Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc., 58788-58789 [05-20186]

Download as PDF 58788 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Notices Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http:// dms.dot.gov, including any personal information provided. Docket: For access to the docket in order to read background documents or comments received, go to http:// dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL– 401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. 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 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. We shall consider all comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated below. To the extent possible, we shall also consider comments filed after the closing date. We shall publish a notice of final action on the application in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority indicated below. (49 U.S.C. 30113; delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. and 501.8) Dated: October 4, 2005. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 05–20277 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This notice grants in full the petition of Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc. (Fuji) for an exemption in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the Subaru B9 Tribeca vehicle line beginning with model year (MY) 2006. This petition is VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:27 Oct 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 granted because the agency has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective September 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rosalind Proctor, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Proctor’s telephone number is (202) 366–0846. Her fax number is (202) 493– 2290. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated July 19, 2005, Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc. (Fuji), requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) for the Subaru B9 Tribeca vehicle line. The petition has been filed pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment for an entire vehicle line. Fuji’s submission is considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in § 543.5 and the specific content requirements of § 543.6. Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for one line of its vehicle lines per year. In its petition, Fuji provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the vehicle line. The antitheft device is a passive transponder-based, electronic, immobilizer system. The device is automatically activated after 30 seconds if the ignition is simply moved to the ‘‘off’’ position or when the engine is shut off and the vehicle key is removed from the ignition. Fuji will install its antitheft device as standard equipment on its B9 Tribeca vehicle line beginning with MY 2006. Fuji stated that the antitheft device controls engine ignition, fuel delivery and starter motor operation. This device prevents the engine from unauthorized operation such as ‘‘hot-wiring’’. The proposed device will also have an alarm feature that will monitor the doors and key identification. The visual and audio features (and ‘‘panic’’ mode) of the standard equipment antitheft device will attract attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move the vehicle by sounding the vehicle’s PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 horn and illuminating its 4-way flashing hazard lamps. The immobilization feature of the device will prevent the vehicle from being driven away under its own engine power in the event the ignition lock and doors have been manipulated. Fuji stated that integration of the antitheft device immobilization with the overall vehicle Controller Area Network (CAN) electrical architecture and control modules makes it nearly impossible for the immobilization features to be disabled or bypassed without also disabling all other body and engine controls. The engine will not start or run unless the ID code registered in the ignition key coincides with the code registered in the immobilizer engine control unit (ECU) of the vehicle. When the engine ECU receives a signal that the ID code matches, it allows engine fuel delivery and ignition. If the codes are not received, even with the use of a correct mechanical key, the electronic immobilization features of the key/ vehicle antitheft system interface will not be defeated. In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Fuji provided information on the reliability and durability of its device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Fuji conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Fuji also provided a detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified requirements for each test. Fuji stated its belief that NHTSA has seen a trend in the past that theft rates drop dramatically on vehicles when electronic immobilization has been added to the alarm system. Fuji has concluded that the antitheft device proposed for its vehicle line is no less effective than those devices in the lines for which NHTSA has already granted full exemption from the parts-marking requirements. Based on the evidence submitted by Fuji, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Subaru B9 Tribeca vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). The agency concludes that the device will provide five of the types of performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or operate a vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM 07OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Notices unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device. As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.6 (a)(4) and (5), the agency finds that Fuji has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion is based on the information Fuji provided about its device. For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Fuji’s petition for exemption for the vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. If Fuji decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must formally notify the agency, and, thereafter, the line must be fully marked as required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts). NHTSA notes that if Fuji wishes in the future to modify the device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a part 543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the line’s exemption is based. Further, §543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to permit the use of an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in that exemption.’’ The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that part 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself. The agency did not intend part 543 to require the submission of a modification petition for every change to the components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the manufacturer contemplates making any changes the effects of which might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before preparing and submitting a petition to modify. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. Issued on: October 3, 2005. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 05–20186 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:27 Oct 06, 2005 Jkt 208001 58789 contained in § 543.5 and the specific content requirements of § 543.6. National Highway Traffic Safety Mazda’s antitheft device is activated Administration when the driver/operator turns off the engine using the properly coded Petition for Exemption From the ignition key. When the ignition key is Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft turned to the ‘‘ON’’ position, the Prevention Standard; Mazda transponder (located in the head of the key) transmits a code to an immobilizer AGENCY: National Highway Traffic control module which then Safety Administration, Department of communicates with powertrain’s Transportation (DOT). electronic control module. The vehicle’s ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. engine can only be started if the transponder code matches the code SUMMARY: This document grants in full previously programmed into the the petition of Mazda Motor immobilizer control module. If the code Corporation, (Mazda) for an exemption does not match, the engine will be in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft disabled. Mazda stated that Prevention Standard, for the Mazda CX– communications between the immobilizer system control function 7 vehicle line beginning with model year (MY) 2007. This petition is granted and the powertrains electronic control because the agency has determined that module are encrypted with 18 × 1018 different codes, and each transponder is the antitheft device to be placed on the hard coded with a unique code at time line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring of manufacture. Mazda also stated that its immobilizer system incorporates a motor vehicle theft as compliance with light-emitting diode (LED) that provides the parts-marking requirements of the information as to when the system is Theft Prevention Standard. ‘‘set and ‘‘unset’’. When the ignition is DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with model initially turned to the ‘‘ON’’ position, a three-second continuous LED indicates year (MY) 2007. the proper ‘‘unset’’ state of the device. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. When the ignition is turned to ‘‘OFF’’, Rosalind Proctor, Office of International a flashing LED indicates the ‘‘set’’ state Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer of the system and provides a visual Programs, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, confirmation that the vehicle is SW., Washington DC 20590. Ms. protected by the immobilizer system. Proctor’s phone number is (202) 366– The integration of the setting/unsetting 0846. Her fax number is (202) 493–2290. device (transponder) into the ignition SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a key prevents any inadvertent activation petition dated June 21, 2005, Mazda of the system. Motor Corporation (Mazda), requested In addressing the specific content an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of 543.6, Mazda provided requirements of the theft prevention information on the reliability and standard (49 CFR part 541) for the durability of its proposed device. To Mazda CX–7 vehicle line beginning ensure reliability and durability of the with MY 2007. The petition requested device, Mazda conducted tests based on an exemption from parts-marking its own specified standards. Mazda also pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption provided a detailed list of the tests from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, conducted and believes that the device based on the installation of an antitheft is reliable and durable since the device device as standard equipment for the complied with its specified entire vehicle line. requirements for each test. The Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may components of the immobilizer device petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for are tested in climatic, mechanical and one line of its vehicle lines per year. In chemical environments, and, immunity its petition, Mazda provided a detailed to various electromagnetic radiation. description and diagram of the identity, Mazda stated that for reliability/ design, and location of the components durablility purposes, its key and key of the antitheft device for the new cylinders must also meet unique vehicle line. The anti-theft device is a strength tests against attempts of transponder-based, electronic, mechanical overriding. The tests immobilizer system. Mazda will install conducted were for thermal shock, high its antitheft device, as standard temperature exposure, low-temperature equipment on its CX–7 vehicle line exposure, thermal cycle, humidity beginning with MY 2007. Mazda’s temperature cycling, functional, random submission is considered a complete vibration, dust, water, connector and petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in lead/lock strength, chemical resistance, that it meets the general requirements electromagnetic field, power line DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM 07OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58788-58789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20186]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard; Fuji Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc.

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice grants in full the petition of Fuji Heavy 
Industries U.S.A., Inc. (Fuji) for an exemption in accordance with 
Sec.  543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft 
Prevention Standard, for the Subaru B9 Tribeca vehicle line beginning 
with model year (MY) 2006. This petition is granted because the agency 
has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as 
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and 
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking 
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective September 1, 
2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rosalind Proctor, Office of 
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Proctor's telephone 
number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2290.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated July 19, 2005, Fuji 
Heavy Industries U.S.A., Inc. (Fuji), requested an exemption from the 
parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard (49 CFR 
part 541) for the Subaru B9 Tribeca vehicle line. The petition has been 
filed pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft 
Prevention Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device 
as standard equipment for an entire vehicle line. Fuji's submission is 
considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it 
meets the general requirements contained in Sec.  543.5 and the 
specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6. Under Sec.  543.5(a), a 
manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for one line of its 
vehicle lines per year.
    In its petition, Fuji provided a detailed description and diagram 
of the identity, design, and location of the components of the 
antitheft device for the vehicle line. The antitheft device is a 
passive transponder-based, electronic, immobilizer system. The device 
is automatically activated after 30 seconds if the ignition is simply 
moved to the ``off'' position or when the engine is shut off and the 
vehicle key is removed from the ignition. Fuji will install its 
antitheft device as standard equipment on its B9 Tribeca vehicle line 
beginning with MY 2006.
    Fuji stated that the antitheft device controls engine ignition, 
fuel delivery and starter motor operation. This device prevents the 
engine from unauthorized operation such as ``hot-wiring''. The proposed 
device will also have an alarm feature that will monitor the doors and 
key identification. The visual and audio features (and ``panic'' mode) 
of the standard equipment antitheft device will attract attention to 
the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move the vehicle by 
sounding the vehicle's horn and illuminating its 4-way flashing hazard 
lamps.
    The immobilization feature of the device will prevent the vehicle 
from being driven away under its own engine power in the event the 
ignition lock and doors have been manipulated. Fuji stated that 
integration of the antitheft device immobilization with the overall 
vehicle Controller Area Network (CAN) electrical architecture and 
control modules makes it nearly impossible for the immobilization 
features to be disabled or bypassed without also disabling all other 
body and engine controls. The engine will not start or run unless the 
ID code registered in the ignition key coincides with the code 
registered in the immobilizer engine control unit (ECU) of the vehicle. 
When the engine ECU receives a signal that the ID code matches, it 
allows engine fuel delivery and ignition. If the codes are not 
received, even with the use of a correct mechanical key, the electronic 
immobilization features of the key/vehicle antitheft system interface 
will not be defeated.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Fuji 
provided information on the reliability and durability of its device. 
To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Fuji conducted 
tests based on its own specified standards. Fuji also provided a 
detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is 
reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified 
requirements for each test.
    Fuji stated its belief that NHTSA has seen a trend in the past that 
theft rates drop dramatically on vehicles when electronic 
immobilization has been added to the alarm system. Fuji has concluded 
that the antitheft device proposed for its vehicle line is no less 
effective than those devices in the lines for which NHTSA has already 
granted full exemption from the parts-marking requirements.
    Based on the evidence submitted by Fuji, the agency believes that 
the antitheft device for the Subaru B9 Tribeca vehicle line is likely 
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as 
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention 
Standard (49 CFR 541).
    The agency concludes that the device will provide five of the types 
of performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; 
attracting attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter 
or operate a vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or 
circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing 
operation of the vehicle by

[[Page 58789]]

unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of 
the device.
    As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.6 (a)(4) and (5), the 
agency finds that Fuji has provided adequate reasons for its belief 
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion 
is based on the information Fuji provided about its device. For the 
foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Fuji's petition for 
exemption for the vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 
49 CFR part 541.
    If Fuji decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must 
formally notify the agency, and, thereafter, the line must be fully 
marked as required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major 
component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Fuji wishes in the future to modify the device 
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a 
petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a part 543 
exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under 
this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the line's 
exemption is based. Further, Sec. 543.9(c)(2) provides for the 
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of 
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in 
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that part 
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself. 
The agency did not intend part 543 to require the submission of a 
modification petition for every change to the components or design of 
an antitheft device. The significance of many such changes could be de 
minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the manufacturer 
contemplates making any changes the effects of which might be 
characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before 
preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 
1.50.

    Issued on: October 3, 2005.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 05-20186 Filed 10-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P