Petition To Modify an Exemption of a Previously Approved Antitheft Device; Ford Motor Company, 35112-35113 [2012-14216]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
35112
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2012 / Notices
protected to the greatest degree possible
when they ride in motor vehicles. The
OMB approval for this survey is
scheduled to expire on October 31,
2012. NHTSA seeks an extension to this
approval in order to obtain this
important survey data, save more
children and help to comply with the
TREAD Act requirement.
Estimated Annual Burden: 320 hours.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
Approximately 4,800 adult motorists in
passenger vehicles at gas stations, fast
food restaurants, and other types of sites
frequented by children during the time
in which the survey is conducted.
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 Department’s 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.
Issued on: June 7, 2012.
Terry Shelton,
Associate Administrator, National Center for
Statistics and Analysis, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2012–14264 Filed 6–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–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).
ACTION: Grant of petition to modify an
exemption of a previously approved
antitheft device.
AGENCY:
On January 13, 2011, 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 Fusion vehicle
line beginning with its model year (MY)
2012 vehicles. On February 16, 2012,
Ford submitted a petition to modify its
previously approved exemption for the
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:42 Jun 11, 2012
Jkt 226001
Ford Fusion vehicle line beginning with
model year (MY) 2013. Ford also
requested confidential treatment of
specific information in its petition by
letter dated April 25, 2012. The agency
will address Ford’s request for
confidential treatment by separate letter.
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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard.
DATES: The modification granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2013 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)
366–5222. Her fax number is (202) 493–
2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
January 13, 2011, 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 CFR 541) for the Fusion
vehicle line beginning with its MY 2012
vehicles. The 2012 Ford Fusion is
currently equipped with the SecuriLock
immobilizer device as standard
equipment. The SecuriLock device is a
passive antitheft device and is offered
with an optional perimeter alarm system
(See 76 FR 2444).
On February 16, 2012, Ford submitted
a petition to modify its previously
approved exemption for the Fusion
vehicle line. This notice grants in full
Ford’s petition to modify the exemption
for the Fusion vehicle line beginning
with its MY 2013 vehicles. Ford’s
submission is a complete petition, as
required by 49 CFR part 543.9(d), in that
it meets the general requirements
contained in 49 CFR Part 543.5 and the
specific content requirements of 49 CFR
Part 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 2013 model year.
The MY 2012 passive antitheft device
installed as standard equipment on the
Ford Fusion is a passive transponderbased electronic powertrain immobilizer
system (SecuriLock). Features of the
antitheft device include an electronic
key, ignition lock, and a transponderbased electronic passive immobilizer.
The MY 2012 device also incorporates
PO 00000
Frm 00180
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a separate perimeter alarm system that
monitors all the doors, decklid and
hood of the vehicle. If unauthorized
access is attempted to any of those
protected areas, a visible and audible
alarm is activated.
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 stated
that the Fusion vehicles will be
available with the Intelligent Access
with Push Button Start (IAwPB) system
as optional equipment on its Fusion S
and SE trim vehicles but would
continue to be equipped with the
SecuriLock antitheft system as standard
equipment. Ford also stated that the
Fusion Titanium trim and Fusion
Hybrid vehicles will be equipped with
the IAwPB system as standard
equipment.
Ford further stated that the IAwPB
system being offered on the 2013 Fusion
vehicles is of the same design and
performance as that being installed on
the MY 2011 Ford Explorer vehicles.
Ford was granted an exemption for the
Explorer vehicle line on May 28, 2010
by NHTSA (See 75 FR 30103). The
agency’s most current theft rate
information for the Ford Explorer using
two MYs data (2004–2005) is 1.6477.
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 two modules, the Body
Control Module (BCM), 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 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
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2012 / Notices
module, which then determines key
validity and authorizes engine starting
by sending a separate encrypted
message to the PCM. In the IAwPB
device, when the ‘‘start’’ button is
pressed, and the brake pedal is
depressed, the 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. Additionally, Ford stated
that in both systems, an electronic key
has to be programmed to the vehicle via
a secure diagnostic method. If this
programmed key is not present in the
vehicle, the engine will be inoperable.
Ford previously stated in its MY 2011
petition that reliability and durability of
the devices are supported by the
incorporation of several features in both
the SecuriLock and IAwPB device.
Specifically, some of those features
include: encrypted communication
between the transponder, control
function and the power train control
module; no moving parts; inability to
mechanically override the device to
start the vehicle; and the BCM/RFA
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 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 believes that installation of
the SecuriLock system 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 2012 Fusion
vehicle line, there is no available theft
rate information for this vehicle.
The agency has evaluated Ford’s MY
2012 petition to modify the exemption
for the Fusion 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 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
22:42 Jun 11, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 parts 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: June 6, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012–14216 Filed 6–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[Docket No. AB 279 (Sub-No. 6X)]
Canadian National Railway Company—
Abandonment Exemption—in Niagara
County, NY
On May 23, 2012, Canadian National
Railway Company (CNR) filed with the
Surface Transportation Board (Board) a
petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for
exemption from the provisions of 49
U.S.C. 10903 to abandon the entire U.S.
portion of its Grimsby Subdivision. The
rail line extends from approximately
milepost 0.20 to approximately milepost
0.35 in the City of Niagara Falls, Niagara
County, N.Y., a distance of 0.15 mile.1
Specifically, 0.10 mile of the rail line is
located on the upper deck of the U.S.
portion of the Whirlpool Rapids
Bridge.2 The remaining 0.05 mile of the
rail line consists of single track in
Niagara Falls, extending between the
eastern end of the Bridge and the
beginning of the Niagara Branch of CSX
Transportation, Inc. The line traverses
United States Postal Service Zip Code
14305.
In addition to an exemption from the
provisions of 49 U.S.C. 10903, CNR
1 CNR states that its Grimsby Subdivision lies
partly in Canada and partly in the United States.
The U.S. portion of the Subdivision is one of only
a few CNR segments that extend briefly into the
United States and that are owned and operated by
CNR, rather than by one of CNR’s U.S. operating
affiliates.
2 The Whirlpool Rapids Bridge is an international
rail/highway bridge that crosses the Niagara River
between Niagara Falls, N.Y., and Niagara Falls,
Ontario, Canada, and is owned by the bi-national
Niagara Falls Bridge Commission.
PO 00000
Frm 00181
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35113
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, CNR states
that, upon consummation of the
abandonment authority it seeks, the line
is expected to be used for continued rail
passenger service as part of Niagara
Falls’ plans to develop enhanced rail
passenger and intermodal service, and
that there is no overriding public need
for continued freight rail service. CNR
also seeks expedited action in this
proceeding. CNR states that expedited
handling is being requested so that
Federal funding for the proposed
Niagara Falls International Railway
Station and International Transportation
Center may be released in time to permit
construction during the 2012
construction season. These requests will
be addressed in the final decision.
According to CNR, the line does not
contain Federally granted rights-of-way.
Any documentation in CNR’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 Railroad—
Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch
Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham &
Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C.
91 (1979).
By issuing this notice, the Board is
instituting an exemption proceeding
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final
decision will be issued by September
10, 2012.
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 July 2, 2012. Each trail
use 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 279 (SubNo.6X), and must be sent to: (1) Surface
Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20423–0001; and (2)
David A. Hirsh, Harkins Cunningham
LLP, 1700 K Street NW., Suite 400,
Washington, DC 20006. Replies to
CNR’s petition are due on or before July
2, 2012.
Persons seeking further information
concerning abandonment procedures
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35112-35113]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14216]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
ACTION: Grant of petition to modify an exemption of a previously
approved antitheft device.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 13, 2011, 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
Fusion vehicle line beginning with its model year (MY) 2012 vehicles.
On February 16, 2012, Ford submitted a petition to modify its
previously approved exemption for the Ford Fusion vehicle line
beginning with model year (MY) 2013. Ford also requested confidential
treatment of specific information in its petition by letter dated April
25, 2012. The agency will address Ford's request for confidential
treatment by separate letter. 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 modification granted by this notice is effective beginning
with the 2013 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) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 13, 2011, 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 CFR 541) for the Fusion vehicle line beginning with its MY
2012 vehicles. The 2012 Ford Fusion is currently equipped with the
SecuriLock immobilizer device as standard equipment. The SecuriLock
device is a passive antitheft device and is offered with an optional
perimeter alarm system (See 76 FR 2444).
On February 16, 2012, Ford submitted a petition to modify its
previously approved exemption for the Fusion vehicle line. This notice
grants in full Ford's petition to modify the exemption for the Fusion
vehicle line beginning with its MY 2013 vehicles. Ford's submission is
a complete petition, as required by 49 CFR part 543.9(d), in that it
meets the general requirements contained in 49 CFR Part 543.5 and the
specific content requirements of 49 CFR Part 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 2013 model year.
The MY 2012 passive antitheft device installed as standard
equipment on the Ford Fusion is a passive transponder-based 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 2012 device also
incorporates a separate perimeter alarm system that monitors all the
doors, decklid and hood of the vehicle. If unauthorized access is
attempted to any of those protected areas, a visible and audible alarm
is activated.
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 stated that the Fusion vehicles will
be available with the Intelligent Access with Push Button Start (IAwPB)
system as optional equipment on its Fusion S and SE trim vehicles but
would continue to be equipped with the SecuriLock antitheft system as
standard equipment. Ford also stated that the Fusion Titanium trim and
Fusion Hybrid vehicles will be equipped with the IAwPB system as
standard equipment.
Ford further stated that the IAwPB system being offered on the 2013
Fusion vehicles is of the same design and performance as that being
installed on the MY 2011 Ford Explorer vehicles. Ford was granted an
exemption for the Explorer vehicle line on May 28, 2010 by NHTSA (See
75 FR 30103). The agency's most current theft rate information for the
Ford Explorer using two MYs data (2004-2005) is 1.6477.
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 two modules, the Body Control
Module (BCM), 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 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
[[Page 35113]]
module, which then determines key validity and authorizes engine
starting by sending a separate encrypted message to the PCM. In the
IAwPB device, when the ``start'' button is pressed, and the brake pedal
is depressed, the 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. Additionally, Ford
stated that in both systems, an electronic key has to be programmed to
the vehicle via a secure diagnostic method. If this programmed key is
not present in the vehicle, the engine will be inoperable.
Ford previously stated in its MY 2011 petition that reliability and
durability of the devices are supported by the incorporation of several
features in both the SecuriLock and IAwPB device. Specifically, some of
those features include: encrypted communication between the
transponder, control function and the power train control module; no
moving parts; inability to mechanically override the device to start
the vehicle; and the BCM/RFA 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 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 believes that installation of the SecuriLock system 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 2012 Fusion vehicle line, there is no available theft rate
information for this vehicle.
The agency has evaluated Ford's MY 2012 petition to modify the
exemption for the Fusion 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 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.
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 parts 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: June 6, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-14216 Filed 6-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
