20076 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 

1Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 notice as a 

‘‘final rule.’’ However, the 2003 notice did not issue 

a ‘‘final rule’’ but did establish the procedures and 

standards for issuing exemptions for drivers with 

ITDM. 

has stable control of his diabetes using 

insulin, and is able to drive a CMV 

safely. Mr. Stephens meets the 

requirements of the vision standard at 

49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His 

ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 

and certified that he has stable 

nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 

He holds a Class A CDL from 

Minnesota. 

Francisco M. Torres 

Mr. Torres, 34, has had ITDM since 

1998. His endocrinologist examined him 

in 2010 and certified that he has had no 

severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting 

in loss of consciousness, requiring the 

assistance of another person, or 

resulting in impaired cognitive function 

that occurred without warning in the 

past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 

more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 

the last 5 years. His endocrinologist 

certifies that Mr. Torres understands 

diabetes management and monitoring, 

has stable control of his diabetes using 

insulin, and is able to drive a CMV 

safely. Mr. Torres meets the 

requirements of the vision standard at 

49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist 

examined him in 2010 and certified that 

he does not have diabetic retinopathy. 

He holds a Class D operator’s license 

from New Mexico. 

Dale R. Walton 

Mr. Walton, 53, has had ITDM since 

2010. His endocrinologist examined him 

in 2010 and certified that he has had no 

severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting 

in loss of consciousness, requiring the 

assistance of another person, or 

resulting in impaired cognitive function 

that occurred without warning in the 

past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 

more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 

the last 5 years. His endocrinologist 

certifies that Mr. Walton understands 

diabetes management and monitoring, 

has stable control of his diabetes using 

insulin, and is able to drive a CMV 

safely. Mr. Walton meets the 

requirements of the vision standard at 

49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His 

ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 

and certified that he has stable 

nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 

He holds a Class A CDL from 

Pennsylvania 

Mark H. Wilcox 

Mr. Wilcox, 52, has had ITDM since 

2007. His endocrinologist examined him 

in 2010 and certified that he has had no 

severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting 

in loss of consciousness, requiring the 

assistance of another person, or 

resulting in impaired cognitive function 

that occurred without warning in the 

past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or 

more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in 

the last 5 years. His endocrinologist 

certifies that Mr. Wilcox understands 

diabetes management and monitoring, 

has stable control of his diabetes using 

insulin, and is able to drive a CMV 

safely. Mr. Wilcox meets the 

requirements of the vision standard at 

49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His 

ophthalmologist examined him in 2011 

and certified that he has stable 

nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. 

He holds a Class A CDL from 

Minnesota. 

Request for Comments 

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) 

and 31315, FMCSA requests public 

comment from all interested persons on 

the exemption petitions described in 

this notice. We will consider all 

comments received before the close of 

business on the closing date indicated 

in the date section of the notice. 

FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the 

Safe, Accountable, Flexible and 

Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 

Legacy for Users requires the Secretary 

to revise its diabetes exemption program 

established on September 3, 2003 (68 FR 

52441).1 The revision must provide for 

individual assessment of drivers with 

diabetes mellitus, and be consistent 

with the criteria described in section 

4018 of the Transportation Equity Act 

for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305). 

Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination 

of the requirement for 3 years of 

experience operating CMVs while being 

treated with insulin; and (2) 

establishment of a specified minimum 

period of insulin use to demonstrate 

stable control of diabetes before being 

allowed to operate a CMV. 

In response to section 4129, FMCSA 

made immediate revisions to the 

diabetes exemption program established 

by the September 3, 2003 notice. 

FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year 

driving experience and fulfilled the 

requirements of section 4129 while 

continuing to ensure that operation of 

CMVs by drivers with ITDM will 

achieve the requisite level of safety 

required of all exemptions granted 

under 49 USC. 31136(e). 

Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA 

to ensure that drivers of CMVs with 

ITDM are not held to a higher standard 

than other drivers, with the exception of 

limited operating, monitoring and 

medical requirements that are deemed 

medically necessary. The FMCSA 

concluded that all of the operating, 

monitoring and medical requirements 

set out in the September 3, 2003 notice, 

except as modified, were in compliance 

with section 4129(d). Therefore, all of 

the requirements set out in the 

September 3, 2003 notice, except as 

modified by the notice in the Federal 

Register on November 8, 2005 (70 FR 

67777), remain in effect. 

Issued on: March 31, 2011. 

Pamela M. Pelcovits, 

Director, Office of Policy, Plans and 

Regulations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8561 Filed 4–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2011–0010] 

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 23 individuals from 

the vision requirement in the Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 

(FMCSRs). The exemptions will enable 

these individuals to operate commercial 

motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate 

commerce without meeting the 

prescribed vision standard. 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 are effective 

April 11, 2011. The exemptions expire 

on April 11, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical 

Programs, (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. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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:// 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 20077 

www.regulations.gov at any time 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. The 

FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 

365 days each year. If you want 

acknowledgment that we received your 

comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or 

postcard or print the acknowledgement 

page that appears after submitting 

comments on-line. 

Privacy Act: Anyone may search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or of the person signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review DOT’s Privacy Act 

Statement for the FDMS published in 

the Federal Register on January 17, 

2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/ 

E8-785.pdf. 

Background 

On February 22, 2011, FMCSA 

published a notice of receipt of 

exemption applications from certain 

individuals, and requested comments 

from the public (76 FR 9856). That 

notice listed 23 applicants’ case 

histories. The 23 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 

23 applications on their merits and 

made a determination to grant 

exemptions to each of them. 

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 at 

least 20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with 

or without corrective lenses, field of 

vision of at least 70° in the horizontal 

meridian in each eye, and the ability to 

recognize the colors of traffic signals 

and devices showing standard red, 

green, and amber (49 CFR 

391.41(b)(10)). 

FMCSA recognizes that some drivers 

do not meet the vision standard, but 

have adapted their driving to 

accommodate their vision limitation 

and demonstrated their ability to drive 

safely. The 23 exemption applicants 

listed in this notice are in this category. 

They are unable to meet the vision 

standard in one eye for various reasons, 

including amblyopia, complete loss of 

vision, optic nerve hypoplasia, aphakia, 

macular edema, macular degeneration, 

cataract, retinal detachment and 

prosthesis. In most cases, their eye 

conditions were not recently developed. 

15 of the applicants were either born 

with their vision impairments or have 

had them since childhood. The 8 

individuals who sustained their vision 

conditions as adults have had them for 

periods ranging from 4 to 50 years. 

Although each applicant has one eye 

which does not meet the vision standard 

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 standards for their State of 

residence. By meeting State licensing 

requirements, the applicants 

demonstrated their ability to operate a 

commercial vehicle, with their limited 

vision, to the satisfaction of the State. 

While possessing a valid CDL or nonCDL, these 23 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 for 

careers ranging from 2 to 58 years. In the 

past 3 years, four of the drivers were 

involved in crashes or convicted of 

moving violations in a CMV. 

The qualifications, experience, and 

medical condition of each applicant 

were stated and discussed in detail in 

the Februay 22, 2011 notice (76 FR 

9856). 

Basis for Exemption Determination 

Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, 

FMCSA may grant an exemption from 

the vision standard 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 not only the medical reports 

about the applicants’ vision, but also 

their driving records and experience 

with the vision deficiency. 

To qualify for an exemption from the 

vision standard, 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. 

We believe we 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, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20078 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / Notices 

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 

23 applicants, two of the applicants 

were convicted for moving violations 

and two of the applicants were involved 

in crashes. 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 standard 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 23 applicants 

listed in the notice of February 22, 2011 

(76 FR 9856). 

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 23 

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 standard 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 selfemployed. The driver must also have a 

copy of the certification when driving, 

for presentation to a duly authorized 

Federal, State, or local enforcement 

official. 

Discussion of Comments 

FMCSA received one comment in this 

proceeding. The comment was 

considered and discussed below. 

The Pennsylvania Department of 

Transportation is in favor of granting a 

Federal vision exemption to James H. 

Corby, Thomas E. Moore, and John F. 

Murphy. They indicated that they have 

reviewed the driving histories of these 

three applicants and have no objections 

to FMCSA granting them vision 

exemptions. 

Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 23 

exemption applications, FMCSA 

exempts, Jody L. Baker, Gary W. 

Balcom, Jimmie L. Blue, Ronald Cook, 

James H. Corby, Bobby D. Cox, Wesley 

M. Creamer, Gerald S. Dennis, 

Cleveland E. Edwards, Thomas 

Grandfield, Bruce J. Greil, Johnnie L. 

Hall, Jerry L. Hofer, Charles R. 

Hoeppner, Lester H. Killingsworth, 

Joseph F. Lopez, III, Thomas E. Moore, 

John F. Murphy, Michael O. Regentik, 

Larry D. Robinson, David Serrano, Bill 

J. Thierolf and Edward Timpson from 

the vision requirement in 49 CFR 

391.41(b)(10), subject to the 

requirements cited above (49 CFR 

391.64(b)). 

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: March 31, 2011. 

Pamela M. Pelcovits, 

Director, Office of Policy, Plans and 

Regulations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8565 Filed 4–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2010–0372] 

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 19 individuals from 

the vision requirement in the Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Regulations 

(FMCSRs). The exemptions will enable 

these individuals to operate commercial 

motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate 

commerce without meeting the 

prescribed vision standard. 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 are effective 

April 11, 2011. The exemptions expire 

on April 11, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical 

Programs, (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. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES