View Rule

Statement of Need: As a result of the ICC Termination Act of 1995 [Public Law 104-88, December 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 888] (ICCTA), Congress terminated the Interstate Commerce Commission and transferred its functions concerning licensing and financial responsibility requirements to the DOT. Congress mandated that the agency consider unifying the four current systems with a single, on-line Federal system.

Summary of the Legal Basis: The ICCTA created a new 49 U.S.C. 13908 directing "the Secretary, in cooperation with the States, and after notice and opportunity for public comment," . . . to "issue regulations to replace the current DOT identification number system, the single State registration system under section 14504, the registration system contained in this chapter, and the financial responsibility information system under section 13906 with a single, on-line, Federal system."

Alternatives: FMCSA considered several alternatives to the proposal discussed here, in an effort to minimize the potential new filing burden on small entities which comprise 80% of motor carriers. For instance, we considered exempting existing carriers from certain new filing requirements (via a grandfather clause), with the idea that it would minimize the compliance costs of this proposal. However, while reducing compliance costs (and thereby improving filing efficiency), it would also have reduced, not enhanced, the fairness of the motor carrier registration process relative to the status quo by placing higher burdens on new entrants than existing carriers. As such, it would have acted as a barrier to entry to small new entrants to the benefit of existing carriers. Conversely, we also considered exempting new entrants from these requirements, but dismissed this on the grounds that it too would have reduced the fairness of the registration process. Additionally, either option would have reduced safety relative to the proposal discussed here. The agency also considered removing the process agent designation filing requirement on the grounds that it was the most costly of the initiatives in this proposal. However, the agency dismissed this option because FMCSA division administrators felt that this particular filing requirement had the best potential to increase industry safety by improving the productivity of the agency's safety investigators (thereby allowing them to initiate additional compliance reviews). Additionally, the process agent designation filing requirement also enhances the fairness of the agency's registration process.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits: Total discounted costs of the proposed rule equal $75.4 million over the 10-year analysis period. In examining the overall burden of the NPRM to small entities, the agency countered some new (cost inducing) proposals with several actions that would reduce the filing burden of new entrant and existing motor carriers. The cost savings would partially offset the compliance costs, resulting in average total compliance costs of $48 per new entrant and $42 per existing carrier in any single year of the 10-year analysis period. Since costs are expected to reduce pre-tax profits of small entities by less than 1 percent in a given year, the agency believes the impact on small entities has effectively been minimized with the current proposal, while trying to meet its stated goals and Congress' mandate. Benefits from the proposed rule include crash-related benefits from avoided crashes as well as time/cost savings associated with a reduced filing burden and/or reduced FMCSA fees paid by motor carriers. Total first-year benefits of the proposal would be $9.3 million (discounted), while total discounted benefits are estimated at $91.4 million over the 10-year analysis period. Comments were requested on this subject in the NPRM.

Risks: The proposed rule is intended to streamline the registration process and ensure that FMCSA can more efficiently track CMVs and ensure their safe operation. The Unified Registration System imposes no operational responsibilities on drivers. Therefore, the proposed regulation would not impair a driver's ability to operate vehicles safety; would not impact the physical condition of drivers; and would not have a deleterious effect on the physical condition of drivers, in accordance with the statutory mandate of 49 U.S.C. 31136 (a).