FMCSA Random Test Rates

2172

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a; 49 U.S.C. 322.

2. Part II.A of the Appendix is
amended by republishing the
introductory text and adding a new
paragraph 15, to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
Appendix to Part 10—Exemptions
*

*
*
*
*
Part II. Specific exemptions.
A. The following systems of records
are exempt from subsection (c)(3)
(Accounting of Certain Disclosures), (d)
(Access to Records), (e)(4) (G), (H), and
(I) (Agency Requirements), and (f)
(Agency Rules) of 5 U.S.C. 552a, to the
extent that they contain investigatory
material compiled for law enforcement
purposes in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552a(k)(2):
*
*
*
*
*
15. Vessel Identification System,
maintained by the Operations Systems
Center, U.S. Coast Guard (DOT/CG 590).
The purpose of this exemption is to
prevent persons who are the subjects of
criminal investigations from learning
too early in the investigative process
that they are subjects, what information
there is in Coast Guard files that
indicates that they may have committed
unlawful conduct, and who provided
such information.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 5,
1998.
Rodney E. Slater,
Secretary of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 98–757 Filed 1–13–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–62–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
49 CFR Part 382
Controlled Substances and Alcohol
Testing Management Information
System (MIS) Statistical Data
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Controlled substances and
alcohol testing rates.
AGENCY:

SUMMARY: The FHWA is announcing the
motor carrier industry’s 1994, 1995, and

1996 controlled substances and alcohol
testing positive rates. The controlled
substances testing positive rate was 2.6
percent in calendar year 1994, 2.8
percent in 1995, and 2.2 percent in
1996. The alcohol testing ‘‘violation’’
rate was 0.14 percent in 1995, and 0.18
percent in 1996. Because the violation
rate was below 0.5 percent for two
consecutive years, the FHWA is
announcing it is lowering the random
alcohol testing rate for calendar year
1998 to 10 percent, in accordance with
the provisions of the testing regulations.
DATES: January 1, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Charles Rombro, Office of Motor Carrier
Information Analysis (HIA–20), (202)
366–5615; Federal Highway
Administration, 400 Seventh Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 23, 1993 (58 FR 68220), the
FHWA announced it would require
motor carriers subject to 49 CFR part
391, later replaced by part 382, to
implement and maintain specific
controlled substance testing data, and
submit an appropriate annual report
when requested. All motor carriers must
maintain this information. The FHWA
randomly selects a sample of motor
carriers annually and asks those
selected to submit their data.
On February 15, 1994 (59 FR 7484),
the FHWA promulgated new controlled
substances and alcohol testing rules in
49 CFR part 382. These rules combined
the controlled substances annual report
with a similar alcohol rule ‘‘violation’’
annual report. An alcohol rule violation
for purposes of the annual report are
alcohol concentrations of 0.04 or greater
and refusals to submit to alcohol testing.
On March 13, 1995, the FHWA
amended the rule to reduce the
information collection burden on all
respondents, including small entities
(60 FR 13369).
The current rule at § 382.403,
formerly at 49 CFR 391.87(h), is
essential for the FHWA to accomplish
the following four goals.
1. Collect controlled substance and
alcohol testing statistical data.
2. Use the data to analyze its current
approach to deterring and detecting
illegal controlled substance abuse and

alcohol misuse in the motor carrier
industry.
3. Determine each calendar year’s
random selection rates for alcohol and
controlled substance testing under the
rule.
4. Provide for a more efficient and
effective regulatory program.
In 1995, the FHWA requested a
sample of motor carriers report to the
FHWA data collected in 1994. The
FHWA determined the random positive
controlled substance testing rate for
commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers subject to 49 CFR part 391,
subpart H, for the period of January 1,
1994, through December 31, 1994, was
2.6 percent.
In 1996, the FHWA requested a
sample of motor carriers report to the
FHWA data collected in 1995. The
FHWA calculated a random positive
controlled substance testing rate—‘‘the
positive rate’’—for 1995 of 2.8 percent.
The 1995 random alcohol violation
testing rate—‘‘the violation rate’’—for
CDL drivers of motor carriers with 50 or
more CDL drivers was 0.14 percent.
The FHWA performed similar
calculations on the 1996 data, based on
forms received from a random sample of
carriers in early 1997. The ‘‘positive
rate’’ for controlled substances was 2.2
percent. For alcohol, the ‘‘violation
rate’’ was 0.18 percent. The estimated
rates, with their associated 95 percent
confidence intervals, are presented in
Table 1.
The estimation procedures for the
1995 and 1996 rates incorporate carrier
data on drivers refusing to test. Specific
definitions for violation rate and
positive rate were added to the
regulations during calendar year 1994
for testing in 1995. Based on these rule
changes, refusals to take a random test
are counted as ‘‘positive.’’ Adding
refusals slightly increases the rates for
alcohol concentrations of 0.04 or greater
and verified positive controlled
substances tests, because the number of
refusals each year were very small. See
the definitions for ‘‘violation rate’’
added on February 15, 1994 (59 FR
7484) and ‘‘positive rate’’ added on
December 2, 1994 (59 FR 62218). This
results in a higher rate than would be
the case if the FHWA excluded refusals.

TABLE 1.—RANDOM TESTING
Calendar
year
Controlled substances ....................................................................................................................

Alcohol ............................................................................................................................................

1994
*1995
*1996
*1995

Survey rate
(%)
2.6
2.8
2.2
0.14

95% confidence
(i nterval (%))
±1.9
±0.9
±0.8
±0.04

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

2173

TABLE 1.—RANDOM TESTING—Continued
Calendar
year
*1996

Survey rate
(%)
0.18

95% confidence
(i nterval (%))
±0.06

* Includes drivers refusing to submit to testing.

The FHWA based the calendar year
1994 rates upon U.S. domiciled motor
carriers subject to 49 CFR part 391,
subpart H operating in interstate
commerce. The FHWA based the
calendar year 1995 rates upon a sample
from the following population:
1. Small U.S. domiciled interstate
motor carriers subject to 49 CFR part
391, subpart H; and
2. Large U.S. domiciled intrastate or
interstate motor carriers (also known as
employers) subject to 49 CFR part 382.
All U.S. domiciled motor carriers
became subject to 49 CFR part 382 on
January 1, 1996. As a result, the 1996
rates are based on a sample of all
domestic carriers. All foreign domiciled
motor carriers (e.g., Canadian and
Mexican motor carriers) became subject
to 49 CFR part 382 on July 1, 1997.
Based upon 49 CFR 382.305 and the
results of the survey, the controlled
substances selection and testing rate
must remain at 50 percent of the average
number of CDL driver positions for
calendar year 1998. The controlled
substances positive rate must be below
1.0 percent each year for two
consecutive years before the regulations
would allow the FHWA to reduce the
selection and testing rate to 25 percent.
The alcohol selection and testing rate
will be lowered to 10 percent of the
average number of CDL driver positions
for calendar year 1998, in accordance
with the provisions of 49 CFR
382.305(d)(1). The FHWA may increase
the alcohol selection and testing rate for
calendar year 1999 if the MIS reports
received for calendar year 1997 indicate
the alcohol testing violation rate for
1997 is over 0.5 percent.
The provisions of 49 CFR
382.305(d)(1) are as follows:

Truckload Carriers Conference)
petitioned the FHWA Administrator on
October 23, 1996, to reduce the random
testing rate applicable for alcohol and
controlled substances testing on behalf
of itself and four of its member motor
carriers: C.R. England & Sons, Inc., Salt
Lake City, Utah; Fortune Transportation,
Windom, Minnesota; Roberson
Transportation Services, Farmer City,
Illinois; and Weinrich Truckline, Inc.,
Hinton, Iowa.
The FHWA, as stated above, is
reducing the random alcohol testing rate
for calendar year 1998 for all motor
carriers subject to 49 CFR part 382.
Thus, this notice partially responds to
the TCA petition. The other part
requests a reduction in the random
controlled substances testing rate for
only the TCA’s named and unnamed
members.
As the DOT and the FHWA explained
on December 2, 1994 (59 FR 62218, at
62222), the FHWA will determine
changes to the random testing rate based
upon the motor carrier industry as a
whole as the triggering group, not
individual motor carriers or industry
segments. The DOT and the FHWA
believed then, and continue to believe,
this is the fairest and most effective
approach. Basing the testing rate upon
the industry-wide positive rate provides
an incentive for motor carriers and
groups of motor carriers with successful
programs to pressure problem carriers
and subgroups to improve their
performance.
The FHWA, therefore, denies the
TCA’s petition with respect to reducing
the controlled substances testing for
TCA members only.

§ 382.305

How Did FHWA Determine These
Rates?

Random testing.

(d)(1) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 25 percent or more, the FHWA
Administrator may lower this rate to 10
percent of all driver positions if the
FHWA Administrator determines the
data received under the reporting
requirements of § 382.403 for two
consecutive calendar years indicate the
violation rate is less than 0.5 percent.
Petition
The Truckload Carriers Association
(TCA, formerly named the Interstate

The appendices to this notice contain
the methods used to analyze the data
and calculate the positive testing rates.
The FHWA has attempted to make the
discussion as straightforward as
possible while not slighting any
substantive issues or formulas. The
FHWA believes a discussion of the
process must be available to the widest
available audience; therefore the
statistical methodology and the rates are
provided below.

Will the Reduction of the Random
Alcohol Testing Rate Reduce Highway
Safety?
The FHWA does not believe reducing
the random alcohol testing rate to 10
percent will diminish the safe operation
of commercial motor vehicles. First, the
rates show the motor carrier industry
already has a very low alcohol violation
rate. The FHWA’s MIS data indicates
the motor carrier industry is achieving
about 99.8 percent alcohol free drivers.
Second, recent analysis of fatal crash
results show CMV drivers involved in
fatal crashes do not have a significant
problem with alcohol while driving
CMVs. According to the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s
(NHTSA) publication, Traffic Safety
Facts 1996: Large Trucks, 1.4 percent of
truck drivers driving large trucks
involved in fatal crashes in 1996 were
intoxicated. Intoxication rates for
drivers of passenger cars, light trucks,
and motorcycles were 18.8 percent, 21.9
percent, and 30.3 percent, respectively.
Rates for these other drivers are 13 to 21
times higher than the intoxication rate
for drivers of large trucks.
Third, the percentage of intoxicated
truck drivers involved in fatal crashes
has fallen over the last ten years. The
NHTSA’s data for 1987 showed 2.7
percent of truck drivers involved in fatal
crashes were intoxicated, compared to
1.4 percent in 1996, a 52 percent
decline. This suggests to the FHWA that
truck drivers use of alcohol may be
falling. See Appendix F for a graph
showing the data.
Finally, the industry is promoting
alcohol free driving through educational
material distributed by its associations.
For example, please refer to material
such as the article ‘‘Road Rage,’’ in the
Owner Operator Independent Driver
Association’s ‘‘Land Line’’ Magazine,
November/December 1997 issue. The
article suggests ten ‘‘simple rules of safe
driving’’ including the following rule.
‘‘Don’t drive when fatigued or under
the influence of alcohol or drugs. Many
over the counter medicines can contain
alcohol or other ingredients that can
affect your driving skills.’’
This article is also available from
OOIDA’s internet universal resource
locator at http:\\www.ooida.com and
http:\\www.landlinemag.com

2174

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

Also refer to material available from
the American Trucking Associations,
Inc. (ATA). ATA states one of its safety
initatives is alcohol and drug testing
regulations. Some of ATA’s material is
available on the internet, at
http:\\www.truckline.com.
Will the Reduction of the Random
Alcohol Testing Rate Reduce Any
Burdens in Collecting Information?
Yes, the FHWA will be sending a
revised burden estimate to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
reflecting the savings.
On September 22, 1997, the OMB
reapproved the collections of
information contained in the FHWA’s
controlled substances and alcohol
testing regulations. See FHWA Docket
FHWA–97–2313. The OMB extended
the expiration date of its new approval
until September 30, 2000. The OMB
approved an annual time burden to
collect information of 57,479,400 hours
and an annual financial burden to
collect information of $3,004,913,000.
The costs to actually conduct the testing
are much higher than these information
collection burdens.
Based upon the FHWA’s reduction of
the random alcohol testing rate to ten
percent of the average driver positions,
the FHWA will submit to OMB a request
to lower the burden estimates to
57,169,400 hours and $2,974,170,000.
This is a savings of 310,000 burden
hours and $14,743,000 of financial
burden each year to collect this
information.
Appendix A—FHWA Calculations for
the 1994 Positive Testing Rate
In 1995, the FHWA selected a
stratified random sample of 1,048 motor
carriers. Each selected motor carrier was
mailed a request to prepare and submit
to the FHWA its calendar year 1994
controlled substance testing data (the
FHWA’s alcohol testing regulations had

not yet taken effect). Five hundred fortyseven motor carriers responded to the
request. The strata were defined by the
number of power units owned by each
motor carrier reported on the MCMIS.
The sample size and response rates, by
strata, are shown in Table 2.

Estimation of the Random Positive Rate

1000 or more ..............
Unspecified * ...............

126
459

106
123

Results

Total: ........................

1048

* * 547

The estimate of the rate of controlled
substance use within the motor carrier
industry was carried out using two
steps.
First, the initial estimates of the rate
of controlled substance use were made
TABLE 2.—1994 INITIAL RESPONSES
for each sampling stratum.
RECEIVED
Second, the estimates were adjusted
for
nonresponse. All information in the
No. ranStrata (No. of power
No. resample of nonrespondents showed zero
domly
units)
sampled sponding positive rates in that group. This means
the estimates in the respondent groups
1–19 ............................
204
105
20–99 ..........................
153
127 were adjusted downward by the rate of
100–999 ......................
102
86 response. (See Appendix D.)

* The unspecified stratum includes motor
carriers that have not provided the FHWA’s
MCMIS with information about the number of
CMV drivers who work for them.
* * 551 responses were recevied, but 4
motor carrier responses failed to report sufficient information to classify the motor carriers
in any stratum upon receipt of the report.

Nonrespondents
Four hundred ninety-seven of the
1,048 motor carriers contacted did not
respond. The FHWA made a number of
efforts to contact these nonrespondents.
A second mailing and telephone
contacts revealed the vast majority of
nonrespondents had legitimate reasons
for not returning the MIS forms. Many
carriers were no longer in business,
many did not employ CDL drivers, some
were exempt farmers, and others only
operated intrastate. Those
nonresponding carriers that were
determined to be in business and within
the scope of the survey were
recontacted. Drug and alcohol testing
data from these carriers were then used
to adjust the rates in each sampling
stratum. The adjustments are described
in Appendix D.

Estimates of the rate of controlled
substance use were made for the
industry as a whole and for the
individual strata. The estimated rate of
controlled substance use in the motor
carrier industry is (with a 95 percent
confidence interval (CI)):
r=.026 (2.6%)
95% CI: (0.7%, 4.5%)
Appendix B—FHWA Calculations for
the 1995 and 1996 Controlled
Substances Positive and Alcohol
Violation Rates
I. Disposition of the 1995 Sample
For the 1995 survey, MIS forms were
mailed to 1,747 motor carriers, selected
from a stratified random sample. Two
hundred sixty-five carriers required to
conduct alcohol tests provided usable
alcohol data and 648 carriers provided
usable controlled substance data.
Information on the disposition of the
sample, by sampling stratum, is
provided in Table 3.

TABLE 3.— SAMPLE SIZES AND LEVEL OF RESPONSE BY SIZE CLASS

Size (CDL drivers)

Number of
carriers on
sampling
frame

Total mailouts

Viable sample units

Respondents providing alcohol
data

Respondents providing controlled substance data

Extra Large (1000 +) ................................................................................
Large (100–999) .......................................................................................
Medium (50–99) ........................................................................................
Small (20–49) ...........................................................................................
Very Small (1–19) .....................................................................................
Size Unknown ...........................................................................................

87
953
1,029
2,982
49,859
99,069

87
150
100
100
410
900

83
145
95
90
325
592

77
126
62
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)

78
137
82
80
152
119

Total ...................................................................................................

153,979

1,747

1,330

265

648

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 1998 / Rules and Regulations
Also listed in this table is response
rate information by size class stratum.
The term Viable Sample Units refers to
the number of solicited sample units
found to be in-business and in-scope
(e.g., a motor carrier with trucks over
11,794 kilograms gross vehicle weight
rating and at least one CDL driver). As
can be seen from the table, the FHWA
found a large number of carriers
selected for sample solicitation from the
MCMIS sampling frame to be nonviable. This was particularly
problematic for carriers selected from
the ‘‘size unknown’’ size class stratum,
where only 66 percent of the original
sample units selected were found to be
viable.
For the 1995 survey, intrastate carriers
in the small size classes (fewer than 50
CDL drivers) were not required to
submit alcohol testing information.
Hence, the sample estimate for the
alcohol usage rate is based upon data
from the three largest size classes only
(50 or more CDL drivers). In addition,
data were excluded from the ‘‘size
unknown’’ size class stratum for this

estimate, since the FHWA believes most
carriers in this stratum are small
companies.
Dividing the total number of sample
units providing useable data by the total
number of viable units in the sample
gives the response rate for the survey.
Using this approach for the sampling
strata where data were required, the
response rate for the 1995 survey is 82
percent for alcohol testing (based upon
the three largest size classes where
reporting was required) and 49 percent
for controlled substance testing (based
upon all size classes).
II. 1995 Survey Results
The survey estimate for the
percentage of CDL drivers testing
positive for controlled substances is 2.8
percent, with an estimated standard
error of 0.46 percent. Based upon these
results, a 95 percent confidence interval
for this estimate ranges from 1.9 percent
to 3.7 percent (0.028, plus or minus the
quantity 0.0046 times 2). Based on
statistical theory, if the survey were to
be replicated, it would be expected that

2175

the estimate for the percentage of CDL
drivers testing positive would fall
within this range in 95 out of 100
surveys.
For the alcohol use, the survey
estimate for the percentage of CDL
drivers testing 0.04 or greater alcohol
concentration is 0.14 percent. The
estimated standard error for this
estimate is 0.00018, thus giving a 95
percent confidence interval for the
estimate of 0.10 percent to 0.18 percent.
III. Disposition of the 1996 Sample
For the 1996 survey, MIS forms were
mailed to almost 3,400 motor carriers,
selected from a stratified random
sample. Two thousand seven hundred
carriers responded, of which 1,140
provided usable data. The alcohol use
rate from the 1996 survey includes data
from both small and large carriers, as all
carriers were required to conduct
random tests in 1996. Information on
the disposition of the sample, by
sampling stratum, is provided in Table
4.

TABLE 4.—SAMPLE SIZES AND LEVEL OF RESPONSE BY SIZE CLASS
Size (CDL drivers)

Number of
carriers on
sampling
frame

Total mail
outs

Viable sample units

Respondents providing data

Extra Large (1000 +) ........................................................................................................
Large (100–999) ...............................................................................................................
Medium (50–99) ...............................................................................................................
Small (20–49) ...................................................................................................................
Very Small (1–19) .............................................................................................................
Size Unknown ...................................................................................................................

96
1,324
1,402
3,857
71,074
103,036

96
300
200
200
800
1,800

93
293
194
189
636
1,296

81
258
162
155
240
246

Total ...........................................................................................................................

180,789

3,396

2,701

1,142

IV. 1996 Survey Results
The survey estimate for the
percentage of CDL drivers testing
positive for controlled substances is 2.2
percent, with an estimated standard
error of 0.4 percent. Based upon these
results, a 95 percent confidence interval
for this estimate ranges from 1.5 percent
to 3.1 percent (0.022, plus or minus the
quantity 0.004 times 2). Thus, if the
survey were to be replicated, statistical
theory would suggest that the estimate
for the percentage of CDL drivers testing
positive would fall within this range in
95 out of 100 surveys.
For alcohol use, the survey estimate
for the percentage of CDL drivers testing
0.04 or greater alcohol concentration is
0.18 percent. The estimated standard
error for this estimate is 0.0003, thus
giving a 95 percent confidence interval
for the estimate of 0.12 percent to 0.24
percent.

Appendix C—Methodology for
Estimating the Controlled Substances
Positive and Alcohol Violation Rates
The annual positive rate and its
sampling error must be estimated for the
motor carrier industry. The estimation
of the positive rate and the sampling
error must be based upon the samples
of annual test results. These estimates
are based on a two-stage sampling
design in which the primary sampling
units (motor carriers) are stratified on
the number of secondaries (i.e., CDL
drivers) in each primary unit. This
stratification procedure helps to
increase the precision of the survey
estimates.
When stratification is combined with
simple subsampling and each stratum is
subsampled independently, an unbiased
estimate of the overall mean per
secondary is given by a weighted mean
(for L strata) of the individual rates
obtained for each stratum:

p=∑

 Mi 
p
 M i

i = 1, ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅, L

where the summation is taken over the
L strata and
p = overall mean per secondary
(positive rate)
Mi = number of secondaries (i.e., CDL
drivers) in the ith stratum
M = total number of CDL drivers in the
motor carrier industry
pi = the positive rate in the ith stratum
Estimation of the Sampling Variance

Var ( p) = ∑

2

 Mi 
Var ( Pi ) i = 1, ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅, L
 M

where
Var(Pi) = is the sampling variance of the
positive rates in each stratum
Mi = number of secondaries (i.e., CDL
drivers) in the ith stratum

2176

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

M = total number of CDL drivers in the
motor carrier industry

The estimation of the sampling
variance term, var (Pi), is given as:

n
ˆ (P ) =  N − n   M i 
VAR


∑
i
 Nn   M 

where
N=the total number of motor carriers in
a stratum
n=the number of motor carriers in the
sample in the stratum
f1=n/N
fi=the fraction of CDL drivers sampled
in motor carrier i
˜ =average number of CDL drivers for
M
all motor carriers in a stratum
Mi=the number of CDL drivers in the ith
motor carrier selected
pi=the positive rate in the ith motor
carrier
Appendix D—Estimating Stratum Rates
With a Sample of Nonrespondents
When a sample of nonrespondents is
taken, an unbiased estimate of the
positive rate is given as:
p=tpr+(1¥t)pnr
where
pr=the positive rate among the
respondents
pnr=the positive rate among the
nonrespondents

2

( p i − p)2 +
n −1

 Mi 

2 ∑
 M
n
f1

n

t=the estimated rate of response in the
population (1¥t=the estimated rate
of nonresponse)
The variance of this estimator is:
Var=(1¥ƒ)[S2+(g¥1)(1¥t)So2]/n
where
f=the sampling fraction of the original
sample
S2=the variance of p in the population
So2=the variance of p among the
nonrespondents
g=the inverse of the fraction on
nonrespondent sampled
t=response rate
n=size of the original sample
Appendix E—References for the Testing
MIS Calculations
Cochran, William G. (1977).
‘‘Sampling Theory,’’ Third edition, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Jessen, R.J. (1978). ‘‘Statistical Survey
Techniques,’’ John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York.
Johnson, N.L. and S. Kotz (1969).
‘‘Discrete Distributions,’’ John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., New York.

2

(1 − fi )S2i
mi
Lessler, J.T. and W.D. Kalsbeek
(1992). ‘‘Nonsampling Error in
Surveys,’’ Wiley-Interscience, New
York.
Szameitat, K. and K. Schaeffer (1963).
‘‘Imperfect Frames in Statistics and the
Consequences for Their Use in
Sampling,’’ Bulletin of the International
Statistical Institute (40) 517–544.
Appendix F
This appendix appears at the end of
this document.
(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 31136, 31301 et
seq.; 49 CFR 1.48)
Issued on: December 29, 1997.
Kenneth R. Wykle,
Federal Highway Administrator.

The following Appendix F contains a
chart illustrating: Blood Alcohol
Concentration (grams per decileter) of
Drivers of Large Trucks Involved in
Fatal Crashes, 1982–1996.
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P

Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 14, 1998 / Rules and Regulations

[FR Doc. 98–566 Filed 1–13–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–C

2177