Some school districts and school bus companies in search of drivers may need to look even harder after a federal rule outlaws the issuing of CDLs to non-U.S. citizens.

Many U.S. states are pausing or suspending the issuance of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) in response to U.S. Department of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy’s Sept. 26 announcement of an emergency action to drastically restrict who is eligible for a non-domiciled commercial learner’s permits (CLPs) and CDLs.

Editor’s — This article has been updated to include more comments from states that responded to questions the initial publication. STN will provide further updates as more states respond.

According to the announcement, the rule — effective immediately — comes in response to an ongoing nationwide audit by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and “a recent series of horrific, fatal crashes caused by non-domiciled drivers.”

The rule impacts nearly 200,000 current non-domiciled CDL holders and 20,000 CLP holders. FMCSA estimates about 6,000 drivers will qualify for non-domiciled credentials annually under the new restrictions.

It was unknown at this report how many of those are school bus drivers.

Duffy’s announcement indicates the audit uncovered “a catastrophic pattern of states issuing licenses illegally to foreign drivers, as well as the fact that even if the current regulatory framework is followed, it can fail.

“The confluence of these two factors has created an imminent hazard on America’s roadways that must be fixed,” a press release states.

Moving forward, non-citizens are ineligible for a non-domiciled CDL unless they meet a much stricter set of rules, including obtaining an employment-based visa and undergoing a mandatory federal immigration status check using the SAVE system.

SAVE is an online service for registered federal, state, territorial, tribal, and local government agencies to verify immigration status and naturalized/acquired U.S. citizenship of applicants seeking benefits or licenses.

“What our team has discovered should disturb and anger every American,” said Duffy, noting that CDLs are being issued to “dangerous foreign drivers – oftentimes illegally. This is a direct threat to the safety of every family on the road, and I won’t stand for it,” he continued.

FMCSA’s nationwide audit of non-domiciled CDLs uncovered systemic non-compliance across several states, the announcement noted, adding “the worst and most egregious in California. Due to weak oversight, insufficient training and programming errors, the agency found a large number of non-domiciled CDLs were issued to ineligible drivers and those whose licenses were valid long after their lawful presence in the U.S. expired.”

The audit indicates more than 25 percent of non-domiciled CDLs reviewed in California were improperly issued. U.S. DOT cited one case in which the state issued a driver from Brazil a CDL with endorsements to drive a passenger bus and a school bus that remained valid for months after his legal presence in the country expired.

As a result, Duffy also announced direct enforcement action against California, indicating the state must immediately pause issuance of non-domiciled CDLs, identify all unexpired non-domiciled CDLs that fail to comply with FMCSA regulations, and revoke and reissue all noncompliant non-domiciled CDLs if they comply with the new federal requirements.
Duffy gave California 30 days to come into compliance or FMCSA will withhold federal highway funds, starting at nearly $160 million in the first year and doubling in year two.

Jonathan Groveman, an information officer with the California Department of Motor Vehicles, told School Transportation News the agency is currently reviewing the federal government’s issued guidance within the federal government’s 30-day period.

Duffy indicated FMCSA’s findings are in addition to at least five fatal crashes occurring since January involving non-domiciled CDL holders, prompting what it calls Duffy’s urgent action to “combat the direct threat to national security and the hazard to public safety.”

Colorado, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington were also identified as states with licensing patterns not consistent with federal regulations.

The action limits individuals eligible for non-domiciled CLPs and CDLs to foreign individuals in lawful status in the U.S. in certain employment-based, non-immigrant categories, certain individuals domiciled in a U.S. territory, and individuals domiciled in a state that is prohibited from issuing CLPs or CDLs because FMCSA has decertified the state’s CDL program.

It also requires:

• Non-citizen applicants — except for lawful permanent residents — to provide an unexpired foreign passport and an unexpired Form I-94/94A (Arrival/Departure Record) indicating one of the specified employment-based nonimmigrant categories, specifically H2-B, H2-A, and E-2 visas, at every issuance, transfer, renewal, and upgrade action de-fined in the regulation.

• State drivers licensing agencies (SDLA) to query the SAVE system, which is administered by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, to verify the accuracy and legitimacy of provided documents and information.

• SDLAs retain copies of the application documents for at least two years.

• The expiration date for any non-domiciled CLP or CDL to match the expiration date of the Form I-94/94A or to expire in one year, whichever is sooner.

• The applicant to be present in person at each renewal.

• An SDLA to downgrade the non-domiciled CLP or CDL if the state becomes aware that the holder is no longer eligible to hold a non-domiciled CLP or CDL.

STN reached out to all 50 state agencies that issue CDLs, with several state websites announcing changes.

The Colorado DMV provided a statement to STN that effective Sept. 29 it paused all commercial drivers issuances and renewals of term-limited or non-domiciled CDLs and CLPs.

A spokesperson for the Georgia Department of Driver Services told STN the state is complying with the new federal ruling by only issuing CDLs to permanent residents that have acceptable visas.

In New Mexico, the Motor Vehicle Division (MVD) announced it also paused its issuance and renewal of CDLs and CLPs to certain non-domiciled foreign individuals as of Sept. 29 to comply with the emergency interim final rules issued by the FMCSA.

The MVD statement reads that the agency’s pause in CDL and CPL issuance and renewal affects foreign nationals relying on an employment zuthorization card to substantiate their authorization to work in the U.S. and it will continue to issue CDLs and CLPs to foreign nationals who present a foreign passport with an approved I-94 Arrival/Departure record.

“New Mexico law complies with all federal requirements for the issuance of CDLs and CLPs to non-domiciled individuals,” according to the statement. “Currently, 204 CDLs and CLPs have been issued to non-domiciled individuals in New Mexico. 2

Legislation introduced in 2022 on behalf of MVD added requirements for issuances of CDLs and CLPs to foreign nationals who demonstrate lawful status in the U.S. Individuals who seek a new or renewed non-domiciled CDL or CLP based on an employment authorization card will not be able to complete their transaction through MVD or its partner offices at this time.’

Regarding school bus drivers, Megan Gleason, public information officer for the New Mexico Department of Taxation and Revenue, noted, “There is a specific endorsement — an S (school bus) endorsement — on commercial driver’s licenses that authorizes drivers to operate a school bus transporting students to and from school or school-sponsored activities.

“When applied to a commercial learner’s permit, the endorsement serves solely for testing purposes, permitting the driver to complete the required skills examination to qualify for the endorsement on their commercial driver’s license,” she said.

Current data on active and total endorsements in New Mexico, indicates there are four active non-domicile CDLs, a total of eight non-domicile CDLs since 2022, one active non-domicile CLPs, and a total of nine CLPs since 2022.

Gleason said the same requirement for a foreign passport with an I-94 for an H2/H2A/E2 visa remains for those drivers at the time of renewal.

---

Related: U.S. DOT Proposes Rule to Add Fentanyl to CDL Drug Testing Program
Related: FMCSA Grant to Enhance CDL Testing in New Jersey
Related: FMCSA Proposal Seeks to Quicken CDL Process

---

A Texas Department of Public Safety spokesperson told STN all currently issued CDLs, including those to school bus drivers with appropriate endorsements, will remain valid and only the issuance of new CDLs and commercial learners permits, or CLPs, has been halted.

An additional statement from the agency, which issues CDLs and CLPs in Texas, noted that non-citizens include refugees, asylum seekers, and recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA.

“Customers with a pending issuance will not be allowed to continue any written or skills testing until the services for non-domicile CDL/CLP are reinstated” DPS added.

Other states changes include:

• The Arizona Department of Transportation said in a statement, “it is aware of the new federal guidelines and has instituted them for all new CDL issuances as well as renewals, which includes those seeking CDLs with passenger and school bus endorsements. There are approximately 125,000 CDLs in Arizona, and of those 800 are non-domiciled CDLs.” Though information related to school bus drivers was not known.

• Indiana noted its Bureau of Motor Vehicles has ceased processing all applications for non-domiciled CDL/CLPs, including applications for new, amended, duplicated, transferred, renewed, or upgraded non-domiciled CDL/CLPs. Affected non-domiciled CDL/CLP customers may submit an application at a BMV license branch to apply for or downgrade to a non-CDL driver’s license should they so choose.

• Maryland paused the issuance of all non-domiciled commercial driver products until further notice. This includes issuance, transfers, updates, replacements, duplicates, and renewals of both non-domiciled CLPs and non-domiciled CDLs, adding ‘we apologize for the inconvenience.’

• Massachusetts also apologetically indicated it has paused the issuance of all non-domiciled commercial driver credentials until further notice, including issuance, transfers, updates, replacements, duplicates, and renewals of both non-domiciled CLPs and non-domiciled CDLs.

• Missouri suspended all new, renewal and duplicate nondomiciled CDL and CLP issuance until further notice, including a suspension of knowledge and skills testing for any in-state or out-of-state test applicant who would be restricted to a non-domiciled CDL or CLP.

• Oregon DMV is no longer issuing limited-term (non-domiciled) CDLs and CLPs until further notice.

• Utah has paused issuing non-domiciled CDLs.

• The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) Office of Public Affairs issued a statement. “Due to the recent interim final rule issued by the FMCSA, like many states across the country, WisDOT Division of Motor Vehicles has paused its non-domiciled CDLs and CLPs issuance program to ensure compliance with the interim final rule. Wisconsin already had many of the new rule’s regulations in place. As we work to resolve any remaining issues, we will communicate the status of our program to impacted individuals on our website and at our DMV service centers.”

The post Update: U.S. Department of Transportation Enacts CDL Restrictions on Non-Domiciled Workers appeared first on School Transportation News.

This article marks the inaugural installment in a new series highlighting pupil transportation practices around the world, drawing on Gray Ram Tactical’s 18-plus years of global experience in training, consulting and working directly with transportation professionals. By sharing insights from multiple countries, the goal is to compare systems, explore best practices and encourage continual improvement in student safety and operational excellence.

Having worked alongside pupil transportation teams on both sides of the Atlantic, I’m often asked a deceptively simple question: “How different can school transport really be?” The short answer: Very. The two systems are built on different legal duties, vehicle standards and road-user expectations—and those differences shape daily practice, staffing, budgets and risk.

In the United Kingdom, local authorities have a statutory duty to arrange free home-to-school travel for eligible children, including those beyond statutory walking distance, with no safe walking route, or with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND).

The SEND program ensures that children with learning difficulties, disabilities or medical needs receive tailored support so they can access education on an equal basis with peers. Local authorities assess needs through an education, health and care (EHC) plan and, when necessary, provide additional services such as specialized transportation, teaching support, or therapeutic interventions.

Guidance sets clear distance thresholds, such as over two miles for children under age eight and over three miles for those age eight and above. There are also extended rights for low-income families. In contrast, the U.S, has no national duty to transport all pupils. Policy and funding are largely state or local decisions. While most districts do provide service, the eligibility rules vary significantly from state to state.

One of the most visible differences lies in the vehicles themselves. In the U.S., purpose-built yellow school buses are a hallmark. These vehicles are designed to FMVSS standards, including compartmentalization seating and specialized mirrors and lighting. Meanwhile, in the U.K., there is a mixed fleet. Many routes rely on public-service buses, contracted coaches, or minibuses rather than a unique standardized yellow bus. Seatbelt rules also vary by vehicle type, creating a more diverse operational environment.

Road-user laws further distinguish the two systems. In the U.S., every state makes it illegal to pass a school bus with its stop arm extended and red lights flashing. This creates a protective zone around the bus during loading and unloading. In the United Kingdom, however, there is no general legal requirement for motorists to stop for a school bus. Drivers are expected to exercise caution near schools, but compliance depends more on public awareness and enforcement of school-crossing-patrol signals.

Driver qualifications, vetting and training also differ. U.S. drivers must hold a commercial driver’s license with passenger and school bus endorsements, complete federally mandated entry-level driver training (ELDT), and undergo drug and alcohol testing as well as background checks. In the U.K., drivers typically hold passenger carrying vehicle licenses and must maintain their driver certificate of professional competence (CPC) through 35 hours of periodic training every five years. Because the work involves children, enhanced disclosure and barring service safeguarding checks are also required.

Both systems also address the transportation needs of students with special educational needs and disabilities. In the U.S., under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, transportation may be provided as a related service, determined by the student’s IEP team. In the U.K., local authorities assess eligibility and make arrangements under SEND or EHC provisions. This includes clear entitlements for low-income families, although many councils face rising costs in this area.

Daily operations bring further contrasts. In the U.S., systems typically design tailored routes around neighborhoods and bell times. In the U.K., there is a heavier reliance on blending dedicated coaches with mainstream public transport. At the bus stop, U.S. systems rely heavily on stop-arm protections and crossing procedures, whereas the U.K. leans on school-crossing patrols, signage and infrastructure. Another distinction is that U.K. authorities are not obligated to provide mid-day transport between school sites.

Despite these differences, there are important similarities in safety culture. Both nations emphasize prevention and continuous improvement. In the U.S., FMVSS standards guide design, while in the U.K. licensing and seatbelt rules are central. Training and supervision also play a major role, with U.S. ELDT paralleled by U.K. Driver CPC. Safeguarding is another shared priority, with DBS checks in the U.K. and various forms of background vetting in the U.S.

---

Related: American Yellow School Bus Comes to South Korea
Related: European Association Says Student Transporters There Face Similar Challenges as the U.S.
Related: Routes Around the World: Quarterly Quotes From Anson Stewart

---

For leaders, there are clear lessons. Policy should be designed around legal duties. Stops must be engineered with safety in mind. Investing in people—through training, vetting and professional development—is essential. And perhaps most importantly, proactive planning for SEND transportation can help mitigate rising demand and costs.

The U.S. and U.K. start from different blueprints—one anchored in a dedicated, highly standardized school-bus ecosystem; the other in a statutory entitlement delivered through a mixed public and contracted network. Yet the goal is identical: every child, safe there and safe home. When we borrow best practices across the Atlantic—on stop design, driver development, safeguarding, and SEND planning—we move measurably closer to that goal.

Coming next in this series: A look at pupil transportation in India.

---

Bret E. Brooks is the chief operating officer for Gray Ram Tactical, LLC, a Missouri-based international training and consulting firm specializing in transportation safety and security issues. Bret is the author of several books and articles. He is also a keynote speaker and presents around the world. He can be reached directly at bretbrooks@grayramtacticaltraining.com.

The post What Differs Between Pupil Transportation in the U.S. and the U.K.? appeared first on School Transportation News.

As school districts across the country continue to grapple with a nationwide shortage of school bus drivers, Burlington, Vermont, is stepping up its efforts to ensure students get to and from school safely and on time, reported NBC 5.

According to the news report, Burlington School District announced a series of new initiatives aimed at recruiting and retaining bus drivers, including paid CDL training, increased wages and expanded benefits. The district has lost three drivers over the past year and, like many others nationwide, has struggled to fill the vacancies.

“We know that one of the biggest barriers to becoming a bus driver is the cost of getting a commercial driver’s license (CDL),” said Michelle Meola, director of human resources for the district. “That process can cost anywhere from hundreds to thousands of dollars, and that’s a significant burden for many people.”

Starting wages have jumped from just under $18 an hour to $30 an hour, following recent union negotiations aimed at making the job more competitive in today’s labor market.

“In order to give a significant increase, we had to go through negotiations because we are under a union contract,” Meola explained . “But even before those talks began, we came to the table ready to invest in this position.”

Beyond better pay and training, the district is also reportedly working to make the role more sustainable by creating additional job opportunities for drivers within the school system. These could include roles in property services or other support functions, allowing drivers to become full-time employees and qualify for full-time benefits.

“We’re excited about this direction,” Meola told local news reporters. “It allows us to impact people’s lives by offering more stability, and it helps our district run more smoothly by keeping experienced, dedicated staff on board.”

Currently, the Burlington School District is looking to hire at least four new drivers. Officials are reportedly encouraging anyone interested to apply through the district’s website.

“This is more than just a job,” Meola added. “It’s an opportunity to be part of the community and make a real difference in the lives of students and families every day.”

---

Related: Dauphin County School District Considers Paying Parents Amid Bus Driver Shortage
Related: Arizona School District Increases Bus Driver Pay to Help with Shortage
Related: Turning School Bus Driver Shortages Into Opportunities
Related: School Bus Driver Shortage Impacts Florida Districts

The post Vermont School District Boosts Pay, Offers Training to Attract Bus Drivers appeared first on School Transportation News.

Citing the frequency of overdose deaths nationwide and in the interest of transportation safety, the U.S. Department of Transportation said it seeks to add fentanyl and its metabolite norfentanyl to its drug-testing panels for CDL holders.

The proposal issued Sept. 2 seeks to amend certain provisions of 49 CFR Part 40 to “harmonize as appropriate” with the current U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) mandatory guidelines for federal workplace drug testing programs using urine (UrMG) and oral fluid (OFMG) that went into effect July 7, following a final rule published in January. A majority of HHS-certified labs already can test for fentanyl and norfetanyl with “sufficiently sensitive detection limits,’ according to this month’s NPRM.

The NPRM cites HHS findings from the Drug Enforcement Agency’s National Forensic Laboratory Information System 2021 report that fentanyl, a schedule II synthetic opioid, was the fourth most frequently identified drug and accounted for 11.61 percent of all drugs reported by forensic laboratories. Norfentanyl is “an important component of identifying fentanyl users when urine is the specimen matrix,” the proposal adds, with fentanyl being detected in oral fluid in pain management patients, overdose cases and cases of driving under the influence of drugs.

The National School Transportation Association said it is reviewing all the provisions of the  NPRM but is likely to support adding fentanyl to the drug testing panel.

If published as a final rule, school districts and school bus companies administering or managing drug tests will need to update their policies.

“If a DOT drug/alcohol policy lists the drugs that are tested for, this will need to be added to the policy,” commented Tonic Lathrop, president of operations for Sinnett Consulting Services in Reno, Nevada. “When I write policy, I only list the main categories and not sub-categories so when substances get added to the testing panel, I don’t have to change all of my clients’ policies.”

This includes updating testing procedures and protocols, if a company or school district adds a biomarker or testing type information into their drug and alcohol policy, she explained.

Additionally, Lathrop said employers would need to provide their employees with notification and education about the changes and ensure employees are aware of the additional substance testing and possible update to the drug and alcohol testing policy.  Updated education material should also include fentanyl with substance awareness.

She also noted a positive test for fentanyl may have a legitimate medical explanation. A medical review officer, or MRO, may verify and report a negative test with safety concerns.

Public comments on Docket DOT-OST-2025-0049 are due by Oct. 17 online, by mail or in person.

---

Related: Update: Feds Withdraw Oral Fluid Collection for CDL Drug Tests Rule
Related: Federal Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse Finds 46K Driver Drug-Related Violations
Related: Marijuana Use Dominates Positive Drug Testing Rates of Commercial Drivers

The post U.S. DOT Proposes Rule to Add Fentanyl to CDL Drug Testing Program appeared first on School Transportation News.