Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2016-06-22 · Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT · Notices

Notices. Notice of denials

767 words·~3 min read·/register/2016/06/22/2016-14753

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0038] Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of denials. SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its denial of 78 applications from individuals who requested an exemption from the Federal diabetes standard applicable to interstate truck and bus drivers and the reasons for the denials.
FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals from the diabetes requirement if the exemptions granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these exemptions does not 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. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical Programs Division,
(202)366-4001, *fmcsamedical@dot.gov,* FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption from the Federal diabetes standard for a renewable 2-year period if it finds “such an exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such an exemption.” The procedures for requesting an exemption are set forth in 49 CFR part 381. Accordingly, FMCSA evaluated 78 individual exemption requests on their merits and made a determination that these applicants do not satisfy the criteria eligibility or meet the terms and conditions of the Federal exemption program. Each applicant has, prior to this notice, received a letter of final disposition on the exemption request. Those decision letters fully outlined the basis for the denial and constitute final Agency action. The list published in this notice summarizes the Agency's recent denials as required under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(4) by periodically publishing names and reasons for denial. The following applicant, Robert A. Pettella, withdrew his application from the application process. The following 12 applicants met the diabetes requirements of 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) and do not need an exemption: Reuben T. Askew Steven E. Eastburn Quinzell Faison James Griffin Bayram A. Kabakci John C. Lasbury James M. Moore Saul N. Morales Jaime S. Ortiz Curtis W. Stanley Eric A. Williams Allen T. Wooten The following 21 applicants were not operating CMVs in interstate commerce: Felipe H. Abrego Michael D. Adamson Daniel J. Arena, Jr. David R. Brooks, Jr. Roger L. Harper Gary T. Hedrick Raymond Honaker Shaun F. Hutchinson Sondra R. Jones Kevin M. Kurpiewski Randy Lamb James P. Moran Jesse L. Mumford Jason M. Palermo John J. Raley II Leonard F. Robinson Donald G. Ross, Jr. Tracy A. Rowland Rachelle M. Seaver Robert Taylor Robert Webb The following 3 applicants had renal insufficiency: Harold J. Bowen, Jr. Robert A. Rye John J. Steele The following 7 applicants had more than one hypoglycemic episode requiring hospitalization or the assistance of others, or had one such episode but not had one year of stability following the episode: Timothy W. Adams Robert A. Beaty Andrew S. Crawford Jesse J.D. Graber Ryan B. Silva Jimmy R. Toton Deborah C. Williams The following 9 applicants had other medical conditions making the applicant otherwise unqualified under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations: Nader M. Abdelrahman Richard G. Baker Patrick L. Beasley John T. Brecken Robert E. Davis Marlin L. Gabbard Marvin D. Mitchell David W. Presby Darrel J. Shafer The following applicant, Tina M.M. Kent, was unable to have an endocrinologist state the applicant is able to operate a CMV from a diabetes standpoint. The following applicant, Henry G.E. Martinez, currently resides in Puerto Rico. He is not eligible because a Federal exemption is for drivers operating only in the United States. The following 3 applicants did not meet the minimum age criteria outlined in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(1) which states that an individual must be at least 21 years old to operate a CMV in interstate commerce: Ervin L. Fulton, Jr. Henry G. McGinnis Samuel J. Opatz The following 19 applicants were excepted from the diabetes standard based on 49 CFR390.3(f): Brian K. Aldrich Christopher A. Ball John A. Bowman Wilbert A. Cummings, Jr. Larry W. Davlin Theodore J. Hargraves Erick B. Hobson Stanley Holiday, Jr. Mark J. Huselstein Wesley T. Johnson Robert R. Martinez Robert S. Mendoza Arbra M. Patton Vincent Randle Robert J. Stepien Franklin T. Sult Calvin R. Williams Melissa F. Williams Ronald D. Williams Issued on: June 13, 2016. Larry W. Minor, Associate Administrator for Policy. [FR Doc. 2016-14753 Filed 6-21-16; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 2
4 references not yet in our index
  • 49 CFR 381
  • 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)
  • 49 CFR 391.41(b)(1)
  • 49 CFR 390.3(f)
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of denials
Cite49 CFR 381
Cite49 CFR 391.41(b)(3)
Cite49 CFR 391.41(b)(1)
Cite49 CFR 390.3(f)
Cites 6Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.