Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Ford, 21173-21174 [E8-8479]
Download as PDF
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 76 / Friday, April 18, 2008 / Notices
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 § 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 Chevrolet Equinox
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 Parts 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 Apr 17, 2008
Jkt 214001
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: April 15, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8–8477 Filed 4–17–08; 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;
Ford
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 Ford Motor Company
(Ford) in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2)
of 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the
Theft Prevention Standard, for the Ford
Escape 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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with model
year (MY) 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Deborah Mazyck, Office of International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Mazyck’s telephone number is (202)
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21173
366–0846. Her fax number is (202) 493–
2290.
In a
petition dated February 8, 2008, Ford
requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541)
for the Ford Escape vehicle line
beginning with MY 2009. The petition
requested an 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 of its vehicle lines per year. Ford
has petitioned the agency to grant an
exemption for its Ford Escape vehicle
line beginning with MY 2009. In its
petition, Ford provided a detailed
description and diagram of the identity,
design, and location of the components
of the antitheft device for the Ford
Escape vehicle line. Ford will install its
passive antitheft device as standard
equipment on the vehicle line. Features
of the antitheft device will include an
electronic key, ignition lock, and a
passive immobilizer. Ford’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 Ford Escape is the
SecuriLock Passive Anti-Theft
Electronic Engine Immobilizer System
(SecuriLock). The Ford SecuriLock is a
transponder-based electronic
immobilizer system. Ford stated that the
integration of the transponder into the
normal operation of the ignition key
assures activation of the system. When
the ignition key is turned to the start
position, the transceiver module reads
the ignition key code and transmits an
encrypted message to the cluster.
Validation of the key is determined and
start of the engine is authorized once a
separate encrypted message is sent to
the powertrain’s control module (PCM).
The powertrain will function only if the
key code matches the unique
identification key code previously
programmed into the PCM. If the codes
do not match, the powertrain engine
starter will be disabled. Ford also stated
that the SecuriLock electronic engine
immobilizer device makes conventional
theft methods such as hot-wiring or
attacking the ignition lock cylinder
ineffective and virtually eliminates
drive-away thefts.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
21174
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 76 / Friday, April 18, 2008 / Notices
The agency’s theft rate data is not
available for calendar year/model year
(CY/MY) 2007 and 2008. Ford stated
that since the introduction of the Ford
Escape in MY 2001, it has been
equipped with the SecuriLock system
(except the 2005 Escape Hybrid). Ford
also provided theft rate data for the MY
2001 through 2005 Ford Escape vehicle
line. The chart illustrates that the
reported theft rate for the Escape is
significantly below the agency’s median
theft rate of 3.5826 for all vehicles in
each calendar year/model year. Ford
stated that it believes that the
exceptional low theft rate of 1.0342 for
CY/MY 2005 is likely to continue or
improve in future years.
Additionally, Ford noted the
reduction in theft rate for other vehicle
lines equipped with the SecuriLock
device. Ford’s SecuriLock device was
first introduced as standard equipment
on its MY 1996 Mustang GT and Cobra.
In MY 1997, the SecuriLock system was
installed on the entire Mustang vehicle
line as standard equipment. Ford stated
that the 1997 model year Mustang with
SecuriLock shows a 70% reduction in
theft compared to the MY 1995
Mustang, according to National
Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) theft
statistics. There were 149 reported thefts
for 1997 compared to 500 reported
thefts in 1995.
In addressing the specific content
requirements of 543.6, Ford provided
information on the reliability and
durability of its proposed device. To
ensure reliability and durability of the
device, Ford conducted tests based on
its own specified standards. Ford 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.
The agency also notes that the device
will provide four of the five types of
performance listed in § 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.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49
CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a
petition for exemption from the partsmarking requirements of part 541 either
in whole or in part, if it determines that,
based upon substantial evidence, the
standard equipment antitheft device is
likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts marking
requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Ford has provided adequate
reasons for its belief that the antitheft
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:38 Apr 17, 2008
Jkt 214001
device for the Ford Escape 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). This
conclusion is based on the information
Ford provided about its device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full Ford’s petition for
exemption for the Escape 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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard.
If Ford 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 Ford 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
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 15, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8–8479 Filed 4–17–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket No. PHMSA–2007–27181 (Notice
No. 08–5)]
Notice of Information Collection
Approval
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Information Collection
Approval.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice announces Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
approval and extension until March 31,
2010 for the following information
collection requests (ICRs): OMB Control
No. 2137–0572, ‘‘Testing Requirements
for Non-Bulk Packaging’’; and approval
and extension until August 31, 2010 for
OMB Control No. 2137–0039,
‘‘Hazardous Materials Incidents.’’
This notice also announces OMB
approval and extension until October
31, 2010 for the following ICRs: OMB
Control No. 2137–0018, ‘‘Inspection and
Testing of Portable Tanks and
Intermediate Bulk Containers’’; and
OMB Control No. 2137–0595, ‘‘Cargo
Tank Motor Vehicles in Liquefied
Compressed Gas Service.’’
Additionally, this notice announces
OMB approval and extension until
February 28, 2011 for the following
ICRs: OMB Control No. 2137–0014,
‘‘Cargo Tank Specification
Requirements’’; OMB Control No. 2137–
0542, ‘‘Flammable Cryogenic Liquids’’;
OMB Control No. 2137–0582,
‘‘Container Certification Statements’’;
and OMB Control No. 2137–0591,
‘‘Response Plans for Shipments of Oil.’’
DATES: The expiration dates for these
ICRs are either March 31, 2010, August
31, 2010, October 31, 2010, or February
28, 2011 as indicated under the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this notice.
ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of an
information collection should be
directed to Deborah Boothe or T. Glenn
Foster, Office of Hazardous Materials
Standards (PHH–11), Pipeline and
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 76 (Friday, April 18, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21173-21174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-8479]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Ford
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 Ford Motor
Company (Ford) in accordance with Sec. 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR Part 543,
Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the Ford Escape
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.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
model year (MY) 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
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 February 8, 2008, Ford
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the Ford Escape 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
exemptions for one of its vehicle lines per year. Ford has petitioned
the agency to grant an exemption for its Ford Escape vehicle line
beginning with MY 2009. In its petition, Ford provided a detailed
description and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the
components of the antitheft device for the Ford Escape vehicle line.
Ford will install its passive antitheft device as standard equipment on
the vehicle line. Features of the antitheft device will include an
electronic key, ignition lock, and a passive immobilizer. Ford'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 Ford Escape is
the SecuriLock Passive Anti-Theft Electronic Engine Immobilizer System
(SecuriLock). The Ford SecuriLock is a transponder-based electronic
immobilizer system. Ford stated that the integration of the transponder
into the normal operation of the ignition key assures activation of the
system. When the ignition key is turned to the start position, the
transceiver module reads the ignition key code and transmits an
encrypted message to the cluster. Validation of the key is determined
and start of the engine is authorized once a separate encrypted message
is sent to the powertrain's control module (PCM). The powertrain will
function only if the key code matches the unique identification key
code previously programmed into the PCM. If the codes do not match, the
powertrain engine starter will be disabled. Ford also stated that the
SecuriLock electronic engine immobilizer device makes conventional
theft methods such as hot-wiring or attacking the ignition lock
cylinder ineffective and virtually eliminates drive-away thefts.
[[Page 21174]]
The agency's theft rate data is not available for calendar year/
model year (CY/MY) 2007 and 2008. Ford stated that since the
introduction of the Ford Escape in MY 2001, it has been equipped with
the SecuriLock system (except the 2005 Escape Hybrid). Ford also
provided theft rate data for the MY 2001 through 2005 Ford Escape
vehicle line. The chart illustrates that the reported theft rate for
the Escape is significantly below the agency's median theft rate of
3.5826 for all vehicles in each calendar year/model year. Ford stated
that it believes that the exceptional low theft rate of 1.0342 for CY/
MY 2005 is likely to continue or improve in future years.
Additionally, Ford noted the reduction in theft rate for other
vehicle lines equipped with the SecuriLock device. Ford's SecuriLock
device was first introduced as standard equipment on its MY 1996
Mustang GT and Cobra. In MY 1997, the SecuriLock system was installed
on the entire Mustang vehicle line as standard equipment. Ford stated
that the 1997 model year Mustang with SecuriLock shows a 70% reduction
in theft compared to the MY 1995 Mustang, according to National
Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics. There were 149 reported
thefts for 1997 compared to 500 reported thefts in 1995.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Ford
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Ford
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Ford 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.
The agency also notes 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.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Ford has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Ford Escape 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). This conclusion is based on the information Ford
provided about its device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Ford's
petition for exemption for the Escape 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 Ford 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 Ford 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: April 15, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E8-8479 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P