Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft Prevention Standard; General Motors Corporation, 17616-17617 [E7-6528]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 67 (Monday, April 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17616-17617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6528]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft 
Prevention Standard; General Motors Corporation

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of General Motors 
Corporation (GM) for an exemption in accordance with Sec.  543.9(c)(2) 
of 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for 
the Saturn Aura vehicle line beginning with model year (MY) 2008. 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 beginning with 
model year (MY) 2008.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated October 6, 2006, GM 
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft 
prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the Saturn Aura vehicle line 
beginning with MY 2008. The petition requested an exemption from parts-
marking pursuant to 49 CFR 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard 
equipment for the 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, 
GM provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design, 
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the new 
vehicle line. The antitheft device is a transponder-based, electronic, 
immobilizer system. GM will install its passive antitheft device as 
standard equipment on its Saturn Aura vehicle line beginning with MY 
2008. GM stated that the device will provide protection against 
unauthorized use (i.e., starting and engine fueling), but will not 
provide any visible or audible indication of unauthorized vehicle entry 
(i.e., flashing lights or horn alarm). GM'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.
    The antitheft device to be installed on the MY 2008 Saturn Aura is 
the PASS-Key III+. The PASS-Key III+ device is designed to be active at 
all times without direct intervention by the vehicle operator. The 
system is fully armed immediately after the ignition has been turned 
off and the key removed. The system will provide protection against 
unauthorized starting and fueling of the vehicle engine. Components of 
the antitheft device include an electronically-coded ignition key, a 
PASS-Key III+ controller module and an engine control module. The 
ignition key contains electronics molded into the key head. These 
electronics receive energy and data from the control module. Upon 
receipt of the data, the key will calculate a response to the data 
using secret information and an internal encryption algorithm, and 
transmit the response back to the vehicle. The controller module 
translates the radio frequency signal received from the key into a 
digital signal and compares the received response to an internally 
calculated value. If the values match, the key is recognized as valid 
and the vehicle can be operated.
    GM indicated that the theft rates, as reported by the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation's National Crime Information Center (NCIC), are 
lower for GM models equipped with the ``PASS-Key''-like systems which 
have exemptions from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, 
than the theft rates for earlier, similarly-constructed models which 
were parts-marked. Based on the performance of the PASS-Key, PASS-Key 
II, and PASS-Key III systems on other GM models, and the advanced 
technology utilized by

[[Page 17617]]

the modification, GM believes that the MY 2008 antitheft device will be 
more effective in deterring theft than the parts-marking requirements 
of 49 CFR Part 541.
    For clarification purposes, the agency notes that it does not 
collect theft data. NHTSA publishes theft rates based on data provided 
by the NCIC of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. NHTSA uses NCIC 
data to calculate theft rates and publishes these rates annually in the 
Federal Register.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, GM 
provided information on the reliability and durability of the proposed 
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, GM 
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. GM provided a 
detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is 
reliable and durable since it complied with the specified requirements 
for each test.
    GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ system has been designed to 
enhance the functionality and theft protection provided by GM's first, 
second, and third generation PASS-Key, PASS-Key II, and PASS-Key III 
systems.
    GM 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. GM stated that the theft rates for the 2003 and 
2004 Cadillac CTS and the MY 2004 Cadillac SRX currently installed with 
the PASS-Key III+ antitheft device exhibit theft rates that are lower 
than the median theft rate (3.5826) established by the agency. The 
Cadillac CTS introduced as a MY 2003 vehicle line has been equipped 
with the PASS-Key III+ device since the start of production. The theft 
rates for the MY 2003 and 2004 Cadillac CTS is 1.0108 and 0.7681 
respectively. Similarly, the Cadillac SRX introduced as a MY 2004 
vehicle has been equipped with the PASS-Key III+ device since 
production. The theft rate for MY 2004 Cadillac SRX is 0.7789. GM 
stated that the theft rates experienced by these lines with 
installation of the PASS-Key III+ device demonstrate the effectiveness 
of the device. The agency agrees that the device is substantially 
similar to devices for which the agency has previously approved 
exemptions.
    Based on comparison of the reduction in the theft rates of GM 
vehicles using a passive theft deterrent device with an audible/visible 
alarm system to the reduction in theft rates for GM vehicle models 
equipped with a passive antitheft device without an alarm, GM finds 
that the lack of an alarm or attention attracting device does not 
compromise the theft deterrent performance of a system such as PASS-Key 
III+.
    GM's proposed device, as well as other comparable devices that have 
received full exemptions from the parts-marking requirements, lack an 
audible or visible alarm. Therefore, these devices cannot perform one 
of the functions listed in 49 CFR Part 543.6(a)(3), that is, to call 
attention to unauthorized attempts to enter or move the vehicle. 
However, theft data have indicated a decline in theft rates for vehicle 
lines that have been equipped with devices similar to that which GM 
proposes. In these instances, the agency has concluded that the lack of 
a visual or audio alarm has not prevented these antitheft devices from 
being effective protection against theft.
    Based on the evidence submitted by GM, the agency believes that the 
antitheft device for the GM 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 four of the five 
types of performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; 
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 Part 543.6(a)(4) and (5), 
the agency finds that GM has provided adequate reasons for its belief 
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion 
is based on the information GM provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full GM's 
petition for exemption for the Saturn Aura 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 Part 
543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition 
of all Part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of 
future product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the 
petition is granted and a general description of the antitheft device 
is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle 
lines exempted from the parts marking requirements of the Theft 
Prevention Standard.
    If GM decides not to use the exemption for this line, it should 
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must 
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and 
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if GM 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 antitheft device on which the line's 
exemption is based. Further, Part 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 Sec.  
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself. 
The agency did not intend in drafting 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: April 3, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. E7-6528 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P