1. ENTRY-LEVEL DRIVER TRAINING (ELDT) – A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Briefing for Entry Level Driver Training Advisory Committee (ELDTAC) February 26, 2015 v2b

2. 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. National Transportation Safety Board 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

3. 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

4. History “Adequacy Report” – Two major conclusions: Of the three 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. 2004 ELDT Final Rule Writ of mandamus (2003) Public Citizen v. FMCSA for Agency to issue long overdue rulemakings – one on these was entry-level driver training (ELDT) FMCSA issued 2004 final rule that was employer-based requiring carriers to train new interstate CDL holders in four “key” areas: Driver qualifications (including medical); Hours of service; Driver wellness; and Whistleblower protection 5

6. Legal Challenge to the 2004 Rule In 2005, the Court stated that FMCSA “inexplicably ignores the Adequacy Report and the regulatory prescriptions contained in that report… adequate must include ‘on street hours’ of training” Court remanded the rule for reconsideration, and there was no deadline set for reconsideration of the 2004 final rule 6

7. 2007 NPRM FMCSA proposed a new rule (12/26/07) that would: Apply to new interstate CDL applicants before taking the skills test at the State Driver Licensing Agency; Include mandatory curriculum with minimum classroom and behind-the-wheel (BTW) hours; Require schools to be accredited by an agency recognized by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) or the Department of Education (ED); and 3-year implementation from Rule publication. 7

8. 2007 NPRM Comments Over 700 sets of NPRM comments filed Around 175 substantive comments – nearly all industry stakeholders filed Most commenters support the general concept of driver training; HOW the NPRM would be implemented was the contentious issue 8

9. Reaction to the 2007 NPRM Primary commenter concerns: Hours–based training: Commenters preferred performance–based with the option to test out of specific portions of the training; Accreditation: They believe accreditation adds significant costs and the process would preclude new training schools from entering into the industry; Impact of rule on Federal financial aid: Establishing minimum hours for entering into a profession would potentially reduce financial aid availability for programs exceeding the minimum hours required. 9

10. Reaction to the 2007 NPRM Other commenter concerns: Rule costs; Lack of quantitative safety benefit data from training; 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 10

11. MAP-21 Requirements Section 32304 – CMV operator training. By October 1, 2013, the Secretary must issue final regulations to establish minimum entry-level training requirements for all (new interstate and intrastate CDL applicants) operators and license upgrades The regulations must address knowledge and skills for drivers, with specific requirements for drivers seeking a passenger or hazmat endorsement The rules must require that training providers demonstrate that their training meets the Federal standards 11

12. FMCSA Actions Since MAP-21 Two 2013 public listening sessions (American Bus Association and Mid-America Trucking Show) Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC) June 2013 letter report on ELDT In September 9, 2013, FMCSA published a notice withdrawing the 2007 NPRM citing: –Substantive issues raised by docket commenters; –Listening session participants’ remarks; –MCSAC letter report; and –MAP-21 requirements beyond the scope of 2007 NPRM 12

13. MCSAC Report Late 2012 -- MCSAC presented with long ELDT history, primary concerns from 2007 NPRM, and new MAP-21 mandates; June 2013 -- MCSAC submitted final report to FMCSA in 3 sections: 1) issues related to the scope/applicability of ELDT requirements; 2) 2007 NPRM “key” comments/concerns; 3) continued or on-going driver training Report available at www.mcsac.fmcsa.dot.gov 13

14. Overview of REG-NEG July 21, 2014: Agency hired Convener to speak with interested parties about the feasibility of conducting an ELDT Negotiated Rulemaking (“Reg-Neg”) August 19, 2014: Agency published Federal Register Notice of Intent; Consideration of Negotiated Rulemaking Processes November 2014: Convener submitted written “convening” report of findings and recommendations to the Agency; and December 10, 2014: Agency published notice of intent to establish ELDTAC 14

15. Why is FMCSA Conducting a Negotiated Rulemaking? MAP-21 mandated numerous changes from the 2007 NPRM, therefore, the Agency could not move forward with a robust final rule; A “Reg-Neg” provides an opportunity to get the committee members to help the Agency gather information and data to help quantify the costs and benefits of the rulemaking; and Stakeholders can help the Agency draft the basic framework for a rule that is practicable, enforceable, and cost effective 15