Federal Register/Vol. 83, No. 68/Monday, April 9, 2018/Notices
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2018 / Notices 15233 without the exemption. The exemption driver response just as intensely as Eric J. Andersen (CT) allows applicants to operate CMVs in interstate driving conditions. Mason M. Arends (CO) interstate commerce. The applicants in this notice have Darin P. Ball (NY) The Agency’s decision regarding these driven CMVs with their limited vision Freddie L. Boyd (MI) exemption applications is based on in careers ranging for 2 to 46 years. In Larry W. Buchanan, Jr. (NM) medical reports about the applicants’ the past three years, no drivers were Gerald R. Eister (NC) vision as well as their driving records involved in crashes, and one driver was Joseph A. Kennedy (ME) and experience driving with the vision convicted of moving violations in Kent E. Kirchner (IA) deficiency. The qualifications, CMVs. All the applicants achieved a Veronica D. Lowe (ID) experience, and medical condition of record of safety while driving with their Michael P. Meyer (WI) each applicant were stated and vision impairment, demonstrating the Christopher T. Peevyhouse (TN) discussed in detail in the December 11, likelihood that they have adapted their William L. Richardson, Jr. (IN) 2017, Federal Register notice (82 FR driving skills to accommodate their Russell J. Soland (MN) 58262) and will not be repeated in this condition. As the applicants’ ample William L. Sunkler (OR) notice. driving histories with their vision Brian J. Tegeler (IL) FMCSA recognizes that some drivers deficiencies are good predictors of William H. Wrice, Jr. (OH) do not meet the vision requirement but future performance, FMCSA concludes In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) have adapted their driving to their ability to drive safely can be and 31315, each exemption will be valid accommodate their limitation and projected into the future. for two years from the effective date demonstrated their ability to drive Consequently, FMCSA finds that in unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The safely. The 16 exemption applicants each case exempting these applicants exemption will be revoked if the listed in this notice are in this category. from the vision requirement in 49 CFR following occurs: (1) The person fails to They are unable to meet the vision 391.41(b)(10) is likely to achieve a level comply with the terms and conditions requirement in one eye for various of safety equal to that existing without of the exemption; (2) the exemption has reasons, including amblyopia, the exemption. resulted in a lower level of safety than chorioretinal scar, corneal scar, was maintained prior to being granted; keratoconus, macular edema, V. Conditions and Requirements or (3) continuation of the exemption nystagmus, optic atrophy, prosthetic The terms and conditions of the would not be consistent with the goals eye, retinal detachment, and retinal exemption are provided to the and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and scar. In most cases, their eye conditions applicants in the exemption document 31315. were not recently developed. Ten of the and includes the following: (1) Each applicants were either born with their driver must be physically examined Issued on: April 2, 2018. vision impairments or have had them every year (a) by an ophthalmologist or Larry W. Minor, since childhood. The six individuals optometrist who attests that the vision Associate Administrator for Policy. that sustained their vision conditions as in the better eye continues to meet the [FR Doc. 2018–07184 Filed 4–6–18; 8:45 am] adults have had it for a range of 4 to 18 standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and (b) BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P years. Although each applicant has one by a certified Medical Examiner who eye which does not meet the vision attests that the individual is otherwise requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), physically qualified under 49 CFR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION each has at least 20/40 corrected vision 391.41; (2) each driver must provide a in the other eye, and in a doctor’s copy of the ophthalmologist’s or National Highway Traffic Safety opinion, has sufficient vision to perform optometrist’s report to the Medical Administration all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV. Examiner at the time of the annual [Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0124; Notice 3] Doctors’ opinions are supported by medical examination; and (3) each the applicants’ possession of a valid driver must provide a copy of the General Motors LLC, Receipt of Third license to operate a CMV. By meeting annual medical certification to the Petition for Inconsequentiality and State licensing requirements, the employer for retention in the driver’s Notice of Consolidation applicants demonstrated their ability to qualification file, or keep a copy in his/ operate a CMV, with their limited vision her driver’s qualification file if he/she is AGENCY: National Highway Traffic in intrastate commerce, even though self-employed. The driver must also Safety Administration (NHTSA), their vision disqualified them from have a copy of the exemption when Department of Transportation. driving in interstate commerce. We driving, for presentation to a duly ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition and believe that the applicants’ intrastate authorized Federal, State, or local decision denying request for deferral of driving experience and history provide enforcement official. determination. an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely in interstate VI. Preemption SUMMARY: On January 2, 2018, TK commerce. Intrastate driving, like During the period the exemption is in Holdings Inc. (Takata) filed a defect interstate operations, involves effect, no State shall enforce any law or information report (DIR), in which it substantial driving on highways on the regulation that conflicts with this determined that a defect existed in interstate system and on other roads exemption with respect to a person certain passenger-side air bag inflators built to interstate standards. Moreover, operating under the exemption. that it manufactured, including driving in congested urban areas passenger inflators that it supplied to exposes the driver to more pedestrian VII. Conclusion General Motors, LLC (GM) for use in and vehicular traffic than exists on Based upon its evaluation of the 16 certain GMT900 vehicles. GM has interstate highways. Faster reaction to exemption applications, FMCSA petitioned the Agency for a decision traffic and traffic signals is generally exempts the following drivers from the that, because of differences in inflator required because distances between vision requirement, 49 CFR design and vehicle integration, the them are more compact. These 391.41(b)(10), subject to the equipment defect determined to exist by conditions tax visual capacity and requirements cited above: Takata is inconsequential as it relates to VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Apr 06, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM 09APN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 15234 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2018 / Notices motor vehicle safety in the GMT900 the Chief Counsel, NCC–100, National Federal Register on November 28, 2016, vehicles, and that GM should therefore Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Agency published notice of the First be relieved of its notification and 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Petition and granted two administrative remedy obligations. This notice serves Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202) requests, accepting the petition out of to make the public aware of GM’s 366–5263). time and granting GM additional time to pending request to the agency and the For general information regarding provide data in support of the petition. period for public comment. It does not NHTSA’s investigation into Takata air See 81 FR 85681. address GM’s substantive claims, nor bag inflator ruptures and the related On January 3, 2017, Takata timely legal arguments or interpretations recalls: http://www.safercar.gov/rs/ submitted the second scheduled asserted by GM. takata/index.html. equipment DIRs for additional covered DATES: The closing date for comments is SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: passenger inflators. See Recall Nos. May 9, 2018. I. Background 17E–001, 17E–002, and 17E–003. Again, ADDRESSES: Interested persons are the Takata filing triggered GM’s On May 4, 2016, NHTSA issued, and obligation to file a DIR for the affected invited to submit written data, views, Takata agreed to, an Amendment to the and arguments regarding this petition GM vehicles. See 49 CFR part 573; November 3, 2015 Consent Order (the Amendment at ¶ 16; Third Amendment for inconsequentiality. Comments must ‘‘Amendment’’), under which Takata is refer to the docket and notice number to Coordinated Remedy Order at ¶ 32. bound to declare a defect in all frontal GM ultimately submitted its DIRs on cited in the title of this notice and be driver and passenger air bag inflators submitted by one of the following January 10, 2017, and notified NTHSA that contain a phase-stabilized of its intention to file an methods: ammonium nitrate (PSAN)-based • Internet: Go to http:// inconsequentiality petition. See Recall propellant and do not contain a Nos. 17V–010, 17V–019, and 17V–021.1 www.regulations.gov and follow the moisture-absorbing desiccant. Such online instructions for submitting Contemporaneous with its DIRs, GM defect declarations are being made on a submitted to the Agency a Petition for comments. rolling basis, with the first declaration • Mail: Docket Management Facility, Inconsequentiality and Request for due May 16, 2016, the second Deferral of Determination Regarding M–30, U.S. Department of declaration due December 31, 2016, and Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Certain GMT900 Vehicles Equipped the third declaration due December 31, with Takata ‘‘SPI YP’’ and ‘‘PSPI–L YD’’ Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12– 2017. See Amendment at ¶ 14. 140, Washington, DC 20590. Passenger Inflators Subject to January • Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S.