Petition to Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved Antitheft Device; Porsche, 69321-69323 [2011-28936]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices Panorama’’) requesting a foreign carrier permit and exemption authority authorizing Blue Panorama to conduct operations to and from the United States to the full extent authorized by the United States-European Union Air Transportation Agreement (‘‘U.S.-E.U. Agreement’’), including authority to engage in: (i) Scheduled and charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail from any point(s) behind any Member State(s) of the European Community, via any point(s) in any Member State(s) and via intermediate points to any point(s) in the United States and beyond; (ii) scheduled and charter foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail between any point(s) in the United States and any point(s) in any member of the European Common Aviation Area; (iii) other charters; and (iv) transportation authorized by any additional route or other right(s) made available to European Community carriers in the future. Docket Number: DOT–OST–2011– 0183. Date Filed: September 21, 2011. Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope: October 13, 2011. Description: Application of Icelandair ehf. (‘‘lcelandair’’) requesting the Department amend its foreign air carrier permit so that it can exercise new rights recently made available to Icelandic air carriers pursuant to the Air Transport Agreement between the United States of America and the European Union and its Member States and Iceland and Norway. lcelandair also requests an exemption to the extent necessary to enable it to provide the services covered by this application while lcelandair’s request for an amended foreign air carrier permit is pending. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison. [FR Doc. 2011–28882 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Aviation Administration Intent To Rule On Request To Release Airport Property at the Malden Regional Airport and Industrial Park (MAW), Malden, MO Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the release of SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Nov 07, 2011 Jkt 226001 land at the Malden Regional Airport & Industrial Park (MAW), Malden, Missouri, under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2). DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 8, 2011. ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be mailed or delivered to the FAA at the following address: Lynn D. Martin, Airports Compliance Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration, Airports Division, ACE–610C, 901 Locust Room 364, Kansas City, MO 64106. In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be mailed or delivered to: Barbara Crayne, Airport Manager, Malden Regional Airport & Industrial Park, 3077 Mitchell Dr., P.O. Box 411, Malden, MO 63863–0411, (573) 276–2279 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn D. Martin, Airports Compliance Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration, Airports Division, ACE–610C, 901 Locust Room 364, Kansas City, MO 64106, (816) 329–2644, lynn.martin@faa.gov The request to release property may be reviewed, by appointment, in person at this same location. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA invites public comment on the request to release approximately 2.4 acres of airport property at the Malden Regional Airport & Industrial Airport (MAW) under the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 47107(h)(2). On December 20, 2010, the Mayor of the City of Malden and the Airport Manager at the Malden Regional Airport requested from the FAA that approximately 2.4 acres of property be released for sale to Murphy Argo Investments. On Sept. 16, 2011, the FAA determined that the request to release property at Malden Regional Airport and Industrial Park (MAW) submitted by the Sponsor meets the procedural requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration and the release of the property does not and will not impact future aviation needs at the airport. The FAA may approve the request, in whole or in part, no sooner than thirty days after the publication of this Notice. The following is a brief overview of the request: Malden Regional Airport and Industrial Park (MAW) is proposing the release of two parcels, one of 0.8 acres and another of 1.6 acres, for a total of 2.4 acres. The release of land is necessary to comply with Federal Aviation Administration Grant Assurances that do not allow federally acquired airport property to be used for non-aviation purposes. The sale of the PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69321 subject property will result in the land at the Malden Regional Airport and Industrial Park (MAW) being changed from aeronautical to nonaeronautical use and release the lands from the conditions of the AIP Grant Agreement Grant Assurances. In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 47107(c)(2)(B)(i) and (iii), the airport will receive fair market value for the property, which will be subsequently reinvested in another eligible airport improvement project for general aviation facilities at the Malden Regional Airport and Industrial Park. Any person may inspect, by appointment, the request in person at the FAA office listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, any person may, upon appointment and request, inspect the application, notice and other documents determined by the FAA to be related to the application in person at the Malden Regional Airport and Industrial Park. Issued in Kansas City, MO, on October 31, 2011. Jim A. Johnson, Manager, Airports Division. [FR Doc. 2011–28935 Filed 11–7–11; 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; Porsche National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Grant of a petition to modify an exemption of a previously approved antitheft device. AGENCY: On May 25, 1989, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) granted in full Porsche Cars North America’s (Porsche) petition for an exemption in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard for the Porsche 911 vehicle line beginning with model year (MY) 1990. On August 16, 2011, Porsche submitted a petition to modify its previously approved exemption for the Porsche 911 vehicle line and notified the agency that all new successor models within the 911 line will be installed with the proposed antitheft device beginning with MY 2012. NHTSA is granting Porsche’s petition to modify the exemption in full, because it has determined that the modified device is also likely to be as effective in SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 69322 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with the 2012 MY. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlita Ballard, Office of International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, W43–439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard’s telephone number is (202) 366–5222. Her fax number is (202) 493–2990. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 2, 1989, NHTSA published in the Federal Register a notice granting in full a petition from Porsche for an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541) for the 911 vehicle line beginning with its MY 1990 vehicles. The Porsche 911 is equipped with a passive antitheft device and an audible and visible alarm. (See 54 FR 23727) On April 4, 1990, Porsche submitted its first letter requesting deminimis treatment of a modification to its existing 911 vehicle line beginning with its MY 1991 vehicles. Porsche’s modification added an alarm control unit integrated with central locking and an interior light control unit. The modification to the device also included improved diagnostic capabilities to accept inputs such as motion sensors and an alarm control unit that monitored the glove box for unauthorized opening. By letter dated May 31, 1990, the agency determined the changes to the antitheft device installed on the 911 line as standard equipment were de minimis. On September 10, 1992, the agency received a second request for de minimis treatment of a proposed modification to Porsche’s existing antitheft device for only one model within the Porsche 911 vehicle line for MY 1994. By letter dated December 4, 1992, the agency notified Porsche that its de minimis request was denied. The agency stated that the proposed change to the device was significant and warranted a petition for modification. Consequently, because of the denial of its request, Porsche met the partsmarking requirements of theft prevention standard for the entire 911 vehicle line for its MY 1994 vehicles. Porsche subsequently informed the agency that beginning with its MY 1995 vehicles, it would no longer produce the 911 vehicle line with a feature exclusive to only one model within the line, and that for MY 1995, it would install the antitheft device as standard equipment VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Nov 07, 2011 Jkt 226001 under the agency’s previous grant of exemption for its MY 1991 911 vehicle line. On August 16, 2011, Porsche submitted its third petition to modify a previously approved exemption for the 911 vehicle line incorporating new successor models into the existing vehicle line. This notice grants in full Porsche’s petition to modify the exemption for the 911 vehicle line. Porsche’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. Porsche’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 MY. Porsche will install its passive, transponder-based electronic engine immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment on its Porsche 911 vehicle line. Key components of the modified antitheft device will include an electronic ignition switch, a centrallocking control unit, an alarm indicator, a remote control unit, a transponder, an engine control unit and an electronic ignition switch. Porsche stated that the antitheft device consists of two major subsystems; a microprocessor based immobilizer device which prevents the engine management system from functioning when the device is engaged, and a central-locking and alarm system. Porsche stated that the immobilizer device is automatically activated when removing the key from the ignition switch assembly. The key contains a radio signal transponder which signals the control unit to allow the engine to be started. Porsche stated that as an option, a keyless entry device can be provided for the 911 vehicle line. Porsche stated that the antitheft device will remain the same, but the ignition key is substituted with a special key that contains a radio signal transmitter similar to that in the standard ignition key. The immobilizer system is automatically activated after the engine is turned off with the optional keyless entry device. Porsche stated that only by inserting the correct key into the ignition switch or by having the special keyless entry device within the compartment of the car, will the correct signal be sent to the control unit allowing start and operation of the engine. When the key is removed from the ignition or the keyless entry key is removed from the vehicle, the device will return to its normal ‘‘OFF’’ state disallowing engine start and operation. PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 In order to ensure the reliability and durability of the device, Porsche conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Porsche provided a detailed list of tests conducted and believes that its device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified requirements for each test. The test conducted included extreme temperature tests, voltage spike tests, reverse polarity tests, electromagnetic interference tests, vibration tests and endurance tests. Porsche stated that its antitheft device also features a built-in self-diagnostic that constantly checks for system failures. If a failure is detected, the operator receives a signal via the alarm indicator. In Porsche’s petition to modify its exemption, it stated that for MY 2012, the 911 vehicle line will be modified to accommodate the introduction of the antitheft device and strategies provided for the previously exempted MY 2010 Panamera vehicle line (see 75 FR 22174). Specifically, Porsche stated that the MY 2012 device will include all of the antitheft features of the MY 2010 Panamera including an electronically activated parking brake. Porsche stated that if the control unit does not receive the correct signal from the key or keyless entry system, the parking brake will remain activated and the vehicle cannot be towed away. Porsche also stated that an alarm system will monitor the opening of the doors, rear luggage compartment, and front deck lid while monitoring interior movement through an ultrasonic sensor. If any violation of these areas is detected, the horn will sound and the lights will flash. Porsche also stated that disconnection of power to the antitheft device and/or engine management device does not affect the operation of either device. Therefore, an unauthorized person cannot operate the car unless they obtain the key or optional keyless entry device for the vehicle. Porsche stated that another additional theft prevention feature to the 911 vehicle line is the implementation of a new off-board antitheft strategy which involves making it impossible to use stolen electronic control units to repair other Porsche vehicles. Porsche stated that the goal of the off-board theft protection strategy is to reduce the marketability of stolen electronic components. Specifically, Porsche explained that during the production process of the vehicle, initialization and registration of various antitheft related electronic components are recorded in a central database. Changes to these components are only possible with authorized on-line access to the central database. Porsche stated that if the E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices components have to be replaced or repaired while authorized access to the central database is unavailable or the components are unauthorized, further operation and use of the vehicle is restricted or even impossible. In its MY 2012 modification, Porsche stated that it believes its new 911 antitheft device will prove to be even more effective in reducing and deterring theft than its antitheft devices have proven in the past. Porsche also compared its device with other devices without alarms that NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-marking requirements. Porsche stated that similar systems without alarms, (i.e., GM PASS-Key, Mercedes Benz 202 vehicle line, Porsche Boxster (Cayman) as well as earlier 911 vehicle line devices were determined to be as effective as parts-marking. Porsche also referenced the agency’s theft rate data for the 911 vehicle line which indicates that its theft rates (2002–2009) are still below the median theft rate of 3.5826. The theft rate for the 911 vehicle line using the most current 3 MY’s theft rate data is 0.6339. The agency has evaluated Porsche’s MY 2012 petition to modify the exemption for the 911 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 five types of performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device. If Porsche 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. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Nov 07, 2011 Jkt 226001 Issued on: October 28, 2011. Christopher J. Bonanti, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. [FR Doc. 2011–28936 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–59–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. DOT–NHTSA–2011–0157, Notice 1] Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision that Nonconforming 1987– 1994 ALPINA Burkard Bovensiepen GmbH B11 Sedan Model Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that 1987–1994 ALPINA B11 sedan model passenger cars that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) are eligible for importation into the United States because they have safety features that comply with, or are capable of being altered to comply with, all such standards. SUMMARY: The closing date for comments on the petition is December 8, 2011. ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above and be submitted by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590–0001 • Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • Fax: (202) 493–2251 Instructions: Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your DATE: PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69323 comments were received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below. Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). How to Read Comments submitted to the Docket: You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the address and times given above. You may also view the documents from the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the dockets. The docket ID number and title of this notice are shown at the heading of this document notice. Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search the Docket for new material. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Stevens, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202) 366–5308). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B), a motor vehicle that was not originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS, and has no substantially similar U.S.-certified counterpart, shall be refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that the motor vehicle has safety features that comply with, or are capable of being altered to comply with, all applicable FMVSS based on destructive test data or such other evidence as NHTSA decides to be adequate. Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69321-69323]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28936]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition to Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved 
Antitheft Device; Porsche

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of a petition to modify an exemption of a previously 
approved antitheft device.

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

SUMMARY: On May 25, 1989, the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) granted in full Porsche Cars North America's 
(Porsche) 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 Porsche 911 vehicle line beginning with model year 
(MY) 1990. On August 16, 2011, Porsche submitted a petition to modify 
its previously approved exemption for the Porsche 911 vehicle line and 
notified the agency that all new successor models within the 911 line 
will be installed with the proposed antitheft device beginning with MY 
2012. NHTSA is granting Porsche's petition to modify the exemption in 
full, because it has determined that the modified device is also likely 
to be as effective in

[[Page 69322]]

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 MY.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlita Ballard, Office of 
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 1200 
New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, W43-439, Washington, DC 20590. 
Ms. Ballard's telephone number is (202) 366-5222. Her fax number is 
(202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 2, 1989, NHTSA published in the 
Federal Register a notice granting in full a petition from Porsche for 
an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft 
Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541) for the 911 vehicle line beginning 
with its MY 1990 vehicles. The Porsche 911 is equipped with a passive 
antitheft device and an audible and visible alarm. (See 54 FR 23727)
    On April 4, 1990, Porsche submitted its first letter requesting 
deminimis treatment of a modification to its existing 911 vehicle line 
beginning with its MY 1991 vehicles. Porsche's modification added an 
alarm control unit integrated with central locking and an interior 
light control unit. The modification to the device also included 
improved diagnostic capabilities to accept inputs such as motion 
sensors and an alarm control unit that monitored the glove box for 
unauthorized opening. By letter dated May 31, 1990, the agency 
determined the changes to the antitheft device installed on the 911 
line as standard equipment were de minimis.
    On September 10, 1992, the agency received a second request for de 
minimis treatment of a proposed modification to Porsche's existing 
antitheft device for only one model within the Porsche 911 vehicle line 
for MY 1994. By letter dated December 4, 1992, the agency notified 
Porsche that its de minimis request was denied. The agency stated that 
the proposed change to the device was significant and warranted a 
petition for modification. Consequently, because of the denial of its 
request, Porsche met the parts-marking requirements of theft prevention 
standard for the entire 911 vehicle line for its MY 1994 vehicles.
    Porsche subsequently informed the agency that beginning with its MY 
1995 vehicles, it would no longer produce the 911 vehicle line with a 
feature exclusive to only one model within the line, and that for MY 
1995, it would install the antitheft device as standard equipment under 
the agency's previous grant of exemption for its MY 1991 911 vehicle 
line.
    On August 16, 2011, Porsche submitted its third petition to modify 
a previously approved exemption for the 911 vehicle line incorporating 
new successor models into the existing vehicle line. This notice grants 
in full Porsche's petition to modify the exemption for the 911 vehicle 
line. Porsche'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. 
Porsche'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 MY.
    Porsche will install its passive, transponder-based electronic 
engine immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment on its 
Porsche 911 vehicle line. Key components of the modified antitheft 
device will include an electronic ignition switch, a central-locking 
control unit, an alarm indicator, a remote control unit, a transponder, 
an engine control unit and an electronic ignition switch. Porsche 
stated that the antitheft device consists of two major subsystems; a 
microprocessor based immobilizer device which prevents the engine 
management system from functioning when the device is engaged, and a 
central-locking and alarm system.
    Porsche stated that the immobilizer device is automatically 
activated when removing the key from the ignition switch assembly. The 
key contains a radio signal transponder which signals the control unit 
to allow the engine to be started. Porsche stated that as an option, a 
keyless entry device can be provided for the 911 vehicle line. Porsche 
stated that the antitheft device will remain the same, but the ignition 
key is substituted with a special key that contains a radio signal 
transmitter similar to that in the standard ignition key. The 
immobilizer system is automatically activated after the engine is 
turned off with the optional keyless entry device. Porsche stated that 
only by inserting the correct key into the ignition switch or by having 
the special keyless entry device within the compartment of the car, 
will the correct signal be sent to the control unit allowing start and 
operation of the engine. When the key is removed from the ignition or 
the keyless entry key is removed from the vehicle, the device will 
return to its normal ``OFF'' state disallowing engine start and 
operation.
    In order to ensure the reliability and durability of the device, 
Porsche conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Porsche 
provided a detailed list of tests conducted and believes that its 
device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its 
specified requirements for each test. The test conducted included 
extreme temperature tests, voltage spike tests, reverse polarity tests, 
electromagnetic interference tests, vibration tests and endurance 
tests. Porsche stated that its antitheft device also features a built-
in self-diagnostic that constantly checks for system failures. If a 
failure is detected, the operator receives a signal via the alarm 
indicator.
    In Porsche's petition to modify its exemption, it stated that for 
MY 2012, the 911 vehicle line will be modified to accommodate the 
introduction of the antitheft device and strategies provided for the 
previously exempted MY 2010 Panamera vehicle line (see 75 FR 22174). 
Specifically, Porsche stated that the MY 2012 device will include all 
of the antitheft features of the MY 2010 Panamera including an 
electronically activated parking brake. Porsche stated that if the 
control unit does not receive the correct signal from the key or 
keyless entry system, the parking brake will remain activated and the 
vehicle cannot be towed away. Porsche also stated that an alarm system 
will monitor the opening of the doors, rear luggage compartment, and 
front deck lid while monitoring interior movement through an ultrasonic 
sensor. If any violation of these areas is detected, the horn will 
sound and the lights will flash. Porsche also stated that disconnection 
of power to the antitheft device and/or engine management device does 
not affect the operation of either device. Therefore, an unauthorized 
person cannot operate the car unless they obtain the key or optional 
keyless entry device for the vehicle.
    Porsche stated that another additional theft prevention feature to 
the 911 vehicle line is the implementation of a new off-board antitheft 
strategy which involves making it impossible to use stolen electronic 
control units to repair other Porsche vehicles. Porsche stated that the 
goal of the off-board theft protection strategy is to reduce the 
marketability of stolen electronic components. Specifically, Porsche 
explained that during the production process of the vehicle, 
initialization and registration of various antitheft related electronic 
components are recorded in a central database. Changes to these 
components are only possible with authorized on-line access to the 
central database. Porsche stated that if the

[[Page 69323]]

components have to be replaced or repaired while authorized access to 
the central database is unavailable or the components are unauthorized, 
further operation and use of the vehicle is restricted or even 
impossible.
    In its MY 2012 modification, Porsche stated that it believes its 
new 911 antitheft device will prove to be even more effective in 
reducing and deterring theft than its antitheft devices have proven in 
the past. Porsche also compared its device with other devices without 
alarms that NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing and 
deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-
marking requirements. Porsche stated that similar systems without 
alarms, (i.e., GM PASS-Key, Mercedes Benz 202 vehicle line, Porsche 
Boxster (Cayman) as well as earlier 911 vehicle line devices were 
determined to be as effective as parts-marking. Porsche also referenced 
the agency's theft rate data for the 911 vehicle line which indicates 
that its theft rates (2002-2009) are still below the median theft rate 
of 3.5826. The theft rate for the 911 vehicle line using the most 
current 3 MY's theft rate data is 0.6339.
    The agency has evaluated Porsche's MY 2012 petition to modify the 
exemption for the 911 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 five types of 
performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; 
attracting attention to the efforts of unauthorized persons to enter or 
operate a vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or 
circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing 
operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the 
reliability and durability of the device.
    If Porsche 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: October 28, 2011.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-28936 Filed 11-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P