Opinion: Working on an Effective Driver-Training Rule
By Don Lefeve
President and CEO
Commercial Vehicle Training Association
In this negotiated rulemaking, FMCSA selected 26 individuals representing various industries that are connected to trucking, including the Commercial Vehicle Training Association, to “negotiate” a proposed regulation. The other participants are made up of schools, trucking associations, bus associations, safety groups, enforcement groups, unions and a large carrier and an owner-operator. This diverse group has the challenge of formulating regulations surrounding entry-level training standards.
It will focus on the following topics:
• Development of minimum training requirements for individuals applying for a commercial driver license for the first time or upgrading from one class of CDL to another.
• Determining the amount of behind-the-wheel training and classroom instruction.
• Gathering and providing data to quantify the costs and safety benefits of training.
• Accreditation versus certification of entry-level driver training programs and schools.
• Contents of driver-training curricula, including separate course modules for motorcoach and passenger carriers, as well as hazardous materials carriers.
• Instructor qualifications and requirements.
• A performance-based approach versus a minimum hours-of-training approach, as well as simulation training and special considerations.
For more than 20 years, the Department of Transportation has attempted to produce minimum training requirements for entry-level drivers. Prior attempts have failed to pass judicial scrutiny.
With the passage of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act in 1986, President Reagan established the Commercial Driver License Program. This program requires both knowledge and skills testing for new entrants.
In 1991, President George H.W. Bush signed the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act — commonly known as ISTEA — into law, which directed the secretary of transportation to begin a rulemaking on entry-level training.
In 2004, FMCSA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on entry-level driver training, but soon after the release of the proposed rule, the agency was sued.
In 2005, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision that remanded the rule to FMCSA, stating that training must include on-the-road training.
In 2007, FMCSA’s proposed rule would have required entry-level training to be 120 hours and required all programs to be accredited. To be clear, CVTA supported — and still supports — mandatory training for entry-level drivers but not in the form that FMCSA had originally proposed in 2007.
CVTA and others supported an alternative version known as performance-based testing — which requires an individual to demonstrate the required knowledge and skills prior to sitting for the CDL skills exam rather than simply requiring an individual to complete a specific number of hours where he or she may or may not learn what is required.
In 2012, the highway funding law known as MAP-21, again called for FMCSA to put forth minimum driver-training requirements. Since then, FMCSA withdrew its 2007 proposed rule and is now undertaking the negotiated rulemaking process.
I believe all participants will agree that our nation needs to establish minimum requirements. I also believe all would agree that the status quo is not delivering the results that our nation’s highways and motoring public demand. The question, therefore, is: How do we achieve success?
Readers should know that there are no requirements or formal standards for driver training. Articulating standards and then requiring a prospective driver to obtain certification that he or she attended training is a reasonable request.
CVTA and others believe this should be demonstrated through an approach that is performance-based rather than hours-based. Additionally, we must ensure that all programs are licensed by the states in which they operate.
Some readers may be shocked to know that in the state of California, programs that cost less than $2,500 are exempt from regulation. This loophole, and others like it, allows CDL mills to flourish. Allowing such institutions to flourish makes a mockery of those who are dedicated to creating a culture of safety. CVTA actively works to ensure that these CDL mills either raise their standards or be shut down. The items articulated above are a logical first step.
While there are many subjects the committee will undertake, I am confident that as more people learn about performance-based testing, they, too, will become confident that it is the natural path forward for establishing training standards.
Our nation demands better training standards and accountability in our industry. I am optimistic that we will achieve success because failing to do so results in not having any standards at all.
CVTA is a trade association representing the interests of truck driving schools, students, carriers and other businesses that depend on their services. Its school members can be found in 185 locations in 43 states representing about 50,000 graduates annually.
