[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 27 (Thursday, February 9, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6743-6745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1739]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA-2005-22895]
RIN 2127-AI53
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards No. 111 Rearview Mirrors
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document denies the petition for rulemaking submitted by
Mr. Bernard Cox, requesting that NHTSA amend the Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard for rearview mirrors to require manufacturers to
install a mirror of unit magnification (a flat mirror) on the
passenger's side of multipurpose passenger vehicles (MPVs) and trucks
with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds)
or less when such vehicles are equipped with a tow hitch package.
Accordingly, manufacturers of
[[Page 6744]]
MPVs, trucks, and buses (other than school buses) with a GVWR of 4,536
kg (10,000 pounds) or less continue to have the option of installing
either a flat mirror or a convex mirror on the passenger's side of the
vehicle provided that either mirror meets the applicable requirements
of the standard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues: Mr. John Lee,
Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, NVS-123, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
Telephone number: (202) 366-2720. Fax: (202) 366-7002.
For legal issues: Mr. Eric Stas, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-
112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone number: (202) 366-2992.
Fax: (202) 366-3820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 5, 2004, Mr. Bernard Cox submitted a petition for
rulemaking \1\ requesting that NHTSA amend Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) No. 111, Rearview Mirrors, to require original
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to install a mirror of unit
magnification (called a ``flat'' mirror) on the passenger's side of
MPVs and trucks with a GVWR of 4,536 kg (10,000 pounds) or less when
such vehicles are equipped with a tow hitch package, thereby
eliminating the current option for vehicle manufacturers to install
either a flat mirror or a convex mirror in that location. The
petitioner expressed his belief that when the vehicle's interior flat
rearview mirror is obstructed by an object in tow, it is unsafe to make
a lane change relying solely on an exterior passenger-side convex
rearview mirror. Mr. Cox stated that he attempted to replace the
outside passenger side convex mirror with a flat mirror and was told by
his local automobile dealership that a flat mirror was unavailable for
that application. The petitioner did not provide any data in support of
his recommended amendments to Standard No. 111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Docket No. NHTSA-2004-16856-61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Analysis
Under paragraph S6, Requirements for multipurpose passenger
vehicles, trucks, and buses, other than school buses, with GVWR of
4,536 kg or less, FMVSS No. 111 currently requires such vehicles to be
equipped with either with: (1) Mirrors that conform to the requirements
of S5, or (2) outside mirrors of unit magnification, each with not less
than 126 cm2 of reflective surface, installed with stable
supports on both sides of the vehicle, located so as to provide the
driver a view to the rear along both sides of the vehicle, and
adjustable in both the horizontal and vertical directions to view the
rearward scene (see S6.1 of FMVSS No. 111). S5.3, Outside rearview
mirror passenger's side, permits either a mirror of unit magnification
or a convex mirror to be installed in that location. Thus, Standard No.
111 provides a choice to vehicle manufacturers in terms of the type of
passenger-side mirror that they install on MPVs, trucks, and buses
(other than school buses) within the above-referenced weight class,
which is the subject of the present petition.
That portion of the vehicle fleet currently covered by S6 of the
standard reflects a mix of convex mirrors and mirrors of unit
magnification on the passenger's side of the vehicle. Each type of
mirror has its advantages. Convex mirrors have the advantage of
providing a wider field of view than a mirror of unit magnification of
the same size. However, convex mirrors tend to provide an image that
causes objects to appear further away and to be moving more slowly than
they actually are. In contrast, mirrors of unit magnification generally
provide a realistic rendering of approaching vehicles, although a
narrower field of view and a larger ``blind spot.''
Consumer preferences also vary in terms of the type of rearview
mirror installed on the passenger's side of vehicles. The agency has
received complaints from some vehicle owners who find convex mirrors
annoying when trying to back up and maneuver trailers. However, others
have asked the agency to allow convex mirrors in situations in
locations where only a mirror of unit magnification is permitted (e.g.,
driver-side outside rearview mirrors).
The critical question posed by Mr. Cox's petition is whether there
is evidence that use of a convex mirror at the passenger's side
location on the vehicles in question has a negative impact on vehicle
safety. To examine this issue, we reviewed the available research,
including a relevant, agency-sponsored fleet study whose results were
reported in a DOT research report titled, ``Field Test Evaluation of
Rearview Mirror Systems for Commercial Vehicles.'' \2\ This study
involved a two-year field examination of fleets of telephone company
repair vans, some using passenger-side mirrors of unit magnification
and others using passenger-side convex mirrors. In that study, the
convex mirrors had a 40-inch radius of curvature, similar to the OEM
supplied passenger-side mirrors that the petitioner is seeking to have
changed. Although those vans were not pulling trailers, such cargo vans
generally have poor direct rear visibility, so the situations are
generally analogous. The study reported that vans equipped with
passenger-side convex mirrors had a lower crash rate than vans equipped
with passenger-side mirrors of unit magnification. Thus, the available
safety data do not demonstrate adverse safety consequences associated
with the use of passenger-side convex mirrors. As noted previously, the
petitioner did not provide any data, to demonstrate a safety problem
that would be remedied by his requested amendments to the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ DOT HS 806 948 (Sept. 1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, consumers who experience difficulty adjusting to the
field of view provided by a passenger-side convex mirror, including on
vehicles towing a trailer, have a readily available alternative. There
are currently many mirrors available in the aftermarket specifically
designed to improve the visibility for drivers towing trailers, the
majority of which are inexpensive and do not require significant
vehicle modification.
In summary, the petitioner has not demonstrated and the agency's
own research has not revealed the existence of a safety problem, as
would justify amending FMVSS No. 111. People's attitudes regarding
side-mounted rearview mirrors may vary based upon physiological
differences or personal preference. For those consumers who desire a
passenger-side mirror of unit magnification, aftermarket equipment is
available to effectuate such a change. Accordingly, we do not see any
reason to diminish the range of choice which FMVSS No. 111 currently
provides to manufacturers to equip the vehicles in question with either
a passenger-side convex mirror or mirror of unit magnification which
meets the requirements of the safety standard.
Decision To Deny the Petition
In accordance with 49 CFR part 552, this completes the agency's
review of the petition for rulemaking. In light of the considerations
discussed above, the agency has concluded that agency resources should
be spent addressing higher priority safety issues. Therefore, the
petition for rulemaking is denied.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 332, 30111, 30115, 30117; and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
[[Page 6745]]
Issued on: February 3, 2006.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E6-1739 Filed 2-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P