WAIS Document Retrieval[Federal Register: June 2, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 107)]
[Rules and Regulations]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Parts 385 and 390
[Docket No. FMCSA-98-3947 (Formerly Docket No. FHWA-98-3947)]
RIN 2126-AA14 (Formerly 2125-AD49)
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; General; Commercial
Motor Vehicle Marking
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The FMCSA is revising its requirements concerning the marking
of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) and for the submission of a Motor
Carrier Identification Report (Form MCS-150) to the agency. The FMCSA
is eliminating the marking regulations of the former Interstate
Commerce Commission (ICC), and requiring motor carriers to apply
markings that conform to the requirements of this final rule. The
agency is also amending its marking requirements to require that CMVs
be marked with the legal name of the business entity that owns or
controls the motor carrier operation, or the ``doing business as''
(DBA) name, as it appears on the Form MCS-150. Motor carriers will be
allowed two years to comply with the requirement to affix the USDOT
number to both sides of their CMVs, and five years to comply with the
additional requirements to display the legal name or a single trade
name on the CMVs currently in their fleet. The FMCSA is redesignating
the regulation that requires motor carriers to submit the Form MCS-150,
and requiring that all new interstate motor carriers submit a Form MCS-
150 to the FMCSA before (rather than within 90 days after) commencing
operations. These revisions are intended to enhance the ability of the
FMCSA, the States, and the general public to identify motor carriers.
The FMCSA also revises the listing for locations of motor carrier
safety Service Centers to reflect recent changes to the agency
organizational structure. They were originally included in the NPRM
concerning safety fitness procedures [RIN 2126-AA42, formerly RIN 2125-
AE56, Docket No. OMCS-99-5467 (formerly Docket No. FHWA-99-5467)] (64
FR 44460, August 16, 1999).
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 3, 2000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah M. Freund, Office of Bus
and Truck Operations, Routing Code MC-PSV, (202) 366-4009; or Mr.
Charles E. Medalen, Office of the Chief Counsel, HCC-20, (202) 366-
1354, Federal Highway Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Internet users may access all comments received by the U.S. DOT
Dockets, Room PL-401, by using the universal resource locator
(URL):http://dms.dot.gov. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days
each year. Please follow the instructions online for more information
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded by using a
computer, modem and suitable communication software from the Government
Printing Offices's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 512-1661.
Internet users may reach the Office of Federal Register's home page at:
http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government Printing Office's web
page at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
On January 28, 1992, the FHWA published a final rule (57 FR 3142)
which required interstate motor carriers to mark their interstate CMVs
with specific information, including the USDOT number (see 49 CFR
390.21). The final rule, however, provided an exception for motor
carriers authorized by the former ICC to conduct operations as a for-
hire motor carrier. These motor carriers were required to comply only
with the marking provisions in former 49 CFR part 1058, now
redesignated as 49 CFR 390.401, 390.403, 390.405, and 390.407 (61 FR
54706, 54710, October 21, 1996).
The ICC Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) (Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat.
803) was enacted on December 29, 1995, and became effective on January
1, 1996. The ICCTA abolished the ICC, amended subtitle IV of title 49,
United States Code, reformed the economic regulation of transportation,
and transferred the assets, personnel, and many of the duties and
functions of the ICC to the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary).
On June 16, 1998, the FHWA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) (63 FR 32801) to amend its regulations concerning the
marking of CMVs and the submission of the Form MCS-150. The agency
proposed (1) To eliminate the marking regulations of the former ICC and
to require motor carriers to replace the vehicle markings specified by
those requirements with markings that conform to 49 CFR 390.21; (2) to
amend its current rule to require that CMVs be marked with the legal
name of the business entity that owns or controls the motor carrier
operation, or the ``doing business as'' name, and the city and State
for the principal place of business as they appear on the Form MCS-150;
(3) to allow motor carriers two years to comply with the marking
requirement (i.e., to display the USDOT number on both sides of their
self-propelled CMVs), and five years to comply with the additional
requirements to display the address of the principal place of business
and the legal name, or a single trade name; (4) to amend the
regulations to require all new interstate motor carriers submit a Form
MCS-150 to the FMCSA before (rather than within 90 days after)
commencing operations; and (5) to move the regulations that require
motor carriers to submit the Form MCS-150 from 49 CFR part 385 to part
Discussion of Comments to the NPRM
The FMCSA received 196 comments in response to the NPRM.
The commenters were: the American Trucking Associations (ATA) ; the
New York State Motor Truck Association Inc. (NYSMTA); the National
Automobile Dealers Association (NADA); the National Automobile
Transporters Association (NATA); Bonanza Bus Lines; Yellow Corporation;
the Association of Waste Hazardous Materials Transporters (AWHMT); ATC
Leasing Company; the New Jersey Motor Truck Association; the Iowa
Department of Transportation; United Parcel Service (UPS); the Missouri
Division of Motor Carrier and Railroad Safety (Missouri DMCRS);
Consolidated Freightways (CF); the South Carolina Trucking Association,
Inc.; GROWMARK, Inc.; the Truck Renting and Leasing Association
(TRALA); the Georgia Public Service Commission; Distribution & LTL
Carriers Association; the National Private Truck Council (NPTC); J.B.
Hunt; ConAgra Inc.; North American Van Lines, Inc. (NAVL); the
Truckload Carriers Association (TCA); the National Association of Small
Trucking Companies (NASTC); the Illinois State Police; the Colorado
Department of Public Safety; Roadway Express; the American Moving and
Storage Association (AMSA); the State of New York Department of
Transportation; Peninsula Transport, Inc., and an additional 167 motor
carriers. The following is a summary of the comments on some of the key
items addressed in the notice.
Relationship to Unified Motor Carrier Registration System Rulemaking
Although most commenters did not oppose in principle the FMCSA's
proposal to require self-propelled CMVs to be marked with a USDOT
number, several of them, including the ATA, UPS, and the Distribution &
LTL Carriers Association, recommended that the FMCSA delay this
rulemaking pending the implementation of the congressionally mandated
Unified Motor Carrier Registration System (Unified System). The Unified
System is intended to provide a comprehensive foundation for
registration, insurance, and safety information. The commenters
asserted that the Unified System would help solve many of the problems
mentioned in the NPRM, including matching the motor carrier (MC) and
USDOT numbers. Commenters also suggest that the Unified System could be
designed to include all of a motor carrier's DBA names and other
The New York State DOT notes that it is participating in
discussions with the U.S. DOT and others concerning the consolidation
of the Unified System and the Single State Registration System (SSRS).
New York believes there is conceptual agreement among the majority of
SSRS States concerning assignment of USDOT numbers for both interstate
and intrastate motor carriers, and asks that the FMCSA's regulation
facilitate this approach. The Illinois State Police believes that many
States already have the infrastructure in place to support a national
motor carrier identification system.
The NASTC categorically opposes the NPRM, believing that the MC
number is necessary for State and Federal officials, and the traveling
public, to distinguish for-hire from private motor carriers.
Section 103 of the ICCTA, which, among other things, added 49
U.S.C. 13908, required the Secretary to initiate a rulemaking
proceeding to replace the current Department of Transportation
identification number system, the SSRS under 49 U.S.C. 14504, the
registration/licensing system contained in 49 U.S.C. 13901-13905, and
the financial responsibility information system under 49 U.S.C. 13906
with a single, online Federal system.
On August 26, 1996, the agency published an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) on the Motor Carrier Replacement
Information/Registration System which posed several questions and
requested comments on all of these issues raised by the commenters.
The FMCSA agrees there are items proposed in the Commercial Motor
Vehicle Marking NPRM that are related to the Registration rulemaking.
However, the FMCSA considers the requirement to mark a CMV with the
USDOT number as a vehicle identification issue, not a registration
issue. Therefore, the FMCSA will move forward with its requirement to
mark CMVs with the USDOT number assigned to each motor carrier.
The filing of the Form MCS-150 is not considered a registration
issue in the context of the Motor Carrier Replacement Information/
Registration System because the agency is not changing the
applicability of the regulation, only the time the document must be
filed. The current requirement allows a new motor carrier to file the
Form MCS-150 within 90 days after beginning operations. The FMCSA
believes it is important that CMVs be properly marked before they are
placed into service on the highway. Such markings will assist State
officials conducting roadside inspections and accident investigations
in attributing important safety data to the correct motor carrier. It
will also ensure the public has an effective means to identify motor
carriers operating in an unsafe manner.
The FMCSA has streamlined the process for filing the Form MCS-150
by making it available on the Internet. Motor carriers seeking a copy
of Form MCS-150 may obtain it from the Internet through the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration web page at: http://
www.mcs.dot.gov/factsfigs/formspubs.htm under ``DOT Number--Application
Form.'' Motor carriers may download the Form MCS-150, complete it, and
submit it by mail or by facsimile. Motor carriers may also obtain
copies of the form from any of the four FMCSA Service Centers or the
fifty-two Division Offices. A for-hire motor carrier should submit the
Form MCS-150 along with its application for operating authority (Form
OP-1) to the appropriate address referenced on that form or may submit
it separately to the address mentioned on the web page.
The FMCSA has also made a determination that the USDOT number will
be the number used to identify all motor carriers in the information/
registration system of the future.
Currently, all interstate motor carriers (both for-hire and private)
are assigned USDOT numbers. Also, several States require intrastate
motor carriers to complete Form MCS-150 and obtain a USDOT
identification number. These motor carriers are listed in the Motor
Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) as intrastate-only
carriers. The addition of these motor carriers to the MCMIS enables the
States to work together in determining the number of active motor
carriers operating in the United States, and to monitor the safety
performance of the motor carriers.
Another reason to use the USDOT number as the key identifier for
all motor carriers is the role that it plays in the Performance and
Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM) project. The PRISM
project is a cooperative Federal/State program that makes motor carrier
safety a requirement for obtaining and keeping commercial motor vehicle
registration privileges. The performance of unsafe motor carriers is
improved through a program of progressively more stringent sanctions
leading to a possible Federal operations out-of-service order and
suspension of their State issued vehicle registration privileges. The
vehicle registration records contain the USDOT number as a unique
identifier of the motor carrier responsible for the safety of the CMVs.
Single Trade Name
ConAgra, Inc., the ATA, the TCA, NAVL, and other commenters oppose
the single trade name proposal and believe the FMCSA should allow small
subsidiaries and divisions of large national carriers to maintain their
own identities. They contend that local operations of national carriers
want to maintain the connection to the local communities they served
over the years. They claim that limiting carriers to a single trade
name will dramatically impact a number of large carriers in ways that
the FMCSA may not have fully considered.
The FMCSA agrees with the commenters. The FMCSA will consider
requests for assignment of individual USDOT numbers to corporate
divisions on a case-by-case basis. While the FMCSA does not wish to
limit an organization's flexibility, or its ability to promote a trade
name, we nevertheless must consider whether the assignment of multiple
USDOT numbers to a single corporate entity will compromise the
integrity of the collection and processing of safety data.
Principal Place of Business Address
With regard to the proposed language concerning the requirement for
motor carriers to display only the location of their principal place of
business, the ATA, the NPTC, UPS, CF, Roadway Express, Yellow
Corporation, NAVL, the Georgia Public Service Commission, and a number
of other motor carriers and associations strongly oppose any change to
the existing regulation. Most argue that the principal place of
business address, being the third way to identify the motor carrier
(after the USDOT number and the single trade name), does not help much
if the first two are correct or incorrect. While most commenters agree
that some type of number is needed to help match safety records, they
don't believe that the address of the principal place of business
provides the same benefit. They believe the cost to the motor carrier
to accomplish the change definitely outweighs any perceived advantage.
The New York State DOT opposes the proposal because it believes
that motor carriers would be prohibited from displaying the location
where a CMV is customarily based. The agency cited an example of a
motor carrier of passengers that has acquired various New York based
carriers. New York prefers to retain the location identification to aid
them in tracking the performance of the individual subsidiaries.
The FMCSA agrees with the commenters; the motor carrier name and
the unique USDOT number should be sufficient to properly identify the
motor carrier. The FMCSA does not believe it is necessary to include in
the final rule the requirement to display the city and State. As UPS
noted, unless there is an error in the collection of the original data,
there should be no instance in which two motor carriers have both the
same name and the same USDOT number. The use of an address does not
ensure the accurate collection of data and imposes an additional and
unjustified burden on the industry.
As for the comments of the New York State DOT, the final rule does
not require motor carriers to mark their motor vehicles with the city
and State, but does not prohibit the practice either. The FMCSA
believes that many motor carriers will continue to display the city and
State for marketing purposes and to maintain a connection to the local
communities they serve.
Periodic Update of the Form MCS-150
The ATA, Distribution and LTL Carriers Association, New York State
DOT, and AWHMT have suggested the FMCSA require motor carriers to
periodically update the information contained on the MCS-150. They say
the information initially reported on the Form MCS-150 may change over
time. Inasmuch as the FMCSA uses this information to calculate a motor
carrier's accident rate for safety rating purposes, the commenters
believe the FMCSA has a vested interest in requiring a periodic update
of Form MCS-150 to ensure the integrity of the data.
The 1996 ANPRM on the unified information/registration system (61
FR 43816) addresses this issue. One of the questions included there was
the same as that asked by the AWHMT, the ATA, and the New York DOT.
Section 217 of the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999
requires the FMCSA to require motor carriers to periodically update the
information they provide in the form MCS-150. An initial update is
required by December 2000. Periodic updates would be required not more
frequently than once every two years. The FMCSA will address this
provision in a separate rulemaking action.
Marking of Foreign and Intrastate Motor Carriers' Power Units
The AWHMT requested that the FMCSA consider if there is a potential
for reciprocity between the CMV marking requirements of Canada and
Mexico and those currently contained in and proposed for the FMCSRs.
UPS commented that motor carriers subject to the FMCSA's
regulations that operate portions of their fleets within single
jurisdictions are subject to the additional marking requirements of
those jurisdictions. For example, State Public Utilities Commissions
often impose their own marking requirements. UPS stated that it, as
well as other motor carriers and the ATA, had filed comments in Docket
MC 96-25 [Motor Carrier Replacement Information/Registration System,
now DOT Docket 1997-2349] recommending that the USDOT's marking
requirements be the sole method to identify CMVs operated by motor
carriers under the FMCSA's jurisdiction.
The NYSMTA asked the FMCSA to consider preempting the marking
requirements of State or local jurisdictions for vehicles bearing USDOT
numbers that are not domiciled within that jurisdiction. The NYSMTA
noted that a city requires the marking of a street address. The
Missouri DMCRS requested that States be allowed to
continue to require display of additional information, such as the GVW
or the GVWR, on power units that are registered solely for intrastate
GROWMARK was concerned that States may require different timeframes
from the FMCSA for implementing a marking requirement.
The AWHMT referenced the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
(Public Law 101-615, 104 Stat. 3244, November 16, 1990) safety permit
provisions, not yet implemented by the FMCSA. It asked if the FMCSA
might consider a requirement for displaying the USDOT number on the
CMVs of motor carriers engaged in the transportation of hazardous
materials in intrastate commerce as an initial step toward implementing
the permit system.
Concerning reciprocal marking requirements among the United States,
Canada, and Mexico, the general requirements contained in Sec. 390.21
have been in place since 1954 for for-hire motor carriers operating in
interstate commerce. They have been in place since 1988 for private
motor carriers operating in interstate commerce. No other commenters
raised this issue, and the FMCSA is not aware that the provisions have
caused compliance difficulties for foreign-based motor carriers.
Concerning the questions raised by the NYSMTA about a local
jurisdiction's requirement for listing a full street address, and the
Missouri DMCSR's question about a State's requirement for the display
of a GVW or GVWR on intrastate-only CMVs, any other identifying
information may continue to be displayed, as long as it is not
inconsistent with other Sec. 390.21 requirements. Responding to
GROWMARK's comment, the marking requirement proposed will apply only to
motor carriers operating in interstate commerce. The FMCSA anticipates
that States would allow these motor carriers the phase-in period
established in this rulemaking action.
Finally, concerning the AWHMT's comment concerning the potential
for issuing USDOT numbers to intrastate motor carriers transporting
hazardous materials, the agency is continuing to address permitting in
a separate rulemaking action.
Submittal of MCS-150 and Display of USDOT Number Upon Commencing
The FMCSA's current regulation requires that all new motor carriers
submit a Form MCS-150 to the agency within 90 days of commencing
operations. The NPRM proposed that all new motor carriers submit a Form
MCS-150 to the FMCSA before commencing operations. The NPRM also
proposed that all CMVs added to a motor carrier's fleet on or after the
effective date of the rule must display the motor carrier's USDOT
number before being put into service.
The FMCSA received no adverse comments on this provision of the
NPRM. The final rule will implement it as proposed.
Time to Comply With Regulations
Commenters' responses pertaining to the proposed length of time for
motor carriers to comply with the marking requirements (two years for
the USDOT number and five years for the principal place of business and
single trade name) varied widely. Commenters suggested phase-in periods
that varied from two years for some of the smaller motor carriers to
seven years for those carriers having large fleets. Some commenters
suggested the FMCSA consider a single date for motor carriers to meet
all the requirements. Yellow Corporation, for example, suggested a
conversion period of three years, claiming it would reduce the overall
costs to carriers and would provide adequate time for the training of
enforcement officials. Other commenters, such as the NPTC and NAVL,
contended that five years was a more appropriate phase-in period
because many fleets turn over their equipment over that interval. They
did support the provision in the NPRM requiring vehicles added to a
fleet be marked with the USDOT number when placed into service.
The FMCSA has decided to proceed with the original time frames
outlined in the NPRM. The final rule requires the motor carrier to
display its USDOT number within two years of the effective date of this
rule and its single trade name or DBA name within five years on CMVs
that are currently in service. All new CMVs entering the fleet must
meet all the marking requirements before being put into service. The
FMCSA believes that these time frames will allow motor carriers to meet
the marking requirements without creating either an administrative or
As stated previously, the FMCSA will eliminate the requirement for
motor carriers to display the city and State on the side of their
Marking of Driveaway and Short-Term Rental Vehicles
The ATC Leasing Company and the NATA requested that the provisions
of Sec. 390.407, which were written specifically to recognize the
unique operational needs of driveaway combinations, be left intact.
These commenters claim that the elimination of this section would not
provide any economic or safety benefit to the public, but would burden
those carriers that operate driveaway combinations with unnecessary and
UPS addressed the issue of marking short-term rental CMVs. UPS
noted, among other things, that Sec. 390.21(e) does not require the use
of a temporary identification device.
The FMCSA agrees with the comments submitted by ATC Leasing and the
NATA on behalf of the driveaway industry. The requirements of
Sec. 390.407 concerning removable devices are being retained and
incorporated into Sec. 390.21. The FMCSA responds to UPS that the
proposed language for Sec. 390.21(e) is substantially identical to that
of the current Sec. 390.23(e), except that the agency will no longer
require display of the lessor's city or community and State. Neither
the current nor the proposed regulation require use of a temporary
identification device on short-term rental vehicles.
Contracts and Certificates of Insurance
The ATA, the NASTC, and approximately 170 motor carriers commented
that many of their written contracts and certificates of insurance made
available to the shipping public identify them by their MC number. They
contend the FMCSA has not estimated the cost to the shipper and broker
community of changing existing contracts to use a new system so that
each motor carrier can be identified by a USDOT number. They also
believe it is important for public warehousing purposes that the
existing ``MC number'' in their contract appear on the door of the
equipment making pickups. This allows verification that the freight is
being tendered to the properly licensed and insured motor carrier with
whom a contract was signed. The majority of the motor carriers
commenting suggested the FMCSA allow ``for hire'' carriers to continue
to use the MC number as a primary identifier for all aspects of their
operation and let the private carriers continue to use the USDOT
There is no Federal requirement that motor carriers display their
on contracts or certificates of insurance. This practice was developed
by the motor carrier industry for its own purposes and may be continued
if the industry chooses. The regulation requires motor carriers to
display the USDOT number on both sides of their power units. It does
not require motor carriers to remove the MC number, although they are
encouraged to refrain from displaying the MC number on new or repainted
CMVs once the rule becomes final.
The FMCSA's use of the USDOT number for CMV identification is
premised upon its use in a safety context. The MC number is used by the
FMCSA, process agents, and insurance companies to track the process of
a for-hire motor carrier's application for registration, status of
insurance, and other requirements. The FMCSA's MCMIS includes both the
MC and USDOT numbers, as do many other records used by motor carriers.
Shippers and others can verify the identification of a for-hire motor
carrier with the FMCSA online, or via telephone, using either number.
Motor carriers should also make their clients aware of the change in
the regulations. Taken together, these measures should aid them in
verifying that the freight is being tendered to the properly licensed
and insured motor carrier with whom a contract was signed.
States Assigning USDOT Numbers
The New York and the Iowa Departments of Transportation both
commented on the States' issuance of interstate and intrastate USDOT
numbers. Each State supports the use of the USDOT number as the unique
identifier essential for tracking motor carrier safety performance
data. In addition, both States wanted the final rule to make perfectly
clear that States can issue USDOT numbers to both interstate and
intrastate motor carriers. New York recommended the FMCSA provide batch
filing to the States to convert intrastate carriers to a USDOT
numbering system (using a unique State suffix). The NYDOT argued that
the present system is too cumbersome and time consuming; it would take
five years to convert all the intrastate carriers in New York to the
USDOT number using the current mechanisms. New York says batch
processing is an absolute must and the FMCSA should directly assist the
States in converting intrastate carriers in as short a time frame as
The States involved in the PRISM project have been given access to
the MCMIS Census database to issue USDOT numbers to interstate
carriers. As part of the project, prior to the issuance of
International Registration Plan (IRP) documents, the entity registering
vehicles is required to have a USDOT number and each vehicle must have
a USDOT number assigned to it. If a carrier does not have a USDOT
number at the time of registration, a Form MCS-150 must be provided so
that the State can issue the USDOT number necessary to complete the
vehicle registration process.
The FMCSA has given the States an option to issue USDOT numbers to
their intrastate carriers. Currently, 11 States are adding the Form
MCS-150 information for these carriers individually through direct
access to the MCMIS Census database. The system issues a USDOT number
as each carrier is entered into the database.
New York already has existing databases on their intrastate
carriers and has requested that the FMCSA develop a process for the
batch issuance of USDOT numbers. The FMCSA has developed procedures
necessary to support this process and expects to begin pilot testing by
mid-2000. The agency anticipates that the first test State will be New
York and that the pilot test will last for several months. Assuming the
pilot test is successful, other interested States will then be able to
use this process.
Marking of Intermodal Container Chassis and Trailers
The South Carolina Trucking Association and the New Jersey Motor
Truck Association requested the FMCSA to define an intermodal container
chassis as a CMV and its owner as a motor carrier engaged in interstate
commerce. They believe that intermodal chassis equipment is unique
enough to require the owners to display their own USDOT number, and
that this requirement would go a long way towards establishing
responsibility for the care, maintenance, and condition of chassis
Bonanza Bus Lines recommends that all trailers display a USDOT
number on both sides and on the rear.
Maintenance of intermodal container chassis and trailers is being
addressed in a separate agency action, and will not be addressed in
this final rule. In response to a petition filed by the ATA and the ATA
Intermodal Conference, the agency published an ANPRM (64 FR 7849,
February 17, 1999). The petitioners contended that motor carriers have
minimal opportunity to maintain intermodal container chassis and that
the parties who do have the opportunity often fail to do so. The FMCSA
agreed to consider revisions to the requirements in parts 390 and 396
of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) that place
upon motor carriers the responsibility for maintaining this equipment.
As part of this process, the FMCSA held three public hearings in late
1999 to gather information on the extent of this problem and to receive
feedback on the solution proposed by petitioners, i.e., to mandate
joint responsibility between the ``equipment provider'' and the motor
carrier for maintaining this type of intermodal equipment. The FMCSA
will decide these issues and others raised by the commenters in the
rulemaking involving intermodal containers, chassis and trailers.
Accordingly, comments of the South Carolina Trucking Association and
the New Jersey Motor Truck Association will be submitted to that docket
With respect to Bonanza Bus Lines' comment, the NPRM did not
consider marking of CMVs other than power units; extending its
provisions to cover them would be beyond the scope of this rulemaking.
The ICC first required self-propelled CMVs to be marked in 1954. The
agency has undertaken several rulemakings concerning CMV marking in the
last 12 years. Although the agency has occasionally received
correspondence concerning marking of trailers, the FMCSA does not
believe this additional marking is necessary.
Marking of Small For-Hire Passenger Vehicles
The Georgia Public Service Commission requested the FMCSA to
clarify the marking requirements applicable to smaller for-hire
passenger vehicles (designed to transport 7 to 15 passengers) that are
subject to the FMCSA's registration requirements, but not to the
remainder of the FMCSRs.
On September 3, 1999, the agency published an NPRM (64 FR 48518)
concerning the applicability of specific provisions of the FMCSRs to
this class of passenger vehicles. That action responded to
congressional direction contained in section 4008(a) of the
Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21) (Pub. L. 105-
178, 112 Stat. 107, June 9, 1999), which amended the definition of the
term ``commercial motor vehicle'' found at 49 U.S.C. 31132 to cover
vehicles ``designed or used to transport more than 8 passengers
(including the driver) for
compensation.'' Among other things, the September 3 NPRM proposed to
require that motor carriers operating CMVs designed or used to
transport between 9 and 15 passengers (including the driver) for
compensation file a motor carrier identification report and mark their
CMVs with a USDOT number and other identifying information (i.e., name
or trade name and address of the principal place of business). In an
interim final rule published that same day, the agency amended the
statutory definition of a CMV to be consistent with the TEA-21
definition, but it exempted this class of motor carriers from the
FMCSRs for six months, to allow the FMCSA time to gather additional
information on this population of carriers and to complete the
rulemaking action. The FMCSA is reviewing comments to that docket and
plans to issue a final rule in the near future.
Marking of Pick-Up Trucks
The Colorado Department of Public Safety suggested the FMCSA adopt
a rule that it has implemented. Many pick-up trucks do not meet the
definition of a CMV except when pulling a trailer. Colorado allows the
trailer, instead of the power unit, to be marked if the power unit has
a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less. This allows some farmers, contractors,
and small businesses to use their vehicles for personal conveyance,
such as vacations and errands. Many homeowner associations have
covenants prohibiting commercial vehicles from parking in their
residential areas. In many cases, this would include a pick-up subject
to the present marking requirements in Sec. 390.21.
The FMCSA believes that the power unit should carry the motor
carrier identification. The motor carrier continues to have the
responsibility for ensuring the trailer it accepts meets the safety
requirements of the FMCSRs. Motor carriers who use their personal pick-
ups for business purposes can affix temporary signs and remove them
Vehicles Under Intermittent Lease and Short-Term Rental
The TRALA stated it supported the NPRM as written. The AMSA and
NAVL requested the FMCSA to consider adding a new, unique rule that
would address the household goods, intermittent lease issue. The main
focus would mirror the concept adopted by the International Fuel Tax
Agreement (IFTA) in that a vehicle leased intermittently to a household
goods carrier would be allowed to display both the agent's and the
motor carrier's marking information linked by the phrase ``Interleased
A special provision in the marking rule for the household goods
industry is not necessary. If the industry wishes to display the
household goods agent's name and authority number, in conjunction with
the household goods carrier's name and USDOT number, the FMCSA would
not object. The rule already allows for other identifying information
to be displayed on the CMV as long as it is not inconsistent with the
information required in Sec. 390.21.
FMCSA Estimates of the Costs and Benefits
The FMCSA has completed a final regulatory evaluation (FRE)
comparing the projected safety benefits of a retrofitting requirement
to the potential economic impact on the motor carrier industry. The
following discussion summarizes the FMCSA's analysis. A copy of the
complete FRE is available for review in the docket.
This rule would require all former ICC motor common and contract
carriers to mark their CMVs with a ``USDOT Number'' and the legal name
of the business entity that owns or controls the motor carrier
operation, or the ``doing business as'' name, as they appear on the
Form MCS-150. Many carriers with authority from the former ICC already
include their legal, or DBA name, on the both sides of their vehicles.
The vast majority of carriers will use either stencils or decals
for marking, as these are the cheapest methods. The FMCSA assumed that
small carriers will use individual stencil kits, medium carriers will
use larger kits, and large carriers will use individually developed
decals. Price estimates are shown in table 1. We assumed that changing
a name is 50 percent more expensive than changing a DOT number.
The agency estimates that the average time to affix a DOT number
would be about 12 minutes. Adding a new name was also assumed to
require 12 minutes.
Because this is a simple procedure, we assumed that the marking
would be placed by class 3 mechanics, at an average cost of $15 per
hour. Therefore, the labor cost is $3 to apply a DOT number and an
additional $3 for a name change. Table 1 displays these figures, along
with the total labor and material cost.
The FMCSA has determined that the opportunity cost of this rule is
negligible or nonexistent, for two reasons. First, vehicles will only
be placed out of service for 12 to 36 minutes, which is too brief a
period to have earned any measurable amount of revenue. Second,
virtually all vehicles would be available at no opportunity cost (in
non-revenue producing service and not being serviced) for 12 to 36
minutes sometime in the two-year phase-in period. Therefore, the FMCSA
does not believe there is an opportunity cost associated with this
Table 1.--Estimated Cost of Marking, by Carrier Size
Material cost, per Labor cost, per vehicle
Carrier size, by number of power vehicle --------------------------------- Total cost,
units --------------------------- per vehicle
DOT number Name DOT number Name
1-6................................. $8 $12 $3 $3 $26
7-20................................ 6 9 3 3 21
21-99............................... 4 6 3 3 16
100-999............................. 2 3 3 3 11
1000+............................... 1 1.50 3 3 9
Unspecified......................... 6 9 3 3 21
There are 75,737 carriers with authority from the former ICC, but
the ICC did not collect information about the number of vehicles
operated per carrier. However, FMCSA's MCMIS has information on the
number of power units per carrier.
Table 2 shows how the agency estimated the number of power units
per carrier size class. We applied the MCMIS distribution of carriers
by size to the 75,737 carriers registered by the former ICC. The first
column shows the breakdown of for-hire carriers by number of power
units from MCMIS. The term ``unspecified'' means that the FMCSA has no
information on the number of vehicles operated by the motor carrier.
The third column from the left shows the assumed number of carriers in
each size group regulated by the former ICC. The last column shows the
estimated number of power units in each size class. We assumed that
unspecified carriers have at least three vehicles, since the FMCSA
tends to have the least information about the smaller carriers.
Table 2.--Estimated Number of For-Hire Carriers and Vehicles Regulated by the Former ICC, by Carrier Size
Estimated number Estimated number
Percent of MCMIS of carriers of vehicles
Carriers by number of vehicles carriers regulated by regulated by
former ICC former ICC
1-6................................................... 55.2 41,800 87,665
7-20.................................................. 10.1 7,624 88,109
21-99................................................. 5 3,772 158,033
100+.................................................. 1 778 323,636
Unspecified........................................... 28.7 21,763 65,289
Total........................................... 100 75,737 722,732
Motor carriers are currently required to place either the MC or the
USDOT number on their vehicles. In addition, the majority of carriers
already display either their legal names or their DBA names. We were
unable to locate any information concerning the percent of vehicles
regulated by the former ICC that currently display a USDOT number or a
legal, or DBA, name. For our baseline analysis, we conservatively
estimated that only 10 percent of eligible carriers already display a
USDOT number, while 80 percent already display their legal, or DBA,
names. Therefore, the FMCSA estimates that 90 percent of eligible
carriers or 650,458 vehicles will require a new DOT number (.9 x
722,732), and 20 percent of eligible carriers or 144,546 will need a
new name (.2 x 722,732). If a greater percentage of vehicles already
display either a DOT number or a valid name, the cost of this rule will
be lower than the FMCSA's estimate.
The total undiscounted cost of this rule is $5.7 million. With a 7
percent discount rate and assuming that 1/x of all vehicles are marked
each year (where x equals the phase-in period--two years to comply with
the requirement to affix the USDOT number to both sides of their CMVs,
and five years to comply with the additional requirements to display
the legal name or a single trade name on the CMVs currently in their
fleet) the total discounted cost equals $5 million. Table 3 shows the
breakdown of costs by carrier size.
Table 3.--Undiscounted Cost of Proposal by Carrier Size
Size Material Labor Total cost Per carrier
1-6............................. $841,587 $289,295 $1,130,882 19.9 $27.05
7-20............................ 634,382 290,759 925,141 16.2 121.35
21-99........................... 758,557 521,508 1,280,066 22.5 339.36
100+............................ 607,416 1,067,999 1,675,4152 29.4 2,153.49
Unspecified..................... 470,079 215,453 685,532 12.0 31.50
Total....................... 3,312,021 2,385,014 5,697,036 100.0 2,672.75
Not surprisingly, the cost per carrier increases with carrier size.
This rule would cost the smallest carriers (those with fewer than six
power-units) about $27 and the largest carriers approximately $2,150.
The same pattern is evident within each size class (i.e., carriers with
one vehicle pay less than those with six). As a result of this, small
carriers, which compose 65 percent of all carriers regulated by the
former ICC, bear approximately 20 percent of the total cost of this
Given the relatively modest cost of this rule, only a small number
of accidents would need to be prevented to make it cost beneficial. We
estimate that this rule would cost carriers $5.7 million
(undiscounted), with the cost spread through the five years following
promulgation. The DOT guidelines mandate use of a threshold value per
fatality prevented of $2.7 million. Thus, the benefits of this rule
would approximately equal the costs if two fatalities were prevented
over five years. Other combinations of crashes avoided (fatality,
injury, and property-damage-only) could also drive the benefits of this
rule above its costs, with the precise figures depending on the
severity of the non-fatality accidents. The FMCSA believes that this
rule is based on a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the
cost. The FMCSA also believes that this rule could lead to the
prevention of a small number of accidents, and thus prove cost
The benefits of this rule, although significant, are difficult to
quantify. The primary benefit would be an improvement in the FMCSA's
ability to identify problem carriers and take action to reduce the
potential for harm to the public from these carriers. The action taken
would depend upon the severity of the problem. Extremely dangerous
carriers, such as those with a
consistently high out-of-service (OOS) rate or with a greater than
expected number of accidents, could be forced to discontinue
operations. Carriers with less severe problems could be targeted for
educational outreach and other enforcement actions. While the FMCSA
programs cannot entirely eliminate the threat from unsafe carriers, we
believe they can help reduce the negligent behavior that leads to
accidents. The extreme action of taking a carrier out of business would
eliminate the dangerous behavior of risky carriers entirely.
The FMCSA is not aware of any alternatives which accomplish the
same goals with less burden. The goal of this regulation is to improve
the agency's ability to assign inspections and crashes to the correct
motor carriers. To accomplish this goal, the agency must be able to
correctly identify the operator of a motor vehicle during an inspection
or after a crash. High tech identification methods exist, but they
require vehicles to be equipped with a transponder that broadcasts a
unique ``fingerprint.'' The cost of these units is significantly higher
than the cost of adding a USDOT number or a new name to a power-unit.
In addition, transponder readers would be needed to identify a
vehicle's owner. While it would be possible (albeit expensive) to
provide all inspectors with readers, this would be prohibitively
expensive for accident investigators, given the large number of
crashes, their geographic dispersion, and the number of police officers
who report only a small number of crashes.
As an alternative to marking both sides of the CMV with the USDOT
number, the agency also considered allowing a driver to maintain the
required information on paper inside the vehicle. While this would be
less expensive, there were several problems with this approach. First,
drivers already maintain a number of documents with similar
information, and they may have an incentive to provide an investigating
officer with the incorrect document (or maintain that they do not have
the appropriate document) under some circumstances. In addition, during
crashes investigators may not have access to an onboard document due to
such things as fires, jammed doors due to a crash, or a hazardous
In order to minimize the impact of this rule, the FMCSA is
requiring a two-year phase-in period for the USDOT number requirement
and a five-year phase-in for the legal name or single trade name
requirement. This will give small carriers (and others) ample time to
comply with the marking rule without significantly disrupting their
The FMCSA's intention is not only to improve safety, but to achieve
consistency and uniformity and lower the cost of enforcement and
compliance for the government, the motor carrier industry, and the
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The FMCSA has determined that this action is a significant
regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 and
significant within the meaning of the Department of Transportation's
regulatory policies and procedures. The FMCSA has prepared a final
regulatory evaluation of the economic impact the regulatory changes
will have on the motor carrier industry. A copy of the final regulatory
evaluation is included in the docket file.
Prior to the elimination of the ICC, most for-hire motor carriers
were required to obtain ICC authority in order to operate in interstate
commerce. Carriers which were granted ICC operating authority were also
given an ICC docket number, which they were required to display on both
sides of each power unit.
Carriers are also required to display their name and address (city
and State) on both sides of their power units. A carrier may display
any name under which it operates. The address must be the principal
place of business or the terminal where the vehicle is located.
The FMCSA uses the USDOT number to track carrier performance,
primarily via the MCMIS, a mainframe computer system. It contains motor
carrier data from a variety of sources: roadside inspections, accident
reports, safety and compliance reviews, and enforcement actions.
The MCMIS is the linchpin of a number of the FMCSA's programs.
Federal and State field personnel use the MCMIS to initiate enforcement
actions and educational outreach programs. By using the data,
potentially unsafe carriers can be targeted for attention, often
including compliance reviews. Carriers could be flagged as unsafe if a
high percentage of their vehicles were placed out-of-service during a
roadside safety inspection, or if they experience an above average
number of accidents. The FMCSA analysts and managers use the database
for analysis purposes, including monitoring overall trends and
evaluating program effectiveness.
In order to connect information from disparate sources, a unique
identifier is required. For MCMIS, the USDOT number serves as the
unique identifier. Without this number, there is no way to assign
accidents, inspections, and other events to the correct motor carrier.
The existence of two identification numbers, the ICC/MC and the
USDOT numbers, combined with a lack of consistency in the names
displayed on vehicles, limits the effectiveness of the FMCSA's safety
programs. Identification problems (such as those listed above) could
result in a failure of the FMCSA to attribute a crash, or an OOS
inspection, to the correct carrier. In FY 1996, the FMCSA was unable to
match 12 percent of roadside inspections to the correct motor carrier.
For accidents, the non-match rate was 30 percent. This failure rate
means that the FMCSA is unaware of some carriers' poor safety records,
and these carriers do not receive the attention their safety record
merits, such as a safety review or educational assistance. As a result,
crashes occur that this oversight might have forestalled.
In order to eliminate these problems and improve safety and the
well-being of the public, the FMCSA is requiring all for-hire
interstate carriers formerly regulated by the ICC to display their
USDOT number on their vehicles (private carriers are already subject to
this requirement). This rule would require all commercial motor
vehicles, new or used, added to a motor carrier's fleet to have a USDOT
number displayed after the effective date of this final rule. Owners of
these vehicles would also be required to place either their legal name,
or a single trade name, on their vehicles.
Existing vehicles which do not undergo a change in ownership would
be required to display a USDOT number within two years of the effective
date of this rule. Owners of existing vehicles would have five years to
comply with the name requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), the agency has evaluated the effects of this rule on small
entities. The economic impacts of this rule are discussed in the
regulatory flexibility analysis, a copy of which is in the docket.
Based on its analysis, the FMCSA believes that this rule will affect a
substantial number of small entities, but will not have a significant
economic impact on them. In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, the FMCSA certifies that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The FMCSA estimates that 41,800 carriers with six or fewer power
will be covered by this regulation, as will another 7,600 with 7 to 20
power units. Our estimates indicate motor carriers with fewer than six
power-units would absorb about 26 percent of all costs. This rule would
cost the smallest carriers (those with fewer than six power-units)
about $27 per vehicle. Those small motor carriers with 7 to 20 vehicles
would incur a cost of $21 per vehicle. As a result of this, the
smallest carriers, which compose 65 percent of all carriers regulated
by the former ICC, bear approximately 20 percent of $5,696,036, the
total cost of this proposal. The FMCSA does not see this as a
substantial financial burden on small entities.
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. It has been determined
that this rulemaking does not have a substantial direct effect on
States, nor would it limit the policymaking discretion of the States.
Nothing in this document directly preempts any State law or regulation.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.217, Motor
Carrier Safety. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and
activities do not apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. An analysis of this
rule has been made by the FMCSA, and it has been determined that it
will affect the approved form (MCS-150) associated with a currently-
approved information collection covered by OMB Control No. 2126-0013
(formerly 2125-0544). The wording in the Notice section of the MCS-150
will change; burden hours and numbers of respondents will not change as
a result of this Final Rule. However, a revised estimate that reflects
more accurate numbers of respondents and the time to complete the MCS-
150 was done and submitted to the OMB in June 1999. The OMB approved
that revision to the information collection on October 4, 1999; the
approval period runs through October 31, 2002.
The NPRM that was published on June 16, 1998, solicited public
comments on these information collection requirements as a component of
the NPRM action. A summary of the comments that addressing the MCS-150
was previously provided to the OMB. Comments were neutral to favorable;
in fact, several commenters asked the FMCSA to consider requiring motor
carriers to provide regular updates of information contained in the
MCS-150. A single State commenter contended that the MCS-150 contains
superfluous information, discouraging States from using it to identify
intrastate motor carriers. However, that State did not cite specific
examples of data elements or information categories it believed to be
confusing or redundant.
Section 390.19(a) changes the requirement of when Form MCS-150 must
be filed from ``within 90 days after beginning operations'' to ``before
commencing operations.'' This change will be reflected on Form MCS-150
in the Notice section on the form; however, it will not affect the
burden hours for this information collection.
The NPRM also included a proposed requirement that certain motor
carriers submit an updated Form MCS-150 to the FMCSA within 90 days
from the effective date of the rule. This proposed, updated form would
only have been required from those motor carriers that were using a
name for their business that was not one of the two names on the MCS-
150 had filed with the agency. The FMCSA has eliminated this proposed
requirement from the final rule, along with the additional burden hours
it would have created.
Estimated Annual Reporting Burden
Number of respondents: 50,000 @ 20 minutes per respondent.
Burden Hours: 16,667.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this rulemaking for the purpose of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
has determined that this action does not have any effect on the quality
of the environment.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This rule does not impose a Federal mandate resulting in the
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. ``2
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.''
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under E.O. 12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutional Protected Property Rights.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This action 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.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
We have analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not
concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of
this document can be used to cross reference this action with the
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 385
Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety.
49 CFR Part 390
Highway safety, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle identification and
marking, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Issued on: May 25, 2000.
Clyde J. Hart, Jr.,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
In consideration of the foregoing, the FMCSA amends title 49, Code
of Federal Regulations, chapter III, parts 385 and 390, as follows:
PART 385--SAFETY FITNESS PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 385 continues to read as
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 104, 504, 521(b)(5)(A), 5113, 31136, 31144,
31502; and 49 CFR 1.73.
Secs. 385.21 and 385.23 [Removed]
2. Remove Secs. 385.21 and 385.23.
Appendix A to Part 385--[Removed and Reserved]
3. Remove and reserve appendix A to part 385, Form MCS-150, Motor
Carrier Identification Report.
PART 390--FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS; GENERAL
4. The authority citation for part 390 is revised to read as
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 13301, 13902, 31132, 31133, 31136, 31502,
31504; and sec. 204, Pub. L. 104-88, 109 Stat. 803, 941 (49 U.S.C.
701 note); and 49 CFR 1.73.
Sec. 390.19 [Redesignated as Sec. 390.17]
5. Redesignate Sec. 390.19 as Sec. 390.17.
6. A New Sec. 390.19 reads as follows:
Sec. 390.19 Motor carrier identification report.
(a) All motor carriers conducting operations in interstate commerce
shall file a Motor Carrier Identification Report, Form MCS-150, before
(b) The Motor Carrier Identification Report, Form MCS-150, with
complete instructions, is available from all FMCSA Service Centers and
Division offices nationwide and from the FMCSA's web site at: http://
www.mcs.dot.gov/factsfigs/formspubs.htm or by calling 1-800-832-5660.
(c) The completed Motor Carrier Identification Report, Form MCS-
150, shall be filed with the FMCSA's Office of Data Analysis and
Information Systems, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. A
for-hire motor carrier should submit the Form MCS-150 along with its
application for operating authority (Form OP-1) to the appropriate
address referenced on that form or may submit it separately to the
address mentioned in this section.
(d) Only the legal name or a single trade name of the motor carrier
may be used on the motor carrier identification report (Form MCS-150).
(e) A motor carrier that fails to file a Motor Carrier
Identification Report, Form MCS-150, or furnishes misleading
information or makes false statements upon Form MCS-150, is subject to
the penalties prescribed in 49 U.S.C. 521(b)(2)(B).
(f) Upon receipt and processing of the Motor Carrier Identification
Report, Form MCS-150, the FMCSA will issue the motor carrier an
identification number (USDOT number). The motor carrier must display
the number on each self-propelled CMV, as defined in Sec. 390.5, along
with the additional information required by Sec. 390.21.
[Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control
7. Revise Sec. 390.21 to read as follows:
Sec. 390.21 Marking of CMVs.
(a) General. Every self-propelled CMV, as defined in Sec. 390.5,
subject to subchapter B of this chapter must be marked as specified in
paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section.
(b) Nature of marking. The marking must display the following
(1) The legal name or a single trade name of the motor carrier
operating the self-propelled CMV, as listed on the motor carrier
identification report (Form MCS-150) and submitted in accordance with
(2) The motor carrier identification number issued by the FMCSA,
preceded by the letters ``USDOT''.
(3) If the name of any person other than the operating carrier
appears on the CMV, the name of the operating carrier must be followed
by the information required by paragraphs (b)(1), and (2) of this
section, and be preceded by the words ``operated by.''
(4) Other identifying information may be displayed on the vehicle
if it is not inconsistent with the information required by this
(5) Each motor carrier shall meet the following requirements
pertaining to its operation:
(i) All CMVs that are part of a motor carrier's existing fleet on
July 3, 2000, and which are marked with an ICCMC number must come into
compliance with paragraph (b)(2) of this section by July 3, 2002.
(ii) All CMVs that are part of a motor carrier's existing fleet on
July 3, 2000, and which are not marked with the legal name or a single
trade name on both sides of their CMVs, as shown on the Motor Carrier
Identification Report, Form MCS-150, must come into compliance with
paragraph (b)(1) of this section by July 5, 2005.
(iii) All CMVs added to a motor carrier's fleet on or after July 3,
2000, must meet the requirements of this section before being put into
service and operating on public ways.
(c) Size, shape, location, and color of marking. The marking must--
(1) Appear on both sides of the self-propelled CMV;
(2) Be in letters that contrast sharply in color with the
background on which the letters are placed;
(3) Be readily legible, during daylight hours, from a distance of
50 feet (15.24 meters) while the CMV is stationary; and
(4) Be kept and maintained in a manner that retains the legibility
required by paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
(d) Construction and durability. The marking may be painted on the
CMV or may consist of a removable device, if that device meets the
identification and legibility requirements of paragraph (c) of this
section, and such marking must be maintained as required by paragraph
(c)(4) of this section.
(e) Rented CMVs. A motor carrier operating a self-propelled CMV
under a rental agreement having a term not in excess of 30 calendar
days meets the requirements of this section if:
(1) The CMV is marked in accordance with the provisions of
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section; or
(2) The CMV is marked as set forth in paragraph (e)(2)(i) through
(iv) of this section:
(i) The legal name or a single trade name of the lessor is
displayed in accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.
(ii) The lessor's identification number preceded by the letters
``USDOT'' is displayed in accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of
this section; and
(iii) The rental agreement entered into by the lessor and the
renting motor carrier conspicuously contains the following information:
(A) The name and complete physical address of the principal place
of business of the renting motor carrier;
(B) The identification number issued the renting motor carrier by
the FMCSA, preceded by the letters ``USDOT,'' if the motor carrier has
been issued such a number. In lieu of the identification number
required in this paragraph, the following may be shown in the rental
(1) Information which indicates whether the motor carrier is
engaged in ``interstate'' or ``intrastate'' commerce; and
(2) Information which indicates whether the renting motor carrier
is transporting hazardous materials in the rented CMV;
(C) The sentence: ``This lessor cooperates with all Federal, State,
and local law enforcement officials nationwide to provide the identity
of customers who operate this rental CMV'; and
(iv) The rental agreement entered into by the lessor and the
renting motor carrier is carried on the rental CMV during the full term
of the rental agreement. See the leasing regulations at 49 CFR 376 for
information that should be included in all leasing documents.
(f) Driveaway services. In driveaway services, a removable device
may be affixed on both sides or at the rear of a
single driven vehicle. In a combination driveaway operation, the device
may be affixed on both sides of any one unit or at the rear of the last
unit. The removable device must display the legal name or a single
trade name of the motor carrier and the motor carrier's USDOT number.
8. Revise Sec. 390.27 to read as follows:
Sec. 390.27 Locations of motor carrier safety service centers.
Service center Territory included Location of office
Eastern............. CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, City Crescent Building,
NJ, NH, NY, PA, PR, RI, #10 South Howard
VA, VT, WV. Street, Suite 4000,
Baltimore, MD 21201-
Midwestern.......... IA, IL, IN, KS, MI, MO, 19900 Governors Drive,
MN, NE, OH, WI. Suite 210, Olympia
Fields, IL 60461-1021.
Southern............ AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, 61 Forsyth Street, SW,
MS, NC, NM, OK, SC, TN, Suite 17T75, Atlanta,
TX. GA 30303-3104.
Western............. American Samoa, AK, AZ, 201 Mission Street,
CA, CO, Guam, HI, ID, Suite 2100, San
Mariana Islands, MT, Francisco, CA 94105-
ND, NV, OR, SD, UT, WA, 1838.
Secs. 390.401, 390.403, 390.405 and 390.407 (Subpart D) [Removed]
9. In part 390, remove subpart D, consisting of Secs. 390.401,
390.403, 390.405 and 390.407.
[FR Doc. 00-13697 Filed 6-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P