62744 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2004 / Notices 

31315 and 31136(e) to the 29 applicants 

listed in the notice of September 1, 2004 

(69 FR 53493). 

We recognize that the vision of an 

applicant may change and affect his/her 

ability to operate a commercial vehicle 

as safely as in the past. As a condition 

of the exemption, therefore, the FMCSA 

will impose requirements on the 29 

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 

The FMCSA received two comments 

in this proceeding. The comments were 

considered and are discussed below. 

Mr. William Whitaker did not 

comment on the receipt of applications 

for exemption, but requested 

information about applying for an 

exemption for himself. FMCSA is 

responding to him separately by letter. 

Advocates for Highway and Auto 

Safety (Advocates) expresses continued 

opposition to the FMCSA’s policy to 

grant exemptions from the FMCSRs, 

including the driver qualification 

standards. Specifically, Advocates: (1) 

Objects to the manner in which the 

FMCSA presents driver information to 

the public and makes safety 

determinations; (2) objects to the 

agency’s reliance on conclusions drawn 

from the vision waiver program; (3) 

claims the agency has misinterpreted 

statutory language on the granting of 

exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31315 and 

31136(e)); and finally (4) suggests that a 

1999 Supreme Court decision affects the 

legal validity of vision exemptions. 

The issues raised by Advocates were 

addressed at length in 64 FR 51568 

(September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 

(November 30, 1999), 64 FR 69586 

(December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 

3, 2000), 65 FR 57230 (September 21, 

2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001). 

We will not address these points again 

here, but refer interested parties to those 

earlier discussions. 

Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 29 

exemption applications, the FMCSA 

exempts Paul G. Albrecht, David W. 

Brown, David J. Caldwell, Walden V. 

Clarke, Donald O. Clopton, Awilda S. 

Colon, Richard B. Eckert, Charles B. 

Edwards, Zane G. Harvey, Jr., Robert T. 

Hill, Dale E. Johnson, Jimmy D. Johnson 

II, Jeffrey M. Keyser, Donnie A. Kildow, 

Carl M. McIntire, John C. McLaughlin, 

Daniel A. McNabb, David G. Meyers, 

Thomas L. Oglesby, Michael J. Paul, 

Russell A. Payne, Rodney M. Pegg, 

Raymond E. Peterson, Zbigniew P. 

Pietranik, Dennis E. Pinkston, John C. 

Rodriguez, Robert B. Schmidt, Wesley L. 

Schoonover, and Charles E. Wood 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. 31315 

and 31136(e), each exemption will be 

valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier 

by the 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. 31315 and 31136. 

If the exemption is still effective at the 

end of the 2-year period, the person may 

apply to the FMCSA for a renewal under 

procedures in effect at that time.

Issued on: October 21, 2004. 

Rose A. McMurray, 

Associate Administrator, Policy and Program 

Development.

[FR Doc. 04–24061 Filed 10–26–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) received 

a request for a waiver of compliance 

with certain requirements of its safety 

standards. The individual petition is 

described below, including the party 

seeking relief, the regulatory provisions 

involved, the nature of the relief being 

requested, and the petitioner’s 

arguments in favor of relief. 

Long Island Rail Road (Waiver Petition 

Docket Number FRA–2004–18854) 

The Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) 

seeks a waiver of compliance from 

certain provisions of the Railroad 

Locomotive Safety Standards, 49 CFR 

part 229. Specifically, LIRR requests 

relief from the requirements of 49 CFR 

229.27(a)(2) Annual Tests and 49 CFR 

229.29(a) Biennial Tests, applicable to a 

control group of five EMD DE/DM30–

AC locomotives equipped with 

Computer Controlled Brake I (CCB I) 

type brake equipment furnished by New 

York Air Brake Corporation (NYAB) of 

Watertown, New York. 

The five locomotives designated for 

the control group will be Model EMD 

DE/DM30–AC, built by General Motor’s 

Electro Motive Division (EMD), 

accepted new by LIRR in 1999, and 

equipped with NYAB’s CCB I brake 

equipment. The LIRR currently operates 

a fleet of forty six (46) of this model 

type(s) and configured locomotives. The 

current CCB I periodic brake equipment 

maintenance intervals are 1840 days 

(five years) in accordance with the FRA 

Docket Number 2000–7367. 

In October 2003, CCB I, from a 

randomly selected locomotive at the end 

of a five-year COT&S interval, was 

removed and sent to New York Air 

Brake for tests and a tear-down 

inspection. A test report of this 

equipment was submitted to the FRA 

from NYAB to comply with Section 

5.1.6 of ABT–3164 as related to the CCB 

I product five year COT&S 2000–7367 

waiver. In summary of that report, New 

York Air Brake noted that the LIRR’s 

CCB I air brake equipment was fully 

serviceable at five years of age. 

As a result of the NYAB report, the 

LIRR is seeking relief on the 1840 day 

(5 year) COT&S on five locomotive 

described as the ‘‘control group of 

locomotives’’. The control group of 

locomotives will be utilized as a test to 

determine CCB I brake condition when 

the maintenance cycle is extended past 

five-year maintenance interval. 

The control group of five locomotives 

will all have their COT&S extended past 

the 1840 (5 year) COT&S with the 

following proposed schedule: one 

locomotive to 2208 days (6 years), two 

locomotives to 2576 days (7 years), and 

the two remaining locomotives to 2944 

days (8 years). During the testing period 

for the control group, the remaining 

locomotives in the LIRR fleet will 

continue regularly scheduled periodic 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2004 / Notices 62745

maintenance of CCB I equipment at the 

established 1840-day interval. 

Part 229.27(a)(2) requires that, ‘‘Brake 

cylinder relay valve portions, main 

reservoir safety valves, brake pipe vent 

valve portions, feed and reducing valve 

portions in the air brake system 

(including related dirt collectors and 

filters) shall be cleaned, repaired, and 

tested’’ at intervals that do not exceed 

368 calendar days. Part 229.29(a) 

requires in part that ‘‘* * * all valves, 

valve portions, MU locomotive brake 

cylinders and electric-pneumatic master 

controllers in the air brake system 

(including related dirt collectors and 

filters) shall be cleaned, repaired, and 

tested at intervals that do not exceed 

736 calendar days. 

LIRR requests these provisions be 

temporarily waived on the ‘‘control 

group of locomotives’’ to allow them to 

conduct a long term test program 

designed to show that NYAB’s 

electronic air brake technology has 

sufficiently improved overall system 

reliability and safety to a point where it 

is now possible to move toward a 

component repair as required, 

performance based COT&S criterion 

similar in scope to that outlined in a 

previous waiver granted on September 

1, 2000 to CSX Transportation in Docket 

FRA–1999–6252. This referenced 

waiver covers CSXT locomotives 

utilizing NYAB’s Computer Controlled 

Brake (CCB) equipment, with the intent 

of moving to a component repair as 

required, performance-based COT&S 

criterion. 

As part of this waiver request, LIRR 

recommends that a detailed test plan, 

necessary for properly tracking and 

documenting the results, be jointly 

developed between LIRR, NYAB, and 

FRA. At the completion of the test 

program, LIRR further requests that the 

FRA conduct a formal review of the 

results relative to the objective of 

moving toward a ‘‘performance-based 

COT&S’’ criterion. In addition, the LIRR 

and NYAB are currently in the process 

of establishing test plans to specify the 

on-locomotive tests and tear-down 

inspection procedures for the CCB I 

components from the ‘‘control group of 

locomotives’’. The plans will be 

submitted to the FRA for approval when 

they are complete. LIRR will also submit 

to the FRA the locomotive road numbers 

that will be representative of the 

locomotives that will be comprised in 

the ‘‘control group of locomotives’’. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–2004–

18854) and must be submitted to the 

Docket Clerk, DOT Docket Management 

Facility, Room PL–401 (Plaza Level), 

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, 

DC 20590. Communications received 

within 45 days of the date of this notice 

will be considered by FRA before final 

action is taken. Comments received after 

that date will be considered as far as 

practicable. All written communications 

concerning these proceedings are 

available for examination during regular 

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the 

above facility. All documents in the 

public docket are also available for 

inspection and copying on the Internet 

at the docket facility’s Web site at 

http://dms.dot.gov.

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78). The 

Statement may also be found at

http://dms.dot.gov.

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 20, 

2004. 

Grady C. Cothen, Jr., 

Acting Associate Administrator for Safety.

[FR Doc. 04–24062 Filed 10–26–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P