Petition To Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved Antitheft Device; General Motors Corporation, 5892-5894 [E9-2106]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 20 (Monday, February 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5892-5894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2106]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition To Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved 
Antitheft Device; General Motors Corporation

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

ACTION: Notice; Grant of Petition.

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

SUMMARY: On May 15, 1995, the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) granted in full General Motors Corporation's 
(GM) petition for an exemption in accordance with Sec.  543.9(c)(2) of 
49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard for the 
Buick Regal vehicle line (subsequently renamed LaCrosse). On July 27, 
2004, the agency granted GM's first petition to modify its exemption. 
On September 25, 2008, GM submitted a second petition to modify its 
previously approved exemption for the Buick Regal/LaCrosse vehicle line 
beginning with model year (MY) 2010. NHTSA is granting GM's second 
petition to modify the exemption in full because it has determined that 
the modified device is also likely to be as effective in reducing and 
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking 
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.

[[Page 5893]]


DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
model year (MY) 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Mazyck, Office of 
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's telephone 
number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 15, 1995, NHTSA published in the 
Federal Register a notice granting in full a petition from GM for an 
exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention 
Standard (49 CFR 541) for the Buick Regal vehicle line beginning with 
its MY 1996 vehicles. The Buick Regal was equipped with the PASS-Key II 
antitheft device (See 69 FR 44724).
    On July 27, 2004 (see 69 FR 44724), the agency granted a petition 
for modification of the previously granted exemption for the Buick 
Regal/LaCrosse vehicle line beginning with its MY 2005 vehicles. The 
notice also acknowledged that the nameplate for the Buick Regal would 
be changed to Buick LaCrosse. On September 25, 2008, GM submitted a 
second petition to modify the previously approved exemption for the 
Buick LaCrosse vehicle line. This notice grants in full GM's second 
petition to modify the exemption for the Buick LaCrosse vehicle line. 
GM's submission is a complete petition, as required by 49 CFR part 
543.9(d), in that it meets the general requirements contained in 49 CFR 
part 543.5 and the specific content requirements of 49 CFR part 543.6. 
GM's petition provides a detailed description and diagram of the 
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft 
device proposed for installation beginning with the 2010 model year.
    The MY 1996 antitheft device (PASS-Key II) installed on the Buick 
Regal/LaCrosse was a passively activated, transponder-based, electronic 
immobilizer system. GM stated that, in the PASS-Key II device, the key 
resistance was determined by a microprocessor, and the key information 
was monitored for the duration of a valid ignition cycle. Additionally, 
a security indicator would illuminate continuously directing the 
operator to have the vehicle serviced if ``fail enabled'' conditions 
(i.e., vehicle does not start with the proper key because of a dirty or 
contaminated resistor pellet) arose. If a fault was detected, future 
ignition cycles would not be allowed regardless of key authorization.
    GM stated that the current PASS-Key III antitheft device (MY 2004 
modification) installed on the Buick Regal vehicle line provides 
protection against unauthorized starting and fueling of the vehicle 
engine. The antitheft device is designed to be active at all times 
without direct intervention by the vehicle operator, and so that no 
specific or discrete security system action is necessary to achieve 
protection of the device. The device is fully armed immediately after 
the vehicle has been turned off and the key has been removed. GM also 
stated that the PASS-Key III device utilizes a special ignition key and 
decoder module. The mechanical code of the key unlocks and releases the 
transmission lever. The vehicle can only be operated when the key's 
electrical code is sensed by the key cylinder and properly decoded by 
the controller module.
    The ignition key contains electronics in the key head that receive 
energy from the controller module. Upon receipt of the data from the 
controller module, the key transmits a unique code through low 
frequency transmission. The controller module translates the received 
signal from the key into a digital signal which is transmitted to the 
body control module (BCM). The received signal is compared to an 
internally stored value by the BCM. If the values match, the key is 
recognized as valid and a vehicle security password is transmitted 
through data link to the engine control module to enable fuel and 
starting of the vehicle.
    In its second modification, GM stated that it proposes to install 
its Buick LaCrosse vehicle line with its PASS-Key III+ antitheft device 
beginning with its MY 2010 vehicles. The PASS-Key III+ is also a 
transponder based electronic immobilizer system. It is designed to be 
active at all times without direct intervention by the vehicle 
operator. The antitheft device is fully armed immediately after the 
ignition has been turned off and the key removed. The device will 
continue to 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).
    Components of the modified antitheft device include an 
electronically-coded ignition key, a PASS-Key III+ controller module 
and a powertrain control module. Unlike the ignition key used with the 
PASS-Key and PASS-Key II devices, the PASS-Key III and PASS-Key III+ 
ignition key contains electronics embedded within the head of the key.
    GM states that the PASS-Key III+ utilizes an encryption process. 
The electronics embedded within the head of the key 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 one of 65,534 ``Vehicle Security 
Passwords'' is transmitted to enable fuel and starting.
    The PASS-Key III and PASS-Key III+ device use billions of 
electrical key codes which varies with every ignition cycle, while the 
PASS-Key II has code combinations that never varies at each ignition 
cycle. In the PASS-Key III+, each key is uniquely coded and the vehicle 
can be programmed to operate with up to ten different codes, compared 
to the PASS-Key and PASS-Key II devices that only allow a vehicle to 
recognize a single unique code. The PASS-Key III+ device uses an 
encrypted code while the codes for the PASS-Key, PASS-Key II and PASS-
Key III devices use a fixed code.
    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 the modification, GM believes that the MY 2010 
antitheft device will be more effective in deterring theft than the 
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541.
    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 are 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.

[[Page 5894]]

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.
    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. 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+. In past 
petitions, 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.
    On the basis of this comparison, GM believes that the antitheft 
device (PASS-Key III+) for model years 2010 and later will provide 
essentially the same functions and features as found on its MY 2005-
2009 PASS-Key III device and therefore, its modified device will 
provide at least the same level of theft prevention as parts-marking. 
GM believes that the antitheft device proposed for installation on its 
MY 2010 Buick LaCrosse is likely to be as effective in reducing thefts 
as compliance with the parts marking requirements of part 541.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of part 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 also stated that since the authorization code is not 
handled or contacted by the vehicle operator, the reliability of the 
PASS-Key III+ is significantly improved over the PASS-Key and PASS-Key 
II devices. This reliability allows the system to return to the ``Go/No 
Go'' based system, eliminating the ``fail enabled'' mode of operation.
    The agency has evaluated GM's MY 2010 petition to modify the 
exemption for the Buick LaCrosse vehicle line from the parts-marking 
requirements of 49 CFR part 541, and has decided to grant it. It has 
determined that the PASS-Key III+ system is likely to be as effective 
as parts-marking in preventing and deterring theft of these vehicles, 
and therefore qualifies for an exemption under 49 CFR part 543. The 
agency believes that the proposed device will continue to 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.
    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 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 27, 2009.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. E9-2106 Filed 1-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P