Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Chrysler, 65767-65769 [2012-26627]
Download as PDF
wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 210 / Tuesday, October 30, 2012 / Notices
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full GM’s petition for
exemption for the Cadillac ATS vehicle
line from the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR part 541,
beginning with the 2014 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
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 GM 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 notes that if GM 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. Part 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, Part
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:17 Oct 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
Issued on: October 24, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012–26628 Filed 10–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption From the
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Chrysler
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
AGENCY:
This document grants in full
the Chrysler LLC, (Chrysler) petition for
exemption of the Chrysler [confidential]
vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR
Part 543, Exemption from Vehicle 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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard 49 CFR Part 541,
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard. Chrysler requested
confidential treatment for specific
information in its petition. The agency
will grant Chrysler’s request for
confidential treatment by separate letter.
Chrysler informed the agency that the
nameplate will be released prior to
introduction of the vehicle line.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2014 Model Year (MY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Carlita Ballard, International Policy,
Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs,
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 July 31, 2012, Chrysler
requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541)
for the MY 2014 Chrysler [confidential]
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 the
entire vehicle line.
Under 49 CFR Part 543.5(a), a
manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65767
grant an exemption for one vehicle line
per model year. In its petition, Chrysler
provided a detailed description and
diagram of the identity, design, and
location of the components of the
antitheft device for the [confidential]
vehicle line. Chrysler will install the
Sentry Key Immobilizer System (SKIS)
antitheft device as standard equipment
on the vehicle line. The SKIS provides
passive vehicle protection by preventing
the engine from operating unless a valid
electronically encoded key is detected
in the ignition system of the vehicles.
The major components of the SKIS
device consist of the Radio Frequency
Hub Module (RFHM), Ignition Node
Module (IGNM), Engine Control
Module, Body Controller Module,
Sentry Key Immobilizer Module (SKIM),
the transponder key that performs the
immobilizer function and the
Instrument Panel Cluster which
contains the telltale function only.
According to Chrysler, all of these
components work collectively to
perform the immobilizer function.
Chrysler stated that its [confidential]
vehicle line will also be available with
an optional visible or audible alarm
system to provide an indication of
unauthorized vehicle entry (i.e., flashing
lights or horn alarm).
According to Chrysler, the
immobilizer feature is activated when
the key is removed from the ignition
system, whether the doors are open or
not. Only a valid key inserted into the
ignition system will allow the vehicle to
start and continue to run.
Chrysler stated that the functions and
features of the SKIM are all integral to
the RFHM. The SKIM performs the
interrogation with the transponder in
the key. The RFHM receives Low
Frequency (LF) and/or Radio Frequency
(RF) signals from the Sentry Key
transponder which is integral to the
FOB with integrated key. The RFHM
contains an RF transceiver, a
microprocessor and serves as the
Remote Keyless Entry RF receiver.
The RFHM is paired with the IGNM
that contains either a rotary ignition
switch (keyed vehicles) or a START/
STOP push button (keyless vehicles).
According to Chrysler, the SKIS will be
placed on both its keyless entry vehicles
and keyed vehicles. For the keyed
vehicles, the IGNM transmits an LF
signal to excite the transponder in the
key when the ignition switch is turned
to the ON position. The IGNM waits for
a signal response from the transponder
and transmits the response to the
RFHM. If the response identifies the
transponder key as invalid or if no
response is received from the
transponder key, Chrysler stated that the
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
65768
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 210 / Tuesday, October 30, 2012 / Notices
RFHM sends an invalid key message to
the Engine Control Module, which will
disable engine operation and
immobilize the vehicle after two
seconds of running. This process is also
similar for the keyless vehicles. Chrysler
stated that when the keyless START/
STOP button is pressed, the RFHM
transmits a signal to the transponder key
through LF antennas to the RFHM. The
RFHM waits for a signal from the
transponder. If the response from the
transponder identifies the transponder
key as invalid or the transponder key is
not within the car’s interior, the engine
will be disabled and the vehicle will be
immobilized after two seconds of
running.
To avoid any perceived delay when
starting the vehicle with a valid
transponder key and to prevent
unburned fuel from entering the
exhaust, Chrysler stated that the engine
is permitted to run for no more than two
seconds if an invalid transponder key is
used. Chrysler stated that only six
consecutive invalid vehicle start
attempts are permitted and all other
attempts are locked out by preventing
the fuel injectors from firing and
disabling the starter.
Chrysler also stated that each ignition
key used in the SKIS has an integral
transponder chip included on the
circuit board beneath the cover of the
integral Remote Keyless Entry
transmitter. Each transponder key has a
unique transponder identification code
that is permanently programmed into it
by the manufacturer which must be
programmed into the RFHM to be
recognized by the SKIS as a valid key.
Chrysler stated that once a Sentry Key
has been programmed to a particular
vehicle, it cannot be used on any other
vehicle.
In addressing the specific content
requirements of 49 CFR Part 543.6,
Chrysler provided information on the
reliability and durability of the device.
Chrysler conducted tests based on its
own specified standards and stated its
belief that the device meets the stringent
performance standards prescribed.
Specifically, Chrysler stated that its
device must demonstrate a minimum of
95 percent reliability with 90 percent
confidence. In addition to the design
and production validation test criteria,
Chrysler stated that the SKIS device also
undergoes a daily short term durability
test and all of its systems undergo a
series of three functional tests for
durability prior to being shipped from
the supplier to the vehicle assembly
plant for installation in its vehicles.
Chrysler stated that its vehicles are
also equipped with a security indicator
that acts as a diagnostic indicator.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:17 Oct 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
Chrysler stated that if the RFHM detects
an invalid transponder key or if a
transponder key related fault exists, the
security indicator will flash. If the
RFHM detects a system malfunction or
the SKIS has become ineffective, the
security indicator will stay on. If the
vehicle is equipped with a Customer
Learn transponder programming feature,
the security indicator will flash
whenever the Customer Learn
programming is in use.
Chrysler stated that it expects the
[confidential] vehicle line to mirror the
lower theft rate results achieved by the
Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicle line when
ignition immobilizer systems were
included as standard equipment on the
line. Chrysler stated that it has offered
the SKIS immobilizer system as
standard equipment on all Jeep Grand
Cherokee vehicles since the 1999 model
year. Chrysler indicated that the average
theft rate, based on NHTSA’s theft data,
for the Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles for
the four model years prior to 1999
(1995–1998), when a vehicle
immobilizer system was not installed as
standard equipment, was 5.3574 per one
thousand vehicles produced,
significantly higher than the 1990/1991
median theft rate of 3.5826. However,
the average theft rate for the nine model
years (1999–2008, no data available for
2007) after installation of the standard
immobilizer device was 2.5704, which
is significantly lower than the median.
The Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicle line
was granted an exemption from the
parts-marking requirements beginning
with MY 2004 (67 FR 79687, December
30, 2002). Chrysler further stated that
NHTSA’s theft data for the Jeep Grand
Cherokee indicates that the inclusion of
a standard immobilizer system resulted
in a 52 percent net average reduction in
vehicle thefts.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49
CFR Part 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
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 Chrysler has provided
adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the 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
Chrysler provided about its device.
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The agency concludes that the device
will provide four of the five types of
performance listed in 49 CFR Part
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 Chrysler’s petition
for exemption for its [confidential]
vehicle line from the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR Part 541,
beginning with the 2014 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
model year. 49 CFR Part 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 Chrysler decides not to use the
exemption for this vehicle line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a
decision is made, the vehicle line must
be fully marked as required by 49 CFR
Parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major
component parts and replacement
parts).
NHTSA notes that if Chrysler 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. 49 CFR Part
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 anti-theft device on
which the line’s exemption is based.
Further, 49 CFR Part 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 49 CFR 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
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 210 / Tuesday, October 30, 2012 / Notices
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 24, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012–26627 Filed 10–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption From the
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard;
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
AGENCY:
This document grants in full
the Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc.’s (Volkswagen) petition for
exemption of the Volkswagen Eos
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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard, 49 CFR Part 541,
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2014 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Deborah Mazyck, Office of International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, NHTSA, West Building,
W43–443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck’s
phone number is (202) 366–4139. Her
fax number is (202) 493–2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a
petition dated June 27, 2012,
Volkswagen requested an exemption
from the parts-marking requirements of
the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR
Part 541) for the new MY 2014 Eos
vehicle line. The petition requested an
exemption from parts-marking
requirement pursuant to 49 CFR Part
543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard, based on the
installation of an antitheft device as
wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:17 Oct 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
standard equipment for an entire
vehicle line.
Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may
petition NHTSA to grant an exemption
for one vehicle line per model year. In
its petition, Volkswagen provided a
detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the
components of the antitheft device for
its Eos vehicle line. Volkswagen will
install its fourth generation,
transponder-based electronic engine
immobilizer antitheft device as standard
equipment on its Eos vehicle line
beginning with MY 2014. Volkswagen
stated that its immobilizer device is
aimed to actively incorporate the engine
control unit into the evaluation and
monitoring process. Key components of
the antitheft device will include a
passive immobilizer, a warning message
indicator, an adapted transponder
ignition key, an ignition lock reading
coil, an engine control unit and an
immobilizer control unit. Activation of
the immobilizer device occurs when the
mechanical ignition key is switched to
the OFF position or when the key
transponder is taken outside the vehicle
in the optional keyless start option.
Deactivation of the device occurs when
the ignition is turned on or the key
transponder is recognized by the
immobilizer control unit. The key
transponder sends a fixed code to the
immobilizer control unit. If this is
identified as the correct code, a variable
code is generated in the immobilizer
control unit and sent to the transponder.
A secret arithmetic process is then
started in the transponder and the
control unit according to a set of
specific equations. The results of the
computing process are evaluated in the
control unit and if they tally, the vehicle
key is acknowledged as correct. The
engine control unit then sends a
variable code to the immobilizer control
unit. If all these data match up with one
another, start-up of the vehicle is
enabled. Volkswagen stated that a new
variable code is generated each time
during this secret computing process.
Therefore, Volkswagen believes that the
code is undecipherable. Volkswagen
stated that it will also offer a keyless
start option for the vehicle line.
Volkswagen’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.
Volkswagen stated that the antitheft
device will also include an audible and
visible alarm feature as standard
equipment. When the system is
activated, the alarm will trigger if one of
the doors, the engine hood or the
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65769
luggage compartment lid are forcibly
opened. Volkswagen also stated that
when any of the protected components
are violated, the horn will sound and
the vehicle’s turn signals will flash. The
antitheft alarm system is automatically
activated when the vehicle is locked by
pressing the lock button on the remote
control vehicle key. Deactivation of the
alarm system occurs by pressing the
unlock button on the remote control
vehicle key or turning on the ignition
with a valid key.
In addressing the specific content
requirements of 543.6, Volkswagen
provided information on the reliability
and durability of its proposed device.
To ensure reliability and durability of
the device, Volkswagen stated that the
antitheft device has been tested for
compliance to its corporate
requirements for electrical and
electronic assemblies in motor vehicles
related to performance.
Volkswagen stated that the Eos
vehicle line was introduced in MY 2007
as a parts-marked vehicle and was also
equipped with a standard anti-theft
device. Volkswagen also stated that the
antitheft device has been effective in
maintaining a low theft rate for the Eos
and that removal of parts-marking will
not have an adverse effect on the theft
rate. Volkswagen stated that the theft
rates for MYs 2007, 2008 and 2009 are
0.8250, 0.7239 and 0.5229, respectively.
Using an average of 3 MYs of the most
recent theft data (2008–2010), the theft
rate for the Eos vehicle line is well
below the median at 0.1736.
Volkswagen 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 of the Theft Prevention
Standard. Specifically, Volkswagen
provided data on the theft reduction
benefits experienced by other vehicle
lines installed with immobilizer devices
that have already been granted petitions
for exemptions by the agency.
Volkswagen stated the theft rates for the
MYs 2007–2009 Mitsubishi Eclipse,
BMW 3, Volkswagen Golf/GTI,
Volkswagen New Beetle and the MYs
2008–2009 BMW 1 series vehicles have
been below the median theft rate. Using
an average of 3 MYs data (2007–2009),
the average theft rates are 2.5788,
0.6548, 1.1433, and 0.6025, respectively.
The average theft rate using two MYs
data for the BMW 1 series is 0.2383.
Volkswagen also stated that the
proposed device is similar to the
antitheft device installed on its MY
2011 Tiguan vehicle line which was
E:\FR\FM\30OCN1.SGM
30OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 210 (Tuesday, October 30, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65767-65769]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26627]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; Chrysler
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Chrysler LLC, (Chrysler)
petition for exemption of the Chrysler [confidential] vehicle line in
accordance with 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from Vehicle 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. Chrysler requested
confidential treatment for specific information in its petition. The
agency will grant Chrysler's request for confidential treatment by
separate letter. Chrysler informed the agency that the nameplate will
be released prior to introduction of the vehicle line.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2014 Model Year (MY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, 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 July 31, 2012, Chrysler
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the MY 2014 Chrysler
[confidential] 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 the entire vehicle line.
Under 49 CFR Part 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
grant an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its
petition, Chrysler provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for the [confidential] vehicle line. Chrysler will install the
Sentry Key Immobilizer System (SKIS) antitheft device as standard
equipment on the vehicle line. The SKIS provides passive vehicle
protection by preventing the engine from operating unless a valid
electronically encoded key is detected in the ignition system of the
vehicles. The major components of the SKIS device consist of the Radio
Frequency Hub Module (RFHM), Ignition Node Module (IGNM), Engine
Control Module, Body Controller Module, Sentry Key Immobilizer Module
(SKIM), the transponder key that performs the immobilizer function and
the Instrument Panel Cluster which contains the telltale function only.
According to Chrysler, all of these components work collectively to
perform the immobilizer function. Chrysler stated that its
[confidential] vehicle line will also be available with an optional
visible or audible alarm system to provide an indication of
unauthorized vehicle entry (i.e., flashing lights or horn alarm).
According to Chrysler, the immobilizer feature is activated when
the key is removed from the ignition system, whether the doors are open
or not. Only a valid key inserted into the ignition system will allow
the vehicle to start and continue to run.
Chrysler stated that the functions and features of the SKIM are all
integral to the RFHM. The SKIM performs the interrogation with the
transponder in the key. The RFHM receives Low Frequency (LF) and/or
Radio Frequency (RF) signals from the Sentry Key transponder which is
integral to the FOB with integrated key. The RFHM contains an RF
transceiver, a microprocessor and serves as the Remote Keyless Entry RF
receiver.
The RFHM is paired with the IGNM that contains either a rotary
ignition switch (keyed vehicles) or a START/STOP push button (keyless
vehicles). According to Chrysler, the SKIS will be placed on both its
keyless entry vehicles and keyed vehicles. For the keyed vehicles, the
IGNM transmits an LF signal to excite the transponder in the key when
the ignition switch is turned to the ON position. The IGNM waits for a
signal response from the transponder and transmits the response to the
RFHM. If the response identifies the transponder key as invalid or if
no response is received from the transponder key, Chrysler stated that
the
[[Page 65768]]
RFHM sends an invalid key message to the Engine Control Module, which
will disable engine operation and immobilize the vehicle after two
seconds of running. This process is also similar for the keyless
vehicles. Chrysler stated that when the keyless START/STOP button is
pressed, the RFHM transmits a signal to the transponder key through LF
antennas to the RFHM. The RFHM waits for a signal from the transponder.
If the response from the transponder identifies the transponder key as
invalid or the transponder key is not within the car's interior, the
engine will be disabled and the vehicle will be immobilized after two
seconds of running.
To avoid any perceived delay when starting the vehicle with a valid
transponder key and to prevent unburned fuel from entering the exhaust,
Chrysler stated that the engine is permitted to run for no more than
two seconds if an invalid transponder key is used. Chrysler stated that
only six consecutive invalid vehicle start attempts are permitted and
all other attempts are locked out by preventing the fuel injectors from
firing and disabling the starter.
Chrysler also stated that each ignition key used in the SKIS has an
integral transponder chip included on the circuit board beneath the
cover of the integral Remote Keyless Entry transmitter. Each
transponder key has a unique transponder identification code that is
permanently programmed into it by the manufacturer which must be
programmed into the RFHM to be recognized by the SKIS as a valid key.
Chrysler stated that once a Sentry Key has been programmed to a
particular vehicle, it cannot be used on any other vehicle.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 49 CFR Part
543.6, Chrysler provided information on the reliability and durability
of the device. Chrysler conducted tests based on its own specified
standards and stated its belief that the device meets the stringent
performance standards prescribed. Specifically, Chrysler stated that
its device must demonstrate a minimum of 95 percent reliability with 90
percent confidence. In addition to the design and production validation
test criteria, Chrysler stated that the SKIS device also undergoes a
daily short term durability test and all of its systems undergo a
series of three functional tests for durability prior to being shipped
from the supplier to the vehicle assembly plant for installation in its
vehicles.
Chrysler stated that its vehicles are also equipped with a security
indicator that acts as a diagnostic indicator. Chrysler stated that if
the RFHM detects an invalid transponder key or if a transponder key
related fault exists, the security indicator will flash. If the RFHM
detects a system malfunction or the SKIS has become ineffective, the
security indicator will stay on. If the vehicle is equipped with a
Customer Learn transponder programming feature, the security indicator
will flash whenever the Customer Learn programming is in use.
Chrysler stated that it expects the [confidential] vehicle line to
mirror the lower theft rate results achieved by the Jeep Grand Cherokee
vehicle line when ignition immobilizer systems were included as
standard equipment on the line. Chrysler stated that it has offered the
SKIS immobilizer system as standard equipment on all Jeep Grand
Cherokee vehicles since the 1999 model year. Chrysler indicated that
the average theft rate, based on NHTSA's theft data, for the Jeep Grand
Cherokee vehicles for the four model years prior to 1999 (1995-1998),
when a vehicle immobilizer system was not installed as standard
equipment, was 5.3574 per one thousand vehicles produced, significantly
higher than the 1990/1991 median theft rate of 3.5826. However, the
average theft rate for the nine model years (1999-2008, no data
available for 2007) after installation of the standard immobilizer
device was 2.5704, which is significantly lower than the median. The
Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicle line was granted an exemption from the
parts-marking requirements beginning with MY 2004 (67 FR 79687,
December 30, 2002). Chrysler further stated that NHTSA's theft data for
the Jeep Grand Cherokee indicates that the inclusion of a standard
immobilizer system resulted in a 52 percent net average reduction in
vehicle thefts.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR Part 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 Chrysler has provided adequate reasons for its belief that
the antitheft device for the 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 Chrysler
provided about its device.
The agency concludes that the device will provide four of the five
types of performance listed in 49 CFR Part 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
Chrysler's petition for exemption for its [confidential] vehicle line
from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, beginning with
the 2014 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 model year. 49 CFR Part 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 Chrysler decides not to use the exemption for this vehicle line,
it must formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the
vehicle line must be fully marked as required by 49 CFR Parts 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if Chrysler 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. 49 CFR Part 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 anti-theft device on
which the line's exemption is based. Further, 49 CFR Part 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 49 CFR
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
[[Page 65769]]
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 24, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-26627 Filed 10-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P