Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for Comment; Drivers' Use of Camera-Based Rear Visibility Systems Versus Traditional Mirrors |
|---|
|
Cem Hatipoglu
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
24 May 2021
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 98 (Monday, May 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27952-27956]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10813]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0082]
Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for
Comment; Drivers' Use of Camera-Based Rear Visibility Systems Versus
Traditional Mirrors
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice and request for comments on a request for approval of a
new collection of information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is
re-issuing an announcement of our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of a proposed collection of
certain information by the Agency. Before a Federal agency can collect
certain information from the public, it must receive approval from OMB.
Procedures established under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the
PRA) require Federal agencies to publish a notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information and to
allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. The
proposed collection of information supports research addressing safety-
related aspects of drivers' use of camera-based rear visibility systems
intended to serve as a replacement for traditional mirrors. On August
28, 2019, NHTSA published a notice in the Federal Register Notice
soliciting public comments with a 60-day comment period. NHTSA received
22 public comments submitted to the docket and one additional comment
submitted via email. Given the extended time period since the initial
publication of that notice, NHTSA is publishing this new 60-day notice.
This new notice addresses comments received on the original 60-day
notice relevant to the current study design.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number in
the heading of this document or by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on
the electronic docket site by clicking on ``Help'' or ``FAQ''.
Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management, U.S. Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12-
140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except on Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help
you, please call (202) 366-9322 before coming.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
Docket number for this Notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy heading below.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
Docket: For access to the docket to read comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, or the street address listed above. Follow
the online instructions for accessing the dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Mazzae, Applied Crash
Avoidance Research Division, Vehicle Research and Test Center, NHTSA,
10820 State Route 347--Bldg. 60, East Liberty, Ohio 43319; Telephone
(937) 666-4511; Facsimile: (937) 666-3590; email address:
elizabeth.mazzae@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), before an agency submits a proposed collection
of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a document in
the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and otherwise
consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning
each proposed collection of information. The OMB has promulgated
regulations describing what must be included in such a document. Under
OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask for public
comment on the following: (i) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (iii) how to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (iv) how to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the following proposed collection of information:
Title: Drivers' Use of Camera-Based Rear Visibility Systems Versus
Traditional Mirrors.
OMB Control Number: New.
Form Numbers: NHTSA forms 1553, 1554, 1555, 1556, 1557, 1558.
Type of Request: New collection.
Type of Review Requested: Regular.
Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from date of
approval.
Summary of the Collection of Information:
NHTSA proposes to perform research involving the collection of
information from the public as part of a multi-year effort to learn
about drivers' use of camera-based indirect visibility systems as
compared to their use of traditional rearview mirrors. This research is
[[Page 27953]]
focused on examination of passive camera-based rear visibility systems,
which are systems intended to perform the same function as traditional
mirrors: Displaying areas surrounding the vehicle. Systems performing
detection of objects within the system's field of view and providing
visual or other alerts to the driver are not being examined in this
research.
The research will involve human subjects testing involving driving
instrumented vehicles on a test track and public roads. Testing will
also be performed with participants seated in a stationary vehicle
while detecting nearby objects using a vehicle's mirrors or a camera-
based system. Study participants will be members of the general public
and participation will be voluntary and compensated. The goal is to
characterize drivers' eye glance behavior, visual object detection
performance, and driving performance while operating a vehicle equipped
with traditional outside mirrors versus a vehicle equipped with a
camera-based visibility system in place of vehicle mirrors. Stationary
examination of drivers' ability to detect objects near a vehicle will
also be conducted. This research will support NHTSA decisions relating
to safe implementation of electronic visibility technologies that may
be considered for use as alternatives to meet Federal Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 111 mirror requirements.
Research participants will be members of the public, non-vision-
impaired, and licensed car drivers and/or truck drivers.\1\
Participants will drive a test vehicle equipped with a camera-based
system in place of outside rearview mirrors, an original equipment
outside rearview mirror system, or a combination of both. The research
will involve track-based and on-road, semi-naturalistic driving in
which participants will drive vehicles in multi-lane traffic scenarios
while using the outside rearview mirrors or alternative system during
lane changes and other typical driving situations. A portion of testing
will take place in dark (i.e., nighttime or early morning) driving
conditions to permit examination of system performance and drivers' use
of systems in those conditions. As noted above, a portion of the
testing will also take place with the vehicle stationary. Separate, but
similar data collections will be conducted for passenger cars and heavy
trucks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Should this initial research determine average-sighted
drivers perform at least as well driving with camera-based systems
as with traditional outside mirrors, NHTSA will consider what
remaining issues may warrant research with regard to sight-impaired
drivers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since qualitative feedback or self-reported data is not
sufficiently robust for the purpose of investigating driver performance
and interaction issues with advanced vehicle technologies, the primary
type of information to be collected in this research is objective data
consisting of video and engineering data recorded as participants drive
instrumented study vehicles. Recorded objective data will include
driver eye glance behavior and lane change performance. Eye glance
behavior will reveal how drivers' visual behavior in a vehicle equipped
with a camera-based rear visibility system differs from drivers' visual
behavior in a vehicle equipped with traditional outside mirrors. Lane
change performance will be characterized based on vehicle speed, inter-
vehicle distances during lane changes, and time to complete lane
changes. Lane change performance in a vehicle equipped with a camera-
based rear visibility system will be compared to lane change
performance observed in a vehicle equipped with traditional outside
mirrors. Vehicles will be fitted with instrumentation for recording
driver eye glance behavior, as well as vehicle speed, position,
steering angle, and turn signal status.
This research will also involve information collection through
participant screening questions and post-drive questionnaires.
Questions will be asked during the course of the research to assess
individuals' suitability for study participation, to obtain feedback
regarding participants' use of the camera-based rear visibility
systems, and to gauge individuals' level of comfort with and confidence
in the technologies' performance and safety.
Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information:
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA)
mission is to save lives, prevent injuries, and reduce economic costs
associated with motor vehicle crashes. As new vehicle technologies are
developed, it is prudent to ensure that they do not create any
unintended decrease in safety. The safety of passive visibility-related
technologies depends on both the performance of the systems and on
drivers' ability to effectively and comfortably use the systems. This
work seeks to examine and compare drivers' eye glance behavior and
aspects of driving behavior for traditional mirrors and camera-based
systems intended to replace rearview mirrors.
The collection of information will consist of: (1) Question Set 1,
Driving Research Study Interest Response Form, (2) Question Set 2,
Candidate Screening, (3) passive observation of driving behavior, and
(4) Question Set 3, Post-Drive Questionnaire: Drive with Camera-
Monitoring System, (5) Question Set 4, Post-Drive Questionnaire: Drive
with Traditional Mirrors, (6) Question Set 5, Post-Drive Questionnaire
Final Opinions.
The information to be collected will be used for the following
purposes:
Question Set 1, Driving Research Study Interest Response Form
will be used to determine individuals' willingness to participate in
the study and whether an individual qualifies for participation in this
study based on certain information. For example, participants must:
[cir] Be 25 to 65 years of age, inclusive
[cir] For drivers of passenger cars: Hold a valid U.S. driver's
license
[cir] For drivers of heavy trucks: Hold a valid U.S. commercial
driver's license
Question Set 2, Candidate Screening Questions will
be primarily used to ensure that participants meet certain minimum
health qualifications, are free of recent criminal convictions, and
have reasonable availability to participate in the study. The objective
of the health screening questions is to identify candidate participants
whose physical and health conditions may be deemed ``average'' and are
compatible with being able to drive continuously for up to 3 hours a
vehicle equipped with only original equipment components.
Question Set 3, Post-Drive Questionnaire will be
used to get information about the participants' experiences during the
experimental drive, including their degree of comfort in using the
camera-based system. There will be different versions of the
questionnaire for light vehicle and truck drivers, but both will be
designed to require not more than 15 minutes to complete all questions.
Participants will complete the Question Set 3 post-drive questionnaire
one time for mirrors and one time for the camera-based rear visibility
system.
Affected Public (Respondents): Research participants will be
licensed drivers aged 25 to 65 years of age, inclusive, are in good
health, and do not require assistive devices to safely operate a
vehicle and drive continuously for a period of approximately 3 hours.
Estimated Number of Respondents: The data collection will have two
parts:
[[Page 27954]]
one involving light vehicles that will begin immediately upon receipt
of PRA clearance and a second, subsequent part will involve heavy
trucks. The second part of the data collection will have the same
general approach involving assessment of eye glance behavior and lane
change performance as a function of visibility technology (i.e.,
camera-based system or traditional rearview mirrors).
Information for both parts of the data collection will be obtained
in an incremental fashion to permit the determination of which
individuals have the necessary characteristics for study participation.
All interested candidates will complete Question Set 1, Driving
Research Study Interest Response Form. A subset of individuals meeting
the criteria for Question Set 1 will be asked to complete Question Set
2, Candidate Screening Questions. From the individuals found to meet
the criteria for both Questions Sets 1 and 2, a subset will be chosen
with the goal of achieving a sample providing a balance of age and sex
to be scheduled for study participation. Both data collection parts
together will involve approximately 750 respondents for Question Set 1
and 325 for Question Set 2. Question Sets 3, 4, and 5 will each have
150 respondents of which 110 will be assigned to the light vehicle
category and 40 to the heavy vehicle category. A summary of the
estimated numbers of individuals that will complete the noted question
sets across both the first and second data collection parts is provided
in the following table.
Estimated Number of Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants
Question set No. NHTSA form No. Questions (i.e.,
respondents)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................... 1553 Interest Response Form.......... 750
2....................................... 1554 Candidate Screening Questions... 375
3....................................... 1556 Post-drive Questionnaire: Drive 200
with Camera-Monitoring System.
4....................................... 1557 Post-drive Questionnaire: Drive 200
with Traditional Mirrors.
5....................................... 1558 Post-Drive Questionnaire Final 200
Opinions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency of Collection: The data collection described will be
performed once to obtain the target number of 180 valid test
participants. Assuming typical data loss rates for instrumented vehicle
testing with human subjects, it is anticipated that 200 participants
will need to be run in order to obtain 180 valid participant datasets.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 190 hours.
Completion of Question Set 1, Driving Research Study Interest
Response Form is estimated to take approximately 5 minutes and
completion is estimated to take approximately 7 minutes for Question
Set 2, Candidate Screening Questions. Completion of Question Sets 3 and
4, Post-Drive Questionnaire: Drive with Traditional Mirrors for light
or heavy vehicles, is estimated to take 10 minutes for each survey for
a combined total of 20 minutes per participant. Estimated completion
time for the final opinions questions for both parts of the data
collection is 5 minutes and each participant will compete the
questionnaire two times.
The estimated annual time and cost burdens across both the first
and second data collection parts are summarized in the table below. The
number of respondents and time to complete each question set are
estimated as shown in the table. The time per question set is
calculated by multiplying the number of respondents by the time per
response and then converting from minutes to hours. The hour value for
each question set is multiplied by the latest average hour earning
estimate from the Bureau of Labor Statistics \2\ to obtain an estimated
burden cost per question set.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Bureau of Labor Statistics Feb. 2019 Average Hourly Earnings
data for ``Total Private,'' $27.66 (Accessed 3/8/2019 at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t19.htm.) The Bureau of Labor
Statistics estimates that for private industry workers, wages
represent 70.1% of total compensation. Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation-March 2019, (Assessed 7/31/2019 at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf).
Estimated Time per Response and Total Time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants Time per Total
Question set No. NHTSA Question set titles (i.e., response Total time burden time Total
form No. respondents) (minutes) (minutes) (hours) cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................ 1553 Interest Response Form.......... 750 5 3750 63 $1,784.16
2........................................ 1554 Candidate Screening Questions... 375 7 2625 44 1,246.08
3........................................ 1556 Post-Drive Questionnaire: Drive 200 10 2000 33 934.56
with Camera Monitoring System.
4........................................ 1557 Post-Drive Questionnaire: Drive 200 10 2000 33 934.56
with Traditional Mirrors.
5........................................ 1558 Post-Drive Questionnaire Final 200 5 1000 17 481.44
Opinions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Total Estimated Burden............................................................ .............. ........... 11,375 190 5,380.80
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: NHTSA estimates that there are
no additional costs to respondents.
Comments Received on the Original 60-Day Notice: On August 28,
2019, NHTSA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the
proposed collection of information.\3\ We received comments from 23
entities, including 8 organizations and 15 individuals. Organizations
submitting comments included American Bus Association (ABA), Automotive
Safety Council, Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), Lotus Cars
Ltd., Greyhound Lines, Inc., Stoneridge Inc., Volvo Group, and ZF North
America, Inc. Of the 23 commenters, 17 were supportive of the research.
No comments addressed the specific questions to be asked of
participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 84 FR 45209 (August 28, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several suggestions for expanding the research were provided. These
suggestions are summarized briefly below, together with NHTSA's
response.
1. Some commenters recommended that the vehicle types to be
examined be
[[Page 27955]]
expanded. Greyhound Lines, Inc. and Volvo Group requested that NHTSA
include over-the-road (coach) buses and transit buses in the heavy
vehicle testing. American Bus Association requested that we expand this
research to include all types of commercial motor vehicles, including
both property- and passenger-carrying light vehicles. While it is not
possible to include all vehicle types in the current research effort,
NHTSA will consider these other vehicle types for inclusion in
subsequent work.
2. The Automotive Safety Council also recommended that we evaluate
the impact of different ambient light levels (e.g., day and night
conditions). NHTSA notes that the research will involve observation of
drivers' eye glance behavior and use of camera-based visibility systems
during daytime and nighttime conditions.
3. The Automotive Safety Council also requested drivers be given
enough time to get acclimated to using the camera-based rear visibility
systems. In conducting the research NHTSA will consider driver
acclimation time to the extent possible.
4. The Automotive Safety Council recommended that this study
attempt to understand driver preference for monitor size and position,
and the impact of system frame rate or latency. The Automotive Safety
Council also suggested we investigate reaction times associated with
various monitor layouts (assumed to mean visual display mounting
locations). Systems to be involved in the research will be production
or industry-developed prototype designs. As such, the system
configurations to be tested will be constrained by the particular
systems that NHTSA is able to obtain for this research.
5. The Automotive Safety Council suggested the study include
measures of eye glance behavior and mental effort, and evaluate the
time and effort needed for the driver to refocus from exterior objects
to the visual display of a camera-based rear visibility system. NHTSA
is interested in learning about whether average drivers are able to
refocus and extract information from a camera-based system's visual
display as compared to a traditional mirror. The research will involve
at least an initial examination of this issue.
6. Recommendations were made to include vision-impaired research
participants The Automotive Safety Council and ZF North America, Inc.
requested that NHTSA include vision-impaired participants requiring
prescription glasses, including far-sighted drivers who do not wear
glasses for driving. Additionally, the Automotive Safety Council
requested we include blind in one eye, elderly, and limited-mobility
drivers. NHTSA's immediate approach is to gather information to
determine whether camera-based rear visibility systems should be
allowed as an alternative to current FMVSS No. 108 outside mirror
requirements. We anticipate traditional mirror equipment to continue to
be available for human-operated vehicles for the foreseeable future. As
such, this research will assess how average-sighted drivers are able to
use camera-based systems as compared to traditional outside mirrors
when driving and determine whether these systems, at a minimum, do not
decrease safety for the majority of drivers. Should this initial
research determine average-sighted drivers perform at least as well
driving with camera-based systems as with traditional outside mirrors,
NHTSA will consider what remaining issues may warrant research with
regard to sight-impaired drivers.
7. The Automotive Safety Council suggested we identify the benefits
of a larger field of view, such as improvements in blind spot
detection, especially for limited-mobility drivers. The characteristics
of camera-based visibility systems involved in this research will be
limited to production or prototype systems available to NHTSA for lease
or purchase during the period of performance of the research project.
It is unlikely that technology options will be available that would
allow for objective testing needed to fully consider these issues.
8. The Automotive Safety Council also suggested examining the use
of different cues to determine the most effective way to get the
drivers' attention. However, the type of system to be examined in this
research does not involve provision of any type of driver alert.
Camera-based rear visibility systems to be examined in this research
are those intended to perform a function equivalent to traditional
mirrors. Performing detection of objects within the system's field of
view and providing visual or other alerts to the driver, similar to a
blind spot monitoring system, is not a function being examined in this
research.
9. ZF North America, Inc. suggested we investigate an integrated
display view with the side and rear camera systems combined in one
display. NHTSA's primary goal in this initial research is to examine
camera-based systems that serve to provide a direct replacement for
required outside mirror equipment. Pending the outcome of the initial
research, additional research may be undertaken to examine alternative
system configurations.
10. Some commenters requested that particular system
characteristics be examined in this work. ZF North America suggested
that NHTSA consider adding embedded image processing functions and
technology to camera-based rear visibility systems to avoid poor
visibility issues, including weather and lighting conditions that could
deteriorate field of view. Two commenters, including ZF North America,
Inc., recommended drivers be offered a level of control over the
cameras, such as camera panning and zoom. ZF North America, Inc. also
suggested that the camera and visual display be placed at the same
height on the vehicle to avoid driver disorientation. As stated above,
the systems to be involved in this research will be limited to those
available for lease from automotive manufacturers or suppliers during
the term of this work.
11. Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) requested that NHTSA
consider the non-driving related safety impacts of replacing mirrors
with camera-based rear visibility systems in the context of law
enforcement and roadside inspections. For example, law enforcement
officers use traditional mirrors to enforce safety regulations like
seatbelt use and traditional mirrors help ensure inspector safety
during roadside inspections. Additionally, CVSA also requested NHTSA
consider vehicle width laws before replacing mirrors with camera-based
rear visibility systems. NHTSA's initial research will focus on whether
drivers are able to safely use camera-based systems that provide direct
replacement for required outside mirror equipment. Should the initial
review find camera-based systems to be a reasonable alternative to
traditional outside mirrors, additional impacts of allowing such
electronic systems will be considered.
All of the 15 individuals who submitted comments addressed their
preference for or against allowing camera-based rear visibility systems
rather than indicating whether they support the conduct of the proposed
research and content of the information collection. Three commenters
stated camera-based visibility systems should be allowed on vehicles
but not required. One individual stated camera-based visibility systems
should supplement but never replace traditional mirrors.
Seven individuals indicated their belief that camera-based rear
visibility systems have inherent disadvantages as compared to
traditional mirrors. The disadvantages noted include a requirement for
power, lower reliability,
[[Page 27956]]
more limited operating conditions than mirrors, environmental debris on
camera lens degrades image quality, higher cost, a higher likelihood of
a need for regular maintenance, and more difficult maintenance.
Additional concerns noted by commenters about replacing traditional
mirrors with camera-based rear visibility systems include:
1. Camera-based rear visibility systems' displays will make driving
unsafe, as compared to traditional mirrors.
2. Drivers will not be able to easily acclimate to using the visual
displays of camera-based rear visibility systems and different display
locations (if applicable).
3. Camera-based rear visibility systems and new technology will
further remove the human from the driving task.
4. Concerns about camera-based rear visibility systems' ability to
function reliably and that cameras requiring power can fail
unexpectedly and cause a lack of awareness of the drivers'
surroundings, while traditional mirrors cannot.
5. Concerns camera-based rear visibility systems would be more
difficult for law enforcement to determine if they are working
correctly, as compared to traditional mirrors for which damage can be
easily determined.
In summary, the proposed research is intended to gather information
to address the question of whether camera-based rear visibility system
use is as safe as that of traditional mirrors through examination of
drivers' eye glance behavior and driving performance. However, issues
such as reliability and law enforcement impacts are outside of the
scope of this initial work. NHTSA appreciates the feedback and many
relevant suggestions offered regarding additional experimental
conditions to consider. NHTSA will consider the provided suggestions as
input for follow-on research programs.
Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspects of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1.95.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Cem Hatipoglu,
Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2021-10813 Filed 5-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P