Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 179 / Monday, September 16, 2024 / Notices 75631 

9. Hazardous Materials: 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) [42 U.S.C. 9601–9675]; 

Superfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA); 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA) [42 U.S.C. 6901–6992(k)]. 

10. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990 

Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988 

Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898, 

Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and 

Enhancement of Cultural Resources; 

E.O. 13007 Indian Sacred Sites; E.O. 

13287 Preserve America; E.O. 11514 

Protection and Enhancement of 

Environmental Quality; E.O. 13112 

Invasive Species. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning 

and Construction. The regulations 

implementing Executive Order 12372 

regarding intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities apply to this 

program.) 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1). 

Issued on: September 11, 2024. 

Karen M. Brunelle, 

Director, Office of Project Development, 

Federal Highway Administration, 

Tallahassee, Florida. 

[FR Doc. 2024–20989 Filed 9–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2023–0244] 

Hours of Service: Denial of Application 

for Exemption; Arbert Ibraimi 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; 

denial of application for exemption. 

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its 

decision to deny the application of Mr. 

Arbert Ibraimi on behalf of GTLM 

Transport Inc. (GTLM), requesting an 

exemption from the requirement to use 

an electronic logging device (ELD) for 

maintaining driver records of duty 

status (RODS). FMCSA evaluated the 

application and public comments and 

determined that GTLM did not 

sufficiently demonstrate how its 

commercial motor vehicle (CMV) 

operations would likely achieve a level 

of safety that is equivalent to, or greater 

than, the level that would be achieved 

in the absence of the exemption. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Bernadette Walker, FMCSA Driver, and 

Carrier Operations Division; Office of 

Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety 

Standards; 202–385–2415; 

bernadette.walker@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, go to 

www.regulations.gov, insert the docket 

number ‘‘FMCSA–2023–0244’’ in the 

keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, 

sort the results by ‘‘Posted (Newer— 

Older),’’ choose the first notice listed, 

click ‘‘Browse Comments.’’ 

To view documents mentioned in this 

notice as being available in thein the 

docket, go to www.regulations.gov, 

insert docket number ‘‘FMCSA–2023– 

0244’’ in the keyword box, click 

‘‘Search,’’ and choose the document to 

review. 

If you do not have access to the 

internet, you may view the docket by 

visiting Docket Operations on the 

ground floor of the DOT West Building, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. To be sure 

someone is there to help you, please call 

(202) 366–9317 or (202) 366–9826 

before visiting Docket Operations. 

II. Legal Basis 

FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 

31136(e) and 31315(b) to grant 

exemptions from Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). FMCSA 

must publish a notice of each exemption 

request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 

381.315(a)). The Agency must provide 

the public an opportunity to inspect the 

information relevant to the application, 

including the applicant’s safety 

analysis. The Agency must provide an 

opportunity for public comment on the 

request. 

The Agency reviews safety analyses 

and public comments submitted and 

determines whether granting the 

exemption would likely achieve a level 

of safety equivalent to, or greater than, 

the level that would be achieved by the 

current regulation (49 CFR 381.305(a)). 

The Agency must publish its decision in 

the Federal Register (49 CFR 

381.315(b)). If granted, the notice will 

identify the regulatory provision from 

which the applicant will be exempt, the 

effective period, and all terms and 

conditions of the exemption (49 CFR 

381.315(c)(1)). If the exemption is 

denied, the notice will explain the 

reason for the denial (49 CFR 

381.315(c)(2)). The exemption may be 

renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)). 

III. Background 

Current Regulation(s) Requirements 

With limited exceptions, the HOS 

regulation at 49 CFR 395.8(a)(1)(i) 

requires motor carriers operating CMVs 

to install and require each of its drivers 

to use an ELD to record the driver’s duty 

status. 

Applicant’s Request 

GTLM requested a one-year 

exemption from the ELD requirement in 

49 CFR 395.8(a)(1)(i). The applicant 

stated that it is a new business, 

operating a single CMV as an owneroperator, and has limited funds to 

support the purchase of an ELD. The 

applicant stated that it would use the 

funds saved from not purchasing and 

installing an ELD, to monitor the safety 

of operations and to incorporate safety 

management controls into its operation. 

Applicant’s Method To Ensure an 

Equivalent or Greater Level of Safety 

GTLM stated that an equivalent or 

greater level of safety will be achieved 

under the exemption because, since the 

carrier is owner-operated, ‘‘the 

operational safety impact will be 

virtually identical and manageable.’’ 

GTLM also stated that funds that would 

be used to purchase and install an ELD 

could be invested in a safety 

management control system from which 

the company would benefit more in its 

initial stages (e.g., training on current 

safety topics.) 

IV. Public Comments 

On March 1, 2024, FMCSA published 

a notice of GTLM’s application and 

requested public comments (89 FR 

15258). The agency received a total of 

122 comments: 62 in support, 32 in 

opposition, and 28 taking no position 

either for or against granting the 

exemption. Of the 62 comments in 

support of granting the exemption, five 

were from trucking companies. 

Commenters who supported granting 

the exemption expressed general 

opposition to ELDs. They stated that 

ELDs are too expensive, and they create 

a stressful environment for drivers who 

feel pressured to arrive at their 

destinations before running out of 

hours. Some commenters also stated 

that ELDs have made CMV operations 

less safe because they cause drivers to 

rush. Jimmy Haynes stated, ‘‘After 35 

years of driving the elds are making 

drivers take unnecessary risks to 

maximize time. Instead of being able to 

take naps or breaks when needed the 

elds make you push through to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
75632 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 179 / Monday, September 16, 2024 / Notices 

situations you wouldn’t normally.’’ RJ’s 

Trucking & Logistics LLC stated, ‘‘I 

believe he should be exempt and the 

requirement should be discontinued. 

ELD does nothing but give brokers more 

power. Some use this as a way to fine 

you a load. If its [sic] about safety then 

why do some still let you get a load. 

There is nothing wrong with paper 

logs.’’ 

Of the 24 comments filed opposing 

the exemption, six were from trucking 

companies. The commenters who 

opposed granting the exemption 

emphasized placing safety first. Joint 

comments filed by the Truck Safety 

Coalition, Citizens for Reliable and 

Safety Highways, and Parents Against 

Tired Truckers stated that safety ‘‘must 

be the top priority, not the last to be 

addressed with whatever funds remain 

available. Safety has a cost, and it must 

be paid by all industry stakeholders if 

meaningful progress will be made in 

reducing truck crash deaths and 

injuries.’’ John Bowlby stated, ‘‘This 

exemption should not be granted. ELDs 

make it harder for drivers to cheat. A 

new business tight on cash flow would 

be tempted to cheat to make more 

money.’’ Some commenters also cited 

the relatively low cost of ELDs. An 

anonymous commenter stated, ‘‘I pay 

$300 a year for ELD. If you can’t afford 

that, how are you going to pay for safety 

related items. 1 tire costs more than 

that.’’ 

V. FMCSA Safety Analysis and 

Decision 

FMCSA evaluated GTLM’s 

application and the public comments 

and denies the exemption request. 

GTLM failed to establish that it would 

likely achieve a level of safety 

equivalent to, or greater than, the level 

achieved without the exemption. ELDs 

help drivers more accurately track 

driving time to ensure compliance with 

HOS regulations, which are designed to 

help drivers maintain alertness while 

operating CMVs. Additionally, ELDs 

decrease the likelihood that the RODS 

could be altered after the date the 

records were generated, without leaving 

an electronic trail. For these reasons, 

and as discussed in the amended 

rulemaking proceedings that established 

the ELD requirements [80 FR 78292], the 

Agency believes the level of safety 

provided by the use of ELDs is likely 

greater than that provided by the use of 

paper logs as an alternative. GTLM did 

not propose safety countermeasures to 

compensate for the lower level of safety 

that paper logs entail. Economic 

difficulties, such as those that GTLM 

described, do not justify the granting of 

an exemption. 

For the reasons stated, GTLM’s 

exemption application is denied. 

Vincent G. White, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2024–20931 Filed 9–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2024–0026] 

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption 

Applications; Epilepsy and Seizure 

Disorders 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of denials. 

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its 

decision to deny applications from 21 

individuals who requested an 

exemption from the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) 

prohibiting persons with a clinical 

diagnosis of epilepsy or any other 

condition that is likely to cause a loss 

of consciousness or any loss of ability to 

operate a commercial motor vehicle 

(CMV) from operating CMVs in 

interstate commerce. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical 

Programs Division, FMCSA, Department 

of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001, (202) 366–4001, fmcsamedical@

dot.gov. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. 

to 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. If you have 

questions regarding viewing material in 

the docket, contact Dockets Operations, 

(202) 366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

A. Comments 

To view comments go to 

www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket 

number (FMCSA–2024–0026) in the 

keyword box, and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, 

choose the only notice listed, and click 

‘‘Browse Comments.’’ If you do not have 

access to the internet, you may view the 

docket online by visiting Dockets 

Operations on the ground floor of the 

DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. To be sure someone is there to 

help you, please call (202) 366–9317 or 

(202) 366–9826 before visiting Dockets 

Operations. 

B. Privacy Act 

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments 

from the public on the exemption 

request. 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 (Federal Docket Management 

System), which can be reviewed at 

https://www.transportation.gov/ 

individuals/privacy/privacy-act-systemrecords-notices, the comments are 

searchable by the name of the submitter. 

II. Background 

FMCSA received applications from 21 

individuals who requested an 

exemption from the FMCSRs 

prohibiting persons with a clinical 

diagnosis of epilepsy or any other 

condition that is likely to cause a loss 

of consciousness or any loss of ability to 

operate a CMV from operating CMVs in 

interstate commerce. 

FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility 

of these applicants and concluded that 

granting these exemptions would not 

provide a level of safety that would be 

equivalent to, or greater than, the level 

of safety that would be obtained by 

complying with § 391.41(b)(8). 

III. Basis for Exemption Determination 

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

31315(b), FMCSA may grant an 

exemption from the FMCSRs for no 

longer than a 5-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 5-year 

period. FMCSA grants medical 

exemptions from the FMCSRs for a 2- 

year period to align with the maximum 

duration of a driver’s medical 

certification. The Agency’s decision 

regarding these exemption applications 

is based on the eligibility criteria, the 

terms and conditions for Federal 

exemptions, and an individualized 

assessment of each applicant’s medical 

information provided by the applicant. 

IV. Conclusion 

The Agency has determined that these 

applicants do not satisfy the eligibility 

criteria or meet the terms and 

conditions of the Federal exemption and 

granting these exemptions would not 

provide a level of safety that would be 

equivalent to, or greater than, the level 

of safety that would be obtained by 

complying with § 391.41(b)(8). 

Therefore, the 21 applicants in this 

notice have been denied exemptions 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1