Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 48343-48345 [E9-22768]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 22, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket ID. FMCSA–2009–0154]
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 40 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
September 22, 2009. The exemptions
expire on September 22, 2011.
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:
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
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 online.
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
21:23 Sep 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 July 28, 2009, FMCSA published
a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals,
and requested comments from the
public (74 FR 37295). That notice listed
40 applicants’ case histories. The 40
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
40 applications on their merits and
made a determination to grant
exemptions to all of them.
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 at
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 40 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, optic nerve defect, retinal
vein occlusion, pappilodema, optic
atrophy, prosthesis, retinal detachment,
retinal scarring, macular scarring, and
loss of vision due to trauma. In most
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48343
cases, their eye conditions were not
recently developed. All but 16 of the
applicants were either born with their
vision impairments or have had them
since childhood. The 16 individuals
who sustained their vision conditions as
adults have had them for periods
ranging from 4 to 36 years.
Although each applicant has one eye
which does not meet the vision standard
in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at
least 20/40 corrected vision in the other
eye, and in a doctor’s opinion, has
sufficient vision to perform all the tasks
necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors’
opinions are supported by the
applicants’ possession of valid
commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) or
non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before
issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to
knowledge and skills tests designed to
evaluate their qualifications to operate a
CMV.
All these applicants satisfied the
testing standards for their State of
residence. By meeting State licensing
requirements, the applicants
demonstrated their ability to operate a
commercial vehicle, with their limited
vision, to the satisfaction of the State.
While possessing a valid CDL or nonCDL, these 40 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 4 to 49 years. In the
past 3 years, eight of the drivers had
convictions for traffic violations and
two of the drivers were involved in
crashes.
The qualifications, experience, and
medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in
the July 28, 2009 notice (74 FR 37295).
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
E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM
22SEN1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
48344
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 22, 2009 / Notices
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–1998–3637.
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
21:23 Sep 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
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
40 applicants, seven of the applicants
had traffic violations for speeding, one
of the applicants had traffic violation for
failure to obey a traffic sign, and two 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 that the applicants’
intrastate driving experience and history
provide an adequate basis for predicting
their ability to drive safely in interstate
commerce. Intrastate driving, like
interstate operations, involves
substantial driving on highways on the
interstate system and on other roads
built to interstate standards. Moreover,
driving in congested urban areas
exposes the driver to more pedestrian
and vehicular traffic than exists on
interstate highways. Faster reaction to
traffic and traffic signals is generally
required because distances between
them are more compact. These
conditions tax visual capacity and
driver response just as intensely as
interstate driving conditions. The
veteran drivers in this proceeding have
operated CMVs safely under those
conditions for at least 3 years, most for
much longer. Their experience and
driving records lead us to believe that
each applicant is capable of operating in
interstate commerce as safely as he/she
has been performing in intrastate
commerce. Consequently, FMCSA finds
that exempting these applicants from
the vision standard in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level
of safety equal to that existing without
the exemption. For this reason, the
Agency is granting the exemptions for
the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to the 40 applicants
listed in the notice of July 28, 2009 (74
FR 37295).
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 40
individuals consistent with the
grandfathering provisions applied to
drivers who participated in the
Agency’s vision waiver program.
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 two comments in
this proceeding. The comments were
considered and discussed below.
The Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation expressed that it had
reviewed the driving records for Marvin
Leroy Stein and was in favor of granting
the Federal vision exemptions to him.
The second comment was anonymous
and was submitted in favor of granting
the Federal vision exemption to Mark
Anderson.
Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 40
exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts, Michael K. Adams, Michael J.
Amorese, Mark R. Anderson, Darrell W.
Bayless, Keith A. Bliss, Lloyd D.
Burgess, Gary R. Butler, David S.
Clinger, Ronald L. Cote, John C. Defoe,
Shennon E. Dorsey, Steve E. Duran,
Michael M. Edleston, Cecil A. Evey,
Kamal A. Gaddah, Bradley O. Hart, John
M. Homchick, Terry L. Hudgens, Eric M.
Kousgaard, Larry L. Massey, Joe A.
McIntyre, James F. McMahon, Jr.,
Samuel A. Miller, Marvin L. Motes, John
W. Myre, Noah I. Pennington, Ronald D.
Peters, Stephen Pozharsky, Angelo D.
Rogers, Larry T. Rogers, Ricky J.
Sanderson, George V. Sorondo, Marcial
Soto-Rivas, Marvin L. Stein, David C.
Sybesma, Bruce E. Thulin, Matthew K.
Tucker, Stanley W. Tyler, Jr., Victor H.
Vera, and Charles A. Winchell 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
E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM
22SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 22, 2009 / Notices
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.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and
Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9–22768 Filed 9–21–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Ex Parte No. 290 (Sub-No. 5) (2009–
4)]
Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor
Surface Transportation Board.
Approval of rail cost adjustment
AGENCY:
ACTION:
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
factor.
SUMMARY: The Board has approved the
fourth quarter 2009 rail cost adjustment
factor (RCAF) and cost index filed by
the Association of American Railroads.
The fourth quarter 2009 RCAF
(Unadjusted) is 0.996. The fourth
quarter 2009 RCAF (Adjusted) is 0.450.
The fourth quarter 2009 RCAF–5 is
0.427.
DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pedro Ramirez, (202) 245–0333. [Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) for the
hearing impaired: 1–800–877–8339.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Additional information is contained in
the Board’s decision, which is available
on our Web site, https://www.stb.dot.gov.
Copies of the decision may be
purchased by contacting the Office of
Public Assistance, Governmental
Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245–
0235. Assistance for the hearing
impaired is available through FIRS at
1–800–877–8339.
This action will not significantly
affect either the quality of the human
environment or energy conservation.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), we
conclude that our action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
within the meaning of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Decided: September 15, 2009.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
21:23 Sep 21, 2009
Jkt 217001
By the Board, Chairman Elliott, Vice
Chairman Nottingham, and Commissioner
Mulvey.
Jeffrey Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E9–22743 Filed 9–21–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2009–0157]
Automobili Lamborghini SpA; Receipt
of Application for Extension of
Temporary Exemption From Advanced
Air Bag Requirements of FMVSS No.
208
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for
extension of a Temporary Exemption
from certain provisions of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
208, Occupant Crash Protection.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
procedures of 49 CFR Part 555,
Automobili Lamborghini SpA
(‘‘Lamborghini’’) has applied for an
extension of a previously received
temporary exemption from certain
requirements of FMVSS No. 208,
Occupant Crash Protection, for the
Lamborghini Murcielago model.
Lamborghini requests extension of its
temporary exemption for the advanced
air bag requirements. The basis of the
application is that compliance would
cause substantial economic hardship to
a manufacturer that has tried in good
faith to comply with the standard.
NHTSA is publishing this notice of
receipt of the application in accordance
with the requirements of 49 U.S.C.
30113(b)(2), and has made no judgment
on the merits of the application.
DATES: You should submit your
comments not later than October 22,
2009.
Comments: We invite you to submit
comments on the application described
below. You may submit comments
identified by docket number in the
heading of this notice by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on the electronic docket site by clicking
on ‘‘Help’’ or ‘‘FAQ.’’
• Mail: DOT Docket Management
Facility, M–30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48345
Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477–78).
Docket: For access to the docket in
order to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov at any time, or to
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20950,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Confidential Business Information: If
you wish to submit any information
under a claim of confidentiality, you
should submit three copies of your
complete submission, including the
information you claim to be confidential
business information, to the Chief
Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. In addition, you should
submit two copies, from which you
have deleted the claimed confidential
business information, to Docket
Management at the address given above.
When you send a comment containing
information claimed to be confidential
business information, you should
include a cover letter setting forth the
information specified in our
confidential business information
regulation (49 CFR Part 512).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Alves, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NCC–112, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590. Phone: 202–366–2992; Fax: 202–
366–3820; E-Mail: sarah.alves@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\22SEN1.SGM
22SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48343-48345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22768]
[[Page 48343]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket ID. FMCSA-2009-0154]
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 40 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 September 22, 2009. The exemptions
expire on September 22, 2011.
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 online.
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 July 28, 2009, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the
public (74 FR 37295). That notice listed 40 applicants' case histories.
The 40 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 40 applications on their merits
and made a determination to grant exemptions to all of them.
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 at 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 40 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, optic nerve defect, retinal vein
occlusion, pappilodema, optic atrophy, prosthesis, retinal detachment,
retinal scarring, macular scarring, and loss of vision due to trauma.
In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently developed. All
but 16 of the applicants were either born with their vision impairments
or have had them since childhood. The 16 individuals who sustained
their vision conditions as adults have had them for periods ranging
from 4 to 36 years.
Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision
standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected
vision in the other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient
vision to perform all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Doctors'
opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of valid
commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) or non-CDLs to operate CMVs. Before
issuing CDLs, States subject drivers to knowledge and skills tests
designed to evaluate their qualifications to operate a CMV.
All these applicants satisfied the testing standards for their
State of residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the
applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a commercial vehicle,
with their limited vision, to the satisfaction of the State.
While possessing a valid CDL or non-CDL, these 40 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 4 to 49
years. In the past 3 years, eight of the drivers had convictions for
traffic violations and two of the drivers were involved in crashes.
The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the July 28, 2009
notice (74 FR 37295).
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
[[Page 48344]]
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-1998-3637.
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 40 applicants, seven of the applicants had traffic violations for
speeding, one of the applicants had traffic violation for failure to
obey a traffic sign, and two 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 that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and
history provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive
safely in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate
operations, involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate
system and on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover,
driving in congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian
and vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster
reaction to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because
distances between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual
capacity and driver response just as intensely as interstate driving
conditions. The veteran drivers in this proceeding have operated CMVs
safely under those conditions for at least 3 years, most for much
longer. Their experience and driving records lead us to believe that
each applicant is capable of operating in interstate commerce as safely
as he/she has been performing in intrastate commerce. Consequently,
FMCSA finds that exempting these applicants from the vision standard in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to
that existing without the exemption. For this reason, the Agency is
granting the exemptions for the 2-year period allowed by 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315 to the 40 applicants listed in the notice of July
28, 2009 (74 FR 37295).
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 40 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 two comments in this proceeding. The comments were
considered and discussed below.
The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation expressed that it had
reviewed the driving records for Marvin Leroy Stein and was in favor of
granting the Federal vision exemptions to him.
The second comment was anonymous and was submitted in favor of
granting the Federal vision exemption to Mark Anderson.
Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 40 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts, Michael K. Adams, Michael J. Amorese, Mark R. Anderson,
Darrell W. Bayless, Keith A. Bliss, Lloyd D. Burgess, Gary R. Butler,
David S. Clinger, Ronald L. Cote, John C. Defoe, Shennon E. Dorsey,
Steve E. Duran, Michael M. Edleston, Cecil A. Evey, Kamal A. Gaddah,
Bradley O. Hart, John M. Homchick, Terry L. Hudgens, Eric M. Kousgaard,
Larry L. Massey, Joe A. McIntyre, James F. McMahon, Jr., Samuel A.
Miller, Marvin L. Motes, John W. Myre, Noah I. Pennington, Ronald D.
Peters, Stephen Pozharsky, Angelo D. Rogers, Larry T. Rogers, Ricky J.
Sanderson, George V. Sorondo, Marcial Soto-Rivas, Marvin L. Stein,
David C. Sybesma, Bruce E. Thulin, Matthew K. Tucker, Stanley W. Tyler,
Jr., Victor H. Vera, and Charles A. Winchell 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
[[Page 48345]]
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.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-22768 Filed 9-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P