Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Ford Motor Company, 30103-30105 [2010-12948]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices
Richard H. Doyle, Regional Administrator, Region 1—Boston, Kendall
Square 55 Broadway, Suite 920, Cambridge, MA 02142–1093, Tel.
617–494–2055.
States served: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, and Vermont.
Brigid Hynes-Cherin, Regional Administrator, Region 2—New York,
One Bowling Green, Room 429, New York, NY 10004–1415,Tel.
212–668–2170.
States served: New Jersey, New York .....................................................
New York Metropolitan Office, Region 2—New York, One Bowling
Green, Room 428, New York, NY 10004–1415, Tel. 212–668–2202.
Letitia Thompson, Regional Administrator, Region 3—Philadelphia,
1760 Market Street, Suite 500, Philadelphia, PA 19103–4124, Tel.
215–656–7100.
States served: Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and District of Columbia.
Philadelphia Metropolitan Office, Region 3—Philadelphia, 1760 Market
Street, Suite 500, Philadelphia, PA 19103–4124, Tel. 215–656–7070.
Washington, DC Metropolitan Office, 1990 K Street, NW, Room 510,
Washington, DC 20006, Tel. 202–219–3562.
Yvette Taylor, Regional Administrator, Region 4—Atlanta, 230
Peachtreet Street, NW., Suite 800, Atlanta, GA 30303, Tel. 404–865–
5600.
States served: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virgin Islands.
Marisol Simon, Regional Administrator, Region 5—Chicago, 200 West
Adams Street, Suite 320, Chicago, IL 60606, Tel. 312–353–2789.
States served: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Chicago Metropolitan Office, Region 5—Chicago, 200 West Adams
Street, Suite 320, Chicago, IL 60606, Tel. 312–353–2789.
[FR Doc. 2010–12950 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–57–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption From the
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard;
Ford Motor Company
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
SUMMARY: This document grants in full
the Ford Motor Company’s (Ford)
petition for an exemption of the
Explorer vehicle line in accordance with
§ 543.9(c)(2) of 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). Ford requested confidential
treatment for the attachments it
submitted in support of its petition. The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 May 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
Robert C. Patrick, Regional Administrator, Region 6–Ft. Worth, 819
Taylor Street, Room 8A36, Ft. Worth, TX 76102, Tel. 817–978–
0550.
States served: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico and
Texas.
Mokhtee Ahmad, Regional Administrator, Region 7—Kansas City, MO,
901 Locust Street, Room 404, Kansas City, MO 64106,Tel. 816–
329–3920.
States served: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
Terry Rosapep, Regional Administrator, Region 8—Denver, 12300
West Dakota Ave., Suite 310, Lakewood, CO 80228–2583, Tel.
720–963–3300.
States served: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah,
and Wyoming.
Leslie T. Rogers, Regional Administrator, Region 9—San Francisco,
201 Mission Street, Room 1650, San Francisco, CA 94105–
1926,Tel. 415–744–3133.
States served: American Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii,
Nevada, and the Northern Mariana Islands.
Los Angeles Metropolitan Office, Region 9—Los Angeles, 888 S.
Figueroa Street, Suite 1850, Los Angeles, CA 90017–1850, Tel.
213–202–3952.
Rick Krochalis, Regional Administrator, Region 10—Seattle, Jackson
Federal Building, 915 Second Avenue, Suite 3142, Seattle, WA
98174–1002, Tel. 206–220–7954.
States served: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
agency will address Ford’s request for
confidential treatment by separate letter.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2011 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Carlita Ballard, Office of International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Ballard’s telephone number is (202)
366–0846. Her fax number is (202) 493–
2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a
petition dated December 11, 2009, Ford
requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541)
for the MY 2011 Ford Explorer vehicle
line. 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 exemptions for
one vehicle line per model year. 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 Explorer
vehicle line. Ford will install its
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 4703
30103
Sfmt 4703
SecuriLock antitheft device (also known
as the Passive Antitheft System or
PATS) on the 2011 Explorer as standard
equipment. Ford stated that it will also
offer its Intelligent Access with Push
Button Start (IAwPB) antitheft device as
optional equipment. Ford stated that
both systems are passive, electronic
immobilizer devices that use encrypted
transponder technology. Key
components of the Securilock/PATS
antitheft device will include an
electronic transponder key, transceiver
module, ignition lock, and a passive
immobilizer. Key components of the
IAwPB device is an electronic keyfob,
remote function actuator, body control
module, power train control module
and a passive immobilizer. Ford stated
that its MY 2011 Explorer vehicle line
will also be equipped with several other
standard antitheft features common to
Ford vehicles, (i.e., counterfeit resistant
VIN labels; secondary VINs, cabin
accessibility through the use of a valid
key fob or keycode). Ford further stated
that there will also be a separate visible
and audible perimeter alarm available
on its Explorer vehicle line. The alarm
will be available as an option on
vehicles with the Securilock/PATS
device and included as standard
equipment on vehicles with the IAwPB
device. Ford’s submission is considered
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
30104
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices
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.
Ford stated that the devices
integration of the transponder into the
normal operation of the ignition key
assures activation of the system. Ford
further stated that both devices are
always active and require no other
operator action. Specifically, in the
SecuriLock device, when the ignition
key is turned to the ‘‘start’’ position, the
transceiver module reads the ignition
key code and transmits an encrypted
message from the keycode to the control
module, which then determines key
validity and authorizes engine starting
by sending a separate encrypted
message to the powertrain contol
module (PCM). In the IAwPB device,
when the ‘‘startstop’’ button is pressed,
the transceiver module reads the key
code and transmits an encrypted
message from the keycode to the control
module to determine validity and
authorizes engine starting by sending a
separate encrypted message to the body
control module (BCM), the PEP/RFA
module and the PCM. Ford pointed out
that in addition to the programmed key,
the three modules that must be matched
to allow start of the vehicle adds even
an additional level of security to the
IAwPB device and in both devices, if
the codes do not match, the powertrain
engine starter, spark and fuel will be
disabled.
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
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.
Ford also stated that incorporation of
several features in both devices further
support reliability and durability of the
devices. Specifically, some of those
features include: encrypted
communication between the
transponder, control function and the
power train control module; no moving
parts; inability to mechanically override
the device to start the vehicle; and the
body control module/remote function
actuator and the power train control
module share security data that during
vehicle assembly form matched
modules that if separated from each
other will not function in other vehicles.
Ford compared the device proposed
for its vehicle line with other devices
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 May 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
which NHTSA has determined to be as
effective in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle theft as would
compliance with the parts-marking
requirements. Ford stated that it
believes that the standard installation of
either the SecuriLock device or the
IAwPB device would be an effective
deterrent against vehicle theft.
Ford stated that it installed the
SecuriLock device on all MY 1996 Ford
Mustang GT and Cobra models and
other selected models. Ford stated that
in the 1997 model, the SecuriLock
device was extended to the complete
Ford Mustang vehicle line as standard
equipment. Ford also stated that
according to the National Insurance
Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics, MY
1997 Mustangs installed with the
SecuriLock device showed a 70%
reduction in theft rate compared to the
MY 1995 Mustangs. Ford also reported
that the SecuriLock device is currently
offered as standard equipment on most
of its North American Ford, Lincoln and
Mercury vehicles but is offered as
optional equipment on its F-series
Super Duty pickups, Econoline and
Transit Connect vehicles. Ford stated
that with MY 2011, the IAwPB device
will be offered as standard equipment
on the Lincoln MKT and optionally on
the Lincoln MKS, MKX, Taurus, Edge
and the Explorer vehicles.
Ford also referenced theft rate data
published by NHTSA showing that the
theft rate for the Explorer is lower than
the median theft rate for all vehicles
from MY’s 2000–2006. Ford stated that
the 2011 Explorer will be comparable in
vehicle segment, size and equipment
(including the SecuriLock device) to
those Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer
vehicles for which theft rate data is
currently available (between MYs 2004
and 2006). Ford stated that since either
the SecuriLock device or the IAwPB
device is the primary theft deterrent on
Ford Explorer vehicles, it believes that
theft rates for the Explorer will improve
or continue comparatively lower in the
future than the theft rates experienced
by its Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer
vehicles between MYs’ 2004–2006. The
theft rate for the Ford Explorer using
two MYs’ data (2004–2005) data is
1.6797 and theft rate for the Mercury
Mountaineer using three MYs data is
1.3361.
The agency agrees that the device is
substantially similar to devices in other
vehicle lines for which the agency has
already granted exemptions. Based on
the evidence submitted by Ford, the
agency believes that the antitheft device
for the Explorer vehicle line is likely to
be as effective in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle theft as compliance with
PO 00000
Frm 00138
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part
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 Ford has provided adequate
reasons for its belief that the antitheft
device for the Ford Explorer 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.
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.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full Ford’s petition for
exemption for the Explorer 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
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 103 / Friday, May 28, 2010 / Notices
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 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: May 25, 2010.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010–12948 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
Petition for Waiver of Compliance
In accordance with part 211 of Title
49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
notice is hereby given that the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) received
a request for a waiver of compliance
with certain requirements of its safety
standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party
seeking relief, the regulatory provisions
involved, the nature of the relief being
requested, and the petitioner’s
arguments in favor of relief.
Long Island Rail Road
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA–2010–
0090]
The Long Island Rail Road (LIRR)
seeks a waiver of compliance with the
Locomotive Safety Standards, 49 CFR
229.129(b)(2), which requires that the
sound level of locomotives
manufactured before September 18,
2006, have their horns tested before
June 24, 2010; and 49 CFR 229.129(c),
which prescribes the testing
requirements for testing locomotive
horns.
LIRR operates 836 M–7 MU passenger
cars of which 84 have had their horns
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:43 May 27, 2010
Jkt 220001
tested; and 170 M–3 MU passenger cars
of which 60 have had their horns tested.
In addition, LIRR operates 80 diesel
electric locomotives of which 7 horns
have been tested; and 23 control car
locomotives of which 2 horns have been
tested.
LIRR cites the previous winters (2009
and 2010) climatic conditions for failure
to complete the required horn testing.
LIRR is requesting an additional 6month extension to complete the
testing. Because of the constraints of
their maintenance facilities, LIRR is also
requesting that they be allowed to
utilize an alternate testing standard.
LIRR would do reference sample testing
of locomotive horns as required in 49
CFR 229.129(c), and use the test results
from the reference tests to develop an
alternative test plan.
Interested parties are invited to
participate in these proceedings by
submitting written views, data, or
comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in
connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a
hearing. If any interested party desires
an opportunity for oral comment, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before
the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
All communications concerning these
proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver
Petition Docket Number 2010–0090) and
may be submitted by any of the
following methods:
• Web site: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Operations Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Room W12–140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
Communications received within 30
days of the date of this notice will be
considered by FRA before final action is
taken. Comments received after that
date will be considered as far as
practicable. All written communications
concerning these proceedings are
available for examination during regular
business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the
above facility. All documents in the
public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet
at the docket facility’s Web site at
https://www.regulations.gov.
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of any written
communications and comments
PO 00000
Frm 00139
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
30105
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78).
Issued in Washington, DC on May 24,
2010.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety
Standards and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010–12880 Filed 5–27–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
Solicitation of Applications for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2010 Motor Carrier Safety
Assistance Program (MCSAP) High
Priority Grant Funding
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that on
May 21 it published an opportunity to
apply for FY 2010 MCSAP High Priority
grant funding on the grants.gov Web site
(https://www.grants.gov).
DATES: FMCSA will initially consider
funding for applications submitted by
July 1, 2010. If additional funding
remains available, applications
submitted after that date will be
considered on a case-by-case basis.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Cim Weiss, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, Office of Safety
Programs, State Programs Division (MC–
ESS), 202–366–0275, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., EST., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2010 provides grant funding for
Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV) safety
programs as authorized under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users, Public Law 111–147, 124 Stat. 71
(2010); Public Law 109–59, 119 Stat.
1144 (2005).
This notice announces the availability
of approximately $2,000,000 in unawarded FY 2010 funding for MCSAP
High Priority projects. These funds are
available for activities conducted by
State agencies, local governments, and
organizations representing government
E:\FR\FM\28MYN1.SGM
28MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 103 (Friday, May 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30103-30105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12948]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Ford Motor Company
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Ford Motor Company's (Ford)
petition for an exemption of the Explorer vehicle line in accordance
with Sec. 543.9(c)(2) of 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). Ford
requested confidential treatment for the attachments it submitted in
support of its petition. The agency will address Ford's request for
confidential treatment by separate letter.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2011 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone
number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated December 11, 2009, Ford
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the MY 2011 Ford Explorer
vehicle line. 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 vehicle line per model year. 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 Explorer
vehicle line. Ford will install its SecuriLock antitheft device (also
known as the Passive Antitheft System or PATS) on the 2011 Explorer as
standard equipment. Ford stated that it will also offer its Intelligent
Access with Push Button Start (IAwPB) antitheft device as optional
equipment. Ford stated that both systems are passive, electronic
immobilizer devices that use encrypted transponder technology. Key
components of the Securilock/PATS antitheft device will include an
electronic transponder key, transceiver module, ignition lock, and a
passive immobilizer. Key components of the IAwPB device is an
electronic keyfob, remote function actuator, body control module, power
train control module and a passive immobilizer. Ford stated that its MY
2011 Explorer vehicle line will also be equipped with several other
standard antitheft features common to Ford vehicles, (i.e., counterfeit
resistant VIN labels; secondary VINs, cabin accessibility through the
use of a valid key fob or keycode). Ford further stated that there will
also be a separate visible and audible perimeter alarm available on its
Explorer vehicle line. The alarm will be available as an option on
vehicles with the Securilock/PATS device and included as standard
equipment on vehicles with the IAwPB device. Ford's submission is
considered
[[Page 30104]]
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.
Ford stated that the devices integration of the transponder into
the normal operation of the ignition key assures activation of the
system. Ford further stated that both devices are always active and
require no other operator action. Specifically, in the SecuriLock
device, when the ignition key is turned to the ``start'' position, the
transceiver module reads the ignition key code and transmits an
encrypted message from the keycode to the control module, which then
determines key validity and authorizes engine starting by sending a
separate encrypted message to the powertrain contol module (PCM). In
the IAwPB device, when the ``startstop'' button is pressed, the
transceiver module reads the key code and transmits an encrypted
message from the keycode to the control module to determine validity
and authorizes engine starting by sending a separate encrypted message
to the body control module (BCM), the PEP/RFA module and the PCM. Ford
pointed out that in addition to the programmed key, the three modules
that must be matched to allow start of the vehicle adds even an
additional level of security to the IAwPB device and in both devices,
if the codes do not match, the powertrain engine starter, spark and
fuel will be disabled.
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 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.
Ford also stated that incorporation of several features in both
devices further support reliability and durability of the devices.
Specifically, some of those features include: encrypted communication
between the transponder, control function and the power train control
module; no moving parts; inability to mechanically override the device
to start the vehicle; and the body control module/remote function
actuator and the power train control module share security data that
during vehicle assembly form matched modules that if separated from
each other will not function in other vehicles.
Ford 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. Ford stated that it believes that the standard
installation of either the SecuriLock device or the IAwPB device would
be an effective deterrent against vehicle theft.
Ford stated that it installed the SecuriLock device on all MY 1996
Ford Mustang GT and Cobra models and other selected models. Ford stated
that in the 1997 model, the SecuriLock device was extended to the
complete Ford Mustang vehicle line as standard equipment. Ford also
stated that according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB)
theft statistics, MY 1997 Mustangs installed with the SecuriLock device
showed a 70% reduction in theft rate compared to the MY 1995 Mustangs.
Ford also reported that the SecuriLock device is currently offered as
standard equipment on most of its North American Ford, Lincoln and
Mercury vehicles but is offered as optional equipment on its F-series
Super Duty pickups, Econoline and Transit Connect vehicles. Ford stated
that with MY 2011, the IAwPB device will be offered as standard
equipment on the Lincoln MKT and optionally on the Lincoln MKS, MKX,
Taurus, Edge and the Explorer vehicles.
Ford also referenced theft rate data published by NHTSA showing
that the theft rate for the Explorer is lower than the median theft
rate for all vehicles from MY's 2000-2006. Ford stated that the 2011
Explorer will be comparable in vehicle segment, size and equipment
(including the SecuriLock device) to those Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer
vehicles for which theft rate data is currently available (between MYs
2004 and 2006). Ford stated that since either the SecuriLock device or
the IAwPB device is the primary theft deterrent on Ford Explorer
vehicles, it believes that theft rates for the Explorer will improve or
continue comparatively lower in the future than the theft rates
experienced by its Explorer/Mercury Mountaineer vehicles between MYs'
2004-2006. The theft rate for the Ford Explorer using two MYs' data
(2004-2005) data is 1.6797 and theft rate for the Mercury Mountaineer
using three MYs data is 1.3361.
The agency agrees that the device is substantially similar to
devices in other vehicle lines for which the agency has already granted
exemptions. Based on the evidence submitted by Ford, the agency
believes that the antitheft device for the Explorer 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).
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 Explorer 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.
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.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Ford's
petition for exemption for the Explorer 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
[[Page 30105]]
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 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: May 25, 2010.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-12948 Filed 5-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
