3166 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices 

The drivers were included in docket 

number FMCSA–2013–0123, FMCSA– 

2014–0104, FMCSA–2017–0058, 

FMCSA–2018–0139, FMCSA–2019– 

0111, or FMCSA–2019–0112. Their 

exemptions are applicable as of 

February 14, 2022 and will expire on 

February 14, 2024. 

As of February 19, 2022, and in 

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

31315(b), the following nine individuals 

have satisfied the renewal conditions for 

obtaining an exemption from the 

hearing requirement in the FMCSRs for 

interstate CMV drivers: 

Wyatt Baldwin (NV) 

Richard Davis (OH) 

Adam Hayes (CA) 

Adrian Lopez (TX) 

Jeffrey Schulkers (KY) 

Jason Thomas (TX) 

Joshua J. Tinley (AZ) 

Roderick Thomas (GA) 

Kerri Wright (OK) 

The drivers were included in docket 

number FMCSA–2014–0385, FMCSA– 

2016–0003, or FMCSA–2017–0057. 

Their exemptions are applicable as of 

February 19, 2022 and will expire on 

February 19, 2024. 

V. Conditions and Requirements 

The exemptions are extended subject 

to the following conditions: (1) Each 

driver must report any crashes or 

accidents as defined in § 390.5; and (2) 

report all citations and convictions for 

disqualifying offenses under 49 CFR 383 

and 49 CFR 391 to FMCSA; and (3) each 

driver prohibited from operating a 

motorcoach or bus with passengers in 

interstate commerce. The driver must 

also have a copy of the exemption when 

driving, for presentation to a duly 

authorized Federal, State, or local 

enforcement official. In addition, the 

exemption does not exempt the 

individual from meeting the applicable 

CDL testing requirements. Each 

exemption will be valid for 2 years 

unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The 

exemption will be rescinded if: (1) The 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(e) and 31315(b). 

VI. Preemption 

During the period the exemption is in 

effect, no State shall enforce any law or 

regulation that conflicts with this 

exemption with respect to a person 

operating under the exemption. 

VII. Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 17 

exemption applications, FMCSA renews 

the exemptions of the aforementioned 

drivers from the hearing requirement in 

§ 391.41 (b)(11). In accordance with 49 

U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each 

exemption will be valid for 2 years 

unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. 

Larry W. Minor, 

Associate Administrator for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00987 Filed 1–19–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2021–0059] 

Parts and Accessories Necessary for 

Safe Operation; Application for an 

Exemption From Waste Management 

Inc. 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of final disposition; grant 

of exemption. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration (FMCSA) 

announces its decision to grant the 

limited 5-year exemption requested by 

Waste Management Inc. (Waste 

Management) to allow all of its 

operating companies, which currently 

number 106, to replace the highmounted brake lights on their owned 

and operated fleets of heavy-duty refuse 

and support trucks with red or amber 

brake-activated pulsating lamps 

positioned in the upper center position, 

or in an upper dual outboard position, 

in addition to the steady burning brake 

lamps required by the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). 

The Agency has determined that 

granting the exemption would likely 

achieve a level of safety equivalent to or 

greater than the level of safety provided 

by the regulation. 

DATES: This exemption is effective 

January 20, 2022 and ending January 20, 

2027. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Jose ́ R. Cestero, Vehicle and Roadside 

Operations Division, Office of Carrier, 

Driver, and Vehicle Safety, MC–PSV, 

(202) 366–5541, Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments submitted to notice 

requesting public comments on the 

exemption application, go to 

www.regulations.gov at any time or visit 

Dockets Operations, 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., 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. The 

on-line Federal document management 

system is available 24 hours each day, 

365 days each year. The docket number 

is listed at the beginning of this notice. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 

31136(e) and 31315 to grant exemptions 

from certain parts of the 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 

any safety analyses that have been 

conducted. The Agency must also 

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). 

The decision of the Agency must be 

published in the Federal Register (49 

CFR 381.315(b)) with the reasons for 

denying or granting the application and, 

if granted, the name of the person or 

class of persons receiving the 

exemption, and the regulatory provision 

from which the exemption is granted. 

The notice must also specify the 

effective period and explain the terms 

and conditions of the exemption. The 

exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 

381.300(b)). 

Waste Management’s Application for 

Exemption 

Section 393.25(e) of the FMCSRs 

requires all exterior lamps (both 

required lamps and any additional 

lamps) to be steady-burning, except turn 

signal lamps, hazard warning signal 

lamps, school bus warning lamps, 

amber warning lamps or flashing 

warning lamps on tow trucks and 

commercial motor vehicles (CMV) 

transporting oversized loads, and 

warning lamps on emergency and 

service vehicles authorized by State or 

local authorities. 

Waste Management applied for an 

exemption from 49 CFR 393.25(e) to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices 3167 

1https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1155/ 

2014/792670. 

2U.S. Department of Transportation, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2012), 

Traffic Safety Facts—2010 Data; Large Trucks, 

Report No. DOT HS 811 628, Washington, DC (June 

2012). 

3U.S. Department of Transportation, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2018), 

Traffic Safety Facts—2016 Data; Large Trucks, 

Report No. DOT HS 812 497, Washington, DC (May 

2018). 

allow all of its operating companies, 

which currently number 106, to replace 

the rear high-mounted brake lights with 

red or amber brake-activated pulsating 

lamps positioned in the upper center 

position, or in an upper dual outboard 

position, in addition to the steady 

burning brake lamps required by the 

FMCSRs. 

A copy of the application is included 

in the docket referenced at the 

beginning of this notice. 

Waste Management contended that 

the addition of brake-activated pulsating 

lamps would improve safety and stated 

that research shows that pulsating brake 

lamps installed improve visibility and 

prevent rear end accidents. Waste 

Management noted that FMCSA has 

previously granted similar, but not 

identical, temporary exemptions to the 

National Tank Truck Carriers Inc. 

(NTTC), (85 FR 63643), Grote Industries, 

LLC. (Grote), (85 FR 78918). Inc. (Grote), 

and Groendyke Transport Inc. 

(Groendyke) (84 FR 17910). 

Waste Management included in the 

application several studies conducted 

by the National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA), another 

agency in the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, on the issues of rear-end 

crashes, distracted driving, and braking 

signals. Waste Management stated that 

the addition of brake-activated pulsating 

lamp(s) will not have an adverse impact 

on safety, and that adherence to the 

terms and conditions of the exemption 

would likely achieve a level of safety 

equivalent to or greater than the level of 

safety achieved without the exemption. 

Comments 

FMCSA published a notice of the 

application in the Federal Register on 

June 3, 2021 and asked for public 

comment (86 FR 29876). The Agency 

received comments from the 

Transportation Safety Equipment 

Institute (TSEI), the National Truck 

Equipment Association (NTEA), the 

Florida Highway Patrol-Bureau of 

Commercial Vehicle Enforcement (FHP), 

the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance 

(CVSA), the National Waste Recycling 

Association (NWRA), and from 18 other 

stakeholders and individuals. Twenty of 

the 23 comments favored the exemption 

application. 

NWRA and TSEI supported granting 

the application. CVSA supported the 

use of amber brake-activated warning 

lamps, but was opposed to the use of 

red brake-activated pulsating warning 

lamps. Florida Highway Patrol 

expressed concern regarding the use of 

red brake-activated pulsating warning 

lamps because traffic approaching from 

the rear might confuse the flashing red 

lights with law enforcement vehicles. 

NWRA supports the Waste 

Management application, noting that the 

2019 Bureau of Labor Statistics Census 

of Fatal Injuries classified 40 of the 70 

fatal incidents for waste and 

remediation services as transportation 

incidents. NWRA also provided 

research data from a report 1 noting that 

flashing brake systems and flashing 

hazard systems reduced drivers’ brake 

response times by 0.14–0.62 seconds, 

and 0.03–0.95 seconds respectively, 

while flashing amber lamps reduced 

drivers’ brake response times by 0.11 

seconds on average compared with red 

lamps. NWRA noted that the requested 

exemption should not only improve the 

safety for Waste Management’s workers, 

but also improve the overall safety of 

the motoring public. 

TSEI acknowledged the safety benefits 

of brake-activated warning lamps when 

used in conjunction with steady burning 

red brake lamps and identified its 

support of previous exemption requests 

for Groendyke, NTTC, and Grote. TSEI 

stated that it does not believe the 

Agency should grant the temporary 

exemption to Waste Management to 

allow brake-activated required lamps to 

pulsate without a thorough 

consideration of safety data and 

research with the aim of setting 

standards to ensure consistency across 

all vehicles equipped with such lamps. 

NTEA expressed concern that some 

NTEA members are manufacturers and 

alterers of motor vehicles that receive 

requests from commercial motor vehicle 

fleets to install brake-activated pulsating 

warning lamps on certain new vehicles 

they construct or modify. As 

manufacturers of new motor vehicles, 

NTEA members are required to certify 

these vehicles to applicable NHTSA 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

(FMVSS). NTEA noted that FMCSA 

does not have the authority to exempt 

manufacturers of commercial motor 

vehicles from their obligation to certify 

compliance with affected FMVSS. 

NTEA noted that FMCSA temporary 

exemptions for brake-activated warning 

lamps are narrowly restricted to motor 

carriers making the exempted 

modification to their own vehicles. 

CVSA stated that the Agency should 

allow motor carriers to equip 

commercial motor vehicles with amber 

brake-activated pulsating lights, but is 

opposed to red brake-activated pulsating 

lights. CVSA and FHP noted that 

pulsating red lights are typically 

associated with law enforcement or 

emergency vehicles. Allowing red 

pulsating lamps on the rear of 

commercial motor vehicles may 

negatively impact the driving public’s 

recognition and response to emergency 

vehicles. Further, many States have 

laws prohibiting nonemergency vehicles 

from having pulsating red lights. 

Eighteen stakeholders and individuals 

submitted comments in support of 

granting the exemption. These 

commenters believe that any technology 

that has been shown to reduce rear end 

crashes should be allowed and cited 

various benefits of brake-activated 

pulsating lamps, including (1) enhanced 

awareness that the vehicle is making a 

stop, especially at railroad crossings, 

and (2) increased visibility in severe 

weather conditions. 

FMCSA Decision 

The FMCSA has evaluated the Waste 

Management exemption application and 

the comments received. The Agency 

believes that granting the temporary 

exemption to allow its operating 

companies to replace the high-mounted 

brake lights on their owned and 

operated fleets of heavy-duty refuse and 

support trucks with red or amber brakeactivated pulsating lamps positioned in 

the upper center position, or in an 

upper dual outboard position, in 

addition to the steady burning brake 

lamps required by the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), 

will likely provide a level of safety that 

is equivalent to, or greater than, the 

level of safety achieved without the 

exemption. 

Rear-end crashes generally account 

for approximately 30 percent of all 

crashes. These types of crashes often 

result from a failure to respond (or 

delays in responding) to a stopped or 

decelerating lead vehicle. Data between 

2010 and 2016 show that large trucks 

are consistently three times more likely 

than other vehicles to be struck in the 

rear in two-vehicle fatal crashes.2 3

Both FMCSA and NHTSA have 

conducted research regarding 

alternative rear signaling systems to 

address rear-end crashes. FMCSA has 

conducted research and development of 

an Enhanced Rear Signaling (ERS) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
3168 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices 

4U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Administration (2014), 

Expanded Research and Development of an 

Enhanced Rear Signaling System for Commercial 

Motor Vehicles, Report No. FMCSA–RRT–13–009, 

Washington, DC (April 2014). 

5U.S. Department of Transportation, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2009), 

Traffic Safety Facts—Vehicle Safety Research Notes; 

Assessing the Attention-Gettingness of Brake 

Signals: Evaluation of Optimized Candidate 

Enhanced Braking Signals; Report No. DOT HS 811 

129, Washington, DC (May 2009). 

6U.S. Department of Transportation, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2010), 

Traffic Safety Facts—Vehicle Safety Research Notes; 

Assessing the Attention-Getting Capability of Brake 

Signals: Evaluation of Candidate Enhanced Braking 

Signals and Features; Report No. DOT HS 811 330, 

Washington, DC (June 2010). 

7U.S. Department of Transportation, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2009), The 

Effectiveness of Amber Rear Turn Signals for 

Reducing Rear Impacts; Report No. DOT HS 811 

115, Washington, DC (April 2009). 

system for CMVs.4 The study noted that, 

while brake lights are activated only 

with the service brakes, and the visual 

warning is provided only during 

conditions when the lead vehicle is 

decelerating using its braking system, 

brake lights are not activated during 

other conditions when rear-end 

collisions can occur (e.g., when the 

CMV is (1) stopped along the roadway 

or in traffic, (2) traveling slower, or (3) 

decelerating using an engine retarder). 

Because of the limitations of the existing 

brake system described above, along 

with issues relating to visual distraction, 

the study examined ways for CMVs to 

detect rear-end crash threats and to 

provide drivers of following vehicles a 

supplemental visual warning—located 

on the lead vehicle, and in addition to 

the current brake lights—so followingvehicle drivers can quickly recognize 

impending collision threats. 

During Phase I of this effort, 

researchers performed crash database 

analyses to determine causal factors of 

rear-end collisions and to identify 

potential countermeasures. Phase II 

continued through prototype 

development based on 

recommendations from Phase I. During 

Phase II field testing, potential benefits 

of using such countermeasures were 

realized. During Phase III, a multiphased approach was executed to 

design, develop, and test multiple types 

of countermeasures on a controlled test 

track and on public highways. Phase III 

yielded positive results for a rearwarning prototype system comprising 

12 light-emitting diode (LED) units that 

would flash at 5 Hz to provide a visual 

warning to the following-vehicle drivers 

indicating that, with continued closing 

rate and distance, a collision will occur 

with the lead vehicle. Finally, the 

prototype system was further developed 

and refined to include modification of 

the system into a unit designed for 

simple CMV installation, collisionwarning activation refinements, and 

rear-lighting brightness adjustments for 

nighttime conditions. Formal closed 

test-track and real-world testing were 

then performed to determine the ERS 

system collision-warning activation 

performance. 

While the efforts described above 

demonstrated a promising system for 

follow-on research, FMCSA ultimately 

decided not to pursue formal field 

operational testing of the prototype 

system because of concerns relating to 

(1) the cost to implement the ERS 

system as configured, and (2) fleets’ 

willingness to invest in the technology, 

given the cost of the system. 

Nonetheless, the preliminary research 

showed that the ERS system performed 

well at detecting and signaling rear-end 

crash threats and drawing the gaze of 

following-vehicle drivers to the forward 

roadway which, if implemented, could 

potentially reduce the number and 

frequency of rear-end crashes into 

CMVs. 

Separately, NHTSA has performed a 

series of research studies intended to 

develop and evaluate rear-signaling 

applications designed to reduce the 

frequency and severity of rear-end 

crashes via enhancements to rear-brake 

lighting by redirecting drivers’ visual 

attention to the forward roadway (for 

cases involving a distracted driver), 

and/or increasing the saliency or 

meaningfulness of the brake signal (for 

inattentive drivers).5 6

Initially, the study quantified the 

attention-getting capability and 

discomfort glare of a set of candidate 

rear brake lighting configurations, using 

driver judgments, as well as eyedrawing metrics. This study served to 

narrow the set of candidate lighting 

configurations to those that would most 

likely be carried forward for additional 

on-road study. Both look-up (eyedrawing) data and interview data 

supported the hypothesis that 

simultaneous flashing of all rear lighting 

combined with increased brightness 

would be effective in redirecting the 

driver’s eyes to the lead vehicle when 

the driver is looking away with tasks 

that involve visual load. 

Subsequently, the study quantified 

the attention-getting capability of a set 

of candidate rear brake lighting 

configurations, including proposed 

approaches from automotive companies. 

This study was conducted to provide 

data for use in a simulation model to 

assess the effectiveness and safety 

benefits of enhanced rear brake light 

countermeasures. Among other things, 

this research demonstrated that flashing 

all lights simultaneously or alternately 

flashing is a promising signal for use in 

enhanced brake light applications, even 

at levels of brightness within the current 

regulated limits. Specifically, the study 

concluded that substantial performance 

gains may be realized by increasing 

brake-lamp brightness levels under 

flashing configurations; however, 

increases beyond a certain brightness 

threshold will not return substantive 

performance gains. 

Both FMCSA and NHTSA have 

conducted extensive research and 

development programs to examine 

alternative rear-signaling systems to 

reduce the incidence of rear-end 

crashes. However, while these efforts 

concluded that improvements could be 

realized through rear-lighting systems 

that flash, neither the FMCSRs nor the 

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

(FMVSS) currently permit the use of 

pulsating, brake-activated lamps on the 

rear of CMVs. 

With respect to the use of amber 

lights, NHTSA has conducted research 

on the effectiveness of rear turn signal 

color on the likelihood of being 

involved in a rear-end crash.7 FMVSS 

No. 108 allows rear turn signals to be 

either red or amber in color. The study 

concluded that amber signals show a 5.3 

percent effectiveness in reducing 

involvement in two-vehicle crashes 

where a lead vehicle is rear-struck in the 

act of turning left, turning right, merging 

into traffic, changing lanes, or entering/ 

leaving a parking space. The advantage 

of amber, compared to red, rear turn 

signals was shown to be statistically 

significant. 

FMCSA acknowledges the concern of 

NTEA that FMCSA has the authority to 

grant the temporary exemption only to 

motor carriers and not to commercial 

motor vehicle manufacturers or vehicle 

alterers. FMCSA has met with NHTSA 

to discuss research avenues that would 

support NHTSA updates to 49 CFR 

571.108—Standard No. 108; Lamps, 

reflective devices, and associated 

equipment, such that the commercial 

motor vehicle manufacturers would be 

able to install brake activated warning 

light systems for which FMCSA has 

already granted temporary exemptions 

to motor carriers. FMCSA believes that 

the FMCSA and NHTSA research 

programs demonstrating the ability of 

alternative rear-signaling systems to 

reduce the frequency and severity of 

rear-end crashes, are sufficient to 

conclude that implementation of red or 

amber brake activated pulsating lamps 

is likely to provide a level of safety that 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices 3169 

is equivalent to, or greater than, the 

level of safety achieved without the 

exemption. 

FMCSA acknowledges the concerns of 

FHP and CVSA that flashing, rotating, or 

pulsating red lamps are generally 

permitted only on emergency vehicles. 

FMCSA notes that police and other 

State-authorized emergency vehicles 

utilize high intensity, constantly 

flashing, rotating, or pulsating red lamps 

visible from all directions on the vehicle 

and that continuously operate when 

activated. The amber or red brakeactivated pulsating lamps requested by 

Waste Management are visible only to 

the rear of their vehicles and are similar 

in lamp intensity and flash rate of the 

vehicle’s standard rear hazard warning 

lamps system currently allowed by the 

regulations. FMCSA believes that the 

FMCSA and NHTSA research programs 

that demonstrated the ability of 

alternative rear signaling systems to 

reduce the frequency and severity of 

rear-end crashes are sufficient to 

conclude that the implementation of red 

or amber brake-activated pulsating 

lamps in the upper center position or in 

an upper dual outboard position on the 

rear of their vehicles, in addition to the 

steady-burning brake lamps required by 

the regulations, is likely to provide a 

level of safety that is equivalent to, or 

greater than, the level of safety achieved 

without the exemption. 

Terms and Conditions for the 

Exemption 

The Agency hereby grants the 

exemption for a 5-year period, 

beginning January 20, 2022 and ending 

January 20, 2027. During the temporary 

exemption period, Waste Management’s 

operating companies will be allowed to 

replace the high-mounted brake lights 

on their owned and operated fleets of 

heavy-duty refuse and support trucks 

and will be allowed to install a red or 

amber brake-activated pulsating lamp in 

the upper center position or in an upper 

dual outboard position on the rear of 

their owned and operated fleets of 

heavy-duty refuse and support trucks in 

addition to the steady-burning brake 

lamps required by the FMCSRs. 

The exemption will be valid for 5 

years unless rescinded earlier by 

FMCSA. The exemption will be 

rescinded if: (1) Waste Management 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(b). 

Interested parties possessing 

information that would demonstrate 

that Waste Management’s 106 operating 

companies’ owned and operated fleets 

of heavy-duty refuse and support trucks 

with red or amber brake-activated 

pulsating lamps positioned in the upper 

center position, or in an upper dual 

outboard position, in addition to the 

steady burning brake lamps required by 

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations (FMCSRs) is not achieving 

the requisite statutory level of safety 

should immediately notify FMCSA. The 

Agency will evaluate any such 

information and, if safety is being 

compromised or if the continuation of 

the exemption is not consistent with 49 

U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), will take 

immediate steps to revoke the 

exemption. 

Preemption 

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

31313(d), as implemented by 49 CFR 

381.600, during the period this 

exemption is in effect, no State shall 

enforce any law or regulation applicable 

to interstate commerce that conflicts 

with or is inconsistent with this 

exemption. States may, but are not 

required to, adopt the same exemption 

with respect to operations in intrastate 

commerce. 

Meera Joshi, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01023 Filed 1–19–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2022–0011] 

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption 

Applications; Vision 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), Department 

of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of denials. 

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its 

decision to deny applications from 33 

individuals who requested an 

exemption from the vision standard in 

the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a CMV 

in interstate commerce. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical 

Programs Division, (202) 366–4001, 

fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, DOT, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room 

W64–224, Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

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 materials in 

the docket, contact Dockets Operations, 

(202) 366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation 

A. Viewing Comments 

To view comments go to 

www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket 

number, FMCSA–2022–0011, in the 

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

sort the results by ‘‘Posted (NewerOlder),’’ choose the first 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 in Room W12–140 

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 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.transportation.gov/privacy. 

II. Background 

FMCSA received applications from 33 

individuals who requested an 

exemption from the vision standard in 

the FMCSRs. 

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)(10). 

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. 

FMCSA grants 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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1