Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Ford Motor Company, 16472-16474 [2011-6724]

Download as PDF 16472 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Reports, Forms and Record Keeping Requirements; Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collections and their expected burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period was published on September 3, 2010 [FR Doc. 2010–22008]. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 22, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: KilJae Hong, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W52–232, NPO–520, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Hong’s telephone number is (202) 493–0524 and e-mail address is kiljae.hong@dot.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Title: 49 CFR 575—Consumer Information Regulations (sections 103 and 105) Qualitative Research. OMB Number: Not Assigned. Type of Request: Request for public comment on collection of information request. Abstract: The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), enacted in December 2007, included a requirement that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) develop a consumer information and education campaign to improve consumer understanding of automobile performance with regard to fuel economy, Greenhouse Gases (GHG) emissions and other pollutant emissions; of automobile use of alternative fuels; and of thermal management technologies used on automobiles to save fuel. A critical step in developing the consumer information program is to conduct proper market research to understand consumers’ knowledge surrounding these issues, evaluate potential consumer-facing messages in terms of clarity and understand the communications VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:46 Mar 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 channels in which these messages should be present. The research will allow NHTSA to refine messaging to enhance comprehension and usefulness and will guide the development of an effective communications plan. NHTSA proposes a multi-phased research project to gather the data and apply analyses and results from the project to develop the consumer information program and education campaign. Affected Public: Passenger vehicle consumers. Estimated Total Annual Burden: 128. ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 days, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725–17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention NHTSA Desk Officer. Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; the accuracy of the Departments estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. A Comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Gregory A. Walter, Senior Associate Administrator, Policy and Operations. help caregivers find a child restraint system (‘‘child safety seat’’) that fits their vehicle. This document corrects the public comments submission due date. DATES: Comments should be submitted early enough to ensure that they are received no later than April 26, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues related to the VehicleChild Restraint System (CRS) Fit program, you may contact Ms. Jennifer N. Dang, Office of Crashworthiness Standards (Telephone: 202–493–0598). For legal issues, you may contact Ms. Deirdre Fujita, Office of Chief Counsel (Telephone: 202–366–2992). You may send mail to these officials at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590–0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NHTSA published in the Federal Register of February 25, 2011 (76 FR 10637), a request for comments notice describing the new consumer information program that will help caregivers find a child restraint system that fits their vehicle. In that document, on page 10637, in the DATES section, it states that ‘‘comments should be submitted early enough to ensure that they are received no later than March 28, 2011.’’ In that section, change the date from ‘‘March 28, 2011’’ to ‘‘April 26, 2011.’’ Issued on: March 17, 2011. Joseph S. Carra, Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 2011–6729 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P [FR Doc. 2011–6849 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket NHTSA–2010–00062] Consumer Information; Program for Child Restraint Systems; Correction National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Request for comments; correction. AGENCY: NHTSA published in the Federal Register of February 25, 2011 a request for comments notice detailing observations from an agency pilot study conducted to determine reasonable conditions for participation in a new consumer information program, as part of the New Car Assessment Program, to SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Ford Motor Company National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. AGENCY: This document grants in full the Ford Motor Company’s (Ford) petition for an exemption of the C–MAX 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 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). Ford requested confidential treatment for an attachment it submitted in support of its petition. The agency has addressed Ford’s request for confidential treatment by letter dated March 1, 2011. DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with the 2013 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) 366–5222. Her fax number is (202) 493– 2990. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated January 25, 2011, Ford requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2013 Ford C–MAX 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 C–MAX vehicle line. Ford will install its Passive Antitheft Electronic Immobilizer System (PATS) on the 2013 C–MAX 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 with 28 trillion different possible electronic key codes for the PATS system and 400 million different possible electronic key codes for the IAwPB system. Key components of the 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 2013 C–MAX vehicle line will also be equipped with several other standard antitheft features common to Ford vehicles, (i.e., counterfeit resistant VIN labels; secondary VINs, hood release inside vehicle, and cabin accessibility through VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:46 Mar 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 the use of a valid key fob or keycode). Ford further stated that its C–MAX vehicles will also be available with an optional perimeter alarm system. The perimeter alarm system will utilize both an audible and visible alarm if unauthorized access is attempted. Ford’s submission is considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in § 543.5 and the specific content requirements of § 543.6. 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 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 ‘‘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, 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 start the vehicle adds even an additional level of security to the IAwPB device. In both devices, if the codes do not match, the vehicle will be inoperable. 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 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 PATS device or the IAwPB device would be an effective deterrent against vehicle theft. PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16473 Ford stated that it installed the PATS device on all MY 1996 Ford Mustang GT and Cobra models as standard equipment. Ford also stated that the PATS device was extended to the complete Ford Mustang vehicle line as standard equipment in MY 1997. Ford also stated that according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics, MY 1997 Mustangs installed with the PATS device showed a 70% reduction in theft rate when compared to MY 1995 Mustangs. Ford also stated that the PATS 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 vehicle. Ford stated that beginning with MY 2011, the IAwPB device will also be offered as standard equipment on the Lincoln MKT and optionally on the Lincoln MKS, MKX, Ford Taurus, Edge, Explorer, Focus and Fiesta vehicles. Ford referenced the agency’s published theft rate data for the Volvo S60 for comparison purposes because it stated that the Ford C–MAX is a new vehicle and would utilize the PATS and IAwPB systems that would be similar to the Volvo S60 in design and architecture. Ford stated that the Volvo S60’s theft rate is lower than the vehicle theft rate for all vehicles in four of the last five calendar years for which published data is available. Specifically, the agency’s data show that theft rates for the Volvo S60 for MYs 2006–2008 are 1.3803, 0.6907 and 2.3543 respectively. Using an average of 3 MYs data (2006–2008), the theft rate for the Volvo S60 vehicle line is well below the median at 1.4751. Ford stated that since either the PATS device or the IAwPB device are the primary theft devices on Ford C–MAX vehicles, it believes that theft rates similar to Volvo S60 are likely to continue or improve in the future. 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 C–MAX 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 partsmarking requirements of Part 541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon substantial evidence, the E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 16474 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices 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 C–MAX 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 C–MAX vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, appendix A–1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from the 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 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. Section 543.7(d) states that a part 543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the line’s exemption is based. Further, § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to permit the use of an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in that exemption.’’ VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:46 Mar 22, 2011 Jkt 223001 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: March 17, 2011. Joseph S. Carra, Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 2011–6724 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Surface Transportation Board [Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 296X)] Union Pacific Railroad Company— Abandonment Exemption—in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, CA On March 3, 2011, Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) filed with the Surface Transportation Board (Board) a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for exemption from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10903 to abandon 2 segments, totaling 5.0 miles, of the Riverside Industrial Lead in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, Cal. The northern segment begins at milepost 540.15 near Colton and ends at milepost 543.88 near Riverside (North Segment), a distance of 3.73 miles, of which 2.27 miles are in San Bernardino County and 1.46 miles are in Riverside County. The southern segment begins at milepost 544.56 and extends to the end of the line at milepost 545.83 (South Segment), a distance of 1.27 miles in Riverside County (both segments collectively referred to as the Line). The Line traverses United States Postal Service Zip Codes 92324, 92313, 92507, and 92506. In addition to an exemption from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10903, UP seeks exemption from 49 U.S.C. 10904 (offer of financial assistance (OFA) procedures) and 49 U.S.C. 10905 (public use conditions). In support, UP contends that exemption PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 from these provisions is necessary to ensure that a portion of the underlying right-of-way will be available for conveyance to the California State Road Authority for its Interstate 215 Project. Further, UP states that exemption from these provisions will allow the Interstate 215 Project to avoid costs associated with building a replacement bridge on the North Segment of the Line. These requests will be addressed in the final decision. UP is not seeking authority to abandon the portion of the Riverside Industrial Lead between the North Segment and the South Segment (from milepost 543.88 to milepost 544.56), a distance of .68 miles (the Remaining Segment). UP states that the Remaining Segment will still be part of the UP railroad system and will continue to serve the shippers on the Remaining Segment with BNSF Railway (BNSF) providing service via a haulage agreement and trackage rights, over a connection to be constructed between the Remaining Segment and a line of railroad owned by the Riverside County Transportation Commission. UP will remain the primary railroad obligated to serve the Remaining Segment. The Line does not contain Federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation in UP’s possession will be made available promptly to those requesting it. The interest of railroad employees will be protected by the conditions set forth in Oregon Short Line— Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. 91 (1979). By issuance of this notice, the Board is instituting an exemption proceeding pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final decision will be issued by June 21, 2011. Any OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due no later than 10 days after service of a decision granting the petition for exemption. Each OFA must be accompanied by a $1,500 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). All interested persons should be aware that, following abandonment of rail service and salvage of the Line, the Line may be suitable for other public use, including interim trail use. Any request for a public use condition under 49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be due no later than April 12, 2011. Each trail request must be accompanied by a $250 filing fee. See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(27). All filings in response to this notice must refer to Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 296X), and must be sent to: (1) Surface E:\FR\FM\23MRN1.SGM 23MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16472-16474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6724]


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

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 C-MAX 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

[[Page 16473]]

the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR 
part 541). Ford requested confidential treatment for an attachment it 
submitted in support of its petition. The agency has addressed Ford's 
request for confidential treatment by letter dated March 1, 2011.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
the 2013 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) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated January 25, 2011, Ford 
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft 
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2013 Ford C-MAX 
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 C-MAX 
vehicle line. Ford will install its Passive Antitheft Electronic 
Immobilizer System (PATS) on the 2013 C-MAX 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 with 28 trillion different possible 
electronic key codes for the PATS system and 400 million different 
possible electronic key codes for the IAwPB system. Key components of 
the 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 2013 C-MAX vehicle line will also 
be equipped with several other standard antitheft features common to 
Ford vehicles, (i.e., counterfeit resistant VIN labels; secondary VINs, 
hood release inside vehicle, and cabin accessibility through the use of 
a valid key fob or keycode). Ford further stated that its C-MAX 
vehicles will also be available with an optional perimeter alarm 
system. The perimeter alarm system will utilize both an audible and 
visible alarm if unauthorized access is attempted. Ford's submission is 
considered 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 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 ``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, 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 start the vehicle adds even an additional level 
of security to the IAwPB device. In both devices, if the codes do not 
match, the vehicle will be inoperable.
    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 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 PATS device or the IAwPB device would be an 
effective deterrent against vehicle theft.
    Ford stated that it installed the PATS device on all MY 1996 Ford 
Mustang GT and Cobra models as standard equipment. Ford also stated 
that the PATS device was extended to the complete Ford Mustang vehicle 
line as standard equipment in MY 1997. Ford also stated that according 
to the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics, MY 1997 
Mustangs installed with the PATS device showed a 70% reduction in theft 
rate when compared to MY 1995 Mustangs. Ford also stated that the PATS 
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 vehicle. Ford stated that beginning with MY 2011, the IAwPB 
device will also be offered as standard equipment on the Lincoln MKT 
and optionally on the Lincoln MKS, MKX, Ford Taurus, Edge, Explorer, 
Focus and Fiesta vehicles.
    Ford referenced the agency's published theft rate data for the 
Volvo S60 for comparison purposes because it stated that the Ford C-MAX 
is a new vehicle and would utilize the PATS and IAwPB systems that 
would be similar to the Volvo S60 in design and architecture. Ford 
stated that the Volvo S60's theft rate is lower than the vehicle theft 
rate for all vehicles in four of the last five calendar years for which 
published data is available. Specifically, the agency's data show that 
theft rates for the Volvo S60 for MYs 2006-2008 are 1.3803, 0.6907 and 
2.3543 respectively. Using an average of 3 MYs data (2006-2008), the 
theft rate for the Volvo S60 vehicle line is well below the median at 
1.4751. Ford stated that since either the PATS device or the IAwPB 
device are the primary theft devices on Ford C-MAX vehicles, it 
believes that theft rates similar to Volvo S60 are likely to continue 
or improve in the future.
    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 C-MAX 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

[[Page 16474]]

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 C-MAX 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 C-MAX vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR 
part 541, appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from 
the Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) 
contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all 
part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future 
product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is 
granted and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary 
in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines 
exempted from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention 
Standard.
    If 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 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. Section 543.7(d) states that a part 
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted 
under this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the 
line's exemption is based. Further, Sec.  543.9(c)(2) provides for the 
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of 
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in 
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that 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: March 17, 2011.
Joseph S. Carra,
Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-6724 Filed 3-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P