[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