Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Mercedes-Benz, 1782-1784 [E6-146]

Download as PDF 1782 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2006 / Notices with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission’s Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the MSRB. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR–MSRB–2005–17 and should be submitted on or before February 1, 2006. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.11 Nancy M. Morris, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6–135 Filed 1–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [U.S. DOT Docket Number NHTSA–2006– 23530] Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping Requirements National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Request for public comment on proposed collection of information. AGENCY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of information, including extensions and reinstatement of previously approved collections. This document describes one collection of information for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval. DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 13, 2006. rmajette on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES SUMMARY: 11 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:20 Jan 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 Comments must refer to the docket notice numbers cited at the beginning of this notice and be submitted to Docket Management, Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Please identify the proposed collection of information for which a comment is provided, by referencing its OMB clearance number. It is requested, but not required, that 2 copies of the comment be provided. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Toth, Office of Data Acquisitions (NPO– 110), Room 6213, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Toth’s telephone number is (202) 366–5378. Please identify the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control Number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 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 collections of information: Title: National Automotive Sampling System (NASS). Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection. OMB Control Number: 2127–0021. Affected Public: Passenger Motor Vehicle Operators. ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Abstract: The collection of crash data that support the establishment and enforcement of motor vehicle regulations that reduce the severity of injury and property damage caused by motor vehicle crashes is authorized under the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89– 563, Title 1, Sec. 106, 108, and 112). The National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration investigates high severity crashes. Once a crash has been selected for investigation, researchers locate, visit, measure, and photograph the crash scene; locate, inspect, and photograph vehicles; conduct a telephone or personal interview with the involved individuals or surrogate; and obtain and record injury information received from various medical data sources. NASS CDS data are used to describe and analyze circumstances, mechanisms, and consequences of high severity motor vehicle crashes in the United States. The collection of interview data aids in this effort. Estimated Annual Burden: 5,807 hours. Number of Respondents: 13,500. Issued on: January 4, 2006. Joseph S. Carra, Associate Administrator, National Center for Statistics and Analysis. [FR Doc. E6–137 Filed 1–10–06; 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; Mercedes-Benz National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC., (MBUSA) in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the S-Line Chassis vehicle line. 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. MBUSA requested confidential treatment for E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM 11JAN1 rmajette on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2006 / Notices some of the information and attachments it submitted in support of its petition. In a letter dated August 29, 2005, the agency granted the petitioner’s request for confidential treatment of most aspects of its petition. DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with the 2007 model year. 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 August 8, 2005, MBUSA requested exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the theft prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the MY 2007 S-Line Chassis vehicle line. The petition requested exemption from parts-marking 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. Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for one line of its vehicle lines per year. In its petition, MBUSA provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the new vehicle line. MBUSA will install its passive, antitheft device as standard equipment beginning with MY 2007. Features of the antitheft device will include an electronic key and ignition lock, an intelligent gearshift module, a passive immobilizer and a visible and audible alarm. MBUSA’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. MBUSA stated that the proposed device will utilize a transmitter key, an electronic ignition starter control unit and an engine control unit, which will collectively work to perform the immobilizer function. The immobilizer will prevent the engine from running unless a valid key is used. Immobilization is activated when the key is removed from the ignition switch. Once activated, a valid, coded-key must be inserted into the ignition switch to disable immobilization and permit starting of the vehicle. In addressing the specific content requirements of § 543.6, MBUSA provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed device. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:20 Jan 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 To ensure reliability and durability of the device, and to validate the performance of the device under extreme conditions, MBUSA conducted various tests based on its own internal specifications. MBUSA provided information on the tests conducted and believes that the device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified requirements for each test. Specifically, the components of the immobilizer device were tested in various climatic, mechanical, electrical, and chemical environments and immunity to various electromagnetic radiation. MBUSA also compared the proposed device to other devices which NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-marking requirements. MBUSA stated that its proposed device is functionally equivalent to the systems used in previous vehicle lines which were deemed effective and granted exemptions from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard. Theft data have indicated a decline in theft rates for the S-Line Chassis vehicles that have been equipped with antitheft devices similar to that which MBUSA proposes to install on the new line. Specifically, MBUSA notes that the theft rate for the S-Line Chassis vehicle line was initially reduced by 39.5% from 4.65 stolen vehicles per thousand produced in CY 1999 to 2.86 stolen vehicles per thousand produced in CY 2000. MBUSA believes that the effectiveness of the immobilizer device is reflected in the theft rates that were further reduced to 2.73 stolen vehicles per thousand produced in CY 2001, 1.97 stolen vehicles per thousand vehicles produced in CY 2002, and 1.93 stolen vehicles per thousand vehicles produced in CY 2003. On the basis of this comparison, MBUSA 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 partsmarking requirements. Based on the evidence submitted by MBUSA, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the S-Line Chassis vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541). The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of unauthorized PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 1783 persons 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 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 MBUSA has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion is based on the information MBUSA provided about its device, much of which is confidential. For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full MBUSA’s petition for exemption for the vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A–1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product nameplates, is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the parts marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. Therefore, although MBUSA has been granted confidential treatment for most aspects of its petition, the agency notes that the information that may be published in the Federal Register includes the make and model of vehicle, the model year for which the exemption is granted and a general description of the proposed antitheft device, with a mention of such elements as key activation, starter motor interrupt, and the general location of the sensors triggering the alarm. If MBUSA 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 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts). NHTSA notes that if MBUSA 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. Section 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.’’ E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM 11JAN1 1784 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 7 / Wednesday, January 11, 2006 / Notices 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: January 4, 2006. Stephen R. Kratzke, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. E6–146 Filed 1–10–06; 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; Nissan National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. rmajette on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Nissan North America, Inc., (Nissan) in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the Quest vehicle line. 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. Nissan requested confidential treatment for the information and attachments it submitted in support of its petition. In a letter dated August 4, 2005, the agency granted the petitioner’s request for confidential treatment of most aspects of its petition. DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with model year (MY) 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:20 Jan 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 Ballard’s telephone number is (202) 366–0846. Her fax number is (202) 493– 2290. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated July 19, 2005, Nissan requested exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the theft prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) for the Nissan Quest vehicle line beginning with MY 2006. The petition requested exemption from partsmarking 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. Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for one line of its vehicle lines per year. In its petition, Nissan provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the new vehicle line. Nissan will install its antitheft device as standard equipment beginning with MY 2006. Nissan’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. In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Nissan provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Nissan conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Nissan 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. Nissan also compared the device proposed for its vehicle line with other devices which NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-marking requirements. Nissan stated that its proposed device is functionally equivalent to the systems used in previous vehicle lines which were deemed effective and granted exemptions from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard. Additionally, theft data have indicated a decline in theft rates for vehicle lines that have been equipped with antitheft devices similar to that which Nissan proposes to install on the new line. On the basis of this comparison, Nissan 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 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 granted full exemption from the partsmarking requirements. Based on the evidence submitted by Nissan, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Quest vehicle line is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of unauthorized persons 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 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 Nissan has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion is based on the information Nissan provided about its device, much of which is confidential. This confidential information included a description of reliability and functional tests conducted by Nissan for the antitheft device and its components. For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Nissan’s petition for exemption for the Quest vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A–1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product nameplates, is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the parts marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. Therefore, although Nissan has been granted confidential treatment for most aspects of its petition, the agency notes that the information that may be published in the Federal Register includes the make and model of the vehicle, the model year for which the exemption is granted and a general description of the proposed antitheft device, with a mention of such elements as key activation, starter motor interrupt, and the general location of the sensors triggering the alarm. If Nissan decides not to use the exemption for the Quest vehicle line, it must formally notify the agency, and, thereafter, the line must be fully marked E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM 11JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1782-1784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-146]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard; Mercedes-Benz

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Mercedes-Benz 
USA, LLC., (MBUSA) in accordance with Sec.  543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR Part 
543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the S-Line 
Chassis vehicle line. 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. MBUSA requested 
confidential treatment for

[[Page 1783]]

some of the information and attachments it submitted in support of its 
petition. In a letter dated August 29, 2005, the agency granted the 
petitioner's request for confidential treatment of most aspects of its 
petition.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
the 2007 model year.

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 August 8, 2005, MBUSA 
requested exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft 
prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the MY 2007 S-Line Chassis 
vehicle line. The petition requested exemption from parts-marking 
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.
    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, 
MBUSA provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, 
design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the 
new vehicle line. MBUSA will install its passive, antitheft device as 
standard equipment beginning with MY 2007. Features of the antitheft 
device will include an electronic key and ignition lock, an intelligent 
gearshift module, a passive immobilizer and a visible and audible 
alarm. MBUSA'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.
    MBUSA stated that the proposed device will utilize a transmitter 
key, an electronic ignition starter control unit and an engine control 
unit, which will collectively work to perform the immobilizer function. 
The immobilizer will prevent the engine from running unless a valid key 
is used. Immobilization is activated when the key is removed from the 
ignition switch. Once activated, a valid, coded-key must be inserted 
into the ignition switch to disable immobilization and permit starting 
of the vehicle.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6, 
MBUSA provided information on the reliability and durability of its 
proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, 
and to validate the performance of the device under extreme conditions, 
MBUSA conducted various tests based on its own internal specifications. 
MBUSA provided information on the tests conducted and believes that the 
device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its 
specified requirements for each test. Specifically, the components of 
the immobilizer device were tested in various climatic, mechanical, 
electrical, and chemical environments and immunity to various 
electromagnetic radiation.
    MBUSA also compared the proposed device to other devices which 
NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor 
vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-marking requirements. 
MBUSA stated that its proposed device is functionally equivalent to the 
systems used in previous vehicle lines which were deemed effective and 
granted exemptions from the parts-marking requirements of the theft 
prevention standard. Theft data have indicated a decline in theft rates 
for the S-Line Chassis vehicles that have been equipped with antitheft 
devices similar to that which MBUSA proposes to install on the new 
line. Specifically, MBUSA notes that the theft rate for the S-Line 
Chassis vehicle line was initially reduced by 39.5% from 4.65 stolen 
vehicles per thousand produced in CY 1999 to 2.86 stolen vehicles per 
thousand produced in CY 2000. MBUSA believes that the effectiveness of 
the immobilizer device is reflected in the theft rates that were 
further reduced to 2.73 stolen vehicles per thousand produced in CY 
2001, 1.97 stolen vehicles per thousand vehicles produced in CY 2002, 
and 1.93 stolen vehicles per thousand vehicles produced in CY 2003.
    On the basis of this comparison, MBUSA 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 MBUSA, the agency believes that 
the antitheft device for the S-Line Chassis 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 Part 541).
    The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of 
performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; 
attracting attention to the efforts of unauthorized persons 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 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 MBUSA has provided adequate reasons for its belief 
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion 
is based on the information MBUSA provided about its device, much of 
which is confidential.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full MBUSA's 
petition for exemption for the vehicle line from the parts-marking 
requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, 
Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft 
Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains 
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543 
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product 
nameplates, is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of 
new vehicle lines exempted from the parts marking requirements of the 
Theft Prevention Standard. Therefore, although MBUSA has been granted 
confidential treatment for most aspects of its petition, the agency 
notes that the information that may be published in the Federal 
Register includes the make and model of vehicle, the model year for 
which the exemption is granted and a general description of the 
proposed antitheft device, with a mention of such elements as key 
activation, starter motor interrupt, and the general location of the 
sensors triggering the alarm.
    If MBUSA 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 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major 
component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if MBUSA 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. Section 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.''

[[Page 1784]]

    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: January 4, 2006.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E6-146 Filed 1-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P