Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 63047-63049 [E8-25176]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 22, 2008 / Notices
He holds a Class A CDL from
Connecticut.
Raymond W. Zimmerman, Jr.
Mr. Zimmerman, 51, has had ITDM
since 1988. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2008 and certified that
he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness,
requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired
cognitive function that occurred without
warning in the past 5 years; understands
diabetes management and monitoring;
and has stable control of his diabetes
using insulin, and is able to drive a
CMV safely. Mr. Zimmerman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist
examined him in 2008 and certified that
he does not have diabetic retinopathy.
He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Request for Comments
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, FMCSA requests public
comment from all interested persons on
the exemption petitions described in
this notice. We will consider all
comments received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated
in the dates section of the Notice.
FMCSA notes that Section 4129 of the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible and
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU)
requires the Secretary to revise its
diabetes exemption program established
on September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441).1
The revision must provide for
individual assessment of drivers with
diabetes mellitus, and be consistent
with the criteria described in section
4018 of the Transportation Equity Act
for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
Section 4129 requires: (1) The
elimination of the requirement for 3
years of experience operating CMVs
while being treated with insulin; and (2)
the establishment of a specified
minimum period of insulin use to
demonstrate stable control of diabetes
before being allowed to operate a CMV.
In response to section 4129, FMCSA
made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established
by the September 3, 2003 Notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year
driving experience and fulfilled the
requirements of section 4129 while
continuing to ensure that operation of
CMVs by drivers with ITDM will
achieve the requisite level of safety
1 Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 Notice as a
‘‘final rule.’’ However, the 2003 Notice did not issue
a ‘‘final rule’’ but did establish the procedures and
standards for issuing exemptions for drivers with
ITDM.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:50 Oct 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
required of all exemptions granted
under 49 U.S.C. 31136 (e).
Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA
to ensure that drivers of CMVs with
ITDM are not held to a higher standard
than other drivers, with the exception of
limited operating, monitoring and
medical requirements that are deemed
medically necessary.
FMCSA concluded that all of the
operating, monitoring and medical
requirements set out in the September 3,
2003 Notice, except as modified, were
in compliance with section 4129(d).
Therefore, all of the requirements set
out in the September 3, 2003 Notice,
except as modified by the Notice in the
Federal Register on November 8, 2005
(70 FR 67777), remain in effect.
Issued on: October 14, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and
Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8–25173 Filed 10–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2008–0266]
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 26 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
October 22, 2008. The exemptions
expire on October 22, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs, (202) 366–4001,
fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64–
224, Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63047
Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online
through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments, go to https://
www.regulations.gov at any time or
Room W12–140 on the ground level of
the West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The
FDMS is available 24 hours each day,
365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or
postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or of the person signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT’s complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000
(65 FR 19476). This information is also
available at https://Docketsinfo.dot.gov.
Background
On September 4, 2008, FMCSA
published a notice of receipt of
exemption applications from certain
individuals, and requested comments
from the public (73 FR 51689). That
notice listed 25 applicants’ case
histories. The 25 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
25 applications on their merits and
made a determination to grant
exemptions to all of them. The comment
period closed on October 6, 2008.
In a previous notice (73 FR 48273),
the Agency noted that a public comment
was received challenging the validity of
some information that Mr. James W.
Lappan submitted in his application. At
this time, FMCSA has concluded
investigations regarding Mr. James W.
Lappan and has determined that he
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
63048
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 22, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
meets FMCSA’s criteria for a Federal
vision exemption.
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 26 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, prosthesis, optic nerve
defect, glaucoma, exotropia, 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 3 to 27 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 26 drivers have been
authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate
commerce, even though their vision
disqualified them from driving in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:50 Oct 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
interstate commerce. They have driven
CMVs with their limited vision for
careers ranging from 3 to 35 years. In the
past 3 years, two of the drivers had
convictions for traffic violations and
three of them were involved in crashes.
The qualifications, experience, and
medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in
the September 4, 2008 notice (73 FR
51689).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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.
Applying principles from these
studies to the past 3-year record of the
26 applicants, two of the applicants had
a traffic violation for speeding, and
three of the applicants were involved in
crashes. 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
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 22, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
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 the 25 applicants
listed in the notice of September 4, 2008
(73 FR 51689).
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 26
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 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 three comments in
this proceeding. The comments were
considered and discussed below.
One of the comments was a
recommendation in favor of granting the
Federal vision exemption to Kevin
Quastad, the second was a
recommendation in favor of granting the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:50 Oct 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
Federal vision exemption to all
applicants.
Advocates for Highway and Auto
Safety (Advocates) expressed opposition
to FMCSA’s policy to grant exemptions
from the FMCSRs, including the driver
qualification standards. Specifically,
Advocates: (1) Objects to the manner in
which FMCSA presents driver
information to the public and makes
safety determinations; (2) objects to the
Agency’s reliance on conclusions drawn
from the vision waiver program; (3)
claims the Agency has misinterpreted
statutory language on the granting of
exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315); and finally (4) suggests that a
1999 Supreme Court decision affects the
legal validity of vision exemptions.
The issues raised by Advocates were
addressed at length in 64 FR 51568
(September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962
(November 30, 1999), 64 FR 69586
(December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January
3, 2000), 65 FR 57230 (September 21,
2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001).
We will not address these points again
here, but refer interested parties to those
earlier discussions.
Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 26
exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts, Larry W. Barnes, Rick A.
Benevides, Jack E. Benjamin, Allen S.
Bush, Todd A. Chapman, Delone W.
Dudley, Irvin L. Eaddy, Herman Hicks,
James W. Lappan, Ralph Landers,
Jeromy W. Leatherman, Ernest B.
Martin, Mark L. McWhorter, Charles D.
Messier, Raymond C. Miller, Dennis E.
Palmer, Jr., Gary W. Phelps, Kevin L.
Quastad, John E. Rains, James D. St.
Peter, Michael Sutton, Sylvester Silver,
Sylvester Silver, William R. Thomas,
Terrence L. Trautman, and David
Vallier, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63049
Issued on: October 14, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and
Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8–25176 Filed 10–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA–2008–
0162]
Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping
Requirements
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), United
States Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Request for public comment on
proposed collection of information.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can
collect certain information from the
public, it must receive approval from
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Under procedures established
by the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, before seeking OMB approval,
Federal agencies must solicit public
comment on proposed collections of
information, including extensions and
reinstatement of previously approved
collections. This document describes
one collection of information for which
NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 22, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Comments must refer to the
docket notice numbers cited at the
beginning of this notice and be
submitted to Docket Management
Facility, West Building, Room W12–
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. The Docket
Management office is open on
weekdays, except Federal holidays,
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. You may call the
office at 202–647–5527. You may also
submit comments electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov. Please
identify the proposed collection of
information for which a comment is
provided, by referencing its OMB
clearance Number. It is requested, but
not required, that 2 copies of the
comment be provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Complete copies of each request for
collection of information may be
obtained at no charge from Mr. Santiago
Navarro, Office of Crash Avoidance
Standards, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590. Mr.
Navarro’s telephone number is (202)
493–0248. His FAX number is (202)
E:\FR\FM\22OCN1.SGM
22OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 22, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63047-63049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25176]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0266]
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 26 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 October 22, 2008. The exemptions
expire on October 22, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, 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 Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at https://www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to https://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at https://Docketsinfo.dot.gov.
Background
On September 4, 2008, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of
exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments
from the public (73 FR 51689). That notice listed 25 applicants' case
histories. The 25 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 25 applications on their merits
and made a determination to grant exemptions to all of them. The
comment period closed on October 6, 2008.
In a previous notice (73 FR 48273), the Agency noted that a public
comment was received challenging the validity of some information that
Mr. James W. Lappan submitted in his application. At this time, FMCSA
has concluded investigations regarding Mr. James W. Lappan and has
determined that he
[[Page 63048]]
meets FMCSA's criteria for a Federal vision exemption.
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 26 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, prosthesis, optic nerve defect,
glaucoma, exotropia, 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 3 to 27
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 26 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 3 to 35
years. In the past 3 years, two of the drivers had convictions for
traffic violations and three of them were involved in crashes.
The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the September 4, 2008
notice (73 FR 51689).
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.
Applying principles from these studies to the past 3-year record of
the 26 applicants, two of the applicants had a traffic violation for
speeding, and three of the applicants were involved in crashes. 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
[[Page 63049]]
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 the 25 applicants listed in
the notice of September 4, 2008 (73 FR 51689).
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 26 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 three comments in this proceeding. The comments were
considered and discussed below.
One of the comments was a recommendation in favor of granting the
Federal vision exemption to Kevin Quastad, the second was a
recommendation in favor of granting the Federal vision exemption to all
applicants.
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) expressed
opposition to FMCSA's policy to grant exemptions from the FMCSRs,
including the driver qualification standards. Specifically, Advocates:
(1) Objects to the manner in which FMCSA presents driver information to
the public and makes safety determinations; (2) objects to the Agency's
reliance on conclusions drawn from the vision waiver program; (3)
claims the Agency has misinterpreted statutory language on the granting
of exemptions (49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315); and finally (4) suggests
that a 1999 Supreme Court decision affects the legal validity of vision
exemptions.
The issues raised by Advocates were addressed at length in 64 FR
51568 (September 23, 1999), 64 FR 66962 (November 30, 1999), 64 FR
69586 (December 13, 1999), 65 FR 159 (January 3, 2000), 65 FR 57230
(September 21, 2000), and 66 FR 13825 (March 7, 2001). We will not
address these points again here, but refer interested parties to those
earlier discussions.
Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 26 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts, Larry W. Barnes, Rick A. Benevides, Jack E. Benjamin, Allen S.
Bush, Todd A. Chapman, Delone W. Dudley, Irvin L. Eaddy, Herman Hicks,
James W. Lappan, Ralph Landers, Jeromy W. Leatherman, Ernest B. Martin,
Mark L. McWhorter, Charles D. Messier, Raymond C. Miller, Dennis E.
Palmer, Jr., Gary W. Phelps, Kevin L. Quastad, John E. Rains, James D.
St. Peter, Michael Sutton, Sylvester Silver, Sylvester Silver, William
R. Thomas, Terrence L. Trautman, and David Vallier, 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: October 14, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-25176 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P