Medical and Physical Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant Mariner Credentials, 56600-56604 [E8-22724]
Download as PDF
56600
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Notices
membership or affiliation, biometric and
other information collected to issue
immigration cards evidencing receipt of
immigration benefits and to conduct
background checks and necessary to
determine the existence of criminal
history or other history necessary to
make immigration decisions. Records in
the system may also include case
processing information such as date
applications were filed or received by
USCIS, application/petition status,
location of record, FOIA/PA or other
control number when applicable, and
fee receipt data, and by application/
petition receipt number.
SAFEGUARDS:
Records in this system are
safeguarded in accordance with
applicable rules and policies, including
all applicable DHS automated system
security access policies. Strict controls
have been imposed to minimize the risk
of compromising the information that is
being stored. Access to the computer
system containing the records in this
system is limited to those individuals
who have a need to know the
information for the performance of their
official duties and who have appropriate
clearances or permissions. The system
maintains a real-time auditing function
of individuals who access the system.
Additional safeguards may vary by
component and program.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
RETENTION AND DISPOSAL:
Electronic benefits information is
archived and disposed of in accordance
with the criteria approved by NARA.
Electronic data pertaining to
applications for naturalization will be
deleted 15 years after the processing of
the benefit being sought is completed.
Information in the master file is
destroyed 15 years after the last
completed action with respect to the
application. System documentation
(e.g., manuals) are destroyed when the
system is superseded, obsolete, or no
longer needed for agency business.
Electronic records extracted from
immigrant and nonimmigrant benefits
applications and petitions other than
naturalization, asylum, or refugee status
completed by applicants or petitioners
is destroyed after the data is transferred
to the electronic master file and verified.
Information in the master file is
destroyed 15 years after the last
completed action with respect to the
application. Daily reports generated by
associated information technology
systems are maintained for 15 years by
the service center that generated the
reports and then destroyed.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2008
Jkt 214001
SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS:
EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM:
The system manager is the Director,
Office of Records Services, Department
of Homeland Security, 111
Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Second
Floor, Washington, DC 20529.
Individuals seeking notification of
and access to any record contained in
this system of records, or seeking to
contest its content, may submit a
request in writing to National Records
Center, FOIA/PA Office, P.O. Box
648010, Lee’s Summit, MO 64064–8010.
Specific FOIA contact information can
be found at https://www.dhs.gov/foia
under ‘‘Contacts.’’
When seeking records about yourself
from this system of records or any other
USCIS system of records, your request
must conform with the Privacy Act
regulations set forth in 6 CFR Part 5.
You must first verify your identity,
meaning that you must provide your full
name, current address and date and
place of birth. You must sign your
request, and your signature must either
be notarized or submitted under 28
U.S.C. 1746, a law that permits
statements to be made under penalty or
perjury as a substitute for notarization.
While no specific form is required, you
may obtain forms for this purpose from
the Director, Disclosure and FOIA,
https://www.dhs.gov or 1–866–431–0486.
In addition you should provide the
following:
• An explanation of why you believe
the Department would have information
on you,
• Specify when you believe the
records would have been created,
• If your request is seeking records
pertaining to another living individual,
you must include a statement from that
individual certifying his/her agreement
for you to access his/her records.
Without this bulleted information,
USCIS will not be able to conduct an
effective search, and your request may
be denied due to lack of specificity or
lack of compliance with applicable
regulations.
RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES:
See ‘‘Notification procedure’’ above.
CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES:
See ‘‘Notification procedure’’ above.
RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES:
Information contained in this system
of records is obtained from the
individuals covered by the system.
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Hugo Teufel III,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. E8–22802 Filed 9–26–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:
PO 00000
None.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
[USCG 2006–25080]
Medical and Physical Evaluation
Guidelines for Merchant Mariner
Credentials
ACTION:
Notice of availability.
SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is
to announce the availability of the final
version of a Navigation and Vessel
Inspection Circular. This NVIC contains
revised guidelines for evaluating the
physical and medical conditions of
applicants for merchant mariner’s
documents, licenses, certificates of
registry and STCW endorsements,
collectively referred to as
‘‘credential(s).’’
The new NVIC is numbered 04–08,
and it is entitled ‘‘Medical and Physical
Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant
Mariner Credentials.’’ It replaces NVIC
2–98, which is cancelled as of the
effective date of NVIC 04–08.
DATES: NVIC 04–08 is effective on
October 29, 2008.
ADDRESSES: NVIC 04–08 is available on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov, under this docket
number [USCG 2006–25080]. It is also
permanently available on the
HOMEPORT internet Web site at:
https://homeport.uscg.mil/mycg/portal/
ep/browse.do?channelId=-25023.
The Department of Transportation
Docket Management Facility maintains
the public docket for this notice. All
materials related to this NVIC are part
of this docket and are available for
inspection or copying at the Docket
Management Facility (M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Copies of the
docket may also be viewed on the
Internet at: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions on this notice or on NVIC 04–
08, e-mail or call Captain Matthew D.
Hall, MD, USPHS at the National
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Maritime Center, 304–433–3551, e-mail:
matthew.d.hall@uscg.mil.
For questions on viewing the docket,
contact Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, Office of
Information Services, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Administration,
Office of the Secretary, at M–30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 202–
366–9826; e-mail: renee.wright@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
September 26, 2006, the Coast Guard
published a notice announcing the
availability of, and seeking public
comment on, a draft Navigation and
Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) to
replace the existing NVIC 2–98,
‘‘Physical Evaluation Guidelines for
Merchant Mariner’s Documents and
Licenses.’’ See 71 FR 56998. The
contents of the draft NVIC (September
2006 draft NVIC) were developed from
recommendations and input provided
by the Merchant Marine Personnel
Advisory Committee (MERPAC), the
Towing Safety Advisory Committee
(TSAC), and experienced maritime
community medical practitioners. The
public comment period ended on
November 27, 2006.
The Coast Guard received comments
from 46 mariners, 15 shipping
companies, 6 pilots and pilot
organizations, 2 government agencies,
8 advocacy groups, and 4 maritime
unions.
The Coast Guard has made numerous
changes to the draft NVIC based upon
the public comments received, and
further input provided by MERPAC and
TSAC after the Notice of Availability for
the draft NVIC published in the Federal
Register. These changes have been
incorporated into NVIC 04–08, entitled
‘‘Medical and Physical Evaluation
Guidelines for Merchant Mariner
Credentials,’’ so as to create a guidance
document that is more viable and
responsive to the needs of the impacted
community.
Discussion of the Changes From the
Draft NVIC
We have revised the format of the
NVIC to make it easier to understand
and use, and we have added a direct
link to the National Maritime Center
(NMC) Medical Evaluations Web site on
HOMEPORT. This Web site contains
additional useful medical related
information for credential applicants,
such as recent articles and links to other
relevant information.
There are now six enclosures instead
of five to reflect a stand-alone enclosure
for medications, and we have added a
separate index and table of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2008
Jkt 214001
abbreviations for the medical conditions
in enclosure (3) for ease of reference. We
have also clarified, in the main body of
the NVIC as opposed to only discussing
it in the enclosures, that the guidance
contained in the NVIC applies to
applicants for original, renewal and
raise in grade credentials.
Enclosure (1)—Medical Certification
Standards
Minor changes were made to
enclosure (1) to clarify a few concerns
expressed in some comments. It was
clarified that mariners with short-term
conditions, such as a broken arm, have
numerous flexible options at their
disposal. They can request the
credential be issued if they want to
immediately deposit it with the Coast
Guard until such time as they are
healed. They may also choose not to
apply for the credential until their
condition has improved, or they may
renew the credential for continuity
purposes only until such time as their
condition improves. We also added a
warning in paragraph 10 of enclosure (1)
advising that, under 18 U.S.C. 1001,
criminal prosecution may result if false
information is submitted to the Coast
Guard with respect to the credential
application process, by either the
applicant or the medical practitioner
responsible for the exams, tests, and/or
physical demonstrations.
Finally, the information contained in
the paragraphs of enclosure (1) was
reorganized, at the recommendation of
MERPAC, to make the enclosure flow
more logically. Now, the first paragraph
discusses original credentials, the
second paragraph discusses renewals,
the third paragraph discusses raises in
grade, and the fourth and fifth
paragraphs discuss STCW endorsements
and certificates of registry, respectively.
Enclosure (2)—Physical Ability
Guidelines
There were numerous changes made
to this enclosure, starting with its title
being changed from ‘‘physical ability
standards’’ to ‘‘physical ability
guidelines’’ at the request of TSAC and
MERPAC. The physical ability
guidelines listed in the table of
enclosure (2) were significantly revised,
based largely on input provided by
TSAC. There were also three important
changes made to the introductory text of
the enclosure.
First, in response to multiple
comments from vessel owner/operators
expressing safety concerns related to
obesity, we stated that if the examining
medical practitioner doubts the
applicant’s ability to meet the
guidelines contained within this table,
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56601
and for all applicants with a Body Mass
Index (BMI) of 40.0 or higher, the
practitioner should require that the
applicant demonstrate the ability to
meet the guidelines. This does not
mean, for example, that the applicant
must actually don an exposure suit, pull
an uncharged 1.5 inch diameter 50′ fire
hose with nozzle to full extension, or lift
a charged 1.5 inch diameter fire hose to
fire fighting position. Rather, the
medical practitioner may utilize
alternative measures to satisfy himself
or herself that the applicant possesses
the ability to meet the guidelines in the
third column. If an individual is unable
to satisfactorily demonstrate the ability
to meet these guidelines, a credential
with appropriate limitations may be
issued by the Coast Guard.
Second, in response to comments
from the towing, offshore, and small
passenger vessel industries expressing
concern that the table (which is largely
based upon Regulation I/9 and Table
B–I/9–2 of the International Convention
on Standards of Training, Certification &
Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 as
(amended)) does not accurately reflect
operating conditions on many ‘‘smaller’’
vessels, we clarified that applicants who
cannot meet all of the physical ability
standards contained in the table may
propose suitable alternate standards that
are reflective of their particular
operating conditions. Such proposals
will be given consideration by the Coast
Guard on an individual case-by-case
basis.
No consideration is being given to
excluding broad classes of credential
applicants from the guidance contained
in the table, because for the most part,
credentials issued by the Coast Guard
are not vessel specific. They provide
authority to work on different types and
sizes of vessels, with each vessel having
its own equipment and operating
conditions.
Third, language was added to reflect
the Coast Guard’s understanding that all
medical practitioners may not have the
equipment necessary to test all of the
tasks as listed in the third column of the
table. In such cases, equivalent alternate
testing methodologies may be used.
Various changes were made to the
table itself to make compliance less
burdensome for applicants. For
example, the criterion listed in the third
column of the table for ‘‘participate in
firefighting activities’’ now states that
the applicant should be able to pull an
uncharged 1.5″ diameter, 50′ fire hose
with nozzle to full extension, and to lift
a charged 1.5″ diameter fire hose to fire
fighting position. This criterion
previously asked the applicant to
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
56602
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
handle a 2.5″ diameter fire hose for a
distance of 400′.
Enclosure (3)—Medical Conditions
Subject to Further Review
First, at the request of MERPAC and
TSAC, the title of enclosure (3) was
changed and now more clearly reflects
the Coast Guard’s intended use of the
information provided in enclosure (3). It
is now called ‘‘Medical Conditions
Subject to Further Review’’ instead of
‘‘Potentially Disqualifying Medical
Conditions.’’ We also added the word
‘‘recommended’’ in front of ‘‘evaluation
data’’ in the header of the table, so that
it now reads ‘‘recommended evaluation
data.’’ This change reflects the voluntary
nature of this guidance document.
Moreover, this enclosure, which is the
central component of the NVIC because
it lists the medical conditions subject to
further review, underwent substantial
revision. Technical comments were
received on specific medical conditions
and were presented to MERPAC for
review and recommendations. Many of
the comments were implemented into
this revision of the NVIC. Some of the
significant changes to enclosure (3) are
described below.
In the preface to enclosure (3), we
clarified that the term ‘‘history’’ means
a single previous diagnosis or treatment
of a medical condition, even once in the
applicant’s life, unless otherwise
specified in the table listing the medical
conditions. For example, condition
number 131 in the enclosure (3) table
states ‘‘history of invertebral disc
surgery within the last 5 years.’’ This
means that invertebral disc surgery six
years ago is not considered a medical
condition which needs to be reported
for review for purposes of this NVIC.
We also revised the discussion of
evaluation data in the preface to
enclosure (3). We clarified that all time
frames specified in the table are
measured from the date that the
application is received by the Coast
Guard. For example, if the table requires
a medical test that is no more than 90
days old, the test should have been
completed within the 90 days prior to
the date that the application for the
credential is received by the Coast
Guard.
We also noted that for most
conditions, the table does not contain a
specific time frame as to how old a
status report, evaluation report, or
consultation (of whatever type) may be.
For all active conditions, we added that
the status report, evaluation report or
consultation should have been
completed no more than 1 year prior to
the date the application is received by
the Coast Guard. For conditions which
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2008
Jkt 214001
are not active but for which the table
indicates that a ‘‘history of’’ the
condition should be reported, we added
that the appropriate time frame depends
on what is medically relevant given the
individual circumstances of the
applicant’s condition. Medical
providers may contact NMC, listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, if they have any question
about how recent a status report,
evaluation report, or consultation
should be.
For example, an applicant with an
acquired right bundle branch block
(listed as condition number 54 under
‘‘Heart’’ in the enclosure (3) table)
should submit a cardiology consultation
that is no more than a year old at the
time of application. An applicant with
a prior history of gastrointestinal
bleeding who is not currently suffering
from, or under current treatment or
observation for, the condition (listed as
condition number 96 under ‘‘Abdomen,
Viscera and Anus Conditions’’ in the
enclosure (3) table), may be able to
submit an internal medicine or
gastroenterology consultation that is
more than a year old if the report
confirms that the applicant is free of
symptoms and that the bleeding source
has healed. In such a case, there would
be no need for the applicant to undergo
another consultation just for purposes of
applying for a credential.
We also revised the respective
evaluation data associated with the
medical conditions to remove the word
‘‘current’’ that formerly preceded many
of status reports, evaluation reports or
consultations in the table. We
discovered that in some places, the
word ‘‘current’’ preceded the evaluation
data, while in others it did not. As
pointed out by MERPAC, this caused
confusion as to how old the evaluation
data may be because there is no
definition of the term ‘‘current’’ in the
NVIC.
We also clarified that medical
providers may contact the NMC to
discuss submitting acceptable alternate
evaluation data to demonstrate that the
applicant’s medical status is appropriate
for his/her duties and the limited scope
of the credential being sought.
Finally, we added a paragraph
explaining that the NMC may issue a
letter specifying the extent of the
evaluation data, if any, that should be
submitted to the Coast Guard for any
medical conditions that have been
previously reported to, and evaluated
by, the NMC. This means that an
individual who has properly reported a
medical condition, and provided the
requisite evaluation data regarding it,
may be excused from having to resubmit
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
evaluation data for that condition in the
future, but only if authorized by the
NMC.
With respect to the table of medical
conditions in enclosure (3), a number of
changes were made to reduce
unnecessary evaluations and clarify
ambiguous criteria. The former
condition number 111, pylonephrosis,
was consolidated with condition
number 110 and number 111 was
deleted from the table. The former
condition number 150, allergic
encephalomyelitis, was also deleted
from the table after it was determined,
at the recommendation of MERPAC, that
this condition was unnecessary.
A history of asthma symptoms was
modified to episodes requiring
emergency treatment in the past 2 years.
A history of head trauma was revised to
include only conditions within the last
10 years, and history of seizure disorder
was changed to exclude febrile seizures
prior to age 5. The criteria for asthma
was changed to include only clinically
significant moderate to severe asthma.
The supplemental evaluation
information needed for cardiac
conditions was clarified to include an
exercise stress test versus a
pharmacologic stress test. Mariners need
to demonstrate adequate
cardiopulmonary capacity to perform
safety duties such as fire fighting and
passenger evacuation. Pharmacologic
stress tests evaluate coronary artery
disease but do not provide information
on cardiopulmonary capacity.
The recommended evaluation data for
sarcoidosis, at the urging of certain
maritime labor unions, was restated to
be less extensive. The table now simply
asks for pertinent medical records,
pulmonology consultations, and names
and dosages of medications.
In recognition of the distinction
between substance or alcohol abuse and
substance or alcohol dependence,
conditions number 186 & 186a,
respectively, in the enclosure (3) table
were revised. Consistent with the
medical diagnoses of these conditions,
condition number 186 now covers
history of substance or alcohol abuse, as
defined in the current Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual (DSM), within the
last 5 years. Condition number 186a
now covers history of substance or
alcohol dependence, as defined in the
current DSM, within the last 10 years.
Reference to the Coast Guard standard
of ‘‘cure,’’ which applies when
credentials are subject to suspension
and revocation but not necessarily when
credentials are issued, has been deleted.
The evaluation data for these
conditions has been accordingly
changed to request only a current
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
evaluation report, including a
determination that the individual is safe
to return to work, from a DOT-qualified
substance abuse professional (SAP),
physician certified by the American
Society of Addiction Medicine, or any
other addiction specialist accepted by
the Coast Guard, and reports from the
rehabilitation clinic/center (if any).
Documentation of at least 90 days of
objectively measured and sustained
total abstinence is also recommended
evaluation data for dependence.
It was further modified that, for
applicants with a history of substance
abuse, if they are renewal and/or raise
in grade applicants who have been
subject to the dangerous drug testing
requirements in 46 CFR Part 16 for at
least 3 years, and if they have no
verified non-negative drug test results
for the entire time that they have held
the credential being renewed and/or
raised in grade, they need not submit
any evaluation data for substance abuse.
Likewise, for applicants with a history
of substance dependence, if they are
renewal and/or raise in grade applicants
who have been subject to the dangerous
drug testing requirements in 46 CFR
part 16 for at least 5 years, and if they
have no verified non-negative drug test
results for the entire time that they have
held the credential being renewed and/
or raised in grade, they need not submit
any evaluation data for substance
dependence.
This exception does not apply to
alcohol abuse or dependence because
there are no random, pre-employment,
or periodic testing requirements for
alcohol in 46 CFR Part 16 or 33 CFR part
95.
Enclosure (4)—Medications
The newly renumbered enclosure (4)
contains information about illegal
substances and intoxicants, and a nonexhaustive list of potentially
disqualifying medications that may be
subject to further medical review in
accordance with enclosure (6). This
information was a subset of the larger
enclosure (3) in the September 2006
draft NVIC, but the Coast Guard agrees
with the public comments and MERPAC
input that there should be a separate
enclosure dedicated to medications.
The information was also reorganized
to make it a more useful reference. A
definitions section has been added to
the enclosure, and a new prohibitions
section dealing with illegal substances
and intoxicants has been included.
It was clarified that applicants, who
complete a general medical exam,
should report all prescription
medications prescribed, filled or refilled
and/or taken, and all non-prescription
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2008
Jkt 214001
(over-the-counter) medications,
including dietary supplements and
vitamins, within 30 days prior to the
date that they sign the CG–719K or
approved equivalent form. The
September 2006 draft NVIC stated that
applicants should report all prescription
and over-the-counter medications ‘‘at
the time of application,’’ but the new
language is much more precise in
specifying what should be reported.
The non-exhaustive list of
prescription and over-the-counter
medications that may be subject to
further medical review was also revised,
primarily to eliminate redundancies in
the medications listed and to adjust the
allowable time frames for usage of some
of the medications.
The use of motion sickness
medications was also addressed to allow
their use in accordance with directions.
The use of anti-depressants for use in
smoking cessation and other off-label
indications was also allowed.
The Coast Guard understands the
complexities associated with over-thecounter (OTC) medications and has
revised the NVIC to strike a balance
between the medical needs of mariners
and public safety in response to
comments. The Coast Guard intends to
publish a guide for mariners on the use
of OTC medications.
Enclosure (5)—Vision & Hearing
Standards
The newly renumbered enclosure (5),
which was previously enclosure (4) in
the September 2006 draft NVIC,
contains the same, unrevised vision
standards from NVIC 2–98, but notes
that the Coast Guard has proposed
revising its vision standards in an
ongoing rulemaking. The proposed
vision standards would require
applicants to meet vision acuity
standards in one eye only rather than
both eyes under the current rule. See 72
FR 3605, 3656 (Jan. 2007) (proposed 46
CFR 10.215(b)). The proposed vision
standards would become the new
visions standards for NVIC 04–08 if the
proposed rule becomes an effective,
final rule.
Color vision testing standards have
also been clarified, with reference to the
specific acceptable tests: 14 plate
(which replaces the obsolete 16 plate),
24 plate, or 38 plate Ishihara plates
tests, Farnsworth Lantern, or an
alternative test approved by the NMC.
We have also added an express
reference to the 46 CFR 10.205(d)(2)
prohibition on using color sensing
lenses to assist applicants with passing
the color vision test.
Finally, audiometer test hearing
standards were adjusted from 20
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56603
decibels or less in each ear (unaided) to
30 decibels or less in the best ear
(unaided). This allows for monaural
hearing, provided the applicant has an
unaided threshold of 30 decibels
(unaided) in the ear. Applicants who are
unable to meet the standards of the
audiometer test, but who can pass the
functional speech discrimination test,
may be eligible for a waiver.
Enclosure (6)—Medical Review Process
Important changes were made to the
newly renumbered enclosure (6), which
was previously enclosure (5) in the
September 2006 draft NVIC, in response
to various public comments and
MERPAC and TSAC input. Paragraph 2
of this enclosure was revised to clarify
that a waiver may be granted in all
cases, not necessarily limited to
situations ‘‘for a mariner with a
borderline condition.’’ Language was
added at the end of paragraph 5.f. to
expressly state that recommendations
from private employers (and
government agencies) made on behalf of
applicants will be given full
consideration by the NMC when
considering a waiver.
Paragraph 7 was revised to clearly
state that the NMC will review all
information provided and make an
appropriate determination as to one of
the following outcomes: (a) Applicant is
physically and medically qualified
without any limitations, waivers and/or
other conditions for issuance of the
credential, (b) applicant is physically
and medically qualified with limitations
and/or other conditions for issuance of
the credential, (c) applicant is not
physically or medically qualified, but a
credential may be issued with
appropriate limitations, waivers and/or
other conditions for issuance, (d)
additional information is necessary to
determine if applicant is physically
and/or medically qualified, or (e)
applicant is not physically and/or
medically qualified.
Paragraph 8 was revised to clarify that
the NMC will inform the applicant of
the results of their waiver review. The
appellate rights of applicants, who are
affected by a waiver determination, are
now fully explained in this paragraph as
well. Likewise, in paragraph 9, the
appellate rights of applicants who
disagree with any conditions placed on
their waivers are fully explained.
A new paragraph 10 was added to this
enclosure to state that the NMC will, on
a case-by-case basis, consider individual
proposals from applicants (and their
employers) for credentials to be issued
with appropriate limitations, waivers,
and/or other conditions in order to
address concerns associated with
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
56604
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 189 / Monday, September 29, 2008 / Notices
medical conditions (enclosure (3)) or the
inability to meet the physical ability
standards (enclosure (2)). This was
added to articulate the Coast Guard’s
flexibility and willingness to consider
the unique needs and work
environments of individual mariners
who are otherwise unable to meet the
medical and/or physical standards
specified in the NVIC.
Finally, at the request of both
MERPAC and TSAC, a new paragraph
11 was added to this enclosure
authorizing—but not requiring—the
Coast Guard to designate certain
medical practitioners as ‘‘trusted
agents’’ to perform physical
examinations on mariners. Physical
examinations conducted by these
designated trusted agents and/or their
recommendations may be given more
weight by the Coast Guard. The Coast
Guard would specify the criteria for
designation as a trusted agent if/when
the Coast Guard initiates this program.
It is not anticipated that the NVIC will
result in significantly higher rates of
disqualification for mariners, nor in
increased processing time for credential
applications with physical and/or
medical issues. To the contrary, the
Coast Guard expects the process to be
more consistent and less subjective, and
that the application processing time will
be reduced because all parties will
know precisely what information is
needed at the outset of the application
process.
The Coast Guard did receive some
comments that the NVIC may increase
costs. Based on consultation with
medical practitioners and MERPAC, we
determined exams and documentation
addressed by the NVIC are commonly
required by current medical practice
and will not represent a significant
additional cost to the individual. The
NVIC guidelines apply if the applicant
has an underlying medical condition.
The majority of medical evaluations and
tests specified in the NVIC will be
provided by the mariner’s primary care
provider or specialist as part of standard
care.
Potential benefits associated with
adoption of this NVIC include decreased
credential application processing time
and clearer medical and physical
guidelines for merchant mariners. We
also anticipate that public safety will
improve as result of this NVIC, since
mariners and the medical community
would be aware of complete policy
guidance that is consistent with current
industry health care practice when
evaluating medical conditions.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:48 Sep 26, 2008
Jkt 214001
Dated: September 17, 2008.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations &
Standards.
[FR Doc. E8–22724 Filed 9–26–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Landmarks Committee of the National
Park System Advisory Board Meeting
National Park Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given in
accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act [5 U.S.C. Appendix
(1988)], that a meeting of the Landmarks
Committee of the National Park System
Advisory Board will be held beginning
at 1 p.m. on October 28, 2008 at the
following location. The meeting will
continue beginning at 9 a.m. on October
29.
DATES: October 28–29, 2008.
Location: The 2nd Floor Board Room
of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation, 1785 Massachusetts
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20036.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia Henry, National Historic
Landmarks Program, National Park
Service, 1849 C Street, NW. (2280),
Washington, DC 20240; Telephone (202)
354–2216; e-mail Patty_Henry@nps.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
purpose of the meeting of the
Landmarks Committee of the National
Park System Advisory Board is to
evaluate nominations of historic
properties in order to advise the
National Park System Advisory Board of
the qualifications of each property being
proposed for National Historic
Landmark (NHL) designation, and to
make recommendations regarding the
possible designation of those properties
as National Historic Landmarks to the
National Park System Advisory Board at
its subsequent meeting at a place and
time to be determined. The Committee
also makes recommendations to the
National Park System Advisory Board
regarding amendments to existing
designations and proposals for
withdrawal of designation.
The members of the Landmarks
Committee are:
Dr. Larry E. Rivers, Chair,
Dr. James M. Allan,
Dr. Cary Carson,
Ms. Mary Werner DeNadai, FAIA,
Dr. Alferdteen Brown Harrison,
Mr. E. L. Roy Hunt, J.D.,
Mr. Ronald James,
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dr. William J. Murtagh,
Dr. William D. Seale,
Dr. Jo Anne Van Tilburg.
The meeting will be open to the
public. Pursuant to 36 CFR part 65, any
member of the public may file, for
consideration by the National Park
System Advisory Board, written
comments concerning the National
Historic Landmarks nominations,
amendments to existing designations, or
proposals for withdrawal of designation.
Comments should be submitted to
J. Paul Loether, Chief, National Register
of Historic Places and National Historic
Landmarks Program, National Park
Service, 1849 C Street, NW. (2280),
Washington, DC 20240; E-mail
Paul_Loether@nps.gov.
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
The National Park System Advisory
Board and Its Landmarks Committee
may consider the following
nominations:
Nominations
Arizona
• Sage Memorial Hospital School of
Nursing, Ganado Mission, Ganado, AZ
California
• Steedman Estate/Casa del Herrero,
Santa Barbara County, CA
Colorado
• Ludlow Tent Colony Site, Las
Animas County, CO
Connecticut
• Richard Alsop IV House,
Middletown, CT
Florida
• The Miami Circle at Brickell Point
Site, Miami, FL
Illinois
• New Philadelphia Town Site, Pike
County, IL
Minnesota
• Christ Church Lutheran,
Minneapolis, MN
Pennsylvania
• Alfred Newton Richards Medical
Research Laboratories and David
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 189 (Monday, September 29, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56600-56604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22724]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard
[USCG 2006-25080]
Medical and Physical Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant Mariner
Credentials
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to announce the availability of
the final version of a Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular. This
NVIC contains revised guidelines for evaluating the physical and
medical conditions of applicants for merchant mariner's documents,
licenses, certificates of registry and STCW endorsements, collectively
referred to as ``credential(s).''
The new NVIC is numbered 04-08, and it is entitled ``Medical and
Physical Evaluation Guidelines for Merchant Mariner Credentials.'' It
replaces NVIC 2-98, which is cancelled as of the effective date of NVIC
04-08.
DATES: NVIC 04-08 is effective on October 29, 2008.
ADDRESSES: NVIC 04-08 is available on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov, under this docket number [USCG 2006-25080]. It is
also permanently available on the HOMEPORT internet Web site at: http:/
/homeport.uscg.mil/mycg/portal/ep/browse.do?channelId=-25023.
The Department of Transportation Docket Management Facility
maintains the public docket for this notice. All materials related to
this NVIC are part of this docket and are available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Copies of the docket
may also be viewed on the Internet at: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on this notice or on
NVIC 04-08, e-mail or call Captain Matthew D. Hall, MD, USPHS at the
National
[[Page 56601]]
Maritime Center, 304-433-3551, e-mail: matthew.d.hall@uscg.mil.
For questions on viewing the docket, contact Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, Office of Information Services,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration, Office of the
Secretary, at M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 202-366-9826; e-
mail: renee.wright@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 26, 2006, the Coast Guard
published a notice announcing the availability of, and seeking public
comment on, a draft Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) to
replace the existing NVIC 2-98, ``Physical Evaluation Guidelines for
Merchant Mariner's Documents and Licenses.'' See 71 FR 56998. The
contents of the draft NVIC (September 2006 draft NVIC) were developed
from recommendations and input provided by the Merchant Marine
Personnel Advisory Committee (MERPAC), the Towing Safety Advisory
Committee (TSAC), and experienced maritime community medical
practitioners. The public comment period ended on November 27, 2006.
The Coast Guard received comments from 46 mariners, 15 shipping
companies, 6 pilots and pilot organizations, 2 government agencies, 8
advocacy groups, and 4 maritime unions.
The Coast Guard has made numerous changes to the draft NVIC based
upon the public comments received, and further input provided by MERPAC
and TSAC after the Notice of Availability for the draft NVIC published
in the Federal Register. These changes have been incorporated into NVIC
04-08, entitled ``Medical and Physical Evaluation Guidelines for
Merchant Mariner Credentials,'' so as to create a guidance document
that is more viable and responsive to the needs of the impacted
community.
Discussion of the Changes From the Draft NVIC
We have revised the format of the NVIC to make it easier to
understand and use, and we have added a direct link to the National
Maritime Center (NMC) Medical Evaluations Web site on HOMEPORT. This
Web site contains additional useful medical related information for
credential applicants, such as recent articles and links to other
relevant information.
There are now six enclosures instead of five to reflect a stand-
alone enclosure for medications, and we have added a separate index and
table of abbreviations for the medical conditions in enclosure (3) for
ease of reference. We have also clarified, in the main body of the NVIC
as opposed to only discussing it in the enclosures, that the guidance
contained in the NVIC applies to applicants for original, renewal and
raise in grade credentials.
Enclosure (1)--Medical Certification Standards
Minor changes were made to enclosure (1) to clarify a few concerns
expressed in some comments. It was clarified that mariners with short-
term conditions, such as a broken arm, have numerous flexible options
at their disposal. They can request the credential be issued if they
want to immediately deposit it with the Coast Guard until such time as
they are healed. They may also choose not to apply for the credential
until their condition has improved, or they may renew the credential
for continuity purposes only until such time as their condition
improves. We also added a warning in paragraph 10 of enclosure (1)
advising that, under 18 U.S.C. 1001, criminal prosecution may result if
false information is submitted to the Coast Guard with respect to the
credential application process, by either the applicant or the medical
practitioner responsible for the exams, tests, and/or physical
demonstrations.
Finally, the information contained in the paragraphs of enclosure
(1) was reorganized, at the recommendation of MERPAC, to make the
enclosure flow more logically. Now, the first paragraph discusses
original credentials, the second paragraph discusses renewals, the
third paragraph discusses raises in grade, and the fourth and fifth
paragraphs discuss STCW endorsements and certificates of registry,
respectively.
Enclosure (2)--Physical Ability Guidelines
There were numerous changes made to this enclosure, starting with
its title being changed from ``physical ability standards'' to
``physical ability guidelines'' at the request of TSAC and MERPAC. The
physical ability guidelines listed in the table of enclosure (2) were
significantly revised, based largely on input provided by TSAC. There
were also three important changes made to the introductory text of the
enclosure.
First, in response to multiple comments from vessel owner/operators
expressing safety concerns related to obesity, we stated that if the
examining medical practitioner doubts the applicant's ability to meet
the guidelines contained within this table, and for all applicants with
a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 40.0 or higher, the practitioner should
require that the applicant demonstrate the ability to meet the
guidelines. This does not mean, for example, that the applicant must
actually don an exposure suit, pull an uncharged 1.5 inch diameter 50'
fire hose with nozzle to full extension, or lift a charged 1.5 inch
diameter fire hose to fire fighting position. Rather, the medical
practitioner may utilize alternative measures to satisfy himself or
herself that the applicant possesses the ability to meet the guidelines
in the third column. If an individual is unable to satisfactorily
demonstrate the ability to meet these guidelines, a credential with
appropriate limitations may be issued by the Coast Guard.
Second, in response to comments from the towing, offshore, and
small passenger vessel industries expressing concern that the table
(which is largely based upon Regulation I/9 and Table B-I/9-2 of the
International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification &
Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 as (amended)) does not accurately
reflect operating conditions on many ``smaller'' vessels, we clarified
that applicants who cannot meet all of the physical ability standards
contained in the table may propose suitable alternate standards that
are reflective of their particular operating conditions. Such proposals
will be given consideration by the Coast Guard on an individual case-
by-case basis.
No consideration is being given to excluding broad classes of
credential applicants from the guidance contained in the table, because
for the most part, credentials issued by the Coast Guard are not vessel
specific. They provide authority to work on different types and sizes
of vessels, with each vessel having its own equipment and operating
conditions.
Third, language was added to reflect the Coast Guard's
understanding that all medical practitioners may not have the equipment
necessary to test all of the tasks as listed in the third column of the
table. In such cases, equivalent alternate testing methodologies may be
used.
Various changes were made to the table itself to make compliance
less burdensome for applicants. For example, the criterion listed in
the third column of the table for ``participate in firefighting
activities'' now states that the applicant should be able to pull an
uncharged 1.5'' diameter, 50' fire hose with nozzle to full extension,
and to lift a charged 1.5'' diameter fire hose to fire fighting
position. This criterion previously asked the applicant to
[[Page 56602]]
handle a 2.5'' diameter fire hose for a distance of 400'.
Enclosure (3)--Medical Conditions Subject to Further Review
First, at the request of MERPAC and TSAC, the title of enclosure
(3) was changed and now more clearly reflects the Coast Guard's
intended use of the information provided in enclosure (3). It is now
called ``Medical Conditions Subject to Further Review'' instead of
``Potentially Disqualifying Medical Conditions.'' We also added the
word ``recommended'' in front of ``evaluation data'' in the header of
the table, so that it now reads ``recommended evaluation data.'' This
change reflects the voluntary nature of this guidance document.
Moreover, this enclosure, which is the central component of the
NVIC because it lists the medical conditions subject to further review,
underwent substantial revision. Technical comments were received on
specific medical conditions and were presented to MERPAC for review and
recommendations. Many of the comments were implemented into this
revision of the NVIC. Some of the significant changes to enclosure (3)
are described below.
In the preface to enclosure (3), we clarified that the term
``history'' means a single previous diagnosis or treatment of a medical
condition, even once in the applicant's life, unless otherwise
specified in the table listing the medical conditions. For example,
condition number 131 in the enclosure (3) table states ``history of
invertebral disc surgery within the last 5 years.'' This means that
invertebral disc surgery six years ago is not considered a medical
condition which needs to be reported for review for purposes of this
NVIC.
We also revised the discussion of evaluation data in the preface to
enclosure (3). We clarified that all time frames specified in the table
are measured from the date that the application is received by the
Coast Guard. For example, if the table requires a medical test that is
no more than 90 days old, the test should have been completed within
the 90 days prior to the date that the application for the credential
is received by the Coast Guard.
We also noted that for most conditions, the table does not contain
a specific time frame as to how old a status report, evaluation report,
or consultation (of whatever type) may be. For all active conditions,
we added that the status report, evaluation report or consultation
should have been completed no more than 1 year prior to the date the
application is received by the Coast Guard. For conditions which are
not active but for which the table indicates that a ``history of'' the
condition should be reported, we added that the appropriate time frame
depends on what is medically relevant given the individual
circumstances of the applicant's condition. Medical providers may
contact NMC, listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, if they have
any question about how recent a status report, evaluation report, or
consultation should be.
For example, an applicant with an acquired right bundle branch
block (listed as condition number 54 under ``Heart'' in the enclosure
(3) table) should submit a cardiology consultation that is no more than
a year old at the time of application. An applicant with a prior
history of gastrointestinal bleeding who is not currently suffering
from, or under current treatment or observation for, the condition
(listed as condition number 96 under ``Abdomen, Viscera and Anus
Conditions'' in the enclosure (3) table), may be able to submit an
internal medicine or gastroenterology consultation that is more than a
year old if the report confirms that the applicant is free of symptoms
and that the bleeding source has healed. In such a case, there would be
no need for the applicant to undergo another consultation just for
purposes of applying for a credential.
We also revised the respective evaluation data associated with the
medical conditions to remove the word ``current'' that formerly
preceded many of status reports, evaluation reports or consultations in
the table. We discovered that in some places, the word ``current''
preceded the evaluation data, while in others it did not. As pointed
out by MERPAC, this caused confusion as to how old the evaluation data
may be because there is no definition of the term ``current'' in the
NVIC.
We also clarified that medical providers may contact the NMC to
discuss submitting acceptable alternate evaluation data to demonstrate
that the applicant's medical status is appropriate for his/her duties
and the limited scope of the credential being sought.
Finally, we added a paragraph explaining that the NMC may issue a
letter specifying the extent of the evaluation data, if any, that
should be submitted to the Coast Guard for any medical conditions that
have been previously reported to, and evaluated by, the NMC. This means
that an individual who has properly reported a medical condition, and
provided the requisite evaluation data regarding it, may be excused
from having to resubmit evaluation data for that condition in the
future, but only if authorized by the NMC.
With respect to the table of medical conditions in enclosure (3), a
number of changes were made to reduce unnecessary evaluations and
clarify ambiguous criteria. The former condition number 111,
pylonephrosis, was consolidated with condition number 110 and number
111 was deleted from the table. The former condition number 150,
allergic encephalomyelitis, was also deleted from the table after it
was determined, at the recommendation of MERPAC, that this condition
was unnecessary.
A history of asthma symptoms was modified to episodes requiring
emergency treatment in the past 2 years. A history of head trauma was
revised to include only conditions within the last 10 years, and
history of seizure disorder was changed to exclude febrile seizures
prior to age 5. The criteria for asthma was changed to include only
clinically significant moderate to severe asthma.
The supplemental evaluation information needed for cardiac
conditions was clarified to include an exercise stress test versus a
pharmacologic stress test. Mariners need to demonstrate adequate
cardiopulmonary capacity to perform safety duties such as fire fighting
and passenger evacuation. Pharmacologic stress tests evaluate coronary
artery disease but do not provide information on cardiopulmonary
capacity.
The recommended evaluation data for sarcoidosis, at the urging of
certain maritime labor unions, was restated to be less extensive. The
table now simply asks for pertinent medical records, pulmonology
consultations, and names and dosages of medications.
In recognition of the distinction between substance or alcohol
abuse and substance or alcohol dependence, conditions number 186 &
186a, respectively, in the enclosure (3) table were revised. Consistent
with the medical diagnoses of these conditions, condition number 186
now covers history of substance or alcohol abuse, as defined in the
current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), within the last 5
years. Condition number 186a now covers history of substance or alcohol
dependence, as defined in the current DSM, within the last 10 years.
Reference to the Coast Guard standard of ``cure,'' which applies when
credentials are subject to suspension and revocation but not
necessarily when credentials are issued, has been deleted.
The evaluation data for these conditions has been accordingly
changed to request only a current
[[Page 56603]]
evaluation report, including a determination that the individual is
safe to return to work, from a DOT-qualified substance abuse
professional (SAP), physician certified by the American Society of
Addiction Medicine, or any other addiction specialist accepted by the
Coast Guard, and reports from the rehabilitation clinic/center (if
any). Documentation of at least 90 days of objectively measured and
sustained total abstinence is also recommended evaluation data for
dependence.
It was further modified that, for applicants with a history of
substance abuse, if they are renewal and/or raise in grade applicants
who have been subject to the dangerous drug testing requirements in 46
CFR Part 16 for at least 3 years, and if they have no verified non-
negative drug test results for the entire time that they have held the
credential being renewed and/or raised in grade, they need not submit
any evaluation data for substance abuse.
Likewise, for applicants with a history of substance dependence, if
they are renewal and/or raise in grade applicants who have been subject
to the dangerous drug testing requirements in 46 CFR part 16 for at
least 5 years, and if they have no verified non-negative drug test
results for the entire time that they have held the credential being
renewed and/or raised in grade, they need not submit any evaluation
data for substance dependence.
This exception does not apply to alcohol abuse or dependence
because there are no random, pre-employment, or periodic testing
requirements for alcohol in 46 CFR Part 16 or 33 CFR part 95.
Enclosure (4)--Medications
The newly renumbered enclosure (4) contains information about
illegal substances and intoxicants, and a non-exhaustive list of
potentially disqualifying medications that may be subject to further
medical review in accordance with enclosure (6). This information was a
subset of the larger enclosure (3) in the September 2006 draft NVIC,
but the Coast Guard agrees with the public comments and MERPAC input
that there should be a separate enclosure dedicated to medications.
The information was also reorganized to make it a more useful
reference. A definitions section has been added to the enclosure, and a
new prohibitions section dealing with illegal substances and
intoxicants has been included.
It was clarified that applicants, who complete a general medical
exam, should report all prescription medications prescribed, filled or
refilled and/or taken, and all non-prescription (over-the-counter)
medications, including dietary supplements and vitamins, within 30 days
prior to the date that they sign the CG-719K or approved equivalent
form. The September 2006 draft NVIC stated that applicants should
report all prescription and over-the-counter medications ``at the time
of application,'' but the new language is much more precise in
specifying what should be reported.
The non-exhaustive list of prescription and over-the-counter
medications that may be subject to further medical review was also
revised, primarily to eliminate redundancies in the medications listed
and to adjust the allowable time frames for usage of some of the
medications.
The use of motion sickness medications was also addressed to allow
their use in accordance with directions. The use of anti-depressants
for use in smoking cessation and other off-label indications was also
allowed.
The Coast Guard understands the complexities associated with over-
the-counter (OTC) medications and has revised the NVIC to strike a
balance between the medical needs of mariners and public safety in
response to comments. The Coast Guard intends to publish a guide for
mariners on the use of OTC medications.
Enclosure (5)--Vision & Hearing Standards
The newly renumbered enclosure (5), which was previously enclosure
(4) in the September 2006 draft NVIC, contains the same, unrevised
vision standards from NVIC 2-98, but notes that the Coast Guard has
proposed revising its vision standards in an ongoing rulemaking. The
proposed vision standards would require applicants to meet vision
acuity standards in one eye only rather than both eyes under the
current rule. See 72 FR 3605, 3656 (Jan. 2007) (proposed 46 CFR
10.215(b)). The proposed vision standards would become the new visions
standards for NVIC 04-08 if the proposed rule becomes an effective,
final rule.
Color vision testing standards have also been clarified, with
reference to the specific acceptable tests: 14 plate (which replaces
the obsolete 16 plate), 24 plate, or 38 plate Ishihara plates tests,
Farnsworth Lantern, or an alternative test approved by the NMC. We have
also added an express reference to the 46 CFR 10.205(d)(2) prohibition
on using color sensing lenses to assist applicants with passing the
color vision test.
Finally, audiometer test hearing standards were adjusted from 20
decibels or less in each ear (unaided) to 30 decibels or less in the
best ear (unaided). This allows for monaural hearing, provided the
applicant has an unaided threshold of 30 decibels (unaided) in the ear.
Applicants who are unable to meet the standards of the audiometer test,
but who can pass the functional speech discrimination test, may be
eligible for a waiver.
Enclosure (6)--Medical Review Process
Important changes were made to the newly renumbered enclosure (6),
which was previously enclosure (5) in the September 2006 draft NVIC, in
response to various public comments and MERPAC and TSAC input.
Paragraph 2 of this enclosure was revised to clarify that a waiver may
be granted in all cases, not necessarily limited to situations ``for a
mariner with a borderline condition.'' Language was added at the end of
paragraph 5.f. to expressly state that recommendations from private
employers (and government agencies) made on behalf of applicants will
be given full consideration by the NMC when considering a waiver.
Paragraph 7 was revised to clearly state that the NMC will review
all information provided and make an appropriate determination as to
one of the following outcomes: (a) Applicant is physically and
medically qualified without any limitations, waivers and/or other
conditions for issuance of the credential, (b) applicant is physically
and medically qualified with limitations and/or other conditions for
issuance of the credential, (c) applicant is not physically or
medically qualified, but a credential may be issued with appropriate
limitations, waivers and/or other conditions for issuance, (d)
additional information is necessary to determine if applicant is
physically and/or medically qualified, or (e) applicant is not
physically and/or medically qualified.
Paragraph 8 was revised to clarify that the NMC will inform the
applicant of the results of their waiver review. The appellate rights
of applicants, who are affected by a waiver determination, are now
fully explained in this paragraph as well. Likewise, in paragraph 9,
the appellate rights of applicants who disagree with any conditions
placed on their waivers are fully explained.
A new paragraph 10 was added to this enclosure to state that the
NMC will, on a case-by-case basis, consider individual proposals from
applicants (and their employers) for credentials to be issued with
appropriate limitations, waivers, and/or other conditions in order to
address concerns associated with
[[Page 56604]]
medical conditions (enclosure (3)) or the inability to meet the
physical ability standards (enclosure (2)). This was added to
articulate the Coast Guard's flexibility and willingness to consider
the unique needs and work environments of individual mariners who are
otherwise unable to meet the medical and/or physical standards
specified in the NVIC.
Finally, at the request of both MERPAC and TSAC, a new paragraph 11
was added to this enclosure authorizing--but not requiring--the Coast
Guard to designate certain medical practitioners as ``trusted agents''
to perform physical examinations on mariners. Physical examinations
conducted by these designated trusted agents and/or their
recommendations may be given more weight by the Coast Guard. The Coast
Guard would specify the criteria for designation as a trusted agent if/
when the Coast Guard initiates this program.
It is not anticipated that the NVIC will result in significantly
higher rates of disqualification for mariners, nor in increased
processing time for credential applications with physical and/or
medical issues. To the contrary, the Coast Guard expects the process to
be more consistent and less subjective, and that the application
processing time will be reduced because all parties will know precisely
what information is needed at the outset of the application process.
The Coast Guard did receive some comments that the NVIC may
increase costs. Based on consultation with medical practitioners and
MERPAC, we determined exams and documentation addressed by the NVIC are
commonly required by current medical practice and will not represent a
significant additional cost to the individual. The NVIC guidelines
apply if the applicant has an underlying medical condition. The
majority of medical evaluations and tests specified in the NVIC will be
provided by the mariner's primary care provider or specialist as part
of standard care.
Potential benefits associated with adoption of this NVIC include
decreased credential application processing time and clearer medical
and physical guidelines for merchant mariners. We also anticipate that
public safety will improve as result of this NVIC, since mariners and
the medical community would be aware of complete policy guidance that
is consistent with current industry health care practice when
evaluating medical conditions.
Dated: September 17, 2008.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations & Standards.
[FR Doc. E8-22724 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P