Petition To Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved Antitheft Device; Ford Motor Company, 50036-50038 [2010-20165]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
50036
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 157 / Monday, August 16, 2010 / Notices
The total burden resulting from the
collection of information is 4,608 hours.
For the respondents that participate in
the initial screening survey only, the
annual estimated burden is 3,687.5
hours. For the 1,250 respondents
matched from the screening survey, the
estimated annual burden is 542 hours
(812.5 hours total over a period of 18
months). For the riders that will
participate in the on-motorcycle skills
test, the estimated annual burden from
information collection is 108 hours.
Therefore, the total estimated annual
burden is 4,337.5 hours. The
respondents would not incur any
recordkeeping burden or recordkeeping
cost from the information collection.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A).
Jeff Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and
Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010–20162 Filed 8–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Office of Commercial Space
Transportation; Availability of Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and
Record of Decision (ROD) for Actions
Related to Environmental Assessment
for the Expansion of the Wallops Flight
Facility Launch Range
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321–4347 (as
amended), Council on Environmental
Quality NEPA implementing regulations
(40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
parts 1500 to 1508), and FAA Order
1050.1E, Change 1, the FAA is
announcing the availability of a FONSI/
ROD, based on the analysis and findings
of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration’s (NASA) August 2009
Environmental Assessment for the
Expansion of the Wallops Flight Facility
Launch Range (the EA). The FAA
(Office of Commercial Space
Transportation) participated as a
cooperating agency with NASA in the
preparation of the EA, which evaluates
the potential environmental impacts of
the proposed expansion of the MidAtlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) at
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
Wallops Flight Facility (WFF). As the
MARS expansion would require Federal
actions (as defined in 40 CFR Section
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Aug 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
1508.18) involving both NASA and the
FAA, the EA was prepared to satisfy the
NEPA obligations of both agencies.
NASA, as the WFF property owner and
lead agency, is responsible for ensuring
overall compliance with applicable
environmental statutes, including
NEPA. The FAA served as a cooperating
agency in the preparation of the EA
because of its role in (1) licensing the
Virginia Commercial Space Flight
Authority (VCSFA) which operates
MARS as a commercial launch site and
(2) issuing licenses or permits to operate
commercial launch and reentry vehicles
at MARS. The FAA has formally
adopted the EA and is using the FONSI/
ROD to support the modification or
renewal of VCSFA’s Launch Site
Operator License and issuance of
licenses or experimental permits for
commercial launch and reentry vehicles
at MARS.
Under the Proposed Action in the EA,
NASA and MARS facilities would be
upgraded to support up to and
including medium large class suborbital
and orbital expendable launch vehicle
(ELV) launch activities from WFF.
NASA’s Preferred Alternative includes
site improvements required to support
launch operations (such as facility
construction and infrastructure
improvements); testing, fueling, and
processing operations; up to two static
fire tests per year; launching up to six
orbital-class vehicles per year from Pad
0–A; and the reentry of associated crew
or cargo capsules. Implementation of
NASA’s Preferred Alternative would
result in a maximum of 18 orbital-class
vehicle launches from MARS Launch
Complex 0 (twelve existing launches
from Pad 0–B and six additional
launches from Pad 0–A). As several
different launch and reentry vehicles
could launch from MARS Pad 0–A, the
largest launch vehicle and payload
(which could include a reentry vehicle),
in terms of size, weight, and dimension,
was chosen as the demonstration, or
‘‘envelope,’’ vehicle and payload to
provide a benchmark for assessing
impacts on resources at WFF and the
surrounding environment. Orbital
Sciences Corporation’s Taurus II would
be the largest ELV expected to be
launched from MARS Pad 0–A under
the Proposed Action. Therefore, the
Taurus II was selected as the envelope
launch vehicle for purposes of the EA.
Orbital Sciences Corporation’s Cygnus
Capsule and Space Exploration
Technologies Corporation’s Dragon
Capsule were evaluated as potential
reentry vehicles. The EA addresses the
potential environmental impacts of
implementing the EA’s Proposed Action
PO 00000
Frm 00151
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and the No Action Alternative. Under
the No Action Alternative, NASA and
MARS would not proceed with
expansion activities at Pad 0–A.
Based on its independent review and
consideration, the FAA issued a FONSI/
ROD concurring with the analysis of
impacts and findings in the EA and
formally adopting the EA to support the
modification or renewal of VCSFA’s
Launch Site Operator License and
issuance of launch and reentry licenses
or experimental permits to operate
commercial vehicles at MARS. After
reviewing and analyzing available data
and information on existing conditions,
potential impacts, and measures to
mitigate those impacts, the FAA has
determined that neither modification or
renewal of VCSFA’s Launch Site
Operator License nor issuance of launch
and reentry licenses or experimental
permits to operate commercial vehicles
at MARS are Federal actions that would
significantly affect the quality of the
human environment within the meaning
of NEPA. Therefore, the preparation of
an EIS is not required, and the FAA has
issued a FONSI/ROD. The FAA made
this determination in accordance with
all applicable environmental laws and
FAA regulations.
NASA has posted the EA on the
Internet at https://sites.wff.nasa.gov/
code250/expansion_ea.html. The FAA
has posted the FONSI/ROD on the
Internet at https://www.faa.gov/about/
office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/.
Mr.
Daniel Czelusniak, Environmental
Specialist, Office of Commercial Space
Transportation, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Room 331, Washington,
DC 20591, telephone (202) 267–5924;
E-mail daniel.czelusniak@faa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 4,
2010.
Michael McElligott,
Manager, Space Systems Development
Division.
[FR Doc. 2010–19994 Filed 8–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition To Modify an Exemption of a
Previously Approved Antitheft Device;
Ford Motor Company
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA);
Department of Transportation (DOT).
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 157 / Monday, August 16, 2010 / Notices
Grant of petition to modify an
exemption of a previously approved
antitheft device.
ACTION:
On February 14, 2006, the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) granted in full
Ford Motor Company’s (Ford) petition
for an exemption in accordance with
§ 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543,
Exemption from the Theft Prevention
Standard for the Ford Focus vehicle line
beginning with model year (MY 2006).
On June 18, 2010, Ford submitted a
petition to modify its previously
approved exemption for the Ford Focus
vehicle line beginning with model year
(MY) 2012. NHTSA is granting Ford’s
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.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2012 model year (MY).
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: On
February 14, 2006, NHTSA published in
the Federal Register a notice granting in
full a petition from Ford for an
exemption from the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard (49 part CFR 541) for the
Focus vehicle line beginning with its
MY 2006 vehicles. The 2006 Ford Focus
is currently equipped with a passive
antitheft device (See 71 FR 7824) and
offered with an optional perimeter
alarm system.
On June 18, 2010, Ford submitted a
petition to modify the previously
approved exemption for the Focus
vehicle line. This notice grants in full
Ford’s petition to modify the exemption
for the Focus vehicle line. Ford’s
submission is a complete petition, as
required by 49 CFR 543.9(d), in that it
meets the general requirements
contained in 49 CFR 543.5 and the
specific content requirements of 49 CFR
543.6. Ford’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 2012 model year.
The MY 2006 passive antitheft device
installed as standard equipment on the
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Aug 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
Ford Focus is the Passive Antitheft
Electronic Engine Immobilizer System
(PATS)/SecuriLock Passive Anti-Theft
Electronic Powertrain Immobilizer
System (SecuriLock). Features of the
antitheft device include an electronic
key, ignition lock, and a transponder–
based electronic passive immobilizer.
The MY 2006 device also incorporates
an optional perimeter alarm system
which monitors all the doors, decklid
and hood of the vehicle.
Ford stated that integration of the
transponder into the normal operation
of the ignition key assures activation of
the device. 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. Once validation
of the key is determined, the engine can
be started once a separate encrypted
message is sent to the powertrain’s
electronic 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.
In its 2012 modification, Ford will
continue to offer the SecuriLock
System/PATS device as standard
equipment on its base trim level
vehicles but all other trim level vehicles
will have either the SecuriLock System/
PATS device as standard equipment or
the optional Intelligent Access with
Push Button Start (IAwPB). Key
components of the IAwPB system is an
electronic keyfob, remote function
actuator, body control module, power
train control module and a passive
immobilizer. Ford stated that both
devices are always active and require no
other operator action. Ford stated that in
addition to a programmed electronic
key, there are three modules, the BCM,
the IAwPB/RFA module and the PCM,
that must be matched together to start
the vehicle. These matched modules
will not function in other vehicles if
separated from each other, adding even
an additional level of security to the
IAwPB device. Specifically, in the
SecuriLock/PATS 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
control module (PCM). In the IAwPB
device, when the ‘‘start’’ button is
pressed, and the brake pedal is
depressed, the Body Control Module
(BCM) triggers the Remote Function
PO 00000
Frm 00152
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50037
Actuator (RFA) to search for a key
inside the vehicle. If a key is detected,
the RFA compares the keycode to the
stored valid codes in the RFA and
reports back to the BCM whether a valid
key was found. In both devices, if the
codes do not match, the vehicle will be
inoperable. Ford also stated that its MY
2012 Ford Focus 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 only with a valid key fob).
Ford stated that its MY 2012
modification will continue to
incorporate some of the same theft
prevention features that made it very
difficult to defeat its MY 2006 device.
Specifically, some of those features
include: Encrypted communication
between the transponder and the control
function, 28 trillion possible codes,
making key duplication virtually
impossible, 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 also
stated that an audible perimeter alarm
system will also be installed as standard
equipment on its MY 2012 Ford Focus
vehicles with a premier trim package,
adding another level of security. The
audible/visual perimeter alarm system
will not be offered on vehicles with the
base trim package.
Ford stated that it believes that the
planned addition of the optional IAwPB
electronic engine immobilizer system
will render ineffective, conventional
theft methods, such as hot-wiring,
attacking the ignition lock cylinder and
drive-away thefts.
Ford also stated that it believes that
installation of the SecuriLock/PATS
device and IAwPB system are an
effective deterrent against vehicle theft.
Since the same aspects of performance
(i.e., arming and the immobilization
feature) are still provided, the agency
believes that the same level of
protection is being met. Since the
agency granted Ford’s exemption for its
MY 2006 Focus vehicle line, the latest
available theft rate using an average of
3 MY’s data is 2.8629 which is still
below the median theft rate.
The agency has evaluated Ford’s MY
2012 petition to modify the exemption
for the Focus vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR
part 541, and has decided to grant it.
The agency believes that the proposed
device will continue to provide the four
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
50038
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 157 / Monday, August 16, 2010 / Notices
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.
If Ford 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 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 10, 2010.
Joseph S. Carra,
Acting Associate Administrator for
Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010–20165 Filed 8–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
[Docket No. FHWA–2010–0059]
Temporary Closure of I–70 (I–70/I–465
West Leg Interchange to the I–70/I–65
South Split Interchange) on October 7,
2010, in Indianapolis, IN
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Final Notice.
AGENCIES:
The FHWA has approved the
request from the Indiana Department of
Transportation (INDOT) to temporarily
close a segment of I–70 (from the I–70/
I–465 west leg interchange to the I–70/
I–65 south split interchange) on October
7, 2010, for a 12-hour period from 6 a.m.
to 6 p.m. The closure will accommodate
a concentrated I–70 beautification
project sponsored by INDOT. The
approval is granted in accordance with
the provisions of 23 CFR 658.11 which
authorizes the deletion of segments of
the federally designated routes that
make up the National Network
designated in Appendix A of 23 CFR
Part 658. The FHWA published a Notice
and Request for Comment on July 2,
2010, seeking comments from the
general public on this request submitted
by INDOT for a deletion in accordance
with section 658.11(d). No public
comments were received.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:51 Aug 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
Effective Date: This Notice is
effective immediately.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Michael P. Onder, Team Leader Truck
Size and Weight and Freight Operations
and Technology Team, (202) 366–2639,
Raymond W. Cuprill, Office of the Chief
Counsel, (202) 366–0791, Federal
Highway Administration; 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590, and Mr. Robert Tally, FHWA
Division Administrator-Indiana, (317)
226–7476. Office hours for FHWA are
from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Electronic Access and Filing
You may retrieve a copy of the Notice
and Request for Comment, comments
submitted to the docket, and a copy of
this Final Notice through the Federal
eRulemaking portal at: https://
www.regulations.gov. The Web site is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days
each year. Electronic submission and
retrieval help and guidelines are
available under the help section of the
Web site.
An electronic copy of this document
may also be downloaded from Office of
the Federal Register’s home page at:
https://www.archives.gov/federal_register
and the Government Printing Office’s
Web page at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov.
Background
The INDOT submitted a request to
FHWA for approval of the temporary
closure of a segment of I–70 in Indiana
(from the I–70/I–465 west leg
interchange to the I–70/I–65 south split
interchange) on October 7, 2010, for a
12-hour period from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.
(The incoming request and supporting
documents can be viewed electronically
at the docket established for this notice
at https://www.regulations.gov). This
closure will be undertaken in support of
the I–70 beautification project that will
take place with the participation of
approximately 9,100 Lilly ‘‘Day of
Service’’ volunteers. These volunteers
will be working within five different I–
70 interchanges along both sides of I–70.
Approximately 5,600 volunteers will be
assigned to work on the north side of I–
70 and approximately 3,500 workers
will be assigned to the south side. Both
groups have 1 hour appropriated for
arrival and parking as well as 1 hour for
departure from the construction
corridor. A comprehensive plan for the
arrival and departure times, parking,
and emergency evacuation (should it be
necessary) has been developed. The
INDOT has indicated that by closing the
Interstate through the work zone,
PO 00000
Frm 00153
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
lengthy delays caused by the restriction
of lanes will be eliminated as well as
distractions to the motoring public
caused by the 9,100 workers and
associated activities. In addition, the
temporary closure would eliminate the
risk of work zone accidents in the area
of these work zones. The INDOT
believes that the best way to ensure the
safety of the workers will be to
eliminate vehicular travel through the
corridor while the work in the
interchange areas is being conducted.
The closure also provides additional
safety to the motorists by eliminating
the distraction that could be caused by
the significant amount of workers
within the interchanges and by
eliminating the need for traffic
restrictions in the actual work zone. A
12-hour condensed closure provides a
safer condition for workers and provides
better conditions than a long-term
construction work zone with the
associated work zone set ups and
restrictions that would otherwise take
place over many days.
The FHWA is responsible for
enforcing the Federal regulations
applicable to the National Network of
highways that can safely and efficiently
accommodate the large vehicles
authorized by provisions of the Surface
Transportation Assistance Act of 1982
(STAA), as amended, designated in
accordance with 23 CFR part 658 and
listed in Appendix A. In accordance
with sec. 658.11, the FHWA may
approve deletions or restrictions of the
Interstate system or other National
Network route based upon specified
justification criteria in sec. 658.11(d)(2).
Requests for deletions are published in
the Federal Register for notice and
comment.
Notice and Request for Comment
The FHWA published a Notice and
Request for Comment on July 2, 2010,
seeking comments from the general
public on this request submitted by
INDOT for a deletion in accordance
with section 658.11(d). The comment
period closed on August 2, 2010. No
public comments were received.
The FHWA sought comments on this
request for temporary deletion from the
National Network in accordance with 23
CFR 658.11(d). Specifically, the request
is for deletion of I–70 (from the I–70/I–
465 west leg interchange to the I–70/I–
65 south split interchange) from the
National Network on October 7,
beginning at 6:00 a.m., for one
consecutive 12-hour period. The
temporary closure of I–70 to general
traffic should have a negligible impact
to interstate commerce. Using a
comparison of lane mile computations,
E:\FR\FM\16AUN1.SGM
16AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 157 (Monday, August 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50036-50038]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-20165]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition To Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved
Antitheft Device; Ford Motor Company
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA);
Department of Transportation (DOT).
[[Page 50037]]
ACTION: Grant of petition to modify an exemption of a previously
approved antitheft device.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 14, 2006, the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) granted in full Ford Motor Company's (Ford)
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 Ford
Focus vehicle line beginning with model year (MY 2006). On June 18,
2010, Ford submitted a petition to modify its previously approved
exemption for the Ford Focus vehicle line beginning with model year
(MY) 2012. NHTSA is granting Ford's 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.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2012 model year (MY).
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: On February 14, 2006, NHTSA published in the
Federal Register a notice granting in full a petition from Ford for an
exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard (49 part CFR 541) for the Focus vehicle line beginning with
its MY 2006 vehicles. The 2006 Ford Focus is currently equipped with a
passive antitheft device (See 71 FR 7824) and offered with an optional
perimeter alarm system.
On June 18, 2010, Ford submitted a petition to modify the
previously approved exemption for the Focus vehicle line. This notice
grants in full Ford's petition to modify the exemption for the Focus
vehicle line. Ford's submission is a complete petition, as required by
49 CFR 543.9(d), in that it meets the general requirements contained in
49 CFR 543.5 and the specific content requirements of 49 CFR 543.6.
Ford'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 2012 model year.
The MY 2006 passive antitheft device installed as standard
equipment on the Ford Focus is the Passive Antitheft Electronic Engine
Immobilizer System (PATS)/SecuriLock Passive Anti-Theft Electronic
Powertrain Immobilizer System (SecuriLock). Features of the antitheft
device include an electronic key, ignition lock, and a transponder-
based electronic passive immobilizer. The MY 2006 device also
incorporates an optional perimeter alarm system which monitors all the
doors, decklid and hood of the vehicle.
Ford stated that integration of the transponder into the normal
operation of the ignition key assures activation of the device. 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. Once validation of the key is determined, the engine
can be started once a separate encrypted message is sent to the
powertrain's electronic 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.
In its 2012 modification, Ford will continue to offer the
SecuriLock System/PATS device as standard equipment on its base trim
level vehicles but all other trim level vehicles will have either the
SecuriLock System/PATS device as standard equipment or the optional
Intelligent Access with Push Button Start (IAwPB). Key components of
the IAwPB system is an electronic keyfob, remote function actuator,
body control module, power train control module and a passive
immobilizer. Ford stated that both devices are always active and
require no other operator action. Ford stated that in addition to a
programmed electronic key, there are three modules, the BCM, the IAwPB/
RFA module and the PCM, that must be matched together to start the
vehicle. These matched modules will not function in other vehicles if
separated from each other, adding even an additional level of security
to the IAwPB device. Specifically, in the SecuriLock/PATS 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 control module (PCM). In the IAwPB device,
when the ``start'' button is pressed, and the brake pedal is depressed,
the Body Control Module (BCM) triggers the Remote Function Actuator
(RFA) to search for a key inside the vehicle. If a key is detected, the
RFA compares the keycode to the stored valid codes in the RFA and
reports back to the BCM whether a valid key was found. In both devices,
if the codes do not match, the vehicle will be inoperable. Ford also
stated that its MY 2012 Ford Focus 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 only with a valid key fob).
Ford stated that its MY 2012 modification will continue to
incorporate some of the same theft prevention features that made it
very difficult to defeat its MY 2006 device. Specifically, some of
those features include: Encrypted communication between the transponder
and the control function, 28 trillion possible codes, making key
duplication virtually impossible, 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 also stated that an audible perimeter alarm system will
also be installed as standard equipment on its MY 2012 Ford Focus
vehicles with a premier trim package, adding another level of security.
The audible/visual perimeter alarm system will not be offered on
vehicles with the base trim package.
Ford stated that it believes that the planned addition of the
optional IAwPB electronic engine immobilizer system will render
ineffective, conventional theft methods, such as hot-wiring, attacking
the ignition lock cylinder and drive-away thefts.
Ford also stated that it believes that installation of the
SecuriLock/PATS device and IAwPB system are an effective deterrent
against vehicle theft. Since the same aspects of performance (i.e.,
arming and the immobilization feature) are still provided, the agency
believes that the same level of protection is being met. Since the
agency granted Ford's exemption for its MY 2006 Focus vehicle line, the
latest available theft rate using an average of 3 MY's data is 2.8629
which is still below the median theft rate.
The agency has evaluated Ford's MY 2012 petition to modify the
exemption for the Focus vehicle line from the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR part 541, and has decided to grant it. The
agency believes that the proposed device will continue to provide the
four
[[Page 50038]]
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 Ford 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 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 10, 2010.
Joseph S. Carra,
Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-20165 Filed 8-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M
