SB 482 creates the West Virginia Driver Safety Modernization Act, a new article in the motor vehicle code designed to identify and review drivers whose medical, cognitive, or functional conditions may affect safe driving. The bill establishes age-based in-person renewal intervals for older drivers: every five years for drivers ages 75 to 79 and every three years for drivers 80 and older. At those renewals, drivers must complete a vision screening and a non-diagnostic functional screening that can include tasks measuring orientation, reaction time, and visual-motor integration. If a driver does not pass the screening, the Division of Motor Vehicles must refer the driver to a new Medical Review Unit for further evaluation, possible medical certification, or a driving re-examination.
The bill also creates a comprehensive medical review system within the DMV. The Medical Review Unit would receive mandatory medical reports from certain health-care providers, voluntary reports, driver concern reports from family members or law enforcement, and referrals based on wrong-way driving incidents. The unit could require medical certification, impose individualized restrictions such as daylight-only driving or highway restrictions, place a driver in review status, or suspend a license where there is an immediate safety risk. The bill includes due process protections, administrative hearing rights, and judicial review, while also providing confidentiality rules and immunity for good-faith reporting by medical providers and law enforcement.
In addition to driver review provisions, SB 482 directs the Division of Highways to identify and evaluate interchanges, ramps, and divided-highway access points where wrong-way incidents have occurred in the past 10 years, and to consider signage, markings, lighting, and design improvements. It also requires interagency data-sharing between DOH and DMV to support roadway safety analysis and driver review. The bill further creates senior mobility planning resources, including a safe-driving longevity guide and an online resource page, and offers a mature driver safety course incentive that can provide a small renewal fee discount and, for some older drivers, a one-time exemption from functional screening.
The bill’s impact on state law would be substantial, adding a new licensing review framework and new administrative duties for the DMV, medical providers, law enforcement, and the Division of Highways. It would change renewal procedures for older drivers, create new reporting and confidentiality rules for medical information, and authorize individualized restrictions and monitoring for drivers with certain medical or behavioral risks. It also explicitly states that age alone cannot be the sole basis for adverse licensing action, so the bill is structured as an age-triggered screening system combined with medical and functional review standards rather than a blanket age-based disqualification.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from formal legislative debate or roll calls. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and mobility bill that tries to balance roadway safety with due process and independence for older drivers. The main points of contention likely involve the age-based renewal and screening requirements, the scope of mandatory medical reporting, privacy concerns over confidential health information, and whether the DMV and DOH can implement the program without additional appropriations.
SB 482 would add a new article to Chapter 17B of the West Virginia Code establishing a DMV Medical Review Unit, new renewal and screening requirements for older drivers, mandatory and voluntary medical reporting procedures, confidentiality protections, and appeal rights. It would also authorize individualized license restrictions, periodic medical certification, and license review or suspension for drivers with certain medical or functional impairments, while directing the Division of Highways to evaluate and improve wrong-way-prone roadway locations and to share safety data with the DMV. The bill would affect drivers age 75 and older, health-care providers, law enforcement, the DMV, and the Division of Highways.
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no documented legislative sentiment to summarize from debate or roll call. The bill text itself suggests a generally supportive, safety-focused intent, with repeated emphasis on due process, confidentiality, immunity for good-faith reporting, and preservation of mobility and independence for drivers who remain fit to drive. At the same time, the structure of the bill indicates likely concern about balancing public safety with privacy, fairness, and the treatment of older drivers.
The most likely points of contention are the age-based in-person renewal schedule and functional screening requirements for drivers 75 and older, even though the bill says age alone cannot be the sole basis for adverse action. Another likely issue is the mandatory reporting duty for physicians, physician assistants, and APRNs, including whether the reporting standard is clear enough and whether immunity and confidentiality protections are sufficient. The wrong-way incident provisions may also draw scrutiny, especially the mandatory law-enforcement referral requirement, the narrow weather/visibility exception, and the extent of DMV authority to place drivers in review status or impose restrictions. Finally, the bill’s statement that no additional appropriations are required may raise implementation concerns for the DMV and DOH.