Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision, 28734-28736 [2017-13128]
Download as PDF
28734
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2017 / Notices
(LWCF) (16 U.S.C. 4601–4604); Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (42
U.S.C. 300f–300j–26)); Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401–
406); Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16
U.S.C. 1271–1287); Emergency
Wetlands Resources Act, (16 U.S.C.
3901, 3921); Wetlands Mitigation (23
U.S.C. 119(g) and 133(b)(14)); Flood
Disaster Protection Act, 42 U.S.C.
4012a, 4106).
8. 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. 13007 Indian Sacred
Sites; E.O. 13287 Preserve America;
E.O. 13175 Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments; E.O. 11514 Protection
and Enhancement of Environmental
Quality; E.O. 13112 Invasive Species.
9. Navigation: Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899 [33 U.SC. 403]; General Bridge
Act of 1946 [33 U.S.C 9 and 11].
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
May 25, 2017. The exemptions expire
on May 25, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
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
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
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., e.t., 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.
[Docket No. FMCSA–2017–0016]
II. Background
(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: June 13, 2017.
Daniel M. Mathis,
Division Administrator, Olympia,
Washington.
[FR Doc. 2017–12814 Filed 6–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
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 10 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
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Jun 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
On April 24, 2017, FMCSA published
a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals,
and requested comments from the
public (82 FR 18954). That notice listed
10 applicants’ case histories. The 10
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
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
at the end of the 2-year period.
Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated the
10 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 limitation and
demonstrated their ability to drive
safely. The 10 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, complete
loss of vision, enucleation, glaucoma,
and prosthetic eye. In most cases, their
eye conditions were not recently
developed. Nine of the applicants were
either born with their vision
impairments or have had them since
childhood.
The one individual that sustained
their vision condition as an adult has
had it for 12 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 10 drivers have been
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
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 5 to 52 years. In the
past three years, no drivers were
involved in crashes and one driver was
convicted of a moving violation in a
CMV.
The qualifications, experience, and
medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in
the April 24, 2017 notice (82 FR 18954).
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Jun 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
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
10 applicants, no drivers were involved
in crashes and one driver was convicted
of a moving violation in a CMV. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28735
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 10 applicants
listed in the notice of April 24, 2017 (82
FR 18954).
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 10
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 oaf 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
FMCSA received one comment in this
proceeding. Cheyenne Imlay stated she
is against granting the exemptions due
to safety concerns. FMCSA is required
to evaluate medical reports regarding
each applicant’s vision deficiency, as
well as each applicant’s driving records,
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
28736
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2017 / Notices
in order to determine if an equal or
greater level of safety is likely to be
achieved by permitting each of the
applicants to drive in interstate
commerce as opposed to restricting him
or her to driving in intrastate commerce.
The Agency completed this evaluation
for each of the 10 applicants listed in
this notice and determined that an
equivalent or greater level of safety is
likely to be achieved by granting the
exemptions as would be without the
exemptions.
IV. Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 10
exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the
vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10):
Russel R. Dixon (VA)
Robert A. Fasset (MI)
William M. Hanes (OH)
Ryan P. Lambert (UT)
Richard D. Patterson (TN)
Jonathan W. Pryor (OK)
Ernesto Silva (NM)
Dennis L. Spence (WA)
Gordon R. Ulm (OH)
Gary L. Warner (VA)
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: June 14, 2017.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017–13128 Filed 6–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0141; Notice 2]
Spartan Motors USA, Inc., Grant of
Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:21 Jun 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
Spartan Motors USA, Inc.
(Spartan), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2017 Spartan
Emergency Response Metro Star motor
vehicles do not fully comply with
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 120, Tire selection and
rims and motor home/recreation vehicle
trailer load carrying capacity
information for motor vehicles with a
GVWR of more than 4,536 kilograms
(10,000 pounds). Spartan filed a
noncompliance information report
dated December 6, 2016. Spartan also
petitioned NHTSA on January 4, 2017,
for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
ADDRESSES: For further information on
this decision contact Kerrin Bressant,
Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), telephone
(202) 366–1110, facsimile (202) 366–
5930.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview: Spartan Motors USA, Inc.
(Spartan), has determined that certain
model year (MY) 2017 Spartan
Emergency Response Metro Star motor
vehicles do not fully comply with
paragraph S5.2(b) of Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
120, Tire selection and rims and motor
home/recreation vehicle trailer load
carrying capacity information for motor
vehicles with a GVWR of more than
4,536 kilograms (10,000 pounds).
Spartan filed a noncompliance report
dated December 6, 2016, pursuant to 49
CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and
Reports. Spartan also petitioned NHTSA
on January 4, 2017, pursuant to 49
U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49
CFR part 556, for an exemption from the
notification and remedy requirements of
49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that
this noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
Notice of receipt of the petition was
published, with a 30-day public
comment period on April 11, 2017, in
the Federal Register (82 FR 17520). No
comments were received. To view the
petition and all supporting documents
log onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Web page
at: https://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instruction to
locate docket number ‘‘NHTSA–2016–
0141.’’
II. Vehicles Involved: Approximately
19 MY 2017 Spartan Emergency
Response Metro Star motor vehicles
manufactured between September 6,
2016, and October 24, 2016, are
potentially involved.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
III. Noncompliance: Spartan explains
that the noncompliance is that the
wheels on the subject vehicles
incorrectly identify the rim size as 24.5″
x 8.25″ instead of 22.5″ x 8.25″, and
therefore do not meet the requirements
of paragraph S5.2(b) of FMVSS No. 120.
IV. Rule Text: paragraph S5.2 of
FMVSS No. 120 states:
S5.2 Rim marking. Each rim or, at the
option of the manufacturer in the case
of a single-piece wheel, wheel disc shall
be marked with the information listed in
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this
paragraph, in lettering not less than 3
millimeters high, impressed to a depth
or, at the option of the manufacturer,
embossed to a height of not less than
0.125 millimeters . . .
(b) The rim size designation, and in
case of multipiece rims, the rim type
designation. For example: 20 x 5.50, or
20 x 5.5.
V. Summary of Spartan’s Petition:
Spartan described the subject
noncompliance and stated its belief that
the noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, Spartan
provided the following: Chassis cabs
affected by this condition are
manufactured in two or more stages.
While in general, Spartan is the
incomplete vehicle manufacturer, in
this case, Spartan provides a label that
contains the requirements identified in
49 CFR 567.5(a)(2)(iv), which states that
a label must be affixed to an incomplete
vehicle that contains the ‘‘GROSS AXLE
WEIGHT RATING’’ or ‘‘GVWR’’,
followed by the appropriate value in
kilograms and (pounds) for each axle,
identified in order from front to rear
(e.g., front, first intermediate, second
intermediate, rear). The ratings for any
consecutive axles having identical gross
axle weight ratings when equipped with
tires having the same tire size
designation may be stated as a single
value, with the label indicating to which
axles the ratings apply. Similar
information must be included in the
incomplete vehicle document or IVD
that must be furnished by the
incomplete vehicle manufacturer, as
required by 49 CFR 568.4(a)(5).
While the actual wheel stamping may
be 24.5, the physical size (outside
diameter) is 22.5. If a service provider
were to reference the rim size of the
incorrectly stamped rim, and attempt to
install a tire with an inside diameter of
24.5, it would be too large for the 22.5
size rim and thus not fit. Given the label
being provided and the construction
details sheet provided in accordance
with NFPA® 1901 Standard for
Automotive Fire Apparatus 2016
edition, Spartan believes the
E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM
23JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 120 (Friday, June 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28734-28736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13128]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0016]
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 10 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 May 25, 2017. The exemptions expire
on May 25, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 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., e.t., 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 April 24, 2017, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of exemption
applications from certain individuals, and requested comments from the
public (82 FR 18954). That notice listed 10 applicants' case histories.
The 10 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 10 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
limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 10
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, complete loss of vision, enucleation,
glaucoma, and prosthetic eye. In most cases, their eye conditions were
not recently developed. Nine of the applicants were either born with
their vision impairments or have had them since childhood.
The one individual that sustained their vision condition as an
adult has had it for 12 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 10 drivers have been
[[Page 28735]]
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 5 to 52
years. In the past three years, no drivers were involved in crashes and
one driver was convicted of a moving violation in a CMV.
The qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant were stated and discussed in detail in the April 24, 2017
notice (82 FR 18954).
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 10 applicants, no drivers were involved in crashes and one driver
was convicted of a moving violation in a CMV. 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 10 applicants listed in the notice of April
24, 2017 (82 FR 18954).
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 10 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 oaf 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 one comment in this proceeding. Cheyenne Imlay
stated she is against granting the exemptions due to safety concerns.
FMCSA is required to evaluate medical reports regarding each
applicant's vision deficiency, as well as each applicant's driving
records,
[[Page 28736]]
in order to determine if an equal or greater level of safety is likely
to be achieved by permitting each of the applicants to drive in
interstate commerce as opposed to restricting him or her to driving in
intrastate commerce. The Agency completed this evaluation for each of
the 10 applicants listed in this notice and determined that an
equivalent or greater level of safety is likely to be achieved by
granting the exemptions as would be without the exemptions.
IV. Conclusion
Based upon its evaluation of the 10 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10):
Russel R. Dixon (VA)
Robert A. Fasset (MI)
William M. Hanes (OH)
Ryan P. Lambert (UT)
Richard D. Patterson (TN)
Jonathan W. Pryor (OK)
Ernesto Silva (NM)
Dennis L. Spence (WA)
Gordon R. Ulm (OH)
Gary L. Warner (VA)
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: June 14, 2017.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-13128 Filed 6-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P