Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 25831-25833 [E7-8637]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 87 / Monday, May 7, 2007 / Notices
Cultural Affairs, announces revisions to
the original RFGP announced in the
Federal Register on Thursday, April 19,
2007 (Federal Register Vol. 72, No. 75):
IV.3e.1. Applicants must provide a
detailed budget for administrative
expenses only. Administrative costs are
those costs that include applicant’s staff
salaries, benefits, telephone, fax,
printing, office supplies, etc. All
overhead costs associated with the
program (for supervision, financial
management, and other overhead
expenses) are to be included in the
proposal and should be controlled,
reduced, or shared. The costs of
support/central office in any parent
agency (whether covered through an
indirect costs’ rate or as a direct cost)
should be limited or cost shared to the
extent possible. Concrete plans to
streamline operations covered by
overhead and non-program staff
functions should be described in
proposal submissions. (See Budget
Guidelines in the PSI document.)
Additional Information
Interested organizations should
contact Michelle Lampher, Chief,
Community Resources Division, Office
of International Visitors, Bureau of
Educational and Cultural Affairs, U.S.
Department of State, ECA/PE/V/C SA–
44, Rm 247, 301 4th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20547, prior to
Tuesday, June 12, 2007.
Dated: May 1, 2007.
Dina Habib Powell,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and
Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State.
[FR Doc. E7–8684 Filed 5–4–07; 8:45 am]
will hold a series of informational
plenary sessions and subject-specific
committee breakout sessions, which
will be open to the public. On Tuesday,
May 22, 2007, the Commission will
meet from 1:45 p.m. until 4 p.m. to
discuss recommendations on the
meeting’s theme and other UNESCOrelated issues. Members of the public
who wish to attend any of these
meetings should contact the U.S.
National Commission for UNESCO no
later than Wednesday, May 16th for
further information about admission, as
seating is limited. Those who wish to
make oral comments during the public
comment section held during the
concluding session Tuesday afternoon
should request to be scheduled by
Wednesday, May 16th. Each individual
will be limited to five minutes, with the
total oral comment period not exceeding
thirty minutes. Written comments
should be submitted by Monday, May
14th to allow time for distribution to the
Commission members prior to the
meeting. The National Commission may
be contacted via e-mail at
DCUNESCO@state.gov, or via phone at
(202) 663–0026. Its Web site can be
accessed at: https://www.state.gov/p/io/
unesco/.
Dated: May 1, 2007.
Susanna Connaughton,
U.S. National Commission for UNESCO,
Department of State.
[FR Doc. E7–8687 Filed 5–4–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–19–P
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Federal Aviation Administration
[Public Notice 5760]
Availability of Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) (New), St. Marys
Airport, St. Marys, GA
U.S. National Commission for
UNESCO; Notice of Annual Meeting
The Annual Meeting of the
U.S. National Commission for the
United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
will take place on Monday, May 21,
2007 and Tuesday, May 22, 2007, at the
Marriott Georgetown University
Conference Hotel, Washington, DC
(3800 Reservoir Road, NW.). The theme
of this year’s Annual Meeting is
‘‘UNESCO as a Capacity Builder:
Pursuing its mandate through
Education, the Sciences, Culture, and
Communications.’’ On Monday, May 21
from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. and from 2:15
p.m. to 5 p.m. and on Tuesday, May 22
from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., the Commission
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:24 May 04, 2007
Jkt 211001
Federal Aviation
Administration, DOT.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Atlanta Airports
District Office on March 27, 2007,
issued a Finding of No Significant
Impact for proposed construction of a
replacement airport at St. Marys,
Georgia. Copies of the FONSI are
available for review by the public for
thirty (30) days at the following
location: Federal Aviation
Administration, Atlanta Airports
District Office, 1701 Columbia Ave.,
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25831
Campus Building 2–260, College Park,
Georgia 30337.
Scott Seritt,
Manager, Atlanta Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 07–2209 Filed 5–4–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2007–27333]
Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
Applications; Vision
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its
decision to exempt 21 individuals from
the vision requirement in the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). The exemptions will enable
these individuals to operate commercial
motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate
commerce without meeting the
prescribed vision standard. The Agency
has concluded that granting these
exemptions will provide a level of safety
that is equivalent to, or greater than, the
level of safety maintained without the
exemptions for these CMV drivers.
DATES: The exemptions are effective
May 7, 2007. The exemptions expire on
May 7, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical
Qualifications Division, (202) 366–4001,
fmcsamedical@dot.gov, 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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online
through the Document Management
System (DMS) at https://dmses.dot.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
dms.dot.gov and/or Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT’s dockets by
the name of the individual submitting
the comment (or of the person signing
the comment, if submitted on behalf of
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
07MYN1
25832
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 87 / Monday, May 7, 2007 / Notices
an association, business, labor union, or
other entity). You may review DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register (65 FR 19477, Apr. 11,
2000). This statement is also available at
https://dms.dot.gov.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Background
On March 16, 2007, FMCSA
published a notice of receipt of
exemption applications from certain
individuals, and requested comments
from the public (72 FR 12666). That
notice listed 21 applicants’ case
histories. The 21 individuals applied for
exemptions from the vision requirement
in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), for drivers who
operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315,
FMCSA may grant an exemption for a 2year 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.
Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the
21 applications on their merits and
made a determination to grant
exemptions to 21 of them. The comment
period closed on April 16, 2007.
Vision and Driving Experience of the
Applicants
The vision requirement in the
FMCSRs provides:
A person is physically qualified to
drive a commercial motor vehicle if that
person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye
without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40
(Snellen) or better with corrective
lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least
20/40 (Snellen) in both eyes with or
without corrective lenses, field of vision
of at least 70° in the horizontal meridian
in each eye, and the ability to recognize
the colors of traffic signals and devices
showing standard red, green, and amber
(49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)).
FMCSA recognizes that some drivers
do not meet the vision standard, but
have adapted their driving to
accommodate their vision limitation
and demonstrated their ability to drive
safely. The 21 exemption applicants
listed in this notice are in this category.
They are unable to meet the vision
standard in one eye for various reasons,
including amblyopia, macular scar,
retinal detachment, prosthesis, corneal
opacity, optic nerve injury,
histoplasmosis syndrome, choroidal
rupture and loss of vision due to
trauma. In most cases, their eye
conditions were not recently developed.
All but five of the applicants were either
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:36 May 04, 2007
Jkt 211001
born with their vision impairments or
have had them since childhood. The
five individuals who sustained their
vision conditions as adults have had
them for periods ranging from 6 to 36
years.
Although each applicant has one eye
which does not meet the vision standard
in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at
least 20/40 corrected vision in the other
eye, and in a doctor’s opinion, has
sufficient vision to perform all the tasks
necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors’
opinions are supported by the
applicants’ possession of valid
commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) or
non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before
issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to
knowledge and skills tests designed to
evaluate their qualifications to operate a
CMV. All these applicants satisfied the
testing standards for their State of
residence. By meeting State licensing
requirements, the applicants
demonstrated their ability to operate a
commercial vehicle, with their limited
vision, to the satisfaction of the State.
While possessing a valid CDL or nonCDL, these 21 drivers have been
authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate
commerce, even though their vision
disqualified them from driving in
interstate commerce. They have driven
CMVs with their limited vision for
careers ranging from 6 to 36 years. In the
past 3 years, two of the drivers have had
convictions for traffic violations and
none of them were involved in crashes.
The qualifications, experience, and
medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in
the March 16, 2007 notice (72 FR
12666).
Basis for Exemption Determination
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315,
FMCSA may grant an exemption from
the vision standard in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is likely
to achieve an equivalent or greater level
of safety than would be achieved
without the exemption. Without the
exemption, applicants will continue to
be restricted to intrastate driving. With
the exemption, applicants can drive in
interstate commerce. Thus, our analysis
focuses on whether an equal or greater
level of safety is likely to be achieved by
permitting each of these drivers to drive
in interstate commerce as opposed to
restricting him or her to driving in
intrastate commerce.
To evaluate the effect of these
exemptions on safety, FMCSA
considered not only the medical reports
about the applicants’ vision, but also
their driving records and experience
with the vision deficiency. To qualify
for an exemption from the vision
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
standard, FMCSA requires a person to
present verifiable evidence that he/she
has driven a commercial vehicle safely
with the vision deficiency for the past
3 years. Recent driving performance is
especially important in evaluating
future safety, according to several
research studies designed to correlate
past and future driving performance.
Results of these studies support the
principle that the best predictor of
future performance by a driver is his/her
past record of crashes and traffic
violations. Copies of the studies may be
found at docket number FMCSA–98–
3637.
We believe we can properly apply the
principle to monocular drivers, because
data from the Federal Highway
Administration’s (FHWA) former waiver
study program clearly demonstrate the
driving performance of experienced
monocular drivers in the program is
better than that of all CMV drivers
collectively. (See 61 FR 13338, 13345,
March 26, 1996). The fact that
experienced monocular drivers
demonstrated safe driving records in the
waiver program supports a conclusion
that other monocular drivers, meeting
the same qualifying conditions as those
required by the waiver program, are also
likely to have adapted to their vision
deficiency and will continue to operate
safely.
The first major research correlating
past and future performance was done
in England by Greenwood and Yule in
1920. Subsequent studies, building on
that model, concluded that crash rates
for the same individual exposed to
certain risks for two different time
periods vary only slightly. (See Bates
and Neyman, University of California
Publications in Statistics, April 1952.)
Other studies demonstrated theories of
predicting crash proneness from crash
history coupled with other factors.
These factors—such as age, sex,
geographic location, mileage driven and
conviction history—are used every day
by insurance companies and motor
vehicle bureaus to predict the
probability of an individual
experiencing future crashes. (See Weber,
Donald C., ‘‘Accident Rate Potential: An
Application of Multiple Regression
Analysis of a Poisson Process,’’ Journal
of American Statistical Association,
June 1971) A 1964 California Driver
Record Study prepared by the California
Department of Motor Vehicles
concluded that the best overall crash
predictor for both concurrent and
nonconcurrent events is the number of
single convictions. This study used 3
consecutive years of data, comparing the
experiences of drivers in the first 2 years
with their experiences in the final year.
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
07MYN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 87 / Monday, May 7, 2007 / Notices
Applying principles from these
studies to the past 3-year record of the
21 applicants, two of the applicants had
traffic violations for speeding. The
applicants achieved this record of safety
while driving with their vision
impairment, demonstrating the
likelihood that they have adapted their
driving skills to accommodate their
condition. As the applicants’ ample
driving histories with their vision
deficiencies are good predictors of
future performance, FMCSA concludes
their ability to drive safely can be
projected into the future.
We believe the applicants’ intrastate
driving experience and history provide
an adequate basis for predicting their
ability to drive safely in interstate
commerce. Intrastate driving, like
interstate operations, involves
substantial driving on highways on the
interstate system and on other roads
built to interstate standards. Moreover,
driving in congested urban areas
exposes the driver to more pedestrian
and vehicular traffic than exists on
interstate highways. Faster reaction to
traffic and traffic signals is generally
required because distances between
them are more compact. These
conditions tax visual capacity and
driver response just as intensely as
interstate driving conditions. The
veteran drivers in this proceeding have
operated CMVs safely under those
conditions for at least 3 years, most for
much longer. Their experience and
driving records lead us to believe that
each applicant is capable of operating in
interstate commerce as safely as he/she
has been performing in intrastate
commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds
that exempting these applicants from
the vision standard in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level
of safety equal to that existing without
the exemption. For this reason, the
Agency is granting the exemptions for
the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to 21 of the
applicants listed in the notice of March
16, 2007 (72 FR 12666).
We recognize that the vision of an
applicant may change and affect his/her
ability to operate a CMV as safely as in
the past. As a condition of the
exemption, therefore, FMCSA will
impose requirements on the 21
individuals consistent with the
grandfathering provisions applied to
drivers who participated in the
Agency’s vision waiver program.
Those requirements are found at 49
CFR 391.64(b) and include the
following: (1) That each individual be
physically examined every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who
attests that the vision in the better eye
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:36 May 04, 2007
Jkt 211001
continues to meet the standard in 49
CFR 391.41(b)(10), and (b) by a medical
examiner who attests that the individual
is otherwise physically qualified under
49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provide a copy of the ophthalmologist’s
or optometrist’s report to the medical
examiner at the time of the annual
medical examination; and (3) that each
individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for
retention in the driver’s qualification
file, or keep a copy in his/her driver’s
qualification file if he/she is selfemployed. The driver must also have a
copy of the certification when driving,
for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement
official.
Discussion of Comments
FMCSA received no comments in this
proceeding.
Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 21
exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts Rex A. Botsford, Robert A.
Casson, Gregory L. Cooper, Kenneth D.
Craig, Thomas H. Davenport, Sr.,
Christopher A. Deadman, Heather M.B.
Gordon, William K. Gullett, George
Harris, Kenneth C. Keil, Robert K.
Kimbel, Melvin A. Kleman, Roosevelt
Lawson, Jr., David H. Luckadoo,
Emanuel N. Malone, Robert E. Martinez,
Richard W. Mullenix, Steven A. Proctor,
George K. Sizemore, Robert N. Taylor,
and Manuel A. Vargas from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
subject to the requirements cited above
(49 CFR 391.64(b)).
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, each 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.
If the exemption is still effective at the
end of the 2-year period, the person may
apply to FMCSA for a renewal under
procedures in effect at that time.
Issued on: April 30, 2007.
Larry W. Minor,
Acting Associate Administrator, Policy and
Program Development.
[FR Doc. E7–8637 Filed 5–4–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25833
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA 2007–27111; Notice 2]
Baby Trend, Inc.; Grant of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential
Noncompliance
Baby Trend Inc. (Baby Trend) has
determined that certain infant car seats
that it produced in 2006 do not comply
with paragraph S5.6.1.7(i) of 49 CFR
571.213, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 213, Child
Restraint Systems. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30118(d) and 30120(h), Baby Trend has
petitioned for a determination that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and has filed an
appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR
part 573, Defect and Noncompliance
Responsibility and Reports. Notice of
receipt of a petition was published, with
a 30-day public comment period, on
February 16, 2007, in the Federal
Register (72 FR 7708). The National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) received no comments. To
view the petition and all supporting
documents, go to: https://dms.dot.gov/
search/searchFormSimple.cfm and enter
Docket No. NHTSA–2007–27111.
Affected are a total of approximately
30,450 infant car seats produced by
Baby Trend between June 21, 2006 and
November 30, 2006. Specifically,
paragraph S5.6.1.7(i) of FMVSS No. 213
addresses the use of the following
statement on child restraints:
For recall information, call the U.S.
Government’s Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1–
888–327–4236 (TTY: 1–800–424–9153), or go
to https://www.NHTSA.gov.
The infant car seats do not have the
markings most recently required by
paragraph S5.6.1.7. Baby Trend has
corrected the problem that caused these
errors so that they will not be repeated
in future production.
Baby Trend argued that the
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety and that no
corrective action is warranted. Baby
Trend stated that the child restraint
seats comply with the stringent dynamic
performance requirements of FMVSS
No. 213. Baby Trend also asserted that
no safety consequence exists for the
technical labeling non-compliance.
Further, they believe that given the
existing lag time, the use of the older
version of the information remains a
viable means for contacting the NHTSA.
Although telephone exchanges have
changed, NHTSA still forwards calls in
an integrated manner to provide
E:\FR\FM\07MYN1.SGM
07MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 87 (Monday, May 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25831-25833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8637]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2007-27333]
Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 21 individuals from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce without meeting
the prescribed vision standard. The Agency has concluded that granting
these exemptions will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these CMV drivers.
DATES: The exemptions are effective May 7, 2007. The exemptions expire
on May 7, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Chief, Physical
Qualifications Division, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov, 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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online through the Document Management
System (DMS) at https://dmses.dot.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://dms.dot.gov and/or Room PL-401 on the
plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT's dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of
[[Page 25832]]
an association, business, labor union, or other entity). You may review
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register (65 FR
19477, Apr. 11, 2000). This statement is also available at https://
dms.dot.gov.
Background
On March 16, 2007, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the
public (72 FR 12666). That notice listed 21 applicants' case histories.
The 21 individuals applied for exemptions from the vision requirement
in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), for drivers who operate CMVs in interstate
commerce.
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.
Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the 21 applications on their merits
and made a determination to grant exemptions to 21 of them. The comment
period closed on April 16, 2007.
Vision and Driving Experience of the Applicants
The vision requirement in the FMCSRs provides:
A person is physically qualified to drive a commercial motor
vehicle if that person has distant visual acuity of at least 20/40
(Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual acuity
separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with corrective
lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen) in both
eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at least
70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability to
recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing standard
red, green, and amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)).
FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision standard,
but have adapted their driving to accommodate their vision limitation
and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 21 exemption
applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They are unable
to meet the vision standard in one eye for various reasons, including
amblyopia, macular scar, retinal detachment, prosthesis, corneal
opacity, optic nerve injury, histoplasmosis syndrome, choroidal rupture
and loss of vision due to trauma. In most cases, their eye conditions
were not recently developed. All but five of the applicants were either
born with their vision impairments or have had them since childhood.
The five individuals who sustained their vision conditions as adults
have had them for periods ranging from 6 to 36 years.
Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision
standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected
vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient
vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors'
opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of valid
commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) or non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before
issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to knowledge and skills tests
designed to evaluate their qualifications to operate a CMV. All these
applicants satisfied the testing standards for their State of
residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the applicants
demonstrated their ability to operate a commercial vehicle, with their
limited vision, to the satisfaction of the State.
While possessing a valid CDL or non-CDL, these 21 drivers have been
authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate commerce, even though their
vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. They have
driven CMVs with their limited vision for careers ranging from 6 to 36
years. In the past 3 years, two of the drivers have had convictions for
traffic violations and none of them were involved in crashes.
The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the March 16, 2007
notice (72 FR 12666).
Basis for Exemption Determination
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the vision standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is
likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would
be achieved without the exemption. Without the exemption, applicants
will continue to be restricted to intrastate driving. With the
exemption, applicants can drive in interstate commerce. Thus, our
analysis focuses on whether an equal or greater level of safety is
likely to be achieved by permitting each of these drivers to drive in
interstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or her to driving in
intrastate commerce.
To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA
considered not only the medical reports about the applicants' vision,
but also their driving records and experience with the vision
deficiency. To qualify for an exemption from the vision standard, FMCSA
requires a person to present verifiable evidence that he/she has driven
a commercial vehicle safely with the vision deficiency for the past 3
years. Recent driving performance is especially important in evaluating
future safety, according to several research studies designed to
correlate past and future driving performance. Results of these studies
support the principle that the best predictor of future performance by
a driver is his/her past record of crashes and traffic violations.
Copies of the studies may be found at docket number FMCSA-98-3637.
We believe we can properly apply the principle to monocular
drivers, because data from the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA)
former waiver study program clearly demonstrate the driving performance
of experienced monocular drivers in the program is better than that of
all CMV drivers collectively. (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, March 26, 1996).
The fact that experienced monocular drivers demonstrated safe driving
records in the waiver program supports a conclusion that other
monocular drivers, meeting the same qualifying conditions as those
required by the waiver program, are also likely to have adapted to
their vision deficiency and will continue to operate safely.
The first major research correlating past and future performance
was done in England by Greenwood and Yule in 1920. Subsequent studies,
building on that model, concluded that crash rates for the same
individual exposed to certain risks for two different time periods vary
only slightly. (See Bates and Neyman, University of California
Publications in Statistics, April 1952.) Other studies demonstrated
theories of predicting crash proneness from crash history coupled with
other factors. These factors--such as age, sex, geographic location,
mileage driven and conviction history--are used every day by insurance
companies and motor vehicle bureaus to predict the probability of an
individual experiencing future crashes. (See Weber, Donald C.,
``Accident Rate Potential: An Application of Multiple Regression
Analysis of a Poisson Process,'' Journal of American Statistical
Association, June 1971) A 1964 California Driver Record Study prepared
by the California Department of Motor Vehicles concluded that the best
overall crash predictor for both concurrent and nonconcurrent events is
the number of single convictions. This study used 3 consecutive years
of data, comparing the experiences of drivers in the first 2 years with
their experiences in the final year.
[[Page 25833]]
Applying principles from these studies to the past 3-year record of
the 21 applicants, two of the applicants had traffic violations for
speeding. The applicants achieved this record of safety while driving
with their vision impairment, demonstrating the likelihood that they
have adapted their driving skills to accommodate their condition. As
the applicants' ample driving histories with their vision deficiencies
are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA concludes their
ability to drive safely can be projected into the future.
We believe the applicants' intrastate driving experience and
history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive
safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate
operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate
system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover,
driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian
and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster
reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because
distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual
capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving
conditions. The veteran drivers in this proceeding have operated CMVs
safely under those conditions for at least 3 years, most for much
longer. Their experience and driving records lead us to believe that
each applicant is capable of operating in interstate commerce as safely
as he/she has been performing in intrastate commerce. Consequently,
FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the vision standard in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to
that existing without the exemption. For this reason, the Agency is
granting the exemptions for the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to 21 of the applicants listed in the notice of
March 16, 2007 (72 FR 12666).
We recognize that the vision of an applicant may change and affect
his/her ability to operate a CMV as safely as in the past. As a
condition of the exemption, therefore, FMCSA will impose requirements
on the 21 individuals consistent with the grandfathering provisions
applied to drivers who participated in the Agency's vision waiver
program.
Those requirements are found at 49 CFR 391.64(b) and include the
following: (1) That each individual be physically examined every year
(a) by an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in
the better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file, or keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification
file if he/she is self-employed. The driver must also have a copy of
the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
Discussion of Comments
FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.
Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 21 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts Rex A. Botsford, Robert A. Casson, Gregory L. Cooper, Kenneth
D. Craig, Thomas H. Davenport, Sr., Christopher A. Deadman, Heather
M.B. Gordon, William K. Gullett, George Harris, Kenneth C. Keil, Robert
K. Kimbel, Melvin A. Kleman, Roosevelt Lawson, Jr., David H. Luckadoo,
Emanuel N. Malone, Robert E. Martinez, Richard W. Mullenix, Steven A.
Proctor, George K. Sizemore, Robert N. Taylor, and Manuel A. Vargas
from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), subject to the
requirements cited above (49 CFR 391.64(b)).
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each 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.
If the exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year
period, the person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in
effect at that time.
Issued on: April 30, 2007.
Larry W. Minor,
Acting Associate Administrator, Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E7-8637 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P