Hours of Service of Drivers-Restart Provisions
| Published date | 12 September 2019 |
| Citation | 84 FR 48077 |
| Record Number | 2019-19648 |
| Section | Rules and Regulations |
| Court | Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration |
Federal Register, Volume 84 Issue 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2019)
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 177 (Thursday, September 12, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48077-48081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19648]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 395
[Docket No. FMCSA-2004-19608]
RIN 2126-AC30
Hours of Service of Drivers--Restart Provisions
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA amends its hours-of-service (HOS) requirements
applicable to drivers of property-carrying commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) to remove provisions requiring that a 34-hour restart include
two periods between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. and limiting use of a restart to
once every 168
[[Page 48078]]
hours--provisions that were promulgated in December 2011. In a series
of Appropriations Acts, Congress suspended these provisions, pending
completion of a naturalistic study comparing the effects of the restart
provisions in effect under the 2011 rule versus provisions in effect
prior to the 2011 rule's compliance date. The 2017 naturalistic study
found no statistically significant benefits from the restart rule.
Pursuant to a 2017 Appropriations Act, the 2011 restart rules are
therefore void by operation of law. Although not in effect, the
provisions remain in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which could
cause confusion for some stakeholders.
DATES: This final rule is effective September 12, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Clemente, Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590-0001, by telephone at (202) 366-4325, or email at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Final Rule is organized as follows:
I. Abbreviations and Acronyms
II. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
III. Background
IV. International Impacts
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review),
and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs)
C. Congressional Review Act
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Assistance for Small Entities
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
I. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
J. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
K. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
L. Privacy
M. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
N. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
O. E.O. 13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic
Growth)
P. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
Q. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)
R. Environment (NEPA)
S. Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act)
I. Abbreviations and Acronyms
APA Administrative Procedure Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMV Commercial motor vehicle
DOT Department of Transportation
E.O. Executive Order
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FMCSRs Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
FR Federal Register
HOS Hours of service
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
Sec. Section
U.S.C. United States Code
II. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
This rulemaking is based on authority derived from the Motor
Carrier Act of 1935 (1935 Act) and the Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984
(1984 Act), as well as a series of appropriations acts that ultimately
invalidated certain HOS provisions.
The 1935 Act, as amended, provides that ``The Secretary of
Transportation may prescribe requirements for--(1) qualifications and
maximum hours of service of employees of, and safety of operation and
equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2) qualifications and maximum hours
of service of employees of, and standards of equipment of, a motor
private carrier, when needed to promote safety of operation'' (49
U.S.C. 31502(b)(1), (2)). The HOS regulations concern the ``maximum
hours of service of employees'' of both motor carriers and motor
private carriers, as authorized by the 1935 Act.
The 1984 Act, as amended, provides broad concurrent authority to
regulate drivers, motor carriers, and vehicle equipment. It requires
the Secretary of Transportation to ``prescribe regulations on
commercial motor vehicle safety. The regulations shall prescribe
minimum safety standards for commercial motor vehicles.'' (49 U.S.C.
31136(a)). The 1984 Act also requires that: ``At a minimum, the
regulations shall ensure that--(1) commercial motor vehicles are
maintained, equipped, loaded, and operated safely; (2) the
responsibilities imposed on operators of commercial motor vehicles do
not impair their ability to operate the vehicles safely; (3) the
physical condition of operators of commercial motor vehicles is
adequate to enable them to operate the vehicles safely. . .; (4) the
operation of commercial motor vehicles does not have a deleterious
effect on the physical condition of the operators; and (5) an operator
of a commercial motor vehicle is not coerced by a motor carrier,
shipper, receiver, or transportation intermediary to operate a
commercial motor vehicle in violation of a regulation promulgated under
this section . . .'' (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(1)-(5)).
This final rule is a non-discretionary ministerial act to conform
certain sections of the Agency's HOS rules governing the restart of a
driver's 60- or 70-hour limit to a prior version of those limits
restored by operation of law, as discussed below. Thus, there is no
practical impact in any area identified under 49 U.S.C. 31136(a).
In 2014, Congress suspended two provisions of the 2011 restart rule
(the requirement for 2 off-duty periods from 1:00 to 5:00 a.m. and the
limitation of the restart to once a week) and prohibited the use of
appropriated funds to enforce them unless and until a naturalistic
study required by the statute, and described in detail, found that the
2011 restart rule provided greater net operational, safety, health and
fatigue benefits than the pre-2011 restart rule. In the meantime, the
pre-2011 restart rule was restored to full effect (Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015, Pub. L. 113-235, Div. K,
Title I, sec. 133, 128 Stat. 2130, 2711-2713 (Dec. 16, 2014)). The
statute required both the Secretary of Transportation (whose authority
in this area has been delegated to FMCSA) and the Inspector General
(IG) to review and report to Congress the results of the study.
Congress then extended the suspension and funding prohibition through
fiscal year 2016 (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. 114-
113, Div. L, Title I, sec. 133, 129 Stat. 2242, 2850 (Dec. 18, 2015)).
This Act also expanded the factors that would need to be evaluated,
requiring FMCSA and the IG to determine whether the naturalistic study
showed that drivers operating under the 2011 restart rule achieved
``statistically significant improvement in all outcomes related to
safety, operator fatigue, driver health and longevity, and work
schedules, in comparison to commercial motor vehicle drivers who
operated under'' the pre-2011 restart rule. Id.
This provision then was further amended to make clear that, if the
study did not demonstrate such statistically significant improvements,
``the 34-hour restart rule in operational effect on June 30, 2013
[i.e., the pre-2011 rule] shall be restored to full force and effect on
the date that the Secretary submits the final report to the Committees
on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and
funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act or any other
Act shall be available to implement, administer, or enforce the rule''
(Further Continuing and Security Assistance Appropriations Act, 2017,
Pub. L. 114-254, Div. A, sec. 180, 130 Stat. 1005, 1016-1017 (Dec. 10,
2016)).
In January 2017, the final report required by the 2015
Appropriations Act was submitted for review to the IG, as required by
statute. After reviewing the IG's findings, FMCSA's Deputy
[[Page 48079]]
Administrator reported to the Senate and House Appropriations
Committees that drivers using the 2011 restart rule experienced safety
outcomes not significantly different from those using the pre-2011
restart rule.\1\ On March 2, 2017, the IG confirmed this conclusion to
Congress. Because the 2011 restart rule generated no statistically
significant improvements in safety, it became void by operation of law
and the pre-2011 restart rule was restored to full force and effect.
Today's rule adopts the pre-2011 version of 49 CFR 395.3(c), conforming
the language of the regulation to the statutory requirement.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Commercial Motor Vehicle Driver Restart Study Report to
Congress; Pursuant to Section 133 of the Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Pub. L. 113-235), March 2017,
See https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/mission/policy/commercial-motor-vehicle-driver-restart-study-report-congress. A copy has been placed
in the docket.
\2\ Because the study failed to establish a statistically
significant improvement in the initial factors required by Congress,
evaluation of the additional factors added by Congress became moot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) specifically provides
exceptions to its notice and comment rulemaking procedures when an
agency finds there is good cause to dispense with them and incorporates
``the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules
issued.'' (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)). Generally, good cause exists when an
agency determines that notice and public comment procedures are
impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest (id.).
Here, FMCSA finds that it is unnecessary to provide notice and public
comment procedures because, as explained above, this final rule is a
non-discretionary ministerial act to implement a statutory requirement.
Therefore, in accordance with the APA, good cause exists for not
providing notice and comment rulemaking procedures on this final rule.
Additionally, the APA allows agencies to make rules effective
immediately with good cause (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)), instead of requiring
publication at least 30 days prior to the effective date. For the
reasons given above, FMCSA finds good cause to make this rule effective
immediately.
III. Background
Among the provisions included as part of the 2011 HOS rule were
restrictions on the use of the 34-hour restart provision, limiting its
use to once every 168 hours and requiring that a restart include two
periods between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. These restrictions
proved problematic for many drivers and carriers, adversely affecting
their operations and generating significant controversy. As noted
above, Congress suspended these restrictions, subject to a study of the
effectiveness of the new rule. Specifically, Congress required the
Secretary to initiate a ``naturalistic study of the operational,
safety, health and fatigue impacts of the restart provisions''; the law
addressed the methodology of the study in detail and made clear that
the 2011 HOS restart provisions would have no effect unless the study
showed that those provisions had a greater net benefit compared to the
pre-2011 HOS restart rule.\3\ Subsequent legislation made clear that
the study would need to show a statistically significant improvement in
multiple factors enumerated in the legislation. The effectiveness study
\4\ and the March 2017 report to Congress \5\ confirmed the finding
that no statistically significant benefits accrued from the 2011 HOS
restart rule. See discussion under II Legal Basis for this Rulemaking,
above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Shortly after the initial suspension, FMCSA issued a notice
of the suspension of enforcement of these restrictions and announced
that the restart provisions in place on June 30, 2013 (the day
before the applicable compliance date under the 2011 rule), would
govern (79 FR 76241 (December 22, 2014)). Today's rule would align
the applicable provisions in 49 CFR 395.3 with the provisions in
effect at that time, consistent with the governing legislation.
After reviewing the IG's findings, FMCSA's Deputy Administrator
reported to the Senate and House Appropriations Committees that
drivers using the 2011 restart rule did not experience a ``greater
net benefit'' in safety outcomes compared to those using the pre-
2011 restart rule.
\4\ Dinges, et al., Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV) Driver
Restart Study: Final Report, FMCSA-RRR-15-011, Dec. 2015, See
https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety/research-and-analysis/cmv-driver-restart-study-final-report. A copy has been placed in the docket.
\5\ See footnote 1, above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, the limitation on use of the restart option to once every 168
hours and the requirement that a restart include the two periods from 1
a.m. to 5 a.m. are no longer in effect; however, the fact that they
still appear in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) causes confusion
for stakeholders. Today's rule makes technical amendments to Sec.
395.3, removing the two phrases in paragraph (c)(1) and (2) relating to
the 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. requirement and removing paragraph (d) relating to
the 168-hour limitation, consistent with the HOS rules concerning the
34-hour restart option currently in effect. Because the changes in this
rule are ministerial, they will have no adverse effect on safety.
IV. International Impacts
The FMCSRs, and any exceptions to the FMCSRs, apply only within the
United States (and, in some cases, United States territories). Motor
carriers and drivers are subject to the laws and regulations of the
countries in which they operate, unless an international agreement
states otherwise. Drivers and carriers should be aware of the
regulatory differences among nations.
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 395.3 Maximum Driving Time for Property-Carrying Vehicles
This action removes from Sec. 395.3(c) both instances of the
phrase ``that includes two periods from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m.'' and restores
the rule text of paragraph (c) to the Oct. 1, 2011, text. The change is
ministerial and technical only and has no legal effect.
In addition, paragraph (d) is removed completely. It currently
provides that ``a driver may not take an off-duty period allowed by
paragraph (c) of this section to restart the calculation of 60 hours in
7 consecutive days or 70 hours in 8 consecutive days until 168 or more
consecutive hours have passed since the beginning of the last such off-
duty period. When a driver takes more than one off-duty period of 34 or
more consecutive hours within a period of 168 consecutive hours, he or
she must indicate in the Remarks section of the record of duty status
which such off-duty period is being used to restart the calculation of
60 hours in 7 consecutive days or 70 hours in 8 consecutive days.'' The
change also is ministerial and technical only and has no legal effect.
VI. Regulatory Analyses
A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
FMCSA performed an analysis of the impacts of this final rule and
determined it is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning and
Review, as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011),
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it under these Orders. It
is also not significant within the meaning of DOT regulatory policies
and procedures (DOT Order 2100.6 dated Dec. 20, 2018). This rule
conforms 49 CFR 395.3 to statutory requirements and current practice by
removing provisions that are not in effect, thus, not enforced, and
does not result in costs or benefits to any regulated entity.
[[Page 48080]]
B. E.O. 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs)
This rule has been designated as a deregulatory action under
Executive Order (E.O.) 13771 by the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs because it updates obsolete regulatory text.
C. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801, et seq.),
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs designated this rule
as not a ``major rule,'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601-612),
FMCSA is not required to complete a regulatory flexibility analysis
because, as discussed earlier in the Legal Basis for the Rulemaking
section, this action is not subject to notice and public comment under
section 553(b) of the APA.
E. Assistance for Small Entities
In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act, FMCSA wants to assist small entities in
understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its effects on
themselves and participate in the rulemaking initiative. If the rule
will affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please consult the FMCSA point of contact,
Richard Clemente, listed in the For Further Information Contact section
of this rule.
Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call
1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). DOT has a policy regarding the rights
of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an explicit
policy against retaliation for exercising these rights.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $165 million (which is the
value equivalent of $100,000,000 in 1995, adjusted for inflation to
2018 levels) or more in any 1 year. Because this rule will not result
in such an expenditure, a written statement is not required.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). Nor does
this rule modify the existing approved collection of information (OMB
Control Number 2126-0001, HOS of Drivers Regulations, approved Jun. 13,
2016, through Jun. 30, 2019).
H. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)
A rule has implications for federalism under section 1(a) of E.O.
13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' FMCSA determined that this rule does not have substantial
direct costs on or for States, nor does it limit the policymaking
discretion of States. Nothing in this rule preempts any State law or
regulation. Therefore, this rule does not have sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Impact
Statement.
I. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
J. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)
E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), requires agencies
issuing ``economically significant'' rules, if the regulation also
concerns an environmental health or safety risk that an agency has
reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, to include an
evaluation of the regulation's environmental health and safety effects
on children. The Agency determined this rule is not economically
significant and does not anticipate that this regulatory action could
in any respect present an environmental or safety risk that could
disproportionately affect children.
K. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
FMCSA reviewed this rule in accordance with E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights, and has determined it does not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have taking implications.
L. Privacy
Section 522 of title I of division H of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, enacted December 8, 2004 (Pub. L. 108-447,
118 Stat. 2809, 3268, note following 5 U.S.C. 552a), requires the
Agency to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment of a regulation that will
affect the privacy of individuals. The assessment considers impacts of
the rule on the privacy of information in an identifiable form and
related matters. The FMCSA Privacy Officer has evaluated the risks and
effects the rulemaking might have on collecting, storing, and sharing
personally identifiable information and has evaluated protections and
alternative information handling processes in developing the rule to
mitigate potential privacy risks. FMCSA determined that this rule does
not require the collection of individual personally identifiable
information.
The DOT Privacy Office has determined that this rulemaking does not
create privacy risk.
The E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347, sec. 208, 116
Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires Federal agencies to conduct
a Privacy Impact Assessment for new or substantially changed technology
that collects, maintains, or disseminates information in an
identifiable form. No new or substantially changed technology will
collect, maintain, or disseminate information because of this rule.
M. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this
rulemaking.
N. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
FMCSA has analyzed this rule under E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use. The Agency has determined that it is not a ``significant energy
action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
[[Page 48081]]
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it does not require a
Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211.
O. E.O. 13783 (Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth)
E.O. 13783 directs executive departments and agencies to review
existing regulations that potentially burden the development or use of
domestically produced energy resources, and to appropriately suspend,
revise, or rescind those that unduly burden the development of domestic
energy resources. In accordance with E.O. 13783, DOT prepared and
submitted a report to the Director of OMB that provides specific
recommendations that, to the extent permitted by law, could alleviate
or eliminate aspects of agency action that burden domestic energy
production. This rule has not been identified by DOT under E.O. 13783
as potentially alleviating unnecessary burdens on domestic energy
production.
P. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)
This rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because
it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal government and Indian tribes.
Q. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (note
following 15 U.S.C. 272) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus
standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides
Congress, through OMB, with an explanation of why using these standards
will be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
Voluntary consensus standards (e.g., specifications of materials,
performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures;
and related management systems practices) are standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule
does not use technical standards. Therefore, FMCSA did not consider the
use of voluntary consensus standards.
R. Environment (NEPA)
FMCSA analyzed this rule for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
determined this action is categorically excluded from further analysis
and documentation in an environmental assessment or environmental
impact statement under FMCSA Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680, Mar. 1, 2004),
Appendix 2, paragraph 6.b. This Categorical Exclusion addresses minor
corrections such as those found in this rulemaking; therefore,
preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact
statement is not necessary. The Categorical Exclusion determination is
available for inspection or copying in docket FMCSA-2004-19608.
S. Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act)
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(g), FMCSA is required to publish an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking, unless the Agency finds good cause that
an ANPRM is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, or conduct a negotiated rulemaking when it engages in certain
rulemakings. These requirements pertain to a proposed rulemaking likely
to result in a ``major rule.'' \6\ Because this rulemaking does not
involve issuance of a proposed rule, and today's final rule is not a
``major rule,'' these requirements are not applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In enacting this provision, Congress did not define ``major
rule.'' See section 5202 of the FAST Act, Public Law 114-94, 129
Stat. 1312, 1534-1535 (December 4, 2015). However, Congress used the
term in enacting another statute addressing Agency rulemaking,
popularly referred to as the Congressional Review Act, which
includes a definition of the term ``major rule.'' See 5 U.S.C.
804(2). The Agency relies on this definition in evaluating the
application of 49 U.S.C. 31136(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects for 49 CFR Part 395
Highway safety, Motor carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
In consideration of the foregoing, FMCSA amends 49 CFR part 395 to
read as follows.
PART 395--HOURS OF SERVICE OF DRIVERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 395 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 504, 31133, 31136, 31137, 31502; sec. 113,
Pub. L. 103-311, 108 Stat. 1673, 1676; sec. 229, Pub. L. 106-159 (as
added and transferred by sec. 4115 and amended by secs. 4130-4132,
Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1726, 1743, 1744); sec. 4133, Pub.
L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1744; sec. 108, Pub. L. 110-432, 122
Stat. 4860-4866; sec. 32934, Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830;
sec. 5206(b), Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, 1537; and 49 CFR 1.87.
0
2. In Sec. 395.3, revise paragraph (c) and remove paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 395.3 Maximum driving time for property-carrying vehicles.
* * * * *
(c)(1) Any period of 7 consecutive days may end with the beginning
of an off-duty period of 34 or more consecutive hours.
(2) Any period of 8 consecutive days may end with the beginning of
an off-duty period of 34 or more consecutive hours.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87.
Dated: September 5, 2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-19648 Filed 9-11-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
