82 FR 37499 - Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 153 (August 10, 2017)
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 153 (August 10, 2017)
| Page Range | 37499-37502 | |
| FR Document | 2017-16857 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 153 (Thursday, August 10, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 37499-37502] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-16857] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0017] 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 36 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 [[Page 37500]] 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 June 6, 2017. The exemptions expire on June 6, 2019. 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. 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., e.t., 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 May 4, 2017, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the public (82 FR 20962). That notice listed 36 applicants' case histories. The 36 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 two 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 two year period. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the 36 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 36 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 age-related macular degeneration, amblyopia, central vision loss, chorioretinal scarring, choroidal neovascular membrane, coats disease, complete loss of vision, degenerated globe, enucleation, exotropia, glaucoma, macular scar, optic atrophy, optic nerve damage, prosthetic eye, retinal detachment, and scarring. 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 12 individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults have had it for a range of 4 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 36 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 50 years. In the past three years, one driver was involved in a crash and three 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 May 4, 2017 notice (82 FR 20962). 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 three 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 [[Page 37501]] 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, 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 three consecutive years of data, comparing the experiences of drivers in the first two years with their experiences in the final year. Applying principles from these studies to the past three year record of the 36 applicants, one driver was involved in a crash and three drivers 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 three 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 two year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to the 36 applicants listed in the notice of May 4, 2017 (82 FR 20962). 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 36 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 one comment that is outside the scope of this proceeding and will not be addressed in this notice. This one comment was from Mr. Reginald Jackson asking ``why does any moving violations have to stay on a CDL Driver record for three years if no one was injured or lost there [sic] life or the CDL Driver did not receive a citation for careless or reckless driving?'' He also asked ``If the citation must [be] on the drivers record why it cannot [sic] be for one year for a speeding ticket and not three years? [sic]'' Mr. Jackson suggested ``changing the law and shorting the time down to 1 year? [sic] '' He also suggested ``the driver can pay [a] 300 dollar fine and not have anything be paced on his or her mvr [sic] record.'' IV. Conclusion Based upon its evaluation of the 36 exemption applications, FMCSA exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10): David A. Buchanan (SC) Brian E. Burrows (TX) Esta Cadet (FL) Gary G. Colby (UT) Herman A. Davis (AL) Brandon G. Dills (NC) Jeremy L. Fricke (ND) Scott J. Geritano (NC) Jonathen M. Gilligan (NY) Jeffrey J. Graham (MI) Dustin L. Hawkins (MO) Michael S. Higham (IL) Travis R. Honzel (CA) Lloyd M. Hoover (PA) Roy W. Houser, II (NC) Maurice R. Jones, Jr. (MD) Robert B. Jordahl (ND) Damian Klyza (NJ) John J. Lackey (CA) Zachary J. McCluskey (PA) Adam Merges (MN) Jimmy L. Metcalf (NC) John R. Miller (PA) David G. Neff (KY) Matthew J. Neufer (PA) Vincent R. Neville (MN) Willie L. Nez, Jr. (UT) Kevin B. Patterson (GA) Stuart W. Penner (KS) Brock E. Peterson (ND) Efren J. Soliz (NM) Anthony J.M. Thornburg (MI) Eric J. Wickman (MI) Don S. Williams (AL) Garfield M. Williams (TX) James J. Wyles (NC) In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption will be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with [[Page 37502]] 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 two year period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at that time. Issued on: August 4, 2017. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy. [FR Doc. 2017-16857 Filed 8-9-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 153 / Thursday, August 10, 2017 / Notices 37499
obtaining an exemption from the rule Damian J. Porter (NY) Richard L. Stark (OH)
prohibiting drivers with ITDM from David L. Rice (ME) Philip E. Stegeman (ID)
driving CMVs in interstate commerce Wayne F. Richards (PA) Kevin L. Upmann (IL)
(79 FR 14579; 79 FR 28590): Gary G. Sironen (MT) Brandon L. Weaver (PA)
Schylor M. Altenhofen (IA) Rodney L. Stoltenberg (IA) Matthew G. Williams (KY)
Don R. Anderson III (IN) Wade D. Street (MT) Michael B. Wilson (OH)
Thomas A. Barnes (MI) Charles M. Sweat (VA) The drivers were included in one of
Alvin L. Carpenter (MT) Stanley C. Tarvidas (IL) the following docket Nos: FMCSA–
Richard J. D’Ambrosia (NY) The drivers were included in one of 2010–0051; FMCSA–2014–0014. Their
Jefferey F. Deane (MA) the following docket Nos: FMCSA– exemptions are effective as of May 21,
Keith M. Dickerson (WI) 2009–0322; FMCSA–2012–0043. Their 2016, and will expire on May 21, 2018.
Carl A. Federighi (CA) exemptions are effective as of May 17, As of May 23, 2016, and in
Bradley J. Frazier (IL) 2016, and will expire on May 17, 2018. accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
Carl R. Gentry (WA) As of May 21, 2016, and in 31315, Derald E. Moenning (NE) has
Robert M. Hutchison (NY) accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and satisfied the renewal conditions for
Craig A. Keese, Jr. (NY) 31315, the following 52 individuals obtaining an exemption from the rule
Amos L. Lapp (PA) have satisfied the renewal conditions for prohibiting drivers with ITDM from
Edward J. Lulay (IL) obtaining an exemption from the rule driving CMVs in interstate commerce
Donald S. Middleton (MO) prohibiting drivers with ITDM from (79 FR 22573; 79 FR 35855).
Alva D. Moffatt (WA) driving CMVs in interstate commerce This driver was included in docket
John M. Muske (MN) (75 FR 14652; 75 FR 28684; 79 FR No. FMCSA–2014–0015. The exemption
Stephen R. Newlin (IL) 18400; 79 FR 29262): is effective as of May 23, 2016, and will
Antonio Pepiciello (NY) Douglas L. Atkins (GA) expire on May 23, 2018.
David R. Petitt (WA) Bradley E. Bradshaw (NC) In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315,
James K. Popp (MN) Phillip W. Bulen (ID) each exemption will be valid for two
Dustin P. Russell (PA) Robert L. Buol (IA) years from the effective date unless
Sean L. Shidell (WI) Carlos V. Candelaria (NM) revoked earlier by FMCSA. The
Randall L. Shultz (MO) Suellen M. Civiello (ME) exemption will be revoked if the
Kenneth R. Soult (OH) Michael T. Clements (WI) following occurs: (1) The person fails to
Chad B. Spidell (PA) Daniel G. Conery (NJ) comply with the terms and conditions
Cameron M. Sprinkle (IN) John A. Conness (MO) of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
Douglas E. Stewart (MS) James R. Crawford (WA) resulted in a lower level of safety than
Thomas L. Williams (MN) Alan Curtis (UT) was maintained prior to being granted;
The drivers were included in docket David P. Dengate (PA) or (3) continuation of the exemption
No. FMCSA–2014–0013. Their Alan D. Ekberg (NE) would not be consistent with the goals
exemptions are effective as of May 16, Richard A. Flieth (ND) and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and
2016, and will expire on May 16, 2018. Neil G. Ford (PA) 31315.
As of May 17, 2016, and in Alden J. Haskins, Sr. (MD) Issued on: August 4, 2017.
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and James Herrada (NE) Larry W. Minor,
31315, the following 30 individuals Gary W. Hochstein (MN) Associate Administrator for Policy.
have satisfied the renewal conditions for Harold D. Hoggard II (PA)
[FR Doc. 2017–16855 Filed 8–9–17; 8:45 am]
obtaining an exemption from the rule Terry L. Horn (NC)
prohibiting drivers with ITDM from BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
Wayne L. Hurley (MD)
driving CMVs in interstate commerce Gerald A. Johnson (WI)
(75 FR 13647; 75 FR 27616; 77 FR Frank J. Katzbeck (IL)
18302; 77 FR 29446): DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Frank T. Katzele (WI)
Mark S. Boettcher (MN) Cory M. Kobernick (KY) Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Steven C. Boudreau (MA) Thomas G. Lamberton (WA) Administration
Roy L. Brokaw (WI) Lee H. Lewis (PA)
Chris D. Chambers (LA) James K. Libke (IN) [Docket No. FMCSA–2017–0017]
Charles A. Cinert, Sr. (IL) Gordon E. Lindley (WY)
Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
Dale J. Cleaver (PA) Edwin J. Ludwig (OH)
Applications; Vision
James H. Collins (FL) Edwin H. Maranville (OR)
Bert R. Duncan II (UT) Joseph R. Marcelewski (OH) AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Lance L. Fuller (MN) Douglas J. Murray (NY) Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
Johnny Gardner, Jr. (SC) David R. Norton (OH) ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
Mark D. Golden (MI) Eugene P. OQuendo (MA)
Nathaniel W. Gorham (IN) Curtis J. Pitt (OR) SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its
DeVere E. Hansen (UT) Larry J. Reese (PA) decision to exempt 36 individuals from
Grant C. Huftalin (IA) William O. Ruiz III (AZ) the vision requirement in the Federal
Steven M. Janczak (WI) James P. Rushing, Jr. (VA) Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Sheldon R. Koehn (KS) Harold D. Russman (SD) (FMCSRs). They are unable to meet the
Jason R. Kropp (OK) Hector M. Sanchez (NM) vision requirement in one eye for
James W. McClintock, III (AR) Scott W. Shindledecker (IN) various reasons. The exemptions will
Adolfo Moreno, Jr. (WA) Shirliann F. Skroch (NV) enable these individuals to operate
John W. Morrison (CA) Ross L. Smith, Sr. (NJ) commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
Bruce V. Oppegard (MN) Thomas G. Sosnoski (FL) interstate commerce without meeting
Steven G. Petersen (MN) Christopher Starghill (DC) the prescribed vision requirement in
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:03 Aug 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM 10AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_37652/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 153 / Thursday, August 10, 2017 / Notices 37501
better than that of all CMV drivers substantial driving on highways on the V. Discussion of Comments
collectively (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, interstate system and on other roads FMCSA received one comment that is
March 26, 1996). The fact that built to interstate standards. Moreover, outside the scope of this proceeding and
experienced monocular drivers driving in congested urban areas will not be addressed in this notice.
demonstrated safe driving records in the exposes the driver to more pedestrian This one comment was from Mr.
waiver program supports a conclusion and vehicular traffic than exists on Reginald Jackson asking ‘‘why does any
that other monocular drivers, meeting interstate highways. Faster reaction to moving violations have to stay on a CDL
the same qualifying conditions as those traffic and traffic signals is generally Driver record for three years if no one
required by the waiver program, are also required because distances between was injured or lost there [sic] life or the
likely to have adapted to their vision them are more compact. These CDL Driver did not receive a citation for
deficiency and will continue to operate conditions tax visual capacity and careless or reckless driving?’’ He also
safely. driver response just as intensely as
The first major research correlating asked ‘‘If the citation must [be] on the
interstate driving conditions. The drivers record why it cannot [sic] be for
past and future performance was done veteran drivers in this proceeding have
in England by Greenwood and Yule in one year for a speeding ticket and not
operated CMVs safely under those three years? [sic]’’ Mr. Jackson suggested
1920. Subsequent studies, building on conditions for at least three years, most
that model, concluded that crash rates ‘‘changing the law and shorting the time
for much longer. Their experience and down to 1 year? [sic] ’’ He also
for the same individual exposed to driving records lead us to believe that
certain risks for two different time suggested ‘‘the driver can pay [a] 300
each applicant is capable of operating in dollar fine and not have anything be
periods vary only slightly (See Bates interstate commerce as safely as he/she
and Neyman, University of California paced on his or her mvr [sic] record.’’
has been performing in intrastate
Publications in Statistics, April 1952). IV. Conclusion
commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds
Other studies demonstrated theories of
that exempting these applicants from Based upon its evaluation of the 36
predicting crash proneness from crash
the vision requirement in 49 CFR exemption applications, FMCSA
history coupled with other factors.
These factors—such as age, sex, 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level exempts the following drivers from the
geographic location, mileage driven and of safety equal to that existing without vision requirement in 49 CFR
conviction history—are used every day the exemption. For this reason, the 391.41(b)(10):
by insurance companies and motor Agency is granting the exemptions for David A. Buchanan (SC)
vehicle bureaus to predict the the two year period allowed by 49 Brian E. Burrows (TX)
probability of an individual U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to the 36 Esta Cadet (FL)
experiencing future crashes (See Weber, applicants listed in the notice of May 4, Gary G. Colby (UT)
Donald C., ‘‘Accident Rate Potential: An 2017 (82 FR 20962). Herman A. Davis (AL)
Application of Multiple Regression We recognize that the vision of an Brandon G. Dills (NC)
Analysis of a Poisson Process,’’ Journal applicant may change and affect his/her Jeremy L. Fricke (ND)
of American Statistical Association, ability to operate a CMV as safely as in Scott J. Geritano (NC)
June 1971). A 1964 California Driver the past. As a condition of the Jonathen M. Gilligan (NY)
Record Study prepared by the California exemption, therefore, FMCSA will Jeffrey J. Graham (MI)
Department of Motor Vehicles impose requirements on the 36 Dustin L. Hawkins (MO)
concluded that the best overall crash individuals consistent with the Michael S. Higham (IL)
predictor for both concurrent and Travis R. Honzel (CA)
grandfathering provisions applied to
nonconcurrent events is the number of Lloyd M. Hoover (PA)
drivers who participated in the
single convictions. This study used Roy W. Houser, II (NC)
Agency’s vision waiver program.
three consecutive years of data, Maurice R. Jones, Jr. (MD)
Those requirements are found at 49 Robert B. Jordahl (ND)
comparing the experiences of drivers in
the first two years with their CFR 391.64(b) and include the Damian Klyza (NJ)
experiences in the final year. following: (1) That each individual be John J. Lackey (CA)
Applying principles from these physically examined every year (a) by Zachary J. McCluskey (PA)
studies to the past three year record of an ophthalmologist or optometrist who Adam Merges (MN)
the 36 applicants, one driver was attests that the vision in the better eye Jimmy L. Metcalf (NC)
involved in a crash and three drivers continues to meet the requirement in 49 John R. Miller (PA)
were convicted of moving violations in CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) by a medical David G. Neff (KY)
a CMV. All the applicants achieved a examiner who attests that the individual Matthew J. Neufer (PA)
record of safety while driving with their is otherwise physically qualified under Vincent R. Neville (MN)
vision impairment, demonstrating the 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual Willie L. Nez, Jr. (UT)
likelihood that they have adapted their provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s Kevin B. Patterson (GA)
driving skills to accommodate their or optometrist’s report to the medical Stuart W. Penner (KS)
condition. As the applicants’ ample examiner at the time of the annual Brock E. Peterson (ND)
driving histories with their vision medical examination; and (3) that each Efren J. Soliz (NM)
deficiencies are good predictors of individual provide a copy of the annual Anthony J.M. Thornburg (MI)
future performance, FMCSA concludes medical certification to the employer for Eric J. Wickman (MI)
their ability to drive safely can be retention in the driver’s qualification Don S. Williams (AL)
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
projected into the future. file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s Garfield M. Williams (TX)
We believe that the applicants’ qualification file if he/she is self- James J. Wyles (NC)
intrastate driving experience and history employed. The driver must have a copy In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
provide an adequate basis for predicting of the certification when driving, for and 31315, each exemption will be valid
their ability to drive safely in interstate presentation to a duly authorized for two years unless revoked earlier by
commerce. Intrastate driving, like Federal, State, or local enforcement FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked
interstate operations, involves official. if: (1) The person fails to comply with
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:03 Aug 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM 10AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_37652/page/3.svg)
![37502 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 153 / Thursday, August 10, 2017 / Notices
the terms and conditions of the www.regulations.gov and/or Room of consciousness or seizure, requiring
exemption; (2) the exemption has W12–140 on the ground level of the the assistance of another person, or
resulted in a lower level of safety than West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue resulting in impaired cognitive function
was maintained before it was granted; or SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. that occurred without warning
(3) continuation of the exemption would and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, symptoms, in the past 12 months and no
not be consistent with the goals and except Federal holidays. recurrent (two or more) severe
objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315. Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 hypoglycemic episodes in the past five
If the exemption is still effective at the U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments years. In each case, an endocrinologist
end of the two year period, the person from the public to better inform its verified that the driver has
may apply to FMCSA for a renewal rulemaking process. DOT posts these demonstrated a willingness to properly
under procedures in effect at that time. comments, without edit, including any monitor and manage his/her diabetes
Issued on: August 4, 2017. personal information the commenter mellitus, received education related to
provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, diabetes management, and is on a stable
Larry W. Minor,
as described in the system of records insulin regimen. These drivers report no
Associate Administrator for Policy.
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can other disqualifying conditions,
[FR Doc. 2017–16857 Filed 8–9–17; 8:45 am] including diabetes related
be reviewed at http://www.dot.gov/
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P privacy. complications. Each meets the vision
requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
II. Background The qualifications, experience, and
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION On June 6, 2017, FMCSA published a medical condition of each applicant
notice announcing receipt of were stated and discussed in detail in
Federal Motor Carrier Safety the June 6, 2017, Federal Register notice
applications from 42 individuals
Administration (82 FR 26211) and will not be repeated
requesting an exemption from diabetes
[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA–2017–0035] requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) and in this notice.
requested comments from the public (82 Consequently, FMCSA finds that in
Qualification of Drivers; Exemption FR 26211). The public comment period each case exempting these applicants
Applications; Diabetes Mellitus ended on July 6, 2017, and no from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR
comments were received. 391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of safety equal to that existing without
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
of these applicants and determined that the exemption.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
granting the exemptions to these V. Conditions and Requirements
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its individuals would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to or greater than the The terms and conditions of the
decision to exempt 42 individuals from
level that would be achieved by exemption are provided to the
the prohibition in the Federal Motor
complying with the current regulation applicants in the exemption document
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)
49 CFR 391.41(b)(3). and includes the following: (1) Each
against persons with insulin-treated
The physical qualification standard driver must submit a quarterly
diabetes mellitus (ITDM) from operating
for drivers regarding diabetes found in monitoring checklist completed by the
a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) states that a person treating endocrinologist as well as an
interstate commerce. The exemptions
is physically qualified to drive a CMV annual checklist with a comprehensive
enable these individuals with ITDM to
if that person: medical evaluation; (2) each driver must
operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Has no established medical history or report within two business days of
DATES: The exemptions were applicable occurrence, all episodes of severe
clinical diagnosis of diabetes mellitus
on July 7, 2017. The exemptions expire hypoglycemia, significant
currently requiring insulin for control.
on July 7, 2019. complications, or inability to manage
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. III. Discussion of Comments diabetes; also, any involvement in an
Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical FMCSA received no comments in this accident or any other adverse event in
Programs Division, (202) 366–4001, proceeding. a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or
fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, not it is related to an episode of
Department of Transportation, 1200 IV. Basis for Exemption Determination hypoglycemia; (3) each driver must
New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64– Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s
224, Washington, DC 20590–0001. FMCSA may grant an exemption from or optometrist’s report to the Medical
Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 the diabetes standard in 49 CFR Examiner at the time of the annual
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to medical examination; and (4) each
except Federal holidays. If you have achieve an equivalent or greater level of driver must provide a copy of the
questions regarding viewing or safety than would be achieved without annual medical certification to the
submitting material to the docket, the exemption. The exemption allows employer for retention in the driver’s
contact Docket Services, telephone (202) the applicants to operate CMVs in qualification file, or keeping a copy in
366–9826. interstate commerce. his/her driver’s qualification file if he/
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Agency’s decision regarding these she is self-employed. The driver must
exemption applications is based on the also have a copy of the exemption when
I. Electronic Access program eligibility criteria and an driving, for presentation to a duly
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
You may see all the comments online individualized assessment of authorized Federal, State, or local
through the Federal Document information submitted by each enforcement official.
Management System (FDMS) at: http:// applicant.
www.regulations.gov. These 42 applicants have had ITDM VI. Preemption
Docket: For access to the docket to over a range of 1 to 25 years. These During the period the exemption is in
read background documents or applicants report no severe effect, no State shall enforce any law or
comments, go to http:// hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss regulation that conflicts with this
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:03 Aug 09, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM 10AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_37652/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2017-08-10 01:01:47
Document Modified: 2017-08-10 01:01:47
| 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 June 6, 2017. The exemptions expire on June 6, 2019. | |
| 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 | 82 FR 37499 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR