To ensure that any new or revised requirement providing for the screening, testing, or treatment of individuals operating commercial motor vehicles for sleep disorders is adopted pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation is simple, but has the potential to save the trucking industry nearly $1 billion.

If the Department of Transportation--specifically the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration--decides they want to weigh in on sleep apnea, they need to do so by a rulemaking process.

On April 20, 2012, FMCSA published a Federal Register notice that stated FMCSA was going to publish regulatory guidance related to sleep apnea. Subsequently, as has been mentioned, they decided to go through the rulemaking process. But I still believe this bill is necessary to codify that position into law and give the opinion of Congress to FMCSA on this issue.

The problem with issuing guidance instead of traditional rulemaking is that guidance is nonbinding and open to interpretation. When somebody with a commercial driver's license goes to a physician to get a physical, the doctor can follow the guidance and recommend a sleep apnea test. Sleep apnea tests cost thousands of dollars, and the cost would be shifted to the employer of the driver, or if they are an independent driver, to themselves. If the doctor chose to ignore the guidance, they would be open to possible legal actions.

I know from experience that most physicians already practice defensive medicine, and any guidance related to this issue would only drive up the cost of medicine and hurt an industry that is already facing high unemployment.

The American Trucking Association has estimated that nearly one-third of their drivers would meet the arbitrary body mass index threshold. That would be an estimated 1 million drivers getting a sleep apnea test at an average cost of $2,265. The total cost just to the American Trucking Association members would be estimated between $900 million and $1.2 billion. The School Bus

Association estimates that this regulation would cost their drivers $100 million.

Sleep apnea is a serious disease that can't be diagnosed arbitrarily by guidance set in Washington, D.C. The Department needs to go through the rulemaking process--which, again, they've already agreed to do. This would allow a cost-benefit analysis and input from medical providers and all of the stakeholders involved in this issue.

I'm proud that the bill passed out of the Transportation Committee with unanimous support and had over 68 bipartisan cosponsors. The American Trucking Associations, the American Bus Association, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the National School Transportation Association, Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, and the United Motorcoach Association have all endorsed

I thank my good friend, the chairman of the subcommittee, for his work on this very important bill, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3095. This legislation ensures that changes planned by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to better diagnose and treat sleep apnea among commercial truck and bus drivers will be done with a formal rulemaking.

I believe the FMCSA's initiative to address sleep apnea is important, and I fully support the Agency's efforts to improve safety. There is little question that obstructive sleep apnea, if left untreated, can significantly affect a truck or bus driver and his or her on-the-job performance.

When we scheduled markup of this bill in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the Agency was considering making significant changes to the medical screening of drivers for sleep apnea through guidance. The rulemaking process, however, will afford FMCSA the opportunity to get input from the public, including drivers and companies who will be directly affected by the changes.

FMCSA has since committed to making changes through a rulemaking. Therefore, this legislation has been overtaken by events and seems to have already had the desired effect. While I am not sure this bill is necessary, I have no objection whatsoever to its content, and I support its adoption.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I can only hope that the agency--which has a long docket--in fact gets to this rulemaking. It is always, in the best of all possible worlds, best to have rulemaking input from the public, of course the formal effect of rules in the courts of the United States. And I'm not sure why the agency was going to do guidance instead. But this is a very important issue. There have been accidents that have been attributed to sleep apnea. But again, without any guidance, without any rulemaking, without any understanding of how to go about even detecting it and what you're supposed to do to prevent it, we are delayed in preventing these accidents. So I very much appreciate the work of both sides, and certainly of my good friend, the chairman of the subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3095) to ensure that any new or revised requirement providing for the screening, testing, or treatment of individuals operating commercial motor vehicles for sleep disorders is adopted pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill before us.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am pleased to support H.R. 3095. This bill ensures that any new or revised requirements made by the Secretary for the screening, testing, or treatment of commercial motor vehicle drivers for obstructive sleep apnea is adopted through a rulemaking proceeding.

H.R. 3095 does not require a rulemaking proceeding to be initiated. It only requires that any future changes to screening, testing, or treatment requirements for obstructive sleep apnea are made through a rulemaking.

A rulemaking will help the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, stakeholders and this Congress understand the costs and benefits of the proposed changes and provide stakeholders an opportunity to comment.

H.R. 3095 is the most responsible way to move forward with any changes to obstructive sleep apnea screening, testing, or treatment requirements.

This bill has over 59 Democratic and Republican cosponsors and shows how effective a bipartisan effort to move practical legislation can be. Senator Blunt from Missouri and Senator Warner from Virginia have introduced S. 1537, the companion bill to that before us, H.R. 3095.

This bill has strong bicameral, bipartisan support, and I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 3095.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to our colleague from the State of Indiana (Mr. Bucshon).

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage all Members to support the bill before us, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, September 25, 2013 and on Thursday, September 26, 2013, I was necessarily absent from the House chamber.

If I had been present, I would have voted, the following on September 25, 2013:

Rollcall 484 on the motion to suspend the rules and pass, H.R. 1961, To amend title 46, United States Code, to extend the exemption from the fire-retardant materials construction requirement for vessels operating within the Boundary Line, I would have voted, ``aye.''

Rollcall 485 on the motion to suspend the rules and p ass, H.Res. 354, Providing for the concurrence by the House in the Senate amendment to H.R. 527, with an amendment, I would have voted, ``aye.''

If I had been present, I would have voted, the following on September 26, 2013:

Rollcall 486 on the motion to suspend the rules and pass, H.R. 3095, To ensure any new or revised requirement providing for the screening, testing, or treatment of individuals operating commercial motor vehicles for sleep disorders is adopted pursuant to a rulemaking proceeding, and for other purposes, I would have voted, ``aye.''

Rollcall 487 on the motion to suspend the rules and pass, H.R. 2600, To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act to clarify how the Act applies to condominiums, I would have voted, ``aye.''

Rollcall 488, on approving the journal, I would have voted, ``aye.''

Rollcall 489, on agreeing to the amendment of H.R. 687, Grijalva of Arizona Part A Amendment No. 1, I would have vote ``nay.''

Rollcall 490, on agreeing to the amendment of H.R. 687, Napolitano of California Part A Amendment No. 3, I would have vote ``nay.''

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent during the week September 23, 2013. If I were present, I would have voted on the following:

Rollcall vote No. 484: H.R. 1961, ``nay;''

Rollcall vote No. 485: H. Res. 354, ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 486: H.R. 3095, ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 487: H.R. 2600, ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 488: Journal Vote, ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 489: Grijalva Amendment, ``aye;''

Rollcall vote No. 490: Napolitano Amendment, ``aye;''

Rollcall vote No. 491: Senate Amendment to H.R. 1412, ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 492: H.R. 3096, ``aye;''

Rollcall vote No. 493: H. Res. 361--Martial Law Authority Rule, ``nay;''

Rollcall vote No. 494: Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the Rule, ``nay;''

Rollcall vote No. 495: H. Res. 366--Rule providing for consideration of both the amendments to the Senate Amendment to H.J. Res. 59, ``nay;''

Rollcall vote No. 496: H.R. 2251, ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 497: Motion to Concur with the Senate Amendment with a House Amendment, Part 1 (Paulsen), ``yea;''

Rollcall vote No. 498: Motion to Concur with the Senate Amendment with a House Amendment, Part 2 (Blackburn), ``nay;''

Rollcall vote No. 499: H.R. 3210--Pay Our Military Act, ``yea;'' and

Rollcall vote No. 500: H.R. 2848--Department of State Operations and Embassy Security Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2014, ``yea.''