81 FR 94013 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 246 (December 22, 2016)
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 246 (December 22, 2016)
| Page Range | 94013-94015 | |
| FR Document | 2016-30831 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 246 (Thursday, December 22, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 94013-94015] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-30831] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0210] 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 22 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 November 22, 2016. The exemptions expire on November 22, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001, [email protected], FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366-9826. [[Page 94014]] 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., ET, 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 October 20, 2016, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the public (81 FR 72664). That notice listed 22 applicants' case histories. The 22 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 22 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 limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 22 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 amblyopia, cataract, enucleation, glaucoma, macular atrophy, macular scar, maculopathy, optic atrophy, optic neuropathy, prosthetic eye, retinal detachment, and retinal scar. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. Fourteen of the applicants were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since childhood. The 8 individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults have had it for a range of 3 to 36 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 22 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 for 3 to 52 years. In the past three years, no drivers were involved in crashes and no drivers 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 October 20, 2016 notice (81 FR 72664). 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 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, [[Page 94015]] 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 22 applicants, no drivers were involved in crashes and no drivers were convicted of a 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 22 applicants listed in the notice of October 20, 2016 (81 FR 72664). 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 22 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 two comments in this proceeding. An anonymous commenter stated that they believe the drivers should not be granted the exemptions, citing safety concerns related to their vision loss. The basis for granting exemptions is explained in Section IV of this document, and FMCSA has determined that all drivers listed in this document meet the criteria required for an exemption. Deb Carlson stated that Derrick P. Moore currently holds an intrastate exemption in Minnesota, and that James F. McLaughlin was involved in a motor vehicle crash and cited for an equipment violation in 2016. The motor vehicle crash was in Mr. McLaughlin's personal vehicle and not a CMV. The equipment violation was not a moving violation. Therefore, neither of these incidents are disqualifying factors for obtaining a vision exemption. IV. Conclusion Based upon its evaluation of the 22 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): Gary A. Behrends (NE) Harry R. Brewer (TN) Johnnie B. Bush (MS) Nathan J. Bute (IN) Gary L. Cox (KY) Kevin J. Embrey (IL) Peter J. Faber (NE) Ricky L. Gillum (OH) Johnny E. Hill (AL) Justin A. Hooper (MO) John R. Horst (PA) Robert E. Kelley, Jr. (WA) David L. Manktelow (MA) James F. McLaughlin (MN) Derrick P. Moore (MN) Richard L. Moores (CO) Brian T. Morrison (MO) Tad W. Sexsmith (WA) Dennis M. Varga, Jr. (OH) Michael J. Weber (NJ) Mark B. Wilmer (VA) Hezekiah Woodrup Sr. (MD) 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. Issued on: December 8, 2016. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy. [FR Doc. 2016-30831 Filed 12-21-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2016 / Notices 94013
Act; the USTR records compiled to disclosures to counsel or witnesses in Act Office receives your request without
respond to requests and appeals; USTR the course of civil discovery, litigation delay, you should include the notation
personnel assigned to handle requests or settlement negotiations or in ‘‘Privacy Act Request’’ in the subject
and appeals; other agencies or entities connection with criminal proceedings, line of your email or on the front of your
that have referred requests concerning when the information is relevant and envelope and also at the beginning of
USTR records, or that have consulted necessary and USTR or any of its your request.
with USTR regarding the handling of employees are a party to or have a
CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:
particular requests; submitters or significant interest in the proceeding.
subjects of records or information that 8. The appropriate federal, state, local, See record access procedures.
have provided assistance to USTR in territorial, tribal or foreign law NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:
making access or amendment enforcement authority or other
determinations; and The National appropriate entity responsible for See record access procedures.
Archives and Records Administration investigation, enforcement, EXEMPTIONS PROMULGATED FOR THE SYSTEM:
(NARA), Office of Government implementation or prosecution, where a None.
Information Services (OGIS). record, either alone or in conjunction
with other information, indicates a Janice Kaye,
ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE
violation or potential violation of law Chief Counsel for Administrative Law, Office
SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND
PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
whether criminal, civil or regulatory in of the U.S. Trade Representative.
nature. [FR Doc. 2016–30496 Filed 12–21–16; 8:45 am]
We may disclose records or 9. NARA for purposes of records BILLING CODE 3290–F7–P
information contained in the records, as management inspections conducted
a routine use to: under the authority of 44 U.S.C. 2904
1. A federal, state, local or foreign
and 2906. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
agency or entity for the purpose of
consulting with that agency or entity to POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORAGE OF
enable USTR to make a determination as RECORDS:
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
to the propriety of access to or Administration
Records are maintained in file folders
correction of information, or for the and electronic media. [Docket No. FMCSA–2016–0210]
purpose of verifying the identity of an
individual or the accuracy of POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETRIEVAL OF Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
RECORDS: Applications; Vision
information submitted by an individual
who has requested access to or Records are organized by the number
assigned to the request or appeal. USTR AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
amendment of information. Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
2. A federal agency or entity that can search the electronic database by
furnished the record or information for the name of the requester or appellant. ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
the purpose of permitting that agency or POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR RETENTION AND SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its
entity to make a decision as to access to DISPOSAL OF RECORDS: decision to exempt 22 individuals from
or correction of the record or Records are retained and disposed of the vision requirement in the Federal
information, or to a federal agency or in accordance with NARA’s General Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
entity for purposes of providing Records Schedule 14. (FMCSRs). They are unable to meet the
guidance or advice regarding the vision requirement in one eye for
handling of particular requests. ADMINISTRATIVE, TECHNICAL AND PHYSICAL
various reasons. The exemptions will
3. A submitter or subject of a record SAFEGUARDS:
enable these individuals to operate
or information in order to assist USTR File folders are maintained in cabinets commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
in making a determination as to access in secure facilities and access to the files interstate commerce without meeting
or amendment. is restricted to individuals whose role the prescribed vision requirement in
4. OGIS, to the extent necessary to requires use of the records. The one eye. The Agency has concluded that
fulfill its responsibilities in 5 U.S.C. computer servers in which records are granting these exemptions will provide
552(h), to review administrative agency stored are located in secure, guarded a level of safety that is equivalent to or
policies, procedures and compliance facilities. Individuals accessing the greater than the level of safety
with the FOIA, and to facilitate OGIS’ system are authenticated using maintained without the exemptions for
offering of dispute resolution services to encrypted certificates and data stored to these CMV drivers.
resolve disputes between persons the database may require digital
making FOIA requests and DATES: The exemptions were granted
signatures.
administrative agencies. November 22, 2016. The exemptions
5. A congressional office in response RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: expire on November 22, 2018.
to an inquiry made on behalf or at the In accordance with the procedures set FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
request of the subject individual. forth in 15 CFR part 2004, subpart C, Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
6. The legal representative of USTR or direct inquires in writing to the USTR Programs Division, (202) 366–4001,
another federal agency, including the Privacy Act Office. Heightened security fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA,
US Department of Justice, or other may delay mail delivery. To avoid mail Department of Transportation, 1200
delays, we strongly suggest that you New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64–
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
retained counsel, when USTR or any of
its employees are a party to or have a email your request to PRIVACY@ 113, Washington, DC 20590–0001.
significant interest in litigation or an ustr.eop.gov. Our mailing address is: Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
administrative proceeding. Privacy Act Office, Office of the US Monday through Friday, except Federal
7. A court, magistrate, administrative Trade Representative, Anacostia Naval holidays. If you have questions
tribunal, or alternative dispute Annex, Building 410/Door 123, 250 regarding viewing or submitting
resolution mediator in the course of Murray Lane SW., Washington DC material to the docket, contact Docket
presenting evidence, including 20509. To make sure that the Privacy Services, telephone (202) 366–9826.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:40 Dec 21, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM 22DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_94259/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2016 / Notices 94015
geographic location, mileage driven and Agency is granting the exemptions for exempts the following drivers from the
conviction history—are used every day the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. vision requirement in 49 CFR
by insurance companies and motor 31136(e) and 31315 to the 22 applicants 391.41(b)(10), subject to the
vehicle bureaus to predict the listed in the notice of October 20, 2016 requirements cited above 49 CFR
probability of an individual (81 FR 72664). 391.64(b):
experiencing future crashes (See Weber, We recognize that the vision of an Gary A. Behrends (NE)
Donald C., ‘‘Accident Rate Potential: An applicant may change and affect his/her Harry R. Brewer (TN)
Application of Multiple Regression ability to operate a CMV as safely as in Johnnie B. Bush (MS)
Analysis of a Poisson Process,’’ Journal the past. As a condition of the Nathan J. Bute (IN)
of American Statistical Association, exemption, therefore, FMCSA will Gary L. Cox (KY)
June 1971). A 1964 California Driver impose requirements on the 22 Kevin J. Embrey (IL)
Record Study prepared by the California individuals consistent with the Peter J. Faber (NE)
Department of Motor Vehicles grandfathering provisions applied to Ricky L. Gillum (OH)
concluded that the best overall crash drivers who participated in the Johnny E. Hill (AL)
predictor for both concurrent and Agency’s vision waiver program. Justin A. Hooper (MO)
nonconcurrent events is the number of Those requirements are found at 49 John R. Horst (PA)
single convictions. This study used 3 CFR 391.64(b) and include the Robert E. Kelley, Jr. (WA)
consecutive years of data, comparing the following: (1) That each individual be David L. Manktelow (MA)
experiences of drivers in the first 2 years physically examined every year (a) by James F. McLaughlin (MN)
with their experiences in the final year. an ophthalmologist or optometrist who Derrick P. Moore (MN)
Applying principles from these attests that the vision in the better eye Richard L. Moores (CO)
studies to the past 3-year record of the continues to meet the requirement in 49 Brian T. Morrison (MO)
22 applicants, no drivers were involved CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a medical Tad W. Sexsmith (WA)
in crashes and no drivers were examiner who attests that the individual Dennis M. Varga, Jr. (OH)
is otherwise physically qualified under Michael J. Weber (NJ)
convicted of a moving violations in a
Mark B. Wilmer (VA)
CMV. All the applicants achieved a 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
Hezekiah Woodrup Sr. (MD)
record of safety while driving with their provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s
vision impairment, demonstrating the or optometrist’s report to the medical In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
likelihood that they have adapted their examiner at the time of the annual and 31315, each exemption will be valid
driving skills to accommodate their medical examination; and (3) that each for 2 years unless revoked earlier by
condition. As the applicants’ ample individual provide a copy of the annual FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked
driving histories with their vision medical certification to the employer for if: (1) The person fails to comply with
deficiencies are good predictors of retention in the driver’s qualification the terms and conditions of the
future performance, FMCSA concludes file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s exemption; (2) the exemption has
their ability to drive safely can be qualification file if he/she is self- resulted in a lower level of safety than
projected into the future. employed. The driver must have a copy was maintained before it was granted; or
We believe that the applicants’ of the certification when driving, for (3) continuation of the exemption would
intrastate driving experience and history presentation to a duly authorized not be consistent with the goals and
provide an adequate basis for predicting Federal, State, or local enforcement objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.
their ability to drive safely in interstate official. If the exemption is still effective at the
commerce. Intrastate driving, like end of the 2-year period, the person may
interstate operations, involves V. Discussion of Comments apply to FMCSA for a renewal under
substantial driving on highways on the FMCSA received two comments in procedures in effect at that time.
interstate system and on other roads this proceeding. An anonymous Issued on: December 8, 2016.
built to interstate standards. Moreover, commenter stated that they believe the Larry W. Minor,
driving in congested urban areas drivers should not be granted the Associate Administrator for Policy.
exposes the driver to more pedestrian exemptions, citing safety concerns [FR Doc. 2016–30831 Filed 12–21–16; 8:45 am]
and vehicular traffic than exists on related to their vision loss. The basis for
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
interstate highways. Faster reaction to granting exemptions is explained in
traffic and traffic signals is generally Section IV of this document, and
required because distances between FMCSA has determined that all drivers DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
them are more compact. These listed in this document meet the criteria
conditions tax visual capacity and required for an exemption. Deb Carlson Federal Railroad Administration
driver response just as intensely as stated that Derrick P. Moore currently
interstate driving conditions. The [Docket No. FRA–2000–7257, Notice No. 84]
holds an intrastate exemption in
veteran drivers in this proceeding have Minnesota, and that James F. Railroad Safety Advisory Committee;
operated CMVs safely under those McLaughlin was involved in a motor Notice of Meeting Postponement
conditions for at least 3 years, most for vehicle crash and cited for an
much longer. Their experience and equipment violation in 2016. The motor AGENCY: Federal Railroad
driving records lead us to believe that vehicle crash was in Mr. McLaughlin’s Administration (FRA), Department of
each applicant is capable of operating in personal vehicle and not a CMV. The Transportation (DOT).
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
interstate commerce as safely as he/she equipment violation was not a moving ACTION: Notice.
has been performing in intrastate violation. Therefore, neither of these
commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds incidents are disqualifying factors for SUMMARY: FRA announces the
that exempting these applicants from obtaining a vision exemption. postponement of the fifty-seventh
the vision requirement in 49 CFR meeting of the RSAC, a Federal
391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level IV. Conclusion Advisory Committee that develops
of safety equal to that existing without Based upon its evaluation of the 22 railroad safety regulations through a
the exemption. For this reason, the exemption applications, FMCSA consensus process.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:40 Dec 21, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM 22DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_94259/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-12-21 23:52:27
Document Modified: 2016-12-21 23:52:27
| 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 November 22, 2016. The exemptions expire on November 22, 2018. | |
| Contact | Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division, (202) 366-4001, [email protected], FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone (202) 366-9826. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 94013 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR