Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 53514-53517 [2014-21427]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
53514
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 174 / Tuesday, September 9, 2014 / Notices
https://www.regulations.gov and in the
search box insert the docket number
‘‘FMCSA–2014–0215’’ and click
‘‘Search.’’ Next, click ‘‘Open Docket
Folder’’ and you will find all documents
and comments related to the proposed
rulemaking.
Summary of Applications
Thomas Avery, Jr.
Mr. Avery is a 45 year-old class B CDL
holder in New York. He has a history of
seizure and has remained seizure free
since 1998. He takes anti-seizure
medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since that
time. If granted an exemption, he would
like to drive a CMV. His physician states
he is supportive of Mr. Avery receiving
an exemption.
Michael G. Berthiaume
Mr. Berthiaume is a 54 year-old driver
in Minnesota. He has a history of
seizure and has remained seizure free
since 2006. He takes anti-seizure
medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since
November 2013. If granted an
exemption, he would like to drive a
CMV. His physician states he is
supportive of Mr. Berthiaume receiving
an exemption.
Brian L. Bose
Mr. Bose is a 49 year-old class B CDL
holder in Illinois. He has a history of
Right Frontal Lobe Epilepsy secondary
to a right frontal meningioma which was
resected in 1997 and required
reoperation in 2014. He had a single
postoperative seizure after the reoperation in 2014. He takes anti-seizure
medication since 1997. If granted the
exemption, he would like to drive a
CMV. His physician states he is
supportive of Mr. Bose receiving an
exemption.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Aimee-Christine M. Bjornstad
Ms. Bjornstad is a 28 year-old driver
in Indiana. She has a history of post
traumatic partial epilepsy and has
remained seizure free since 2008. She
takes anti-seizure medication with a
recent change medication in August
2014. If granted the exemption, she
would like to drive a CMV. Her
physician states that he is supportive of
Ms. Bjornstad receiving an exemption.
Leo Kurt Clemens
Mr. Clemens is a 59 year-old class B
CDL holder in Pennsylvania. He has a
history of seizure and has remained
seizure free for more than 25 years. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the
dosage and frequency remaining the
same for 3 years. If granted the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Sep 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
exemption, he would like to drive a
CMV. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Clemens receiving an
exemption.
Danny Lee Crafton
Mr. Crafton is a 65 year-old class A
CDL holder in Idaho. He has a history
of seizure and has remained seizure free
since 1974. He takes anti-seizure
medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since
2001. If granted the exemption, he
would like to drive a CMV. His
physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Crafton receiving an exemption.
Kenneth D. Peachey
Mr. Peachey is a 72 year-old class A
CDL holder in Pennsylvania. He has a
history of seizure and has remained
seizure free since 1984. He takes antiseizure medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since that
time. If granted the exemption, he
would like to drive a CMV. His
physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Peachey receiving an exemption.
Todd W. Riel
Mr. Riel is a 45 year-old class A CDL
holder in Ohio. He has a history of a
seizure disorder and has remained
seizure free since 2011. He takes antiseizure medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since that
time. If granted the exemption, he
would like to drive a CMV. His
physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Riel receiving an exemption.
Tory Shuler
Mr. Shuler is a 45 year-old driver in
New York. He has a history of seizure
and has remained seizure free since
2012. He takes anti-seizure medication
with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. If
granted the exemption, he would like to
drive a CMV. His physician states he is
supportive of Mr. Shuler receiving an
exemption.
Philip Neil Stewart
Mr. Stewart is a 43 year-old class A
CDL holder in California. He has a
history of a seizure disorder and has
remained seizure free for 30 years. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the
dosage and frequency remaining the
same for 15 years. If granted the
exemption, he would like to drive a
CMV. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Stewart receiving an
exemption.
Keith T. White
Mr. White is a 59 year-old class A
CDL holder in Pennsylvania. He has a
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
history of seizure and has remained
seizure free since 1994. He takes antiseizure medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since
2004. If granted the exemption, he
would like to drive a CMV. His
physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. White receiving an exemption.
Alan T. Von Lintel
Mr. Von Lintel is a 60 year-old driver
in Kansas. He has a history of a seizure
disorder and has remained seizure free
since 2004. He takes anti-seizure
medication with the dosage and
frequency remaining the same since July
2012. If granted the exemption, he
would like to drive a CMV. His
physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Von Lintel receiving an exemption.
Request for Comments
In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315
and 31136(e), FMCSA requests public
comment from all interested persons on
the exemption applications described in
this notice. We will consider all
comments received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated
earlier in the notice.
Issued on: August 28, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014–21421 Filed 9–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2014–0007]
Qualification of Drivers; Exemption
Applications; Vision
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
AGENCY:
FMCSA announces its
decision to exempt 52 individuals from
the vision requirement in the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). They are unable to meet the
vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons. The exemptions will
enable these individuals to operate
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce without meeting
the prescribed vision requirement in
one eye. 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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 174 / Tuesday, September 9, 2014 / Notices
The exemptions were granted on
August 8, 2014. The exemptions expire
on August 8, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elaine M. Papp, R.N., Chief, Medical
Programs Division, (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. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting
material to the docket, contact Docket
Services, telephone (202) 366–9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. 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 and/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.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT’s dockets by
the name of the individual submitting
the comment (or of the person signing
the comment, if submitted on behalf of
an association, business, labor union, or
other entity). You may review DOT’s
Privacy Act Statement for the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS)
published in the Federal Register on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).
II. Background
On July 28, 2014, FMCSA published
a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals,
and requested comments from the
public (79 FR 38652). That notice listed
52 applicants’ case histories. The 52
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
52 applications on their merits and
made a determination to grant
exemptions to each of them.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Sep 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
III. 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 red, green, and amber (49 CFR
391.41(b)(10)).
FMCSA recognizes that some drivers
do not meet the vision requirement but
have adapted their driving to
accommodate their vision limitation
and demonstrated their ability to drive
safely. The 52 exemption applicants
listed in this notice are unable to meet
the vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons, including central
retinal vein occlusion, amblyopia,
histoplasmosis, misshapen pupil,
detached retina, prosthetic eye,
strabismus, high myopia, vision loss,
optic nerve atrophy, central scar,
corneal scar, refractive amblyopia,
complete loss of vision, macular scar,
macular hole, glaucoma, chronic central
serous chorioretinopathy, early
polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy,
subforeal choroidal neovascular
membrane, bilateral intermediate
uveitis, optic nerve hypoplasia, aphakia,
optic nerve pallor, cellophane
retinopathy, iris rupture, macular
degeneration, longstanding optic nerve
atrophy, optic atrophy, and strabismic
amblyopia. In most cases, their eye
conditions were not recently developed.
Twenty-nine of the applicants were
born with their vision impairments or
have had them since childhood.
The 23 individuals that sustained
their vision conditions as adults have
had them for a period of 2 to 50 years.
Although each applicant has one eye
which does not meet the vision
requirement 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53515
All of these applicants satisfied the
testing requirements for their State of
residence. By meeting State licensing
requirements, the applicants
demonstrated their ability to operate a
CMV, with their limited vision, to the
satisfaction of the State.
While possessing a valid CDL or nonCDL, these 52 drivers have been
authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate
commerce, although their vision
disqualified them from driving in
interstate commerce. They have driven
CMVs with their limited vision in
careers ranging from 2 to 48 years. In the
past 3 years, none of the drivers was
involved in crashes and four were
convicted for moving violations in a
CMV.
The qualifications, experience, and
medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in
the July 8, 2014 notice (79 FR 38652).
IV. Basis for Exemption Determination
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315,
FMCSA may grant an exemption from
the vision requirement 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 the medical reports about
the applicants’ vision as well as their
driving records and experience with the
vision deficiency.
To qualify for an exemption from the
vision requirement, 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.
FMCSA believes that it can properly
apply the principle to monocular
drivers because data from the Federal
Highway Administration’s (FHWA)
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
53516
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 174 / Tuesday, September 9, 2014 / Notices
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
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
52 applicants, none of the drivers was
involved in crashes and four were
convicted of moving violations in a
CMV. All the applicants achieved a
record of safety while driving with their
vision impairments 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Sep 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
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 requirement 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 52 applicants
listed in the notice of July 8, 2014 (79
FR 38652).
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 52
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 requirement 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 have a copy
of the certification when driving, for
presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement
official.
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
V. Discussion of Comments
FMCSA received two comments in
this proceeding. The comments are
discussed below.
Gary Baumfalk, Herb Mattson, and
Brenda Mattson are in favor of granting
Ronnie L. Henry an exemption.
IV. Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 52
exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the
vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), subject to the
requirements cited above (49 CFR
391.64(b)):
Don R. Alexander (OR)
Jimmy A. Baker (TX)
Robert E. Bebout (OH)
Frank B. Belenchia, Jr. (TN)
Ricky W. Bettes (TX)
Thomas J. Bommer (ND)
Antonio A. Calixto (MN)
James W. Carter, Jr. (KS)
Ronald G. Daniels (MO)
Larry G. Davis (TN)
Michael C. Doheny (CT)
William R. Evridge (KY)
George P. Ford (NC)
Lawrence A. Fox (WI)
Donald H. Fuller (NY)
Viktor V. Goluda (SC)
Todd M. Harguth (MN)
Dennis W. Helgeson (MN)
Ronnie L. Henry (KS)
Clarence K. Hill (NC)
James Holmes (GA)
Johnny L. Irving (MS)
Garfield J. Johnson (NC)
Kevin L. Jones (GA)
Michael L. Kautz (CA)
Keith A. Kelley (ME)
Stetson W. King (FL)
Bradley E. Loggins (AL)
Joe C. Mason (AR)
David L. Miller (OH)
Earl L. Mokma (MI)
Timothy W. Nappier (MI)
Donald L. Nisbet (WA)
Jace E. Nixon (IA)
Don R. Padley (MO)
David T. Perkins (NY)
Donald W. Rich (IL)
Joaquin C. Rodriguez (NM)
Harry W. Root (MN)
David A. Shaw (CA)
Kenneth C. Smith (MS)
Paul W. Sorenson (UT)
Randall H. Tempel (MT)
Christopher P. Thornby (MN)
Cory J. Tivnan (WA)
Melvin V. VanMeter (PA)
Kent J. VanRoekel (MN)
Wilbert Walden (NC)
Patrick J. Ward (NJ)
Ricky W. Witt (IA)
John D. Woods (MI)
Zachary J. Workman (ID)
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 174 / Tuesday, September 9, 2014 / Notices
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: August 28, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014–21427 Filed 9–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of Foreign Assets Control
Designation of Twelve Individuals
Pursuant to the Sergei Magnitsky Rule
of Law Accountability Act of 2012
Office of Foreign Assets
Control, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Treasury Department’s
Office of Foreign Assets Control
(‘‘OFAC’’) is publishing the names of
twelve individuals whose property and
interests in property are blocked
pursuant to the Sergei Magnitsky Rule
of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (Pub.
L. 112–208, December 14, 2012) (the
‘‘Magnitsky Act’’).
DATES: The designations by the Director
of OFAC, pursuant to the Magnitsky
Act, of the twelve individuals identified
in this notice were effective on May 20,
2014.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 Sep 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Assistant Director, Sanctions
Compliance and Evaluation, Office of
Foreign Assets Control, Department of
the Treasury, Washington, DC 20220,
tel.: 202/622–2490.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic and Facsimile Availability
This document and additional
information concerning OFAC are
available from OFAC’s Web site
(www.treas.gov/ofac). Certain general
information pertaining to OFAC’s
sanctions programs is available via
facsimile through a 24-hour fax-ondemand service, tel.: 202/622–0077.
Background
On December 14, 2012, the President
signed the Magnitsky Act. The
Magnitsky Act requires the President to
submit to certain congressional
committees a list of each person the
President has determined meets certain
criteria set forth in the Magnitsky Act.
Pursuant to Section 406 of the
Magnitsky Act, the President is required
to block, with certain exceptions, all
property and interests in property of a
person who is on the list required by
Section 404(a) of the Magnitsky Act that
are in the United States, that come
within the United States, or that are or
come within the possession or control of
any United States person. The President
delegated certain functions under the
Magnitsky Act to the Secretary of the
Treasury, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, on April 5, 2013.
On May 20, 2014, the Director of
OFAC designated, pursuant to Section
406 of the Magnitsky Act, twelve
individuals whose property and
interests in property are blocked
pursuant to the Magnitsky Act.
The listings for these individuals on
OFAC’s List of Specially Designated
Nationals and Blocked Persons appear
as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
53517
Individuals
1. ALISOV, Igor Borisovich; DOB 11
Mar 1968 (individual) [MAGNIT].
2. GAUS, Alexandra Viktorovna (a.k.a.
GAUSS, Alexandra); DOB 29 Mar
1975 (individual) [MAGNIT].
3. KHLEBNIKOV, Vyacheslav
Georgievich (a.k.a. KHLEBNIKOV,
Viacheslav); DOB 09 Jul 1967
(individual) [MAGNIT].
4. KLYUEV, Dmitry Vladislavovich
(a.k.a. KLYUYEV, Dmitriy); DOB 10
Aug 1967 (individual) [MAGNIT].
5. KRATOV, Dmitry Borisovich; DOB 16
Jul 1964 (individual) [MAGNIT].
6. KRECHETOV, Andrei Alexandrovich;
DOB 22 Sep 1981 (individual)
[MAGNIT].
7. LITVINOVA, Larisa Anatolievna;
DOB 18 Nov 1963 (individual)
[MAGNIT].
8. MARKELOV, Viktor Aleksandrovich;
DOB 15 Dec 1967; POB Leninskoye
village, Uzgenskiy District, Oshkaya
region of the Kirghiz SSR (individual)
[MAGNIT].
9. STEPANOV, Vladlen Yurievich; DOB
17 Jul 1962 (individual) [MAGNIT].
10. TAGIYEV, Fikret (a.k.a. TAGIEV,
Fikhret Gabdulla Ogly; a.k.a.
TAGIYEV, Fikhret); DOB 03 Apr 1962
(individual) [MAGNIT].
11. SUGAIPOV, Umar; DOB 17 Apr
1966; POB Chechen Republic, Russia
(individual) [MAGNIT].
12. VAKHAYEV, Musa; DOB 1964; POB
Urus-Martan, Chechen Republic,
Russia (individual) [MAGNIT].
Dated: May 20, 2014.
Adam J. Szubin,
Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
Editorial Note: This document was
received for publication by the Office of the
Federal Register on September 4, 2014.
[FR Doc. 2014–21388 Filed 9–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–AL–P
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53514-53517]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21427]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0007]
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 52 individuals from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons. The exemptions will enable these individuals to
operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce without
meeting the prescribed vision requirement in one eye. 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.
[[Page 53515]]
DATES: The exemptions were granted on August 8, 2014. The exemptions
expire on August 8, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, R.N., Chief, Medical
Programs Division, (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. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket
Services, telephone (202) 366-9826.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. 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 and/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.
Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT's dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, or other
entity). You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).
II. Background
On July 28, 2014, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the
public (79 FR 38652). That notice listed 52 applicants' case histories.
The 52 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 52 applications on their merits
and made a determination to grant exemptions to each of them.
III. 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 red, green,
and amber (49 CFR 391.41(b)(10)).
FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision
requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their vision
limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 52
exemption applicants listed in this notice are unable to meet the
vision requirement in one eye for various reasons, including central
retinal vein occlusion, amblyopia, histoplasmosis, misshapen pupil,
detached retina, prosthetic eye, strabismus, high myopia, vision loss,
optic nerve atrophy, central scar, corneal scar, refractive amblyopia,
complete loss of vision, macular scar, macular hole, glaucoma, chronic
central serous chorioretinopathy, early polypoidal choroidal
vasculopathy, subforeal choroidal neovascular membrane, bilateral
intermediate uveitis, optic nerve hypoplasia, aphakia, optic nerve
pallor, cellophane retinopathy, iris rupture, macular degeneration,
longstanding optic nerve atrophy, optic atrophy, and strabismic
amblyopia. In most cases, their eye conditions were not recently
developed. Twenty-nine of the applicants were born with their vision
impairments or have had them since childhood.
The 23 individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults
have had them for a period of 2 to 50 years.
Although each applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision
requirement 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 of these applicants satisfied the testing requirements for
their State of residence. By meeting State licensing requirements, the
applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a CMV, with their
limited vision, to the satisfaction of the State.
While possessing a valid CDL or non-CDL, these 52 drivers have been
authorized to drive a CMV in intrastate commerce, although their vision
disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. They have driven
CMVs with their limited vision in careers ranging from 2 to 48 years.
In the past 3 years, none of the drivers was involved in crashes and
four were convicted for moving violations in a CMV.
The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the July 8, 2014
notice (79 FR 38652).
IV. Basis for Exemption Determination
Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the vision requirement 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 the medical reports about the applicants' vision as well as
their driving records and experience with the vision deficiency.
To qualify for an exemption from the vision requirement, 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.
FMCSA believes that it can properly apply the principle to
monocular drivers because data from the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA)
[[Page 53516]]
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 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 52 applicants, none of the drivers was involved in crashes and four
were convicted of moving violations in a CMV. All the applicants
achieved a record of safety while driving with their vision impairments
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 requirement
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 52 applicants listed in the notice of July 8,
2014 (79 FR 38652).
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 52 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 requirement 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 have a
copy of the certification when driving, for presentation to a duly
authorized Federal, State, or local enforcement official.
V. Discussion of Comments
FMCSA received two comments in this proceeding. The comments are
discussed below.
Gary Baumfalk, Herb Mattson, and Brenda Mattson are in favor of
granting Ronnie L. Henry an exemption.
IV. Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 52 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above (49 CFR
391.64(b)):
Don R. Alexander (OR)
Jimmy A. Baker (TX)
Robert E. Bebout (OH)
Frank B. Belenchia, Jr. (TN)
Ricky W. Bettes (TX)
Thomas J. Bommer (ND)
Antonio A. Calixto (MN)
James W. Carter, Jr. (KS)
Ronald G. Daniels (MO)
Larry G. Davis (TN)
Michael C. Doheny (CT)
William R. Evridge (KY)
George P. Ford (NC)
Lawrence A. Fox (WI)
Donald H. Fuller (NY)
Viktor V. Goluda (SC)
Todd M. Harguth (MN)
Dennis W. Helgeson (MN)
Ronnie L. Henry (KS)
Clarence K. Hill (NC)
James Holmes (GA)
Johnny L. Irving (MS)
Garfield J. Johnson (NC)
Kevin L. Jones (GA)
Michael L. Kautz (CA)
Keith A. Kelley (ME)
Stetson W. King (FL)
Bradley E. Loggins (AL)
Joe C. Mason (AR)
David L. Miller (OH)
Earl L. Mokma (MI)
Timothy W. Nappier (MI)
Donald L. Nisbet (WA)
Jace E. Nixon (IA)
Don R. Padley (MO)
David T. Perkins (NY)
Donald W. Rich (IL)
Joaquin C. Rodriguez (NM)
Harry W. Root (MN)
David A. Shaw (CA)
Kenneth C. Smith (MS)
Paul W. Sorenson (UT)
Randall H. Tempel (MT)
Christopher P. Thornby (MN)
Cory J. Tivnan (WA)
Melvin V. VanMeter (PA)
Kent J. VanRoekel (MN)
Wilbert Walden (NC)
Patrick J. Ward (NJ)
Ricky W. Witt (IA)
John D. Woods (MI)
Zachary J. Workman (ID)
[[Page 53517]]
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: August 28, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-21427 Filed 9-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
