May 5, 2025
Daniel Cohen
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE
Washington, DC 20590
RE: Docket No. DOT-OST-2025-0026; Ensuring Lawful Regulation; Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
Dear Mr. Cohen:
The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives (NCFC) respectfully submits these comments in response to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) efforts to identify, streamline, and modify regulations to reduce the regulatory burden and promote efficiency. We echo the comments submitted by GROWMARK, an agricultural cooperative and member of NCFC, in requesting DOT to provide regulatory clarity around the Restricted Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) for certain drivers in farm-related service industries (“Restricted CDL”). Specifically, we request that DOT clarify its regulatory intent that the weight of implements of husbandry do not count towards the vehicle classification under 49 CFR § 383.91(a).
The agriculture industry has a limited labor pool to transport agricultural inputs and commodities. The need for these qualified individuals within the industry increases at critical times during the season. Using the Restricted CDL for its intended purpose allows farm-related industries to better meet customer needs in a safe and timely manner. The Restricted CDL program is established in 49 CFR 383.3(f) and allows states to issue seasonal Restricted CDLs to employees of designated farm-related service industries and allows these drivers to operate Group B and C Vehicles. Restricted CDL holders may not drive vehicles carrying any placardable quantities of hazardous materials, except for diesel fuel in quantities of 1,000 gallons or less; liquid fertilizers in vehicles or implements of husbandry in total quantities of 3,000 gallons or less; and solid fertilizers that are not transported with any organic substance.
For this program to best accomplish its objectives, clarification is needed from DOT around defining and exempting implements of husbandry from the Gross Combination Weight Rating (GCWR) of the vehicle for the determination of whether the vehicle qualifies as a Group B or Group C vehicle. Determining the vehicle’s group classification depends on the combined weight of the power unit and the “vehicle(s) being towed” by the power unit (49 CFR § 383.91(a)).
For the Restricted CDL, DOT makes a distinction between a “vehicle” and an “implement of husbandry” (49 CFR § 383.3(f)(3)(v)). Therefore, when calculating the weight of “vehicle(s) being towed” to determine vehicle classification (49 CFR § 383.91(a)), the weight of “implements of husbandry” should be excluded from the calculation because they are not “vehicles” under these regulations (49 CFR § 383.3(f)(3)(v)). Despite this distinction, there have been instances of states that have created Restricted CDL programs requiring the weight of an implement of husbandry be used in calculating a GCWR due to what they perceive as a lack of clarity from DOT. As a result, the vehicles pulling specific implements of husbandry as anticipated by 49 CFR 383.3(f)(3)(v) are classified as Group A vehicles on account of the weight of the implement of husbandry, which is not the intention of these regulations.
Additionally, as the weights of trucks increase due to the integration of enhanced safety features on newer equipment, states that include the weight of an implement of husbandry towards the GCWR may push that classification into Group A, precluding it from being operated by a driver with a Restricted CDL despite there being no change in the amount of product being transported.
Without any need to circumvent states’ definitions of implements of husbandry, DOT can simply clarify for the states that for a Restricted CDL, the weight of an implement of husbandry should not be considered when calculating the vehicle classification under 49 CFR § 383.91(a). This clarification would be in line with previous guidance from the DOT that implements of husbandry are outside of the scope of a commercial motor vehicle (76 FR 31279 (May 2011)).
We respectfully request that DOT make this clarification to allow the agriculture industry to continue to enhance the safety features in the vehicles it operates and provide efficient and timely service to the farmers who rely on farmer cooperatives for their inputs and services.
Sincerely,
Charles F. Conner
President & CEO
NCFC Submits Comments to U.S. Department of Transportation on Regulatory Efforts
May 5, 2025
Daniel Cohen
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE
Washington, DC 20590
RE: Docket No. DOT-OST-2025-0026; Ensuring Lawful Regulation; Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
Dear Mr. Cohen:
The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives (NCFC) respectfully submits these comments in response to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) efforts to identify, streamline, and modify regulations to reduce the regulatory burden and promote efficiency. We echo the comments submitted by GROWMARK, an agricultural cooperative and member of NCFC, in requesting DOT to provide regulatory clarity around the Restricted Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) for certain drivers in farm-related service industries (“Restricted CDL”). Specifically, we request that DOT clarify its regulatory intent that the weight of implements of husbandry do not count towards the vehicle classification under 49 CFR § 383.91(a).
The agriculture industry has a limited labor pool to transport agricultural inputs and commodities. The need for these qualified individuals within the industry increases at critical times during the season. Using the Restricted CDL for its intended purpose allows farm-related industries to better meet customer needs in a safe and timely manner. The Restricted CDL program is established in 49 CFR 383.3(f) and allows states to issue seasonal Restricted CDLs to employees of designated farm-related service industries and allows these drivers to operate Group B and C Vehicles. Restricted CDL holders may not drive vehicles carrying any placardable quantities of hazardous materials, except for diesel fuel in quantities of 1,000 gallons or less; liquid fertilizers in vehicles or implements of husbandry in total quantities of 3,000 gallons or less; and solid fertilizers that are not transported with any organic substance.
For this program to best accomplish its objectives, clarification is needed from DOT around defining and exempting implements of husbandry from the Gross Combination Weight Rating (GCWR) of the vehicle for the determination of whether the vehicle qualifies as a Group B or Group C vehicle. Determining the vehicle’s group classification depends on the combined weight of the power unit and the “vehicle(s) being towed” by the power unit (49 CFR § 383.91(a)).
For the Restricted CDL, DOT makes a distinction between a “vehicle” and an “implement of husbandry” (49 CFR § 383.3(f)(3)(v)). Therefore, when calculating the weight of “vehicle(s) being towed” to determine vehicle classification (49 CFR § 383.91(a)), the weight of “implements of husbandry” should be excluded from the calculation because they are not “vehicles” under these regulations (49 CFR § 383.3(f)(3)(v)). Despite this distinction, there have been instances of states that have created Restricted CDL programs requiring the weight of an implement of husbandry be used in calculating a GCWR due to what they perceive as a lack of clarity from DOT. As a result, the vehicles pulling specific implements of husbandry as anticipated by 49 CFR 383.3(f)(3)(v) are classified as Group A vehicles on account of the weight of the implement of husbandry, which is not the intention of these regulations.
Additionally, as the weights of trucks increase due to the integration of enhanced safety features on newer equipment, states that include the weight of an implement of husbandry towards the GCWR may push that classification into Group A, precluding it from being operated by a driver with a Restricted CDL despite there being no change in the amount of product being transported.
Without any need to circumvent states’ definitions of implements of husbandry, DOT can simply clarify for the states that for a Restricted CDL, the weight of an implement of husbandry should not be considered when calculating the vehicle classification under 49 CFR § 383.91(a). This clarification would be in line with previous guidance from the DOT that implements of husbandry are outside of the scope of a commercial motor vehicle (76 FR 31279 (May 2011)).
We respectfully request that DOT make this clarification to allow the agriculture industry to continue to enhance the safety features in the vehicles it operates and provide efficient and timely service to the farmers who rely on farmer cooperatives for their inputs and services.
Sincerely,
Charles F. Conner
President & CEO
Related Resources
Agricultural Transportation Working Group (ATWG) Sends Letter to Congress on Priorities for Surface Transportation Reauthorization
NCFC, 55 Agriculture and Food Supply Chain Groups Send Letter to President Urging Action to Avoid ILA Worker Strike
Transportation