Physical Qualification of Drivers; Vision Standard, 51001-51002 [05-17102]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 391
[Docket No. FHWA–97–2267 Formerly MC
96–4]
RIN 2126–AA05
Physical Qualification of Drivers;
Vision Standard
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM); withdrawal.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FMCSA (formerly the Federal
Highway Administration’s Office of
Motor Carriers) withdraws its 1992
advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) on the vision standard for
commercial motor vehicle drivers in
interstate commerce. The agency sought
comment on whether it should revise its
driver qualification requirements
relating to the vision standard,
including visual acuity, field of vision
and color perception. After reviewing
the public comments received in
response to the ANPRM, the agency
believes there is insufficient data to
support moving forward with a proposal
to change the vision standard at this
time. FMCSA has long term plans to
reevaluate all of its commercial driver
health standards and guidelines and
will review the current vision standard
at that time.
DATES: The ANPRM with request for
comments published on February 28,
1992, is withdrawn effective
immediately.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical
Qualifications Division (MC–PSP), (202)
366–4001, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office
hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) is authorized
by statute to establish minimum
qualification requirements for drivers of
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce. This authority was
originally granted to the Interstate
Commerce Commission (ICC) in the
Motor Carrier Act of 1935,1 and then
1 Motor
Carrier Act of 1935 (49 U.S.C. 31502(b)).
VerDate Aug<18>2005
13:16 Aug 26, 2005
Jkt 205001
transferred to the U.S. Department of
Transportation in 1966 when the
Department was created.2
In 1984,3 Congress further directed
the Secretary to establish minimum
safety standards to ensure ‘‘the physical
condition of operators of commercial
motor vehicles is adequate to enable
them to operate such vehicles safely
* * *.’’
In several of the congressional
committee reports for the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA),4
Congress expressly stated that while it
expected persons who wish to drive
CMVs to meet Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) minimum
physical qualification standards, it
expected FHWA to review its standards
in light of the ADA within 2 years of its
enactment.
Efforts To Reassess the Vision Standard
The agency has used considerable
resources in assessing its requirements
for driver vision. The principal agency
initiatives were the Ketron Panel (1991),
an ANPRM requesting comments on the
vision standard (1992), the FHWA
Vision Research Plan (1996), and the
Berson Panel (1997–98). Each is
discussed briefly below.
Ketron Panel. In the early 1990s,
FHWA began examining the
relationship between visual disorders
and the performance of CMV drivers. In
1991, FHWA retained Ketron, a division
of the Bionetics Corporation, to analyze
this issue. The study had four
objectives: (1) To assess the basis for the
current vision standard, (2) to define the
acceptable level of vision for CMV
drivers, (3) to recommend revised vision
tests if needed, and (4) to assess the risk
associated with establishing objective
measurements of visual acuity, field of
vision (FOV), and color perception.
The Ketron Panel recommended
clarifying the horizontal FOV standard
in § 391.41(b)(10). FOV refers to the
ability to see peripherally and measures
the ability to detect the presence of an
object or shape in the periphery without
moving the head or eyes.
Individuals tested for FOV focus on a
point directly in front of them. It could
be a spot on the wall. It is referred to
as the ‘‘point of fixation.’’ The
individual is directed not to move his or
her head or eyes at any time during the
test. An object is then presented at
several locations in the periphery, one
at a time, at irregular intervals, and at
2 Department of Transportation Act, Sec.
6(e)(6)(C), Pub. L. 89–670, 80 Stat. 931, at 939.
3 Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C.
31136(a)(3)).
4 Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)
(42 U.S.C. 12101, Pub. L. 101–336, 104 Stat. 327).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51001
varying angles, from the eye of the
individual. The individual signals the
examiner when he or she first detects
the object. The various points at which
the object is detected are noted, and
formal measurement is made in degrees.
Normal horizontal FOV in each eye is
60 degrees inward toward the nose, and
100 to 110 degrees outward toward the
ear, or a total of 160 to 170 degrees.
In a rule adopted in 1952, the ICC
required CMV drivers to have a
horizontal FOV of at least 140 degrees.5
Responsibility for motor carrier safety
activities, including establishment of
driver physical qualification standards,
was transferred to the FHWA in 1966.
In a 1970 final rule,6 FHWA changed
the horizontal FOV standard to 70
degrees in each eye. Other than a
general statement that the physical
qualification requirements for drivers
were being changed based upon
‘‘discussions with the Administration’s
medical advisors,’’ the 1970 final rule
provided no insight into why the agency
changed the FOV standard from 140
degrees in each eye, to 70 degrees in
each eye. The 1969 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) 7 did not mention a
proposed FOV standard change at all.
Ketron concluded the 1971
amendment to the vision standard had
misstated the appropriate minimum
horizontal FOV. Ketron recommended
the horizontal FOV be at least 120
degrees in each eye. However, the
Ketron Report included no data
indicating a driver with a horizontal
FOV less than 120 degrees in each eye
is at greater risk for CMV crash
involvement or a link between
diminished FOV and higher probability
of crash involvement.
Request for Comments on the Vision
Standard. On February 28, 1992, FHWA
published an ANPRM 8 requesting
comment on whether the vision
standard for drivers should be revised.
The agency believed a review of the
vision standard was appropriate in light
of medical, scientific, and technological
advances. The ANPRM also was in
response to enactment of the ADA. The
agency’s review of the vision standard
was part of the review of CMV driver
physical qualification standards
recommended in several congressional
committee reports accompanying the
ADA. The ANPRM asked 14 specific
questions on the vision standard,
5 49 CFR 191.2(b), 17 FR 4422, at 4425, May 15,
1952.
6 ‘‘Qualifications of Drivers of Commercial Motor
Vehicles,’’ 35 FR 6463, April 22, 1970, effective
January 1, 1971.
7 ‘‘Qualifications of Drivers,’’ 34 FR 9084, June 7,
1969.
8 ‘‘Qualifications of Drivers; Vision,’’ 57 FR 6793.
E:\FR\FM\29AUP1.SGM
29AUP1
51002
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 166 / Monday, August 29, 2005 / Proposed Rules
including whether the current 70-degree
horizontal FOV standard should remain.
Readers were advised medical experts
believe 120 degrees in each eye is the
appropriate standard and asked to
comment on the FOV standard,
specifically on the effect devices such as
mirrors might have on assisting persons
with restricted FOV.
There were approximately 100
comments to the ANPRM. The majority
of the commenters discussed concerns
about the proposed FHWA Federal
vision exemption program, as well as
key issues and research related to
monocular vision and visual acuity
testing.
A small group of commenters focused
specifically on field of vision. Three
commenters were physicians who
directly addressed discrepancies in the
FOV standards. Other commenters
included two State agencies, several
safety advocate organizations, the
American Trucking Associations and
the American Optometric Association.
This group of commenters focused on
the inadequacy of the FOV
measurement, but no commenter offered
data or relevant information to support
changing this standard.
FHWA Vision Research Plan. FHWA
initiated a program to develop a vision
research plan resulting in a complete
list of visual performance parameters
serving as the basis for a new CMV
driver vision standard. In 1995, Star
Mountain, Inc., under contract to the
agency, conducted a literature review on
this issue. FHWA also consulted with a
panel of medical and technical experts
to obtain their views on the design of
the research plan.
On June 5, 1996,9 FHWA requested
public comment on its proposed vision
research plan. On August 9, 1996, the
agency held a public hearing on the
subject in Chicago. FHWA evaluated the
oral testimony and written comments
and concluded the best course of action
was to postpone vision research. First,
it was generally agreed development of
predictive vision tests would require
substantial agency resources.
Furthermore, validation of the tests
could require using driving simulators,
whose scientific validity was highly
uncertain. FHWA also concluded it
would need a large number of drivers to
validate the new vision tests.
Berson Panel. In September 1997,
FHWA contracted with the Beth Israel
Deaconess Medical Center in Boston to
establish a panel of medical experts to
develop medically-based
recommendations for amending the
9 ‘‘Proposed
Research Plan on Vision Standard,’’
61 FR 28547, June 5, 1996.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
13:16 Aug 26, 2005
Jkt 205001
current vision standard. The agency
directed the panel to assess the FHWA
vision standard and to make
recommendations for changes, with
specific limits to the scope of the
panel’s work:
• Recommendations must ensure
drivers operating CMVs are physically
qualified.
• Recommendations must be
consistent with national policy
objectives expressed in the ADA and the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973,10 as
amended.
• Recommendations must be based
on the most current technology in visual
assessment.
• Recommendations should include
any screening protocols found reliable
for the examination of drivers.
• The panel must rely upon sound
medical judgment concerning the
demands placed on the eyes of drivers
as they operate CMVs on a daily basis.
The Berson Panel endorsed the Ketron
Panel recommendation to change the
horizontal FOV standard from 70
degrees in each eye to at least 120
degrees in each eye. The Berson experts
agreed the 70-degree FOV standard is
insufficient. They cited the unique
visual demands placed upon CMV
drivers while stopping, accelerating,
changing lanes, and responding to
signage. The Berson experts believed the
poor maneuverability of the typical
CMV and the potential for severe injury
and extensive property damage in a
CMV crash justify a more stringent
vision standard. Nevertheless, like the
Ketron Panel Report, the Berson Report
included no data indicating a driver
with a horizontal FOV less than 120
degrees in each eye is at greater risk for
CMV crash involvement or a link
between diminished FOV and higher
probability of crash involvement.
Withdrawal of Proposal
Although considerable resources have
been expended on assessing the vision
standard in general and the FOV
provision in particular, FMCSA believes
there are insufficient crash data to
support initiating an FOV rulemaking at
this time. It is clear 70 degrees
horizontal FOV represents only a
portion of the ‘‘normal’’ FOV for most
individuals. However, there are no data
concerning the relationship between a
specific horizontal FOV value(s) and
crash causation. There also are no data
available to help identify the minimum
horizontal FOV necessary to safely
operate a CMV. Therefore, FMCSA is
10 Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 93–112, 87
Stat. 355, September 26, 1973) (29 U.S.C. 681 et
seq.).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
withdrawing its ANPRM dated February
28, 1992, on the vision standard for
CMV drivers.
FMCSA has a long-term plan of
reevaluating CMV driver health and
wellness issues, including physical
qualifications, medical advisory criteria,
and safety research and policy. The
agency plans to review the horizontal
FOV standard under that initiative.
Issued on: August 22, 2005.
Warren E. Hoemann,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–17102 Filed 8–26–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2005–21649]
RIN 2127–AI53
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Rearview Mirrors
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of termination of
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On September 5, 2000, AM
General Corporation submitted a
petition for rulemaking seeking to
amend the Federal motor vehicle safety
standard for rearview mirrors to permit
certain vehicles with a gross vehicle
weight rating (GVWR) of more than
4,536 kilograms (kg) (10,000 pounds) to
be equipped with passenger-side convex
mirrors. The standard currently requires
vehicles in that weight class to be
equipped with mirrors of unit
magnification in that location. The
agency granted the petition on May 23,
2001 and began to gather data to
evaluate the request, including
information obtained from a January 22,
2003 Request for Comments. Based on
analysis of the available data, NHTSA is
terminating this rulemaking proceeding,
because we have determined that
convex mirrors are not an adequate
substitute for mirrors of unit
magnification in terms of providing
safety benefits associated with allowing
the driver to better judge the distance
and speed of oncoming vehicles,
particularly during lane change
maneuvers.
Mr.
John Lee, Office of Crash Avoidance
Standards, NVS–123, National Highway
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\29AUP1.SGM
29AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 166 (Monday, August 29, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51001-51002]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17102]
[[Page 51001]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 391
[Docket No. FHWA-97-2267 Formerly MC 96-4]
RIN 2126-AA05
Physical Qualification of Drivers; Vision Standard
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM); withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA (formerly the Federal Highway Administration's Office of
Motor Carriers) withdraws its 1992 advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM) on the vision standard for commercial motor vehicle
drivers in interstate commerce. The agency sought comment on whether it
should revise its driver qualification requirements relating to the
vision standard, including visual acuity, field of vision and color
perception. After reviewing the public comments received in response to
the ANPRM, the agency believes there is insufficient data to support
moving forward with a proposal to change the vision standard at this
time. FMCSA has long term plans to reevaluate all of its commercial
driver health standards and guidelines and will review the current
vision standard at that time.
DATES: The ANPRM with request for comments published on February 28,
1992, is withdrawn effective immediately.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical
Qualifications Division (MC-PSP), (202) 366-4001, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office hours are from 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is
authorized by statute to establish minimum qualification requirements
for drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.
This authority was originally granted to the Interstate Commerce
Commission (ICC) in the Motor Carrier Act of 1935,\1\ and then
transferred to the U.S. Department of Transportation in 1966 when the
Department was created.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Motor Carrier Act of 1935 (49 U.S.C. 31502(b)).
\2\ Department of Transportation Act, Sec. 6(e)(6)(C), Pub. L.
89-670, 80 Stat. 931, at 939.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1984,\3\ Congress further directed the Secretary to establish
minimum safety standards to ensure ``the physical condition of
operators of commercial motor vehicles is adequate to enable them to
operate such vehicles safely * * *.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Motor Carrier Safety Act of 1984 (49 U.S.C. 31136(a)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In several of the congressional committee reports for the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA),\4\ Congress expressly stated that
while it expected persons who wish to drive CMVs to meet Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) minimum physical qualification standards,
it expected FHWA to review its standards in light of the ADA within 2
years of its enactment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) (42 U.S.C.
12101, Pub. L. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efforts To Reassess the Vision Standard
The agency has used considerable resources in assessing its
requirements for driver vision. The principal agency initiatives were
the Ketron Panel (1991), an ANPRM requesting comments on the vision
standard (1992), the FHWA Vision Research Plan (1996), and the Berson
Panel (1997-98). Each is discussed briefly below.
Ketron Panel. In the early 1990s, FHWA began examining the
relationship between visual disorders and the performance of CMV
drivers. In 1991, FHWA retained Ketron, a division of the Bionetics
Corporation, to analyze this issue. The study had four objectives: (1)
To assess the basis for the current vision standard, (2) to define the
acceptable level of vision for CMV drivers, (3) to recommend revised
vision tests if needed, and (4) to assess the risk associated with
establishing objective measurements of visual acuity, field of vision
(FOV), and color perception.
The Ketron Panel recommended clarifying the horizontal FOV standard
in Sec. 391.41(b)(10). FOV refers to the ability to see peripherally
and measures the ability to detect the presence of an object or shape
in the periphery without moving the head or eyes.
Individuals tested for FOV focus on a point directly in front of
them. It could be a spot on the wall. It is referred to as the ``point
of fixation.'' The individual is directed not to move his or her head
or eyes at any time during the test. An object is then presented at
several locations in the periphery, one at a time, at irregular
intervals, and at varying angles, from the eye of the individual. The
individual signals the examiner when he or she first detects the
object. The various points at which the object is detected are noted,
and formal measurement is made in degrees. Normal horizontal FOV in
each eye is 60 degrees inward toward the nose, and 100 to 110 degrees
outward toward the ear, or a total of 160 to 170 degrees.
In a rule adopted in 1952, the ICC required CMV drivers to have a
horizontal FOV of at least 140 degrees.\5\ Responsibility for motor
carrier safety activities, including establishment of driver physical
qualification standards, was transferred to the FHWA in 1966. In a 1970
final rule,\6\ FHWA changed the horizontal FOV standard to 70 degrees
in each eye. Other than a general statement that the physical
qualification requirements for drivers were being changed based upon
``discussions with the Administration's medical advisors,'' the 1970
final rule provided no insight into why the agency changed the FOV
standard from 140 degrees in each eye, to 70 degrees in each eye. The
1969 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) \7\ did not mention a
proposed FOV standard change at all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 49 CFR 191.2(b), 17 FR 4422, at 4425, May 15, 1952.
\6\ ``Qualifications of Drivers of Commercial Motor Vehicles,''
35 FR 6463, April 22, 1970, effective January 1, 1971.
\7\ ``Qualifications of Drivers,'' 34 FR 9084, June 7, 1969.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ketron concluded the 1971 amendment to the vision standard had
misstated the appropriate minimum horizontal FOV. Ketron recommended
the horizontal FOV be at least 120 degrees in each eye. However, the
Ketron Report included no data indicating a driver with a horizontal
FOV less than 120 degrees in each eye is at greater risk for CMV crash
involvement or a link between diminished FOV and higher probability of
crash involvement.
Request for Comments on the Vision Standard. On February 28, 1992,
FHWA published an ANPRM \8\ requesting comment on whether the vision
standard for drivers should be revised. The agency believed a review of
the vision standard was appropriate in light of medical, scientific,
and technological advances. The ANPRM also was in response to enactment
of the ADA. The agency's review of the vision standard was part of the
review of CMV driver physical qualification standards recommended in
several congressional committee reports accompanying the ADA. The ANPRM
asked 14 specific questions on the vision standard,
[[Page 51002]]
including whether the current 70-degree horizontal FOV standard should
remain. Readers were advised medical experts believe 120 degrees in
each eye is the appropriate standard and asked to comment on the FOV
standard, specifically on the effect devices such as mirrors might have
on assisting persons with restricted FOV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Qualifications of Drivers; Vision,'' 57 FR 6793.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There were approximately 100 comments to the ANPRM. The majority of
the commenters discussed concerns about the proposed FHWA Federal
vision exemption program, as well as key issues and research related to
monocular vision and visual acuity testing.
A small group of commenters focused specifically on field of
vision. Three commenters were physicians who directly addressed
discrepancies in the FOV standards. Other commenters included two State
agencies, several safety advocate organizations, the American Trucking
Associations and the American Optometric Association. This group of
commenters focused on the inadequacy of the FOV measurement, but no
commenter offered data or relevant information to support changing this
standard.
FHWA Vision Research Plan. FHWA initiated a program to develop a
vision research plan resulting in a complete list of visual performance
parameters serving as the basis for a new CMV driver vision standard.
In 1995, Star Mountain, Inc., under contract to the agency, conducted a
literature review on this issue. FHWA also consulted with a panel of
medical and technical experts to obtain their views on the design of
the research plan.
On June 5, 1996,\9\ FHWA requested public comment on its proposed
vision research plan. On August 9, 1996, the agency held a public
hearing on the subject in Chicago. FHWA evaluated the oral testimony
and written comments and concluded the best course of action was to
postpone vision research. First, it was generally agreed development of
predictive vision tests would require substantial agency resources.
Furthermore, validation of the tests could require using driving
simulators, whose scientific validity was highly uncertain. FHWA also
concluded it would need a large number of drivers to validate the new
vision tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ ``Proposed Research Plan on Vision Standard,'' 61 FR 28547,
June 5, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Berson Panel. In September 1997, FHWA contracted with the Beth
Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston to establish a panel of
medical experts to develop medically-based recommendations for amending
the current vision standard. The agency directed the panel to assess
the FHWA vision standard and to make recommendations for changes, with
specific limits to the scope of the panel's work:
Recommendations must ensure drivers operating CMVs are
physically qualified.
Recommendations must be consistent with national policy
objectives expressed in the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,\10\
as amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 93-112, 87 Stat. 355,
September 26, 1973) (29 U.S.C. 681 et seq.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendations must be based on the most current
technology in visual assessment.
Recommendations should include any screening protocols
found reliable for the examination of drivers.
The panel must rely upon sound medical judgment concerning
the demands placed on the eyes of drivers as they operate CMVs on a
daily basis.
The Berson Panel endorsed the Ketron Panel recommendation to change
the horizontal FOV standard from 70 degrees in each eye to at least 120
degrees in each eye. The Berson experts agreed the 70-degree FOV
standard is insufficient. They cited the unique visual demands placed
upon CMV drivers while stopping, accelerating, changing lanes, and
responding to signage. The Berson experts believed the poor
maneuverability of the typical CMV and the potential for severe injury
and extensive property damage in a CMV crash justify a more stringent
vision standard. Nevertheless, like the Ketron Panel Report, the Berson
Report included no data indicating a driver with a horizontal FOV less
than 120 degrees in each eye is at greater risk for CMV crash
involvement or a link between diminished FOV and higher probability of
crash involvement.
Withdrawal of Proposal
Although considerable resources have been expended on assessing the
vision standard in general and the FOV provision in particular, FMCSA
believes there are insufficient crash data to support initiating an FOV
rulemaking at this time. It is clear 70 degrees horizontal FOV
represents only a portion of the ``normal'' FOV for most individuals.
However, there are no data concerning the relationship between a
specific horizontal FOV value(s) and crash causation. There also are no
data available to help identify the minimum horizontal FOV necessary to
safely operate a CMV. Therefore, FMCSA is withdrawing its ANPRM dated
February 28, 1992, on the vision standard for CMV drivers.
FMCSA has a long-term plan of reevaluating CMV driver health and
wellness issues, including physical qualifications, medical advisory
criteria, and safety research and policy. The agency plans to review
the horizontal FOV standard under that initiative.
Issued on: August 22, 2005.
Warren E. Hoemann,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05-17102 Filed 8-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P