Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 11642-11644 [2016-04801]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
11642
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Notices
downloaded from the project Web site
at: https://southcapitoleis.com/
documents/.
This notice applies to other Federal
agency decisions as of the issuance date
of this notice and all laws under which
actions were taken including, but not
limited to:
1. General: National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U.S.C. 4321–
4347]; Federal-Aid Highway Act [23
U.S.C. 109 and 23 U.S.C.128].
2. Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–
1508), FHWA Code of Federal
Regulations (23 CFR 771.101–771.137,
et seq.).
3. Air: Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401–
7671(q).
4. Land: Section 4(f) of the
Department of Transportation Act of
1966 [23 U.S.C. 138 and 49 U.S.C. 303].
5. Wildlife: Endangered Species Act
[16 U.S.C. 1531–1544 and Section
1536], Marine Mammal Protection Act
[16 U.S.C. 1361], Anadromous Fish
Conservation Act [16 U.S.C. 757(a)–
757(g)], Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act [16 U.S.C. 661–667(d)], Migratory
Bird Treaty Act [16 U.S.C. 703–712].
6. Historic and Cultural Resources:
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended
[16 U.S.C. 470(f) et seq.]; Archeological
Resources Protection Act of 1977 [16
U.S.C. 470(aa)–II]; Archeological and
Historic Preservation Act [16 U.S.C.
469–469(c)]; Native American Grave
Protection and Repatriation Act
(NAGPRA) [25 U.S.C. 3001–3013].
7. Social and Economic: Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C.
2000(d)–2000(d)(1)].
8. Wetlands and Water Resources:
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42
U.S.C. 300(f)–300(j); TEA–21 Wetlands
Mitigation, 23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(m); Land
and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF),
16 U.S.C. 4601–4604.
9. Hazardous Materials:
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601–9675.
10. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990
Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988
Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898,
Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low Income
Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and
Enhancement of Cultural Resources;
E.O. 11514 Protection and Enhancement
of Environmental Quality.
11. Provisions of Safe Accountable
Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU)
and the Moving Ahead for Progress in
the 21st Century Act (MAP–21), which
replaced SAFETEA–LU on July 6, 2012.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:22 Mar 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning
and Construction. The regulations
implementing Executive Order 12372
regarding intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities apply to this
program.)
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1).
Issued on: February 23, 2016.
Joseph C. Lawson,
Division Administrator, District of Columbia.
[FR Doc. 2016–04546 Filed 3–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2015–0071]
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 28 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.
DATES: The exemptions were granted
December 3, 2015. The exemptions
expire on December 3, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division, (202) 366–4001,
fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64–
113, Washington, DC 20590–0001.
Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
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:
SUMMARY:
I. Electronic Access
You may see all the comments online
through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at https://
www.regulations.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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: In accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its
rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
II. Background
On November 2, 2015, FMCSA
published a notice of receipt of
exemption applications from certain
individuals, and requested comments
from the public (80 FR 67472). That
notice listed 28 applicants’ case
histories. The 28 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
28 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° 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
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Notices
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
safely. The 28 exemption applicants
listed in this notice are in this category.
They are unable to meet the vision
requirement in one eye for various
reasons, including amblyopia, cataract,
central scotoma, chorioretinal scar,
complete loss of vision, detached retina,
esotropia, macular degeneration,
myopic degeneration, ocular aneurysm,
optic nerve atrophy, optic nerve
coloboma, optic neuropathy, prosthetic
eye, refractive amblyopia, and retinal
detachment. In most cases, their eye
conditions were not recently developed.
Sixteen of the applicants were either
born with their vision impairments or
have had them since childhood.
The 12 individuals that sustained
their vision conditions as adults have
had it for a range of 6 to 25 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 nonCDL, these 28 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 in
careers ranging for 3 to 43 years. In the
past three years, no drivers were
involved in crashes, and 2 drivers were
convicted of moving violations in
CMVs.
The qualifications, experience, and
medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in
the November 2, 2015 notice (80 FR
67472).
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:22 Mar 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 it 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
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11643
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
28 applicants, no drivers were involved
in crashes, and 2 drivers were convicted
of moving violations in CMVs. All the
applicants achieved a 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 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 28 applicants
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
11644
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2016 / Notices
listed in the notice of November 2, 2015
(80 FR 67472).
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 28
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.
V. Discussion of Comments
Hector J. Lopez (NC)
John V. Narretto, Jr. (LA)
Branden J. Ramos (CA)
Sonny Scott (OH)
Jarrod R. Seirer (KS)
Vince A. Thompson (OR)
Daniel R. Viscaya (NC)
Carlos Vives, Jr. (NJ)
Otis H. Wright, Jr. (MD)
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: February 24, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016–04801 Filed 3–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA–2015–0091; Notice 2]
Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, Grant
of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
IV. Conclusion
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
FMCSA received no comments in this
proceeding.
AGENCY:
Based upon its evaluation of the 28
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)):
Bruce D. Amundson (IA)
Terry M. Baldwin (PA)
Gene B. Clyde, Jr. (NY)
Joseph Coelho Jr. (RI)
Levi R. Coutcher (WA)
Leonard H. Culbertson (GA)
Craig L. Dawson, Sr. (OH)
Jason R. Gast (MO)
Nirmal S. Gill (CA)
Robert C. Green, Jr. (PA)
Stanley Grubb (KY)
Louis M. Hankins (IL)
Nathan H. Jacobs (NM)
Danny L. Keplinger (VA)
Kimber S. Krushinski (NY)
Carmelo Lana (NJ)
Keith A. Lang (TX)
Nathan D. Langham (IL)
Michael S. Lewis (NC)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:22 Mar 03, 2016
Jkt 238001
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
Cooper Tire & Rubber
Company (Cooper), has determined that
certain Cooper tires do not fully comply
with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
No. 139, New Pneumatic Tires Radial
Tires for Light Vehicles. Cooper filed a
report dated August 13, 2015, pursuant
to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. Cooper then petitioned NHTSA
under 49 CFR part 556 requesting a
decision that the subject noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle
safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on
this decision contact Abraham Diaz,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–5310, facsimile (202) 366–
5930.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
30118(d) and 30120(h) (see
implementing rule at 49 CFR part 556),
Cooper submitted a petition for an
exemption from the notification and
remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of Cooper’s petition
was published, with a 30-day public
comment period, on October 22, 2015 in
the Federal Register (80 FR 64057). No
comments were received. To view the
petition and all supporting documents
log onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Web site
at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2015–
0091.’’
II. Tires Involved: Affected are
approximately 1,350 Cooper WeatherMaster S/T2 size 215/70R15 tires
manufactured between April 26, 2015
and May 29, 2015.
III. Noncompliance: Cooper explains
that the noncompliance is that the
inboard sidewalls of the subject tires are
labeled with an incorrect manufacturer’s
identification mark and therefore do not
fully meet all applicable requirements of
paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139.
Specifically, the tires are labeled with
manufacturer’s identification mark
‘‘U8’’ instead of ‘‘U9.’’
IV. Rule Text: Paragraph S5.5.1 of
FMVSS No. 139 requires in pertinent
part:
S5.5.1 Tire Identification Number.
. . .
(b) Tires manufactured on or after
September 1, 2009. Each tire must be labeled
with the tire identification number required
by 49 CFR part 574 on the intended outboard
sidewall of the tire. Except for retreaded tires,
either the tire identification number or a
partial tire identification number, containing
all characters in the tire identification
number, except for the date code and, at the
discretion of the manufacturer, any optional
code, must be labeled on the other sidewall
of the tire. Except for retreaded tires, if a tire
does not have an intended outboard sidewall,
the tire must be labeled with the tire
identification number required by 49 CFR
part 574 on one sidewall and with either the
tire identification number or a partial tire
identification number, containing all
characters in the tire identification number
except for the date code and, at the discretion
of the manufacturer, any optional code, on
the other side wall.
V. Summary of Cooper’s Petition:
Cooper states its belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety because while the
subject tires contain an incorrect
manufacturer’s identification mark on
E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM
04MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 43 (Friday, March 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11642-11644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04801]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0071]
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 28 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.
DATES: The exemptions were granted December 3, 2015. The exemptions
expire on December 3, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division, (202) 366-4001, fmcsamedical@dot.gov, FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
II. Background
On November 2, 2015, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of
exemption applications from certain individuals, and requested comments
from the public (80 FR 67472). That notice listed 28 applicants' case
histories. The 28 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 28 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
[[Page 11643]]
safely. The 28 exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this
category. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons, including amblyopia, cataract, central scotoma,
chorioretinal scar, complete loss of vision, detached retina,
esotropia, macular degeneration, myopic degeneration, ocular aneurysm,
optic nerve atrophy, optic nerve coloboma, optic neuropathy, prosthetic
eye, refractive amblyopia, and retinal detachment. In most cases, their
eye conditions were not recently developed. Sixteen of the applicants
were either born with their vision impairments or have had them since
childhood.
The 12 individuals that sustained their vision conditions as adults
have had it for a range of 6 to 25 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 28 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 in careers ranging for 3 to 43
years. In the past three years, no drivers were involved in crashes,
and 2 drivers were convicted of moving violations in CMVs.
The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the November 2, 2015
notice (80 FR 67472).
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 it 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 28 applicants, no drivers were involved in crashes, and 2 drivers
were convicted of moving violations in CMVs. All the applicants
achieved a 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 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 28 applicants
[[Page 11644]]
listed in the notice of November 2, 2015 (80 FR 67472).
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 28 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 no comments in this proceeding.
IV. Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 28 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)):
Bruce D. Amundson (IA)
Terry M. Baldwin (PA)
Gene B. Clyde, Jr. (NY)
Joseph Coelho Jr. (RI)
Levi R. Coutcher (WA)
Leonard H. Culbertson (GA)
Craig L. Dawson, Sr. (OH)
Jason R. Gast (MO)
Nirmal S. Gill (CA)
Robert C. Green, Jr. (PA)
Stanley Grubb (KY)
Louis M. Hankins (IL)
Nathan H. Jacobs (NM)
Danny L. Keplinger (VA)
Kimber S. Krushinski (NY)
Carmelo Lana (NJ)
Keith A. Lang (TX)
Nathan D. Langham (IL)
Michael S. Lewis (NC)
Hector J. Lopez (NC)
John V. Narretto, Jr. (LA)
Branden J. Ramos (CA)
Sonny Scott (OH)
Jarrod R. Seirer (KS)
Vince A. Thompson (OR)
Daniel R. Viscaya (NC)
Carlos Vives, Jr. (NJ)
Otis H. Wright, Jr. (MD)
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: February 24, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-04801 Filed 3-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P
