80 FR 8927 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 33 (February 19, 2015)
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 33 (February 19, 2015)
| Page Range | 8927-8929 | |
| FR Document | 2015-03461 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 8927-8929] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-03461] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0298] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of final disposition. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 34 individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various reasons. The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce without meeting the prescribed vision requirement in one eye. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these CMV drivers. DATES: The exemptions were granted December 24, 2014. The exemptions expire on December 24, 2016. [[Page 8928]] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366- 9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Electronic Access You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov. Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy. II. Background On November 24, 2014, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the public (79 FR 69985). That notice listed 34 applicants' case histories. The 34 individuals applied for exemptions from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), for drivers who operate CMVs in interstate commerce. Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the 34 applications on their merits and made a determination to grant exemptions to each of them. III. Vision and Driving Experience of the Applicants The vision requirement in the FMCSRs provides: A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red, green, and amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)). FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their vision limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 34 exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various reasons, including a prosthetic eye, amblyopia, complete loss of vision, optic atrophy, retinal damage, strabismic amblyopia, a corneal scar, rubiosis iridis, a macular scar, cataract, ischemic optic neuropathy, refractive amblyopia, a scar, and vision loss. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. Twenty-four of the applicants were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since childhood. The ten individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults have had them for a range of four to 34 years. Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of valid commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) or non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to knowledge and skills tests designed to evaluate their qualifications to operate a CMV. All of these applicants satisfied the testing requirements for their State of residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a CMV, with their limited vision, to the satisfaction of the State. While possessing a valid CDL or non-CDL, these 34 drivers have been authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate commerce, even though their vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. They have driven CMVs with their limited vision in careers ranging from three to 40 years. In the past three years, two of the drivers were involved in crashes and three were convicted of moving violations in a CMV. The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the November 24, 2014, notice (79 FR 69985). IV. Basis for Exemption Determination Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without the exemption. Without the exemption, applicants will continue to be restricted to intrastate driving. With the exemption, applicants can drive in interstate commerce. Thus, our analysis focuses on whether an equal or greater level of safety is likely to be achieved by permitting each of these drivers to drive in interstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or her to driving in intrastate commerce. To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA considered the medical reports about the applicants' vision as well as their driving records and experience with the vision deficiency. To qualify for an exemption from the vision requirement, FMCSA requires a person to present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven a commercial vehicle safely with the vision deficiency for the past 3 years. Recent driving performance is especially important in evaluating future safety, according to several research studies designed to correlate past and future driving performance. Results of these studies support the principle that the best predictor of future performance by a driver is his/her past record of crashes and traffic violations. Copies of the studies may be found at Docket Number FMCSA-1998-3637. FMCSA believes it can properly apply the principle to monocular drivers, because data from the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) former waiver study program clearly demonstrate the driving performance of experienced monocular drivers in the program is better than that of all CMV drivers collectively (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, March 26, 1996). The fact that experienced monocular drivers demonstrated safe driving records in the waiver program supports a conclusion that other monocular drivers, meeting the same qualifying conditions as those required by the waiver program, are also likely to have adapted to their vision [[Page 8929]] deficiency and will continue to operate safely. The first major research correlating past and future performance was done in England by Greenwood and Yule in 1920. Subsequent studies, building on that model, concluded that crash rates for the same individual exposed to certain risks for two different time periods vary only slightly (See Bates and Neyman, University of California Publications in Statistics, April 1952). Other studies demonstrated theories of predicting crash proneness from crash history coupled with other factors. These factors--such as age, sex, geographic location, mileage driven and conviction history--are used every day by insurance companies and motor vehicle bureaus to predict the probability of an individual experiencing future crashes (See Weber, Donald C., ``Accident Rate Potential: An Application of Multiple Regression Analysis of a Poisson Process,'' Journal of American Statistical Association, June 1971). A 1964 California Driver Record Study prepared by the California Department of Motor Vehicles concluded that the best overall crash predictor for both concurrent and nonconcurrent events is the number of single convictions. This study used 3 consecutive years of data, comparing the experiences of drivers in the first 2 years with their experiences in the final year. Applying principles from these studies to the past 3-year record of the 34 applicants, two of the drivers were involved in crashes, and three were convicted of moving violations in a CMV. All the applicants achieved a record of safety while driving with their vision impairment, demonstrating the likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the future. We believe that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions. The veteran drivers in this proceeding have operated CMVs safely under those conditions for at least 3 years, most for much longer. Their experience and driving records lead us to believe that each applicant is capable of operating in interstate commerce as safely as he/she has been performing in intrastate commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption. For this reason, the Agency is granting the exemptions for the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to the 34 applicants listed in the notice of November 24, 2014 (79 FR 69985). We recognize that the vision of an applicant may change and affect his/her ability to operate a CMV as safely as in the past. As a condition of the exemption, therefore, FMCSA will impose requirements on the 34 individuals consistent with the grandfathering provisions applied to drivers who participated in the Agency's vision waiver program. Those requirements are found at 49 CFR 391.64(b) and include the following: (1) That each individual be physically examined every year (a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must have a copy of the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official. V. Discussion of Comments FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding. VI. Conclusion Based upon its evaluation of the 34 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above (49 CFR 391.64(b)): Peter H. Bailey (MI) Dewey E. Ballard, Jr. (SC) Steven M. Claney (IA) Thurman T. Clayton, Jr. (LA) Tig G. Cornell (ID) Kevin R. Cowger (WY) Jon R. Davidson (CO) David R. Demura (TX) Edwin T. Donaldson (PA) William W. R. Dunn (PA) Larry E. Emanuel, Jr. (FL) Barbara A. Evans (NH) Russell J. Fisher (MT) Timothy J. Fisher (FL) Bradley J. Gaspard (LA) Perry D. Hamilton (TN) Jerome A. Henderson (VA) William A. Hill III (OH) James C. Jankowski (WI) Glen L. Joens (IA) Phillip V. King (KY) Keith C. Lendt (MN) Daniel E. Manchester (GA) Richard B. McMaster (AR) Joseph McTear, Jr. (TX) Martin Monta[ntilde]ez (IL) Lee A. Mosier (IA) Timothy L. O'Neill (NY) John W. Randels (CO) Carl W. Russell (OK) Valnei L. Santos (FL) Thomas L. Stanaway (MI) Daniel R. Thompson (PA) Luther W. Wieder, Jr. (ME) In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315. If the exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time. Dated: February 10, 2015. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy. [FR Doc. 2015-03461 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices 8927
diabetes management, and is on a stable employed. The driver must also have a Christopher E. Swanson (CA)
insulin regimen. These drivers report no copy of the certification when driving, Scott R. Swisher (KS)
other disqualifying conditions, for presentation to a duly authorized Diana C. Tabala (NY)
including diabetes-related Federal, State, or local enforcement Brewster E. Thurston (VT)
complications. Each meets the vision official. Phillip J. Ulmer (LA)
requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Charles A. Walker (IL)
The qualifications and medical VI. Conclusion Roger L. Watt (PA)
condition of each applicant were stated Based upon its evaluation of the 66 John D. Weaver (WY)
and discussed in detail in the December exemption applications, FMCSA Avery White (GA)
15, 2014, Federal Register notice and exempts the following drivers from the Leroy D. Yost (IA)
they will not be repeated in this notice. diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Wayne W. Zander (SD)
391.41(b)(10), subject to the In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
III. Discussion of Comments
requirements cited above (49 CFR and 31315 each exemption is valid for
FMCSA received no comments in this 391.64(b)): two years unless revoked earlier by
proceeding. Eric D. Ambler (WI) FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked
IV. Basis for Exemption Determination Clay B. Anderson (IL) if the following occurs: (1) The person
Gregory C. Bartley (PA) fails to comply with the terms and
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, conditions of the exemption; (2) the
Aaron M. Batts (NC)
FMCSA may grant an exemption from Nathan R. Batzel (MN) exemption has resulted in a lower level
the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Michael R. Bell (MD) of safety than was maintained before it
391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to Andrew P. Coffey (CT) was granted; or (3) continuation of the
achieve an equivalent or greater level of Robert N. Coury (NV) exemption would not be consistent with
safety than would be achieved without Jerry A. Cox, Sr. (LA) the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
the exemption. The exemption allows Lloyd F. Cuckow (CO) 31136(e) and 31315. If the exemption is
the applicants to operate CMVs in Kenneth B. Dennard (GA) still effective at the end of the 2-year
interstate commerce. Eric Q. Dickerson (IN) period, the person may apply to FMCSA
To evaluate the effect of these James P. Dreifuerst (WI) for a renewal under procedures in effect
exemptions on safety, FMCSA Billy D. Dryer (MO) at that time.
considered medical reports about the James H. Elliott (OH)
applicants’ ITDM and vision, and Dated: February 10, 2015.
Domenic R. Folino (PA)
reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ Jimmie W. Grist (ID) Larry W. Minor,
medical opinion related to the ability of Scott M. Guyette (WI) Associate Administrator for Policy.
the driver to safely operate a CMV while Carl D. Hall (KY) [FR Doc. 2015–03459 Filed 2–18–15; 8:45 am]
using insulin. Howard M. Hammel (NJ) BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
Consequently, FMCSA finds that in Derrick D. Harris (IL)
each case exempting these applicants Terry M. Jacobson (WI)
from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR Kevin R. Johnson (MI) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level Martin S. Kiss (IL)
of safety equal to that existing without Robert S. Krueger (WA) Federal Motor Carrier Safety
the exemption. David J. Long (PA) Administration
V. Conditions and Requirements Michael R. Ludowese (MN) [Docket No. FMCSA–2014–0298]
David P. Magee (MO)
The terms and conditions of the Gary F. Marson (WI) Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
exemption will be provided to the Steven R. Mc Clain (IL) Applications; Vision
applicants in the exemption document Arthur D. McFadden, Sr. (IA)
and they include the following: (1) That Elbert J. Means (SC) AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
each individual submit a quarterly James A. Meridith (MI) Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
monitoring checklist completed by the Richard A. Moore (PA) ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
treating endocrinologist as well as an Keith B. Muehler (ND)
annual checklist with a comprehensive John K. Murray (NY) SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its
medical evaluation; (2) that each Harold N. Myers (IA) decision to exempt 34 individuals from
individual reports within 2 business Clayton L. Neuhauser (ND) the vision requirement in the Federal
days of occurrence, all episodes of Eugene E. Patterson, III (TX) Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
severe hypoglycemia, significant John D. Pede, Jr. (PA) (FMCSRs). They are unable to meet the
complications, or inability to manage Jack E. Pollock (GA) vision requirement in one eye for
diabetes; also, any involvement in an John F. Prophet (FL) various reasons. The exemptions will
accident or any other adverse event in David M. Pullen (VA) enable these individuals to operate
a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or Dominic F. Quartullo (WI) commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
not it is related to an episode of David Quintrall (WY) interstate commerce without meeting
hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual Michael E. Reed (IA) the prescribed vision requirement in
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s Carlos B. Rodriguez (NY) one eye. The Agency has concluded that
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
or optometrist’s report to the medical Marvin A. Ryan (IN) granting these exemptions will provide
examiner at the time of the annual David J. Sierra (NJ) a level of safety that is equivalent to or
medical examination; and (4) that each Larry D. Small (NJ) greater than the level of safety
individual provide a copy of the annual Roger E. Smith (IA) maintained without the exemptions for
medical certification to the employer for Terrell W. Smith (PA) these CMV drivers.
retention in the driver’s qualification Anthony L. Spratto (WI) DATES: The exemptions were granted
file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s Timothy R. Stephens (KS) December 24, 2014. The exemptions
qualification file if he/she is self- Howard C. Stines (TN) expire on December 24, 2016.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Feb 18, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM 19FEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_8960/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices 8929
deficiency and will continue to operate driver response just as intensely as Peter H. Bailey (MI)
safely. interstate driving conditions. The Dewey E. Ballard, Jr. (SC)
The first major research correlating veteran drivers in this proceeding have Steven M. Claney (IA)
past and future performance was done operated CMVs safely under those Thurman T. Clayton, Jr. (LA)
in England by Greenwood and Yule in conditions for at least 3 years, most for Tig G. Cornell (ID)
1920. Subsequent studies, building on much longer. Their experience and Kevin R. Cowger (WY)
that model, concluded that crash rates driving records lead us to believe that Jon R. Davidson (CO)
for the same individual exposed to each applicant is capable of operating in David R. Demura (TX)
certain risks for two different time interstate commerce as safely as he/she Edwin T. Donaldson (PA)
periods vary only slightly (See Bates has been performing in intrastate William W. R. Dunn (PA)
and Neyman, University of California commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds Larry E. Emanuel, Jr. (FL)
Publications in Statistics, April 1952). that exempting these applicants from Barbara A. Evans (NH)
Other studies demonstrated theories of the vision requirement in 49 CFR Russell J. Fisher (MT)
predicting crash proneness from crash 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level Timothy J. Fisher (FL)
history coupled with other factors. of safety equal to that existing without Bradley J. Gaspard (LA)
These factors—such as age, sex, the exemption. For this reason, the Perry D. Hamilton (TN)
geographic location, mileage driven and Agency is granting the exemptions for Jerome A. Henderson (VA)
conviction history—are used every day the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. William A. Hill III (OH)
by insurance companies and motor 31136(e) and 31315 to the 34 applicants James C. Jankowski (WI)
vehicle bureaus to predict the listed in the notice of November 24, Glen L. Joens (IA)
probability of an individual 2014 (79 FR 69985). Phillip V. King (KY)
experiencing future crashes (See Weber, We recognize that the vision of an Keith C. Lendt (MN)
Donald C., ‘‘Accident Rate Potential: An applicant may change and affect his/her Daniel E. Manchester (GA)
Application of Multiple Regression ability to operate a CMV as safely as in Richard B. McMaster (AR)
Analysis of a Poisson Process,’’ Journal the past. As a condition of the Joseph McTear, Jr. (TX)
of American Statistical Association, exemption, therefore, FMCSA will Martin Montañez (IL)
June 1971). A 1964 California Driver impose requirements on the 34 Lee A. Mosier (IA)
Record Study prepared by the California individuals consistent with the Timothy L. O’Neill (NY)
Department of Motor Vehicles grandfathering provisions applied to John W. Randels (CO)
concluded that the best overall crash drivers who participated in the Carl W. Russell (OK)
predictor for both concurrent and Agency’s vision waiver program. Valnei L. Santos (FL)
nonconcurrent events is the number of Those requirements are found at 49 Thomas L. Stanaway (MI)
single convictions. This study used 3 CFR 391.64(b) and include the Daniel R. Thompson (PA)
consecutive years of data, comparing the following: (1) That each individual be Luther W. Wieder, Jr. (ME)
experiences of drivers in the first 2 years physically examined every year (a) by In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
with their experiences in the final year. an ophthalmologist or optometrist who and 31315, each exemption will be valid
Applying principles from these attests that the vision in the better eye for 2 years unless revoked earlier by
studies to the past 3-year record of the continues to meet the requirement in 49 FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked
34 applicants, two of the drivers were CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a medical
involved in crashes, and three were if: (1) The person fails to comply with
examiner who attests that the individual the terms and conditions of the
convicted of moving violations in a is otherwise physically qualified under
CMV. All the applicants achieved a exemption; (2) the exemption has
49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual resulted in a lower level of safety than
record of safety while driving with their provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s
vision impairment, demonstrating the was maintained before it was granted; or
or optometrist’s report to the medical (3) continuation of the exemption would
likelihood that they have adapted their examiner at the time of the annual
driving skills to accommodate their not be consistent with the goals and
medical examination; and (3) that each objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
condition. As the applicants’ ample individual provide a copy of the annual
driving histories with their vision If the exemption is still effective at the
medical certification to the employer for end of the 2-year period, the person may
deficiencies are good predictors of retention in the driver’s qualification
future performance, FMCSA concludes apply to FMCSA for a renewal under
file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s procedures in effect at that time.
their ability to drive safely can be qualification file if he/she is self-
projected into the future. employed. The driver must have a copy Dated: February 10, 2015.
We believe that the applicants’ of the certification when driving, for Larry W. Minor,
intrastate driving experience and history presentation to a duly authorized Associate Administrator for Policy.
provide an adequate basis for predicting Federal, State, or local enforcement [FR Doc. 2015–03461 Filed 2–18–15; 8:45 am]
their ability to drive safely in interstate official. BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
commerce. Intrastate driving, like
interstate operations, involves V. Discussion of Comments
substantial driving on highways on the FMCSA received no comments in this DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
interstate system and on other roads proceeding.
built to interstate standards. Moreover, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
VI. Conclusion
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
driving in congested urban areas Administration
exposes the driver to more pedestrian Based upon its evaluation of the 34
and vehicular traffic than exists on exemption applications, FMCSA [Docket No. FMCSA- 2014–0313]
interstate highways. Faster reaction to exempts the following drivers from the Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
traffic and traffic signals is generally vision requirement in 49 CFR Applications; Diabetes Mellitus
required because distances between 391.41(b)(10), subject to the
them are more compact. These requirements cited above (49 CFR AGENCY:Federal Motor Carrier Safety
conditions tax visual capacity and 391.64(b)): Administration (FMCSA).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Feb 18, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM 19FEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_8960/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-16 11:12:45
Document Modified: 2018-02-16 11:12:45
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice of final disposition. | |
| Dates | The exemptions were granted December 24, 2014. The exemptions expire on December 24, 2016. | |
| Contact | Charles A. Horan, III, Director, Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards, (202) 366-4001, [email protected], FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366- 9826. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 8927 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR