process for school bus drivers. 
NSTA stated that ``removal of redundancies is paramount'' to alleviate 
the national school bus driver shortage.
    Agency Response: FMCSA invites NSTA to work with the Agency to 
identify redundancies in ELDT and State bus driver licensing 
requirements.

Alexandria Technical and Community College

    Comments: Alexandria Technical and Community College, a learning 
institution that provides professional truck driver training, indicated 
support for third-party testing and advocated for ``broad sweeping'' 
annual audits of ELDT providers, more stringent requirements for ELDT 
providers and third-party CDL examiners, and minimum timeframe 
requirements for theory, behind-the-wheel range, and road training.
    Agency Response: FMCSA is developing plans for an ELDT audit 
program. The Agency will continue to conduct research to support 
decision-making around the CDL and ELDT programs.
    Title 23, United States Code (U.S.C.), chapter 4, section 403 
authorizes the Secretary to use funds appropriated to carry out that 
section to conduct research and development activities, including 
demonstration projects and the collection and analysis of highway and 
motor vehicle safety data and related information with respect to all 
aspects of highway and traffic safety systems and conditions relating 
to vehicle, highway, driver, passenger, motorcyclist, bicyclist, and 
pedestrian characteristics; accident causation and investigations; 
human behavioral factors and their effect on highway and traffic 
safety, including driver education, impaired driving and distracted 
driving; research on, evaluations of, and identification of best 
practices related to driver education programs (including driver 
education curricula, instructor training and certification, program 
administration, and delivery mechanisms) and recommendations for 
harmonizing driver education and multistage graduated licensing 
systems; and the effect of State laws on any aspects, activities, or 
programs described above (see 23 U.S.C. 403(b)(1)(A)(i) through (ii), 
23 U.S.C. 403(b)(1)(B)(i) through (iii), 23 U.S.C. 403(b)(1)(E), 23 
U.S.C. 403(b)(1)(F)).
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of 
this information collection, including: (1) whether the proposed 
collection is necessary for the performance of FMCSA's functions; (2) 
the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways for FMCSA to enhance the 
quality, usefulness, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) 
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of 
the collected information.
    Issued under the authority of 49 CFR 1.87.

Thomas P. Keane,
Associate Administrator, Office of Research and Registration.
[FR Doc. 2023-03505 Filed 2-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


