OTA Dispatch Issue 3 2019

comment period closed October 10, 2018. FMCSA also hosted five listening sessions nationwide to gather industry feedback. One of the four questions listed in DOT’s ANPRM prompted industry representatives for information that would support reinstating the option for splitting up the required 10-hour off- duty rest break for drivers operating trucks with sleeper berth compartments. Many respondents were in favor of allowing drivers to divide their rest time into smaller increments. Any proposed change to the split sleeper berth provision will possibly rankle public safety groups who claim that a person needs at least eight hours of restorative rest. A second transpiring rulemaking that has been highly anticipated is Third Party Commercial License Testers, RIN 2126-AC14. This rulemaking would propose changes to the 49 CFR 383.75(a)(7) restriction that prevents a third-party skills examiner from administering a CDL test for a student he/she has provided skills training to. The NPRM was published May 2019 and this rulemaking is in the public comment period. The Public Comment URL is www.regulations.gov and the proposed rule is indexed by the RIN. The comment period closes on September 9, 2019. At the time I am writing this article, 68 comments have been posted. After quickly perusing the current comments I think they largely fall into two categories. First, there are many abbreviated responses that simply say that this rule would be unsafe and promote issuance of CDLs to unprepared drivers. Then there are supportive comments from folks who have impressive credentials and years of experience as skills trainers. Representative of those comments is that offered by Kevin Randolph: “Uninformed hysteria has no place in this discussion. In my state of N.C. we TPE’s are monitored and audited by DOT compliance officers regularly. There goes the substandard argument. Compliance requirements also lay to rest the street notion that somehow we are in the business of selling CDL’s. Nonsense and rubbish! I wholeheartedly agree with the agencies findings which state that “The Agency believes that allowing States to permit this practice could alleviate CDL skill testing delays and reduce inconvenience and cost for third party testers and CDL applicants, without negatively impacting safety.” As an instructor for an extremely well known and respected TDT school, at a local community college, as well as a certificate holding TPE, I firmly believe that though well intentioned, the law as it is now written has brought more harm than good to the training side of our industry. Every instructor out there has a different flavor, or technique, or approach to dealing with the myriad of problems we are challenged to solve in respect to getting a given student to perform to the level required by law. With more eyes on a student’s problems, we are better equipped to help solve them, thereby enhancing the learning experience which also positively affects that student’s comprehension and retention. End result? Safer and more qualified graduates. Which is why we do this in the first place.” On which side of this discussion do you find yourself? The deadline to comment online for this rule is September 9, 2019. The last rulemaking activity that I will highlight here is one in the ANPRM stage, Application for Employment, RIN 2126- AC13. FMCSA is considering changes to the requirement to have prospective drivers complete an employment application. FMCSA requests comment on the value of and need for this requirement. Comment also is sought on ways the requirement for an employment application could be changed to reduce the associated paperwork burdens for drivers and motor carriers, including but not limited to the complete elimination of the requirement. The requirement that a driver complete an employment application and provide the information specified by FMCSA may limit flexibility for prospective drivers and motor carriers and be overly prescriptive. It is not typical for the Federal government to require employers in regulated industries to have their prospective employees complete employment applications and provide information specified by the government. Even other DOT regulated industries, agencies, such as the Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Railroad Administration, do not impose a requirement to have prospective employees complete an employment application. Additionally, the information required by § 391.21 might be redundant of certain regulatory requirements (e.g., §§ 383.35, 383.37, 391.11, and 391.23), and thus may be unnecessary or could be obtained more efficiently from alternative sources. Accordingly, the best approach may be to leave it to the prospective drivers and motor carriers to determine the most efficient manner and process for them to fulfill their required notification and investigation duties. There were 376 comments received by the due date of May 7, 2019. You can track the further progress of this rulemaking, along with that of any other pending rulemaking topic, at www. regulations.gov by searching with the Regulation Identification Number (RIN). OTA encourages you to be a proactive and participating member of the trucking community by watching the agency rule list and letting your voice be counted by commenting on pending rulemaking. Your OTA staff is available to provide analysis and recommendations for all rulemaking matters.  Please copy OTA on your comments! Oregon Trucking Associations, Inc. Oregon Truck Dispatch Federal Rulemaking, cont. 8