Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 17117 

These applicants report no severe 

hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss 

of consciousness or seizure, requiring 

the assistance of another person, or 

resulting in impaired cognitive function 

that occurred without warning 

symptoms, in the past 12 months and no 

recurrent (2 or more) severe 

hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 

years. In each case, an endocrinologist 

verified that the driver has 

demonstrated a willingness to properly 

monitor and manage his/her diabetes 

mellitus, received education related to 

diabetes management, and is on a stable 

insulin regimen. These drivers report no 

other disqualifying conditions, 

including diabetes-related 

complications. Each meets the vision 

requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). 

The qualifications and medical 

condition of each applicant were stated 

and discussed in detail in the February 

6, 2012, Federal Register notice and 

they will not be repeated in this notice. 

Discussion of Comment 

FMCSA received one comment in this 

proceeding. The comment was 

considered and discussed below. 

The Pennsylvania Department of 

Transportation stated that it has 

reviewed the driving records for 

Michael R. Miller and Timothy M. 

Rearick and are in favor of granting 

them Federal diabetes exemptions. 

Basis for Exemption Determination 

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

FMCSA may grant an exemption from 

the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 

391.41(b)(3) if the exemption is likely to 

achieve an equivalent or greater level of 

safety than would be achieved without 

the exemption. The exemption allows 

the applicants to operate CMVs in 

interstate commerce. 

To evaluate the effect of these 

exemptions on safety, FMCSA 

considered medical reports about the 

applicants’ ITDM and vision, and 

reviewed the treating endocrinologists’ 

medical opinion related to the ability of 

the driver to safely operate a CMV while 

using insulin. 

Consequently, FMCSA finds that in 

each case exempting these applicants 

from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 

391.41(b)(3) is likely to achieve a level 

of safety equal to that existing without 

the exemption. 

Conditions and Requirements 

The terms and conditions of the 

exemption will be provided to the 

applicants in the exemption document 

and they include the following: (1) That 

each individual submit a quarterly 

monitoring checklist completed by the 

treating endocrinologist as well as an 

annual checklist with a comprehensive 

medical evaluation; (2) that each 

individual reports within 2 business 

days of occurrence, all episodes of 

severe hypoglycemia, significant 

complications, or inability to manage 

diabetes; also, any involvement in an 

accident or any other adverse event in 

a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or 

not it is related to an episode of 

hypoglycemia; (3) 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 (4) 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. 

Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 

nineteen exemption applications, 

FMCSA exempts, Roger L. Arcand, Jr. 

(RI), Marsha M. Colberg (WA), Robert D. 

Crissinger (MN), Scott W. Forsyth, Jr. 

(CO), Jose A. Garcia (NY), Fritz D. 

Gregory (UT), Gordon R. Kellogg (NY), 

Anthony P. Kesselring (FL), Don R. Kivi 

(ND), Vincent Ligotti (NY), Larry D. 

Miller (MN), Michael R. Miller (PA), 

Jack L. Phippen (WI), Richard A. Purk 

(CA), Timothy M. Rearick (PA), Jeremy 

Simmons (MA), Jack A. Tidey (AK), 

Brian E. Quick (VA) and Timothy W. 

Work (NY) from the ITDM requirement 

in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), subject to the 

conditions listed under ‘‘Conditions and 

Requirements’’ above. 

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 the following occurs: (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(e) 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 9, 2012. 

Larry W. Minor, 

Associate Administrator for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7120 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2011–0366] 

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 twelve 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 requirement. 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 

March 23, 2012. The exemptions expire 

on March 23, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical 

Programs Division, (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:// 

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 

acknowledgement 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17118 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 

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 6, 2012, FMCSA 

published a notice of receipt of 

exemption applications from certain 

individuals, and requested comments 

from the public (77 FR 5874). That 

notice listed twelve applicants’ case 

histories. The twelve 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 

twelve 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 a 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 requirement red, green, and 

amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)). 

FMCSA recognizes that some drivers 

do not meet the vision requirement but 

have adapted their driving to 

accommodate their vision limitation 

and demonstrated their ability to drive 

safely. The twelve 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, artery 

occlusion, glaucoma, prosthesis, 

macular scarring and complete loss of 

vision. In most cases, their eye 

conditions were not recently developed. 

Six of the applicants were either born 

with their vision impairments or have 

had them since childhood. The six 

individuals that sustained their vision 

conditions as adults have had them for 

a period of 4 to 23 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 nonCDL, these twelve 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 3 to 35 years. In the 

past 3 years, two of the drivers were 

involved in crashes, and none 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 February 6, 2012 notice (77 FR 

5874). 

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. 

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, 

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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 57 / Friday, March 23, 2012 / Notices 17119 

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 

twelve applicants, two of the drivers 

were involved in crashes and none were 

convicted of moving violations in a 

CMV. All the applicants achieved a 

record of safety while driving with their 

vision impairment, demonstrating the 

likelihood that they have adapted their 

driving skills to accommodate their 

condition. As the applicants’ ample 

driving histories with their vision 

deficiencies are good predictors of 

future performance, FMCSA concludes 

their ability to drive safely can be 

projected into the future. 

We believe that the applicants’ 

intrastate driving experience and history 

provide an adequate basis for predicting 

their ability to drive safely in interstate 

commerce. Intrastate driving, like 

interstate operations, involves 

substantial driving on highways on the 

interstate system and on other roads 

built to interstate standards. Moreover, 

driving in congested urban areas 

exposes the driver to more pedestrian 

and vehicular traffic than exists on 

interstate highways. Faster reaction to 

traffic and traffic signals is generally 

required because distances between 

them are more compact. These 

conditions tax visual capacity and 

driver response just as intensely as 

interstate driving conditions. The 

veteran drivers in this proceeding have 

operated CMVs safely under those 

conditions for at least 3 years, most for 

much longer. Their experience and 

driving records lead us to believe that 

each applicant is capable of operating in 

interstate commerce as safely as he/she 

has been performing in intrastate 

commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds 

that exempting these applicants from 

the vision requirement in 49 CFR 

391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level 

of safety equal to that existing without 

the exemption. For this reason, the 

Agency is granting the exemptions for 

the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C. 

31136(e) and 31315 to the twelve 

applicants listed in the notice of 

February 6, 2012 (77 FR 5874). 

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 twelve 

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 selfemployed. The driver must 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 no comments in this 

proceeding. 

Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 

twelve exemption applications, FMCSA 

exempts Eugenio V. Bermudez (MA), 

John A. Carroll, Jr. (AL), Mark W. 

Crocker (TN), Johnny Dillard (SC), Keith 

J. Haaf (VA), Edward M. Jurek (NY), 

Allen J. Kunze (ND), Jack W. Murphy, 

Jr. (OH), Mark A. Smalls (GA), Glenn R. 

Theis (MN), Peter A. Troyan (MI) and 

Gary Vines (AL) 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 9, 2012. 

Larry W. Minor, 

Associate Administration for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7084 Filed 3–22–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0039] 

Pipeline Safety: Cast Iron Pipe 

(Supplementary Advisory Bulletin) 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory 

Bulletin. 

SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an advisory 

bulletin to owners and operators of 

natural gas cast iron distribution 

pipelines and state pipeline safety 

representatives. Recent deadly 

explosions in Philadelphia and 

Allentown, Pennsylvania involving cast 

iron pipelines installed in 1942 and 

1928, respectively, gained national 

attention and highlight the need for 

continued safety improvements to aging 

gas pipeline systems. This bulletin is an 

update of two prior Alert Notices (ALN– 

91–02; October 11, 1991 and ALN–92– 

02; June 26, 1992) covering the 

continued use of cast iron pipe in 

natural gas distribution pipeline 

systems. This advisory bulletin 

reiterates two prior Alert Notices which 

remain relevant, urges owners and 

operators to conduct a comprehensive 

review of their cast iron distribution 

pipelines and replacement programs 

and accelerate pipeline repair, 

rehabilitation and replacement of highrisk pipelines, requests state agencies to 

consider enhancements to cast iron 

replacement plans and programs, and 

alerts owners and operators of the 

pipeline safety requirements for the 

investigation of failures. In addition, the 

latest survey and reporting requirements 

of cast iron pipelines required by the 

Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, 

and Job Creation Act of 2011 are 

included for information. 

ADDRESSES: This document can be 

viewed on the Office of Pipeline Safety 

home page at: http://ops.dot.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Gilliam, Director, Engineering and 

Research, 202–366–0568 or by email at 

Jeffery.Gilliam@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On January 18, 2011, an explosion 

and fire caused the death of one gas 

utility employee and injuries to several 

other people while gas utility crews 

were responding to a natural gas leak in 

Philadelphia, PA. A preliminary 

investigation found a circumferential 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES