Skip to Content


Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Renewals; Vision

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Enhanced Content

Relevant information about this document from provides additional context. This information is not part of the official Federal Register document.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble


Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.


Notice of final disposition.


FMCSA previously announced its decision to renew the exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for 26 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has reviewed the comments submitted in response to the previous announcement and concluded that granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that will be equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

Start Further Info


Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical Programs, (202) 366-4001,, FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 8301, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information


Electronic Access

You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document Management System (FDMS) at


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. The comment period ended on November 17, 2008.

Discussion of Comments

FMCSA received one comment in this proceeding. The comment was considered and discussed below.Start Printed Page 7102

Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressed opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSR, including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates: (1) Objects to the manner in which 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. 31136(e) and 31315); 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.


The Agency has not received any adverse evidence on any of these drivers that indicates that safety is being compromised. Based upon its evaluation of the 26 renewal applications, FMCSA renews the Federal vision exemptions for Paul G. Albrecht, Elijah A. Allen, Jr., David W. Brown, Monty G. Calderon, David J. Caldwell, Walden V. Clarke, Awilda S. Colon, David Hagadorn, Zane G. Harvey, Jr., Jeffrey M. Keyser, Donnie A. Kildow, Carl M. McIntire, Daniel A. McNabb, David G. Meyers, Robert E. Moore, Thomas L. Oglesby, Michael J. Paul, Russell A. Payne, Rodgey M. Pegg, Raymond E. Peterson, Zbigniew P. Pietranik, John C. Rodriguez, James A. Walker, Richard A. Westfall, Charles E. Wood, and Joseph F. Wood.

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each renewal 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.

Start Signature

Issued on: February 5, 2009.

Larry W. Minor,

Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.

End Signature End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. E9-2954 Filed 2-11-09; 8:45 am]