22838 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 17, 2012 / Notices 

13. National Historic Preservation Act 

of 1966; 

14. Historic Sites Act of 1935; 

15. Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act of 1976; 

16. Executive Order 11990, Protection 

of Wetlands 

17. Executive Order 13112, Invasive 

Species; 

18. Executive Order 11988, 

Floodplain Management; and, 

19. Executive Order 12898, 

Environmental Justice. 

(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: April 11, 2012. 

Manuel E. Sa ́nchez, 

Senior Transportation/Border Engineer, 

Federal Highway Administration, San Diego, 

California. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9205 Filed 4–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. FMCSA–2011–0378] 

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 twelve individuals 

from the vision requirement in the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations (FMCSRs). The exemptions 

will enable these individuals to operate 

commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in 

interstate commerce without meeting 

the prescribed vision requirement. The 

Agency has concluded that granting 

these exemptions will provide a level of 

safety that is equivalent to or greater 

than the level of safety maintained 

without the exemptions for these CMV 

drivers. 

DATES: The exemptions are effective 

April 17, 2012. The exemptions expire 

on April 17, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elaine M. Papp, 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. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access 

You may see all the comments online 

through the Federal Document 

Management System (FDMS) at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov at any time or 

Room W12–140 on the ground level of 

the West Building, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The 

FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 

365 days each year. If you want 

acknowledgement that we received your 

comments, please include a selfaddressed, stamped envelope or 

postcard or print the acknowledgement 

page that appears after submitting 

comments on-line. 

Privacy Act: Anyone may search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or of the person signing the 

comment, if submitted on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may review DOT’s Privacy Act 

Statement for the FDMS published in 

the Federal Register on January 17, 

2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/ 

E8–785.pdf. 

Background 

On February 22, 2012, FMCSA 

published a notice of receipt of 

exemption applications from certain 

individuals, and requested comments 

from the public (77 FR 10610). That 

notice listed twelve applicants’ case 

histories. The twelve 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 

twelve applications on their merits and 

made a determination to grant 

exemptions to each of them. 

Vision and Driving Experience of the 

Applicants 

The vision requirement in the 

FMCSRs provides: 

A person is physically qualified to 

drive a commercial motor vehicle if that 

person has distant visual acuity of at 

least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye 

without corrective lenses or visual 

acuity separately corrected to 20/40 

(Snellen) or better with corrective 

lenses, distant binocular acuity of 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 requirement 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 twelve 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, severed 

optic nerve, detached retina, corneal 

scar, complete loss of vision, macular 

scarring and prosthesis. In most cases, 

their eye conditions were not recently 

developed. Ten of the applicants were 

either born with their vision 

impairments or have had them since 

childhood. The two individuals that 

sustained their vision conditions as 

adults have had them for a period of 17 

to 45 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 twelve 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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 17, 2012 / Notices 22839 

CMVs with their limited vision for 

careers ranging from 2 to 40 years. In the 

past 3 years, none of the drivers were 

involved in crashes, and two were 

convicted of moving violations in a 

CMV. 

The qualifications, experience, and 

medical condition of each applicant 

were stated and discussed in detail in 

the February 22, 2012 notice (77 FR 

10610). 

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. 

We believe we can properly apply the 

principle to monocular drivers, because 

data from the Federal Highway 

Administration’s (FHWA) former waiver 

study program clearly demonstrate the 

driving performance of experienced 

monocular drivers in the program is 

better than that of all CMV drivers 

collectively (See 61 FR 13338, 13345, 

March 26, 1996). The fact that 

experienced monocular drivers 

demonstrated safe driving records in the 

waiver program supports a conclusion 

that other monocular drivers, meeting 

the same qualifying conditions as those 

required by the waiver program, are also 

likely to have adapted to their vision 

deficiency and will continue to operate 

safely. 

The first major research correlating 

past and future performance was done 

in England by Greenwood and Yule in 

1920. Subsequent studies, building on 

that model, concluded that crash rates 

for the same individual exposed to 

certain risks for two different time 

periods vary only slightly (See Bates 

and Neyman, University of California 

Publications in Statistics, April 1952). 

Other studies demonstrated theories of 

predicting crash proneness from crash 

history coupled with other factors. 

These factors—such as age, sex, 

geographic location, mileage driven and 

conviction history—are used every day 

by insurance companies and motor 

vehicle bureaus to predict the 

probability of an individual 

experiencing future crashes (See Weber, 

Donald C., ‘‘Accident Rate Potential: An 

Application of Multiple Regression 

Analysis of a Poisson Process,’’ Journal 

of American Statistical Association, 

June 1971). A 1964 California Driver 

Record Study prepared by the California 

Department of Motor Vehicles 

concluded that the best overall crash 

predictor for both concurrent and 

nonconcurrent events is the number of 

single convictions. This study used 3 

consecutive years of data, comparing the 

experiences of drivers in the first 2 years 

with their experiences in the final year. 

Applying principles from these 

studies to the past 3-year record of the 

twelve applicants, none of the drivers 

were involved in crashes and two were 

convicted of moving violations 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 twelve 

applicants listed in the notice of 

February 22, 2012 (77 FR 10610). 

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 twelve 

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. 

Discussion of Comments 

FMCSA received no comments in this 

proceeding. 

Conclusion 

Based upon its evaluation of the 

twelve exemption applications, FMCSA 

exempts Robert J. Abbas (MN), Paul T. 

Browning (MN), Robert P. Clark (NY), 

Carey C. Earwood (AL), Cheryl G. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
22840 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 17, 2012 / Notices 

Johnson (IN), Kevan J. Larson (ID), 

Melvin D. Rolfe (MN), Gilbert M. Rosas 

(AZ), Kim A. Shaffer (PA), Larry W. 

Slinker (VA), Lonnie J. Supanchick (NV) 

and Gerald W. Warner (OH) from the 

vision requirement in 49 CFR 

391.41(b)(10), subject to the 

requirements cited above (49 CFR 

391.64(b)). 

In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) 

and 31315, each exemption will be valid 

for 2 years unless revoked earlier by 

FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked 

if: (1) The person fails to comply with 

the terms and conditions of the 

exemption; (2) the exemption has 

resulted in a lower level of safety than 

was maintained before it was granted; or 

(3) continuation of the exemption would 

not be consistent with the goals and 

objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315. 

If the exemption is still effective at the 

end of the 2-year period, the person may 

apply to FMCSA for a renewal under 

procedures in effect at that time. 

Issued on: April 11, 2012. 

Larry W. Minor, 

Associate Administrator for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9160 Filed 4–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

[Docket Number FRA–2012–0019] 

Notice of Application for Approval of 

Discontinuance or Modification of a 

Railroad Signal System 

Pursuant to Title 49 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part 235 and 49 

U.S.C. 20502(a), the following railroad 

has petitioned the Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA) seeking approval 

for the discontinuance or modification 

of the signal system or relief from the 

requirements of 49 CFR part 236, as 

detailed below. FRA assigned the 

petition Docket Number FRA–2012– 

0019. 

Applicant 

Norfolk Southern Corporation, Mr. B. L. 

Sykes, Chief Engineer, C&S Engineering, 

1200 Peachtree Street NE., Atlanta, GA 

30309. 

The Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) 

seeks approval of the proposed 

modification of a traffic control system. 

The modifications consist of the 

replacement of a power-operated switch 

with a hand-operated switch and the 

shortening of the control point limits by 

replacing the 4E–1 and 4E–2 signals 

with the 4E signal, which will be moved 

east of the Horseheads Industrial Track 

at Control Point Horseheads on the 

Southern Tier (Milepost SR–276.9 in 

Horseheads, NY). The reason given for 

the replacement is that the poweroperated switch is no longer needed in 

today’s operation. 

Any interested party desiring to 

protest the granting of an application 

shall set forth, specifically, the grounds 

upon which the protest is made, and 

include a concise statement of the 

interest of the party in the proceeding. 

Additionally, one copy of the protest 

shall be furnished to the applicant at the 

address listed above. 

A copy of the petition, as well as any 

written communications concerning the 

petition, is available for review online at 

www.regulations.gov and in person at 

the U.S. Department of Transportation’s 

(DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. The Docket 

Operations Facility is open from 9 a.m. 

to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal Holidays. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should be identified by 

Docket Number FRA–2012–0019 and 

may be submitted by any of the 

following methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on the DOT electronic site. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal Holidays. 

Communications received by June 1, 

2012 will be considered by FRA before 

final action is taken. Comments received 

after that date will be considered as far 

as practicable. All written 

communications concerning these 

proceedings are available for 

examination during regular business 

hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the above 

facility. All documents in the public 

docket are also available for inspection 

and copying on the Internet at the 

docket facility’s Web site at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477, or online at http://www.dot.gov/ 

privacy.html. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 11, 

2012. 

Ron Hynes, 

Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for 

Regulatory and Legislative Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9138 Filed 4–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

[Docket Number FRA–1999–6135] 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with Part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) has 

received a request for a waiver of 

compliance from certain requirements 

of its safety standards from New Jersey 

Transit (NJT). NJT seeks a modification 

to the original terms and conditions of 

its waiver of compliance that was 

granted in 1999. As part of NJT’s 

construction of a future Pennsauken 

transfer station (allowing transfers 

between Atlantic City commuter trains 

and the River Line), NJT is lengthening 

the Pennsauken siding at Control Point 

(CP) 55 to now include Minson siding; 

incorporating trackwork improvements 

and changes to the signal and train 

control (S&TC) system. NJT submits that 

this request is consistent with the 

waiver process for shared use. (See 

Statement of Agency Policy Concerning 

Jurisdiction Over the Safety of Railroad 

Passenger Operations and Waivers 

Related to Shared Use of the Tracks of 

the General Railroad System by Light 

Rail and Conventional Equipment, 65 

FR 42529 (July 10, 2000); see also Joint 

Statement of Agency Policy Concerning 

Shared Use of the Tracks of the General 

Railroad System by Conventional 

Railroads and Light Rail Transit 

Systems, 65 FR 42626 (July 10, 2000).) 

Specifically, in April 2007, FRA 

approved NJT’s S&TC improvements 

between CP45 and CP70 (which 

includes CP Ross, Minson siding, and 

Pennsauken siding) along its River Line 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES