Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft Prevention Standard; TESLA, 22383-22384 [2012-8893]

Agencies

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22383-22384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8893]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft 
Prevention Standard; TESLA

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of Tesla Motors 
Inc's. (Tesla) for an exemption of the Model S vehicle line in 
accordance with 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention 
Standard. This petition is granted, because the agency has determined 
that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard 
equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor 
vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the 
Theft Prevention Standard 49 CFR Part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft 
Prevention Standard. Tesla requested confidential treatment for 
specific information in its petition. The agency granted Tesla's 
request for confidential treatment by a letter dated December 5, 2011.

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 Standards, NHTSA, W43-
439, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's 
phone number is (202) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated October 24, 2011, Tesla 
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft 
prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the Model S vehicle line 
beginning with MY 2012. 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 the entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an 
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Tesla 
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design and 
location of the components of the antitheft device for the Model S 
vehicle line. Tesla will install a passive, transponder-based, 
electronic engine immobilizer device as standard equipment on its Model 
S vehicle line beginning with MY 2012. Key components of the antitheft 
device include an engine immobilizer, security controller, gateway 
function, drive inverter and a passive entry transponder (PET). Tesla 
stated that its immobilizer device, which will be installed beginning 
with its MY 2012 vehicle line, will be an upgraded version with a more 
robust design than the antitheft device already installed as standard 
equipment on its MYs 2008-2011 Tesla roadsters. Tesla stated that the 
new design of its immobilizer device will have enhanced communications 
between components, prevent tampering and also provide additional 
features to enhance its overall effectiveness.
    In addition to Tesla's immobilizer device, an audible alarm (horn) 
will be incorporated as standard equipment, but no visual feature will 
be provided with the alarm system. Tesla stated that its alarm system 
will activate with any unauthorized attempt to break in the front and 
rear cargo areas. Tesla also stated that any unauthorized entry without 
the correct PET will trigger the audible alarm. Tesla stated that its 
antitheft device has a two-step activation process with a vehicle code 
query being conducted at each stage. The first stage allows access to 
the vehicle when an authorization cycle occurs between the PET and the 
Security Controller as long as the PET is in close proximity to the car 
and the driver either pushes the lock/unlock button on the key fob, 
pushes the exterior door handle to activate the handle sensors or 
inserts a hand into the handle to trigger the latch release. During the 
second stage, vehicle operation will be enabled when the driver has 
depressed the brake pedal and moves the gear selection stalk to drive 
or reverse. When one of these actions is performed, the security 
controller will poll to verify if the appropriate PET is inside the 
vehicle. Upon location of the PET, the security controller will run an 
authentication cycle with the key confirming the correct PET is being 
used inside the vehicle. Tesla stated that once authentication is 
successful, the security controller initiates an encrypted message 
through the gateway enabling the drive inverter to receive the 
encrypted message which then processes the message generating an 
encrypted response posting the message back to the security controller. 
If the encrypted exchange yields a result that meets the security 
code's expectations of the security controller, the correct exchange 
will authorize the drive inverter to deactivate immobilization allowing 
the vehicle to be driven under its own power. Tesla stated that if the 
results are not correct and there is no response to the drive inverter 
from the security controller, the vehicle will remain immobilized and 
the drive inverter will retry the exchange until there is a proper 
response or it times out. Tesla'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.
    Tesla stated that the immobilizer functions will ensure maximum 
theft protection when the immobilizer is active, the vehicle is off and 
the doors are locked. Tesla stated that it will incorporate an 
additional security measure that performs when the car is unlocked and 
immobilization is deactivated. Specifically, immobilization will 
reactivate when there are no user inputs to the vehicle within a 
programmed period of time. Tesla stated that any attempt to operate the 
vehicle without performing and completing each task, will render the 
vehicle inoperable.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Tesla 
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed 
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Tesla 
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Tesla provided a 
detailed list of the test conducted and stated that it believes that 
its device is reliable and durable because it complied with its own 
specific design standards. Additionally, Tesla stated that it has 
incorporated other measures of ensuring reliability and durability of 
the device. Those measures include the inaccessible location of all 
immobilizer device components within the passenger compartment of the 
vehicle or their containment in other vehicle

[[Page 22384]]

components. Tesla stated that these measures protect the immobilizer 
device from exposure to the elements and limit its access by 
unauthorized persons. Additionally, Tesla stated that the immobilizer 
relies on electronic functions versus mechanical functions and 
therefore expects the components to last at least the life of the 
vehicle.
    Tesla also compared the device proposed for its vehicle line with 
other devices which NHTSA has already determined to be as effective in 
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the 
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. Tesla 
compared the BMW 5 series and the Mercedes-Benz E-Class to its Model S 
vehicle line. Specifically, the agency's data show that theft rates for 
the BMW 5 series are 0.9044, 0.6550 and 0.4098 and for the Mercedes-
Benz E-Class, 0.5898, 0.6286 and 0.9041 respectively. Using an average 
of 3 MYs data (2007-2009), the agency theft rate data show that the 
average theft rate for the BMW 5 series is 0.6564 and 0.7075 for the 
Mercedes-Benz E-Class, well below the median theft rate of 3.5826. 
Tesla also stated that its 2008-2011 roadsters are already equipped 
with an antitheft device as standard equipment. Agency theft rate data 
for the roadster vehicles using an average of the most current theft 
rate data available is 0.0000.
    Based on the evidence submitted by Tesla, the agency believes that 
the antitheft device for the Model S 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 541).
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants 
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of Part 
541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon 
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely 
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as 
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541. The agency 
finds that Tesla has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the 
antitheft device for the Model S 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 Tesla 
provided about its device.
    The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of 
performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation, 
attracting attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter 
or move 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.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Tesla's 
petition for exemption for the Model S vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, beginning with the 2012 model 
year vehicles. 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 MY. 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 Tesla decides not to use the exemption for this line, it shall 
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 Tesla 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 Sec.  
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: April 10, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-8893 Filed 4-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P