Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc., 4304-4305 [E8-1141]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
4304
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 16 / Thursday, January 24, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Title: Generic Clearance for Customer
Surveys.
OMB Number: 2127–0579.
Type of Request: Extension of a
currently approved information
collection.
Abstract: Executive Order 12862
mandates that agencies survey their
customers to identify the kind and
quality of services they want and their
level of satisfaction with existing
services. Other requirements include the
Governmental Performance and Results
Act (GPRA) of 1993 which promotes a
new focus on results, service quality,
and customer satisfaction. NHTSA will
use surveys of the public and other
external stakeholders to gather data as
one input to decisionmaking on how
better to meet the goal of improving
safety on the nation’s highways. The
data gathered on public expectations,
NHTSA’s products and services, along
with specific information on
transportation safety, will be used by
the agency as input to structure its
processes and products, forecast safety
trends and achieve the agency’s goals.
Affected Public: Individuals or
households are primary survey
respondents. Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions, Federal
agencies, and State, local or tribal
governments are other possible survey
respondents.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Jan 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
13,468.
Comments are invited on: 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; the accuracy of
the Department’s estimate of the burden
of the proposed information collection;
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and 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.
Issued on: January 17, 2008.
Margaret O’Brien,
Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–1131 Filed 1–23–08; 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;
Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center,
Inc.
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 Hyundai-Kia Motors
Corporation (Hyundai) in accordance
with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR Part 543,
Exemption from the Theft Prevention
Standard, for the Hyundai Genesis
vehicle line beginning with model year
(MY) 2009. 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. Hyundai
requested confidential treatment for its
information and attachments submitted
in support of its petition. The agency
will address Hyundai’s request for
confidential treatment in a separate
letter.
The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with model
year (MY) 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Deborah Mazyck, International Policy,
Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs,
NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck’s
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
telephone number is (202) 366–0846.
Her fax number is (202) 493–2290.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a
petition dated October 22, 2007,
Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center,
Inc., on behalf of Hyundai-Kia Motors
(Hyundai) requested an exemption from
the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part
541) for the Hyundai Genesis vehicle
line beginning with MY 2009. The
petition requested an 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 an exemption
for one of its vehicle lines per year.
Hyundai has petitioned the agency to
grant an exemption for its Genesis
vehicle line beginning with MY 2009. In
its petition, Hyundai provided a
detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the
components of the antitheft device for
the Genesis vehicle line. Hyundai will
install its passive antitheft device as
standard equipment on the vehicle line.
Features of the antitheft device will
include a passive immobilizer
consisting of an EMS (engine control
unit), SMARTRA 3 (immobilizer unit),
an antenna coil and transponder
ignition keys. Additionally, the Hyundai
Genesis will have a standard alarm
system which will monitor all the doors,
the trunk and the hood of the vehicle.
The audible and visual alarms are
activated when an unauthorized person
attempts to enter or move the vehicle by
unauthorized means. Hyundai’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.
The antitheft device to be installed on
the MY 2009 Hyundai is a transponderbased electronic immobilizer system.
The vehicle immobilizer device consists
of the EMS, the SMARTRA 3 and
ignition keys with a built-in
transponder. Hyundai stated that the
EMS carries out the check of the
ignition key by special encryption
algorithm which runs in the
transponder and in the EMS in parallel.
The engine can only be started if the
results of the ignition key check and
algorithm are equal.
Hyundai stated that the device is
automatically activated by removing the
key from the ignition switch and locking
the vehicle door. In order to arm the
device, the key must be removed from
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 16 / Thursday, January 24, 2008 / Notices
the ignition switch, all of the doors and
hood must be closed and the driver’s
door must be locked with the ignition
key or all doors must be locked with the
keyless entry. When the device is
armed, the visual (flashing hazard
lamps) and audible (horn sound) alarm
system will be triggered if unauthorized
entry is attempted through the doors,
trunk or the hood. The device is
disarmed when the driver’s door is
unlocked with the transponder key or
keyless entry.
Hyundai stated that its antitheft
device has been installed as standard
equipment on the Hyundai Azera which
was previously approved for exemption
from Part 541. There is currently no
available theft rate data for Hyundai
vehicle lines that have been installed
with similar devices. However, Hyundai
submitted data on the effectiveness of
various antitheft devices to support its
belief that its device will be at least
effective as comparable devices
installed on other vehicle lines
previously granted exemptions by the
agency. Hyundai further stated that it
believes that the General Motors, Ford
and Isuzu devices contain components
that are functionally and operationally
similar to its device. Hyundai also
stated that the theft data from the
National Crime Information Center
(NCIC) show a clear reduction in vehicle
thefts after the introduction of the GM
and Ford devices. Therefore, Hyundai
believes that its device will be at least
as effective as those devices that have
been installed on lines previously
granted exemptions by the agency.
Hyundai provided theft rate data for the
Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Firebird
vehicle lines showing a substantial
reduction in theft rates comparing the
lines between pre- and post
introduction of the Pass-Key device.
Hyundai also provided ‘‘percent
reduction’’ data for theft rates between
pre- and post-production years for the
Ford Taurus and Mustang, and
Oldsmobile Toronado and Riviera
vehicle lines normalized to the threeyear average of the Camaro and Firebird
pre-introduction data. Hyundai stated
that the data shows a dramatic
reduction of theft rates due to the
introduction of devices substantially
similar to the Hyundai immobilizer
device. Specifically, the Taurus,
Mustang, Riviera and Toronado vehicle
lines showed a 63, 70, 80 and 58 percent
theft rate reduction respectively
between pre- and post-introduction of
immobilizer devices as standard
equipment on these vehicle lines.
In addressing the specific content
requirements of 543.6, Hyundai
provided information on the reliability
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:35 Jan 23, 2008
Jkt 214001
and durability of its proposed device.
To ensure reliability and durability of
the device, Hyundai conducted tests
based on its own specified standards.
Hyundai 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.
Based on the evidence submitted by
Hyundai, the agency believes that the
antitheft device for the Genesis 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).
Based on the information Hyundai
provided about its device, 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 Hyundai has provided
adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device will reduce and deter
theft.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full Hyundai’s petition
for exemption for the Genesis 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 Hyundai decides not to use the
exemption for this line, it must formally
notify the agency. If such a decision is
made, the line must be fully marked
according to the requirements under 49
CFR Parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of
major component parts and replacement
parts).
NHTSA notes that if Hyundai wishes
in the future to modify the device on
which this exemption is based, the
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4305
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, 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 Part
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: January 17, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8–1141 Filed 1–23–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety Notice of
Application for Special Permits
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: List of Applications for Special
Permits.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special
permits from the Department of
Transportation’s Hazardous Material
Regulations (49 CFR Part 107, Subpart
B), notice is hereby given that the Office
of Hazardous Materials Safety has
received the application described
herein. Each mode of transportation for
which a particular special permit is
requested is indicated by a number in
the ‘‘Nature of Application’’ portion of
the table below as follows: 1—Motor
vehicle, 2—Rail freight, 3—Cargo vessel,
4—Cargo aircraft only, 5—Passengercarrying aircraft.
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 16 (Thursday, January 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4304-4305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1141]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc.
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 Hyundai-Kia
Motors Corporation (Hyundai) in accordance with Sec. 543.9(c)(2) of 49
CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the
Hyundai Genesis vehicle line beginning with model year (MY) 2009. 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. Hyundai requested confidential treatment for its
information and attachments submitted in support of its petition. The
agency will address Hyundai's request for confidential treatment in a
separate letter.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
model year (MY) 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's telephone number is
(202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2290.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated October 22, 2007,
Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc., on behalf of Hyundai-Kia
Motors (Hyundai) requested an exemption from the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the
Hyundai Genesis vehicle line beginning with MY 2009. The petition
requested an 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 an
exemption for one of its vehicle lines per year. Hyundai has petitioned
the agency to grant an exemption for its Genesis vehicle line beginning
with MY 2009. In its petition, Hyundai provided a detailed description
and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of
the antitheft device for the Genesis vehicle line. Hyundai will install
its passive antitheft device as standard equipment on the vehicle line.
Features of the antitheft device will include a passive immobilizer
consisting of an EMS (engine control unit), SMARTRA 3 (immobilizer
unit), an antenna coil and transponder ignition keys. Additionally, the
Hyundai Genesis will have a standard alarm system which will monitor
all the doors, the trunk and the hood of the vehicle. The audible and
visual alarms are activated when an unauthorized person attempts to
enter or move the vehicle by unauthorized means. Hyundai'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 2009 Hyundai is a
transponder-based electronic immobilizer system. The vehicle
immobilizer device consists of the EMS, the SMARTRA 3 and ignition keys
with a built-in transponder. Hyundai stated that the EMS carries out
the check of the ignition key by special encryption algorithm which
runs in the transponder and in the EMS in parallel. The engine can only
be started if the results of the ignition key check and algorithm are
equal.
Hyundai stated that the device is automatically activated by
removing the key from the ignition switch and locking the vehicle door.
In order to arm the device, the key must be removed from
[[Page 4305]]
the ignition switch, all of the doors and hood must be closed and the
driver's door must be locked with the ignition key or all doors must be
locked with the keyless entry. When the device is armed, the visual
(flashing hazard lamps) and audible (horn sound) alarm system will be
triggered if unauthorized entry is attempted through the doors, trunk
or the hood. The device is disarmed when the driver's door is unlocked
with the transponder key or keyless entry.
Hyundai stated that its antitheft device has been installed as
standard equipment on the Hyundai Azera which was previously approved
for exemption from Part 541. There is currently no available theft rate
data for Hyundai vehicle lines that have been installed with similar
devices. However, Hyundai submitted data on the effectiveness of
various antitheft devices to support its belief that its device will be
at least effective as comparable devices installed on other vehicle
lines previously granted exemptions by the agency. Hyundai further
stated that it believes that the General Motors, Ford and Isuzu devices
contain components that are functionally and operationally similar to
its device. Hyundai also stated that the theft data from the National
Crime Information Center (NCIC) show a clear reduction in vehicle
thefts after the introduction of the GM and Ford devices. Therefore,
Hyundai believes that its device will be at least as effective as those
devices that have been installed on lines previously granted exemptions
by the agency. Hyundai provided theft rate data for the Chevrolet
Camaro and Pontiac Firebird vehicle lines showing a substantial
reduction in theft rates comparing the lines between pre- and post
introduction of the Pass-Key device. Hyundai also provided ``percent
reduction'' data for theft rates between pre- and post-production years
for the Ford Taurus and Mustang, and Oldsmobile Toronado and Riviera
vehicle lines normalized to the three-year average of the Camaro and
Firebird pre-introduction data. Hyundai stated that the data shows a
dramatic reduction of theft rates due to the introduction of devices
substantially similar to the Hyundai immobilizer device. Specifically,
the Taurus, Mustang, Riviera and Toronado vehicle lines showed a 63,
70, 80 and 58 percent theft rate reduction respectively between pre-
and post-introduction of immobilizer devices as standard equipment on
these vehicle lines.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Hyundai
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Hyundai
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Hyundai 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.
Based on the evidence submitted by Hyundai, the agency believes
that the antitheft device for the Genesis 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). Based on the information Hyundai provided
about its device, 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 Hyundai has provided adequate reasons for its belief
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Hyundai's petition for exemption for the Genesis 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 Hyundai decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR Parts 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if Hyundai 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, 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 Part
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: January 17, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8-1141 Filed 1-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
