Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 123 / Wednesday, June 30, 2021 / Rules and Regulations interim final rule titled Extension of Compliance Date for Entry-Level Driver Training 85 FR 6088. That interim rule extended the compliance date for the ELDT final rule, from February 7, 2020, to February 7, 2022. The 2-year extension applied to all requirements established by the ELDT final rule, including:
1. The date by which training providers must begin uploading driverspecific ELDT certification information to the TPR;
2. The date by which SDLAs must confirm that applicants for a CDL have complied with ELDT requirements prior to taking a specified knowledge or skills test;
3. The date by which training providers wishing to provide ELDT
must be listed on the TPR; and 4. The date by which drivers seeking a CDL or endorsement must complete the required training, as set forth in the ELDT final rule.
In the interim rule, FMCSA cited IT
development issues largely beyond its control that prevented the Agency from completing the TPR in time for the February 7, 2020, compliance date established by the ELDT final rule.
Accordingly, the partial delay proposed in the NPRM was no longer feasible.
FMCSA issued the interim rule with an immediate effective date, but provided a 45-day comment period. FMCSA
received 20 comments on the interim rule, which are discussed below.

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

VI. Discussion of Comments and Changes to the Interim Final Rule As noted above, FMCSA received 20
comments on the interim final rule, with 10 of them coming from individuals raising issues beyond the scope of the rulemaking. The rulemaking focused on one issue: The extension of the compliance date.
Comments received about changes to the underlying ELDT rule are beyond the scope of the NPRM and will not be discussed. The remaining comments were from three organizations and seven individuals. The organizations that commented were the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law IPI, the Commercial Vehicle Training Association CVTA, and the Oregon Department of Transportation Oregon.
Comment: The IPI comment focuses on the method FMCSA used to monetize the forgone benefits of its interim rule.
According to the IPI, FMCSA
undervalued the forgone benefits by using an interim social cost of carbon, instead of using the emission reduction benefits included in the ELDT final rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:21 Jun 29, 2021

Jkt 253001

FMCSA Response: This rule accounts for delays in the implementation of the TPR that were not foreseen at the time of the ELDT final rule. The projected disbenefits resulting from the interim rule are not directly comparable to the benefits estimated in the ELDT final rule, as they are to be interpreted relative to a baseline consisting of the ELDT final rule, whereas the benefits presented in the ELDT final rule were relative to a no-action baseline.
A direct comparison of the ELDT final rules carbon dioxide benefits to the disbenefits of the interim rule is further complicated by the interim rules use of the interim social cost of carbon values developed under E.O. 13783. The Agency applied these values in lieu of those used in the ELDT final rule because they were the estimates applicable during the development of the interim final rule. FMCSA notes that if those values were recalculated today, yet a different value would result.
FMCSA is not presenting revised calculations as this final rule is not changing the compliance date established by the IFR and showing a different cost would not change that date.
Another factor driving the differential is the time frame over which the interim rule is estimated. The Agency did not expect that the cumulative 10-year estimates from the ELDT final rule would be comparable to an interim rule that projects relative impacts resulting from a 2-year delay. Comparing the two annualized estimates may not prove to be informative either, as the ELDT final rule was annualized over 10 years, and this one over 4 see footnote 2, infra.
Comment: The Commercial Vehicle Training Association CVTA made several recommendations for FMCSA to increase communication as the new compliance date nears.
FMCSA Response: These recommendations will be considered by the Agency.
Comment: Oregon welcomed the delay but noted several errors in the regulatory text, found in the headings for subparts E & F of part 380 and in 384.230.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA corrects these errors, as discussed below in the Section-by-Section Analysis.
Comment: One of the individual commenters explicitly supported the extension, and requested that FMCSA
publish a compliance guide on or before the new compliance date so businesses have time to understand training requirements fully.
FMCSA Response: While FMCSA was not required to publish small business compliance guides when it published
PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

34633

the ELDT final rule see ELDT final rule, 81 FR 88732, 88787, Dec. 8, 2016, the Agency provided guidance to the public, which can be found at https
www.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/
commercial-drivers-license/eldt.
FMCSA plans to provide further guidance as the compliance date approaches.
Comment: A second commenter stated that the compliance date should not be upheld until the States are fully on board and are compliant.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA agrees; the new compliance date should provide States with the time needed to adjust their IT systems to allow them to receive the information that the ELDT final rule requires.
Comment: The five remaining individual commenters expressed disappointment with the delay. One of these commenters questioned why FMCSA doesnt require paper registration to allow the rule to come into effect.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA did not consider implementing paper registration for either training providers or students, as doing so would have increased the cost of the ELDT
final rule, and would require approval from OMB, a process which could require further delay of the compliance date. In addition, the ELDT Advisory Committee strongly advised against using paper records due to concerns about fraud. FMCSA believes the electronic transmission of data is more secure, more efficient, and ensures that the required informational elements will be uniformly understood and reported.
Comment: Another commenter expressing disappointment noted that schools have taken steps to get ready for the ELDT final rule, including determining how to prove the 80
percent proficiency, creating certificates of training, and changing curriculum.
This commenter noted that it is imperative to get the ELDT requirements in place to reap the safety benefits as soon as possible.
FMCSA Response: FMCSA agrees that it is important to get the ELDT
requirements in place as soon as possible and acknowledges that training providers have been proactive in implementing the ELDT final rule requirements. This activity will be useful when the requirements come into effect in 2022. FMCSA also notes that training schools may voluntarily implement updated ELDT curricula at any time prior to February 7, 2022.
Comment: Two commenters questioned what had changed since 2016, when FMCSA stated that the original 3-year compliance date
E:FRFM30JNR1.SGM

30JNR1