Petition To Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved Antitheft Device; Ford Motor Company, 50036-50038 [2010-20165]

Download as PDF 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 http://sites.wff.nasa.gov/ code250/expansion_ea.html. The FAA has posted the FONSI/ROD on the Internet at http://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: http:// 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: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register and the Government Printing Office’s Web page at: http://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 http://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