Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft Prevention Standard; Toyota, 41484-41485 [E9-19585]
Download as PDF
41484
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
18th Meeting: RTCA Special
Committee 206/EUROCAE WG 76
Plenary
AGENCY: Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special
Committee 206 meeting; Aeronautical
Information Services and Meteorology
Data Link Services
SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice
to advise the public of a meeting of
RTCA Special Committee 206:
Aeronautical Information Services and
Meteorology Data Link Services
DATES: The meeting will be held
September 14–18, 2009 from 9 a.m. to
5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
World Meteorological Organization
(WMO), 7bis, avenue de la Paix, Case
postale No. 2300, CH–1211 Geneva 2,
Switzerland
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In
Geneva: Herbert Puempel, tel.:
+41.22.730.82.83, Chief, Aeronautical
Meteorology Unit (C/AEM), email:
hpuempel@wmo.int, Bridgette
Vuitteney-Gelman, email: BVuitteneyGelman@wmo.int, Andrew Mirza, tel.:
+44(0)1392 884108, e-mail:
andrew.mirza@metoffice.gov.uk, Met
Office, FitzRoy Road, Exeter, EX1 3PB,
United Kingdom
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–
463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is
hereby given for a Special Committee
206/EUROCAE WG 76 Plenary meeting.
The agenda will include:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
14 September—Monday
9 a.m. Opening Plenary
fi Chairmen’s remarks and
introductions
fi Review and approve meeting
agenda and approval of previous
meeting minutes
fi Discussion
fi Schedule for this week
fi Action Item Review
fi Schedule for next meetings
10 a.m. Presentations
fi To be determined
1 p.m. SPR
15 September—Tuesday
9 a.m. Joint AIS and MET Subgroup
Meetings
16 September—Wednesday
9 a.m. Joint AIS and MET Subgroup
Meetings
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Aug 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
17 September—Thursday
9 a.m. Joint AIS and MET Subgroup
Meetings
18 September—Friday
9 a.m. Joint AIS and MET Subgroup
Meetings
10:30 a.m. Plenary Session
fi Other Business
fi Meeting Plans and Dates
Attendance is open to the interested
public but limited to space availability.
With the approval of the chairmen,
members of the public may present oral
statements at the meeting. Persons
wishing to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. Members of the public
may present a written statement to the
committee at any time.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 10,
2009.
Francisco Estrada C.,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. E9–19659 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption From the
Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft
Prevention Standard; Toyota
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 Toyota Motor North
America, Inc’s., (Toyota) petition for an
exemption of the Camry vehicle line in
accordance with 49 CFR Part 543,
Exemption from the Theft Prevention
Standard. 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 (49 CFR Part
541).
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with model
year (MY) 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Carlita Ballard, Office of International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Standards, NHTSA, W43–439, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590. Ms. Ballard’s phone number
is (202) 366–0846. Her fax number is
(202) 493–2990.
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
In a
petition dated May 5, 2009, Toyota
requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the theft
prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541)
for the Camry vehicle line beginning
with MY 2011. The petition has been
filed pursuant to 49 CFR Part 543,
Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard, based on the
installation of an antitheft device as
standard equipment for the entire
vehicle line.
Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may
petition NHTSA to grant an exemption
for one vehicle line per model year. In
its petition, Toyota provided a detailed
description and diagram of the identity,
design, and location of the components
of the antitheft device for the Camry
vehicle line. Toyota stated that all
Camry vehicles will be equipped with a
passive engine immobilizer device as
standard equipment beginning with the
2011 model year. Additionally, Toyota
states that the device will feature two
operational systems, a ‘‘smart key
system’’ (keyless entry) and a
‘‘conventional key’’ system. Toyota
stated that both systems will have the
same basic antitheft functionality and
immobilization features but the driver
will use either the transponder to open
the door and start the engine or a
conventional key to open the door and
start the engine. Toyota additionally
stated that the ‘‘conventional key’’
system will be standard on lower trim
models and the ‘‘smart key’’ system will
be standard on higher trim models but
the main feature of the antitheft system
is the immobilizer device. The ‘‘smart
key’’ system is a fob-sized transponder
that allows for ‘‘keyless’’ entry and
push-button start. Key components of
the ‘‘smart key’’ system will include an
engine immobilizer, certification
electronic control unit (ECU), engine
switch, id code box, steering lock ECU,
security indicator, door control receiver,
electrical key and electronic control
module (ECM). The key components of
the ‘‘conventional key’’ system include
an engine immobilizer, transponder key
ECU assembly, transponder key
amplifier, security indicator, ignition
key and ECM. The device’s security
indicators provide the status of the
immobilizer to users and others inside/
outside the vehicle. When the
immobilizer is activated, the indicator
flashes continuously. When the
immobilizer is not activated, the
indicator is turned off. Models with the
‘‘smart’’ key system will also be
installed with an additional visual and
audible alarm feature designed to deter
inappropriate access to the vehicle.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM
17AUN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 157 / Monday, August 17, 2009 / Notices
Toyota stated that with the ‘‘smart
key’’ system, the immobilizer is
activated when the power button is
pushed from the ‘‘ON’’ status to another
ignition status and the signal is verified
by the ECU or with the ‘‘conventional
key’’ system, the key is turned from the
‘‘ON’’ position and/or removed from the
vehicle’s ignition. The device is
deactivated when the doors are
unlocked and the system recognizes the
transponder from the ‘‘smart key’’
system, or the ‘‘conventional key’’ is
inserted into the key cylinder and
turned toward the ‘‘ON’’ position. In
either system, the key code has to be
recognized by the ECM in order for the
vehicle to start. Toyota also stated that
position switches in the vehicle are also
installed to protect the hood and doors
of the vehicle. The position switches in
the hood will trigger the antitheft device
when they sense inappropriate opening
of the hood. The position switches in
the doors will trigger the antitheft
device when they sense opening of the
doors are being attempted without the
use of a key, wirless switch or ‘‘smart
entry’’ system. Toyota’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, Toyota provided
information on the reliability and
durability of its proposed device. To
ensure reliability and durability of the
device, Toyota conducted tests based on
its own specified standards. Toyota
provided a detailed list of the tests
conducted (i.e., high and low
temperature, strength, impact, vibration,
electro-magnetic interference, etc.).
Toyota stated that it believes that its
device is reliable and durable because it
complied with its own specific design
standards and it is installed in other
vehicle lines for which the agency has
granted a parts-marking exemption.
Additionally, Toyota stated that there
are approximately 20,000 combinations
for the key cylinders and key plates for
its outer gutter keys and approximately
10,000 for its inner gutter keys, making
it very difficult to unlock the doors
without valid keys.
Toyota 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. Toyota referenced
NHTSA published theft rate data for
several years before and after the Altima
vehicle line was equipped with a
standard immobilizer. Toyota stated that
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:55 Aug 14, 2009
Jkt 217001
the average theft rate for the Altima
dropped to 3.0 per 1,000 cars produced
between MYs 2000–2006 (with a
standard immobilizer) from 5.3 per
1,000 cars produced between MYs
1996–1999 (without a standard
immobilizer). Toyota stated that this
represents approximately a 43%
decrease in the theft rate (with
installation of a standard immobilizer)
when compared to the average for the
Altima when it was parts marked.
Toyota believes that installing the
immobilizer as standard equipment
reduces the theft rate and expects the
Camry will experience comparable
effectiveness to that of the Altima and
therefore would be more effective than
parts-marking labels.
Based on the evidence submitted by
Toyota, the agency believes that the
antitheft device for the Camry 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 541).
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 Toyota has provided adequate
reasons for its belief that the antitheft
device for the Toyota Camry 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
Toyota provided about its device.
The agency concludes that the device
will provide four or five of the types of
performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3):
Promoting activation; attract attention to
the efforts of an unauthorized person to
enter or move 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.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full Toyota’s petition
for exemption for the Toyota Camry
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
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
41485
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, 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 Toyota 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 Toyota 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 antitheft 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.’’
The agency wishes to minimize the
administrative burden that § 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: August 11, 2009.
Julie Abraham,
Director, Office of International Policy, Fuel
Economy and Consumer Programs.
[FR Doc. E9–19585 Filed 8–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM
17AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 157 (Monday, August 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41484-41485]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19585]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft
Prevention Standard; Toyota
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 Toyota Motor
North America, Inc's., (Toyota) petition for an exemption of the Camry
vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the
Theft Prevention Standard. 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 (49 CFR Part 541).
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
model year (MY) 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, W43-
439, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's
phone number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated May 5, 2009, Toyota
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft
prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the Camry vehicle line
beginning with MY 2011. The petition has been filed pursuant to 49 CFR
Part 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 an
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Toyota
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the Camry
vehicle line. Toyota stated that all Camry vehicles will be equipped
with a passive engine immobilizer device as standard equipment
beginning with the 2011 model year. Additionally, Toyota states that
the device will feature two operational systems, a ``smart key system''
(keyless entry) and a ``conventional key'' system. Toyota stated that
both systems will have the same basic antitheft functionality and
immobilization features but the driver will use either the transponder
to open the door and start the engine or a conventional key to open the
door and start the engine. Toyota additionally stated that the
``conventional key'' system will be standard on lower trim models and
the ``smart key'' system will be standard on higher trim models but the
main feature of the antitheft system is the immobilizer device. The
``smart key'' system is a fob-sized transponder that allows for
``keyless'' entry and push-button start. Key components of the ``smart
key'' system will include an engine immobilizer, certification
electronic control unit (ECU), engine switch, id code box, steering
lock ECU, security indicator, door control receiver, electrical key and
electronic control module (ECM). The key components of the
``conventional key'' system include an engine immobilizer, transponder
key ECU assembly, transponder key amplifier, security indicator,
ignition key and ECM. The device's security indicators provide the
status of the immobilizer to users and others inside/outside the
vehicle. When the immobilizer is activated, the indicator flashes
continuously. When the immobilizer is not activated, the indicator is
turned off. Models with the ``smart'' key system will also be installed
with an additional visual and audible alarm feature designed to deter
inappropriate access to the vehicle.
[[Page 41485]]
Toyota stated that with the ``smart key'' system, the immobilizer
is activated when the power button is pushed from the ``ON'' status to
another ignition status and the signal is verified by the ECU or with
the ``conventional key'' system, the key is turned from the ``ON''
position and/or removed from the vehicle's ignition. The device is
deactivated when the doors are unlocked and the system recognizes the
transponder from the ``smart key'' system, or the ``conventional key''
is inserted into the key cylinder and turned toward the ``ON''
position. In either system, the key code has to be recognized by the
ECM in order for the vehicle to start. Toyota also stated that position
switches in the vehicle are also installed to protect the hood and
doors of the vehicle. The position switches in the hood will trigger
the antitheft device when they sense inappropriate opening of the hood.
The position switches in the doors will trigger the antitheft device
when they sense opening of the doors are being attempted without the
use of a key, wirless switch or ``smart entry'' system. Toyota'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, Toyota
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Toyota
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Toyota provided a
detailed list of the tests conducted (i.e., high and low temperature,
strength, impact, vibration, electro-magnetic interference, etc.).
Toyota stated that it believes that its device is reliable and durable
because it complied with its own specific design standards and it is
installed in other vehicle lines for which the agency has granted a
parts-marking exemption. Additionally, Toyota stated that there are
approximately 20,000 combinations for the key cylinders and key plates
for its outer gutter keys and approximately 10,000 for its inner gutter
keys, making it very difficult to unlock the doors without valid keys.
Toyota 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. Toyota referenced NHTSA published theft rate data
for several years before and after the Altima vehicle line was equipped
with a standard immobilizer. Toyota stated that the average theft rate
for the Altima dropped to 3.0 per 1,000 cars produced between MYs 2000-
2006 (with a standard immobilizer) from 5.3 per 1,000 cars produced
between MYs 1996-1999 (without a standard immobilizer). Toyota stated
that this represents approximately a 43% decrease in the theft rate
(with installation of a standard immobilizer) when compared to the
average for the Altima when it was parts marked. Toyota believes that
installing the immobilizer as standard equipment reduces the theft rate
and expects the Camry will experience comparable effectiveness to that
of the Altima and therefore would be more effective than parts-marking
labels.
Based on the evidence submitted by Toyota, the agency believes that
the antitheft device for the Camry 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).
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 Toyota has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Toyota Camry 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 Toyota
provided about its device.
The agency concludes that the device will provide four or five of
the types of performance listed in Sec. 543.6(a)(3): Promoting
activation; attract attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person
to enter or move 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.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Toyota's petition for exemption for the Toyota Camry 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, 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 Toyota 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 Toyota 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 antitheft 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.''
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: August 11, 2009.
Julie Abraham,
Director, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs.
[FR Doc. E9-19585 Filed 8-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P