Petition for Exemption from the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, 24937-24939 [2016-09767]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2016 / Notices
raised the financial security amount for
brokers to $75,000 and extended the
financial security requirement to freight
forwarders for the first time. FMCSA
implemented those requirements in a
2013 Omnibus rulemaking (78 FR
60226) (Oct. 1, 2013), codified at 49 CFR
387.307(a) (brokers) and 49 CFR
387.403(c) and 387.405 (freight
forwarders). Brokers or Freight
Forwarders are required to have either
a BMC–84 Surety Bond or BMC–85 trust
fund on file with the Agency as a
condition of obtaining FMCSA
operating authority.
MAP–21 added requirements
pertaining to the composition of trust
fund assets (49 U.S.C.
13906(b)(1)(C),(c)(1)(D)), the immediate
suspension of broker or freight
forwarder operating authority if their
financial security falls below $75,000
(49 U.S.C. 13906(b)(5),(c)(6)), and the
payment of claims in the event of
financial failure or insolvency (49
U.S.C. 13906(b)(6),(c)(7)). Additionally,
it gave FMCSA the authority to take
direct enforcement action against surety
providers, either through administrative
proceedings, court action or suspending
their ability to make financial security
filings with the agency. (49 U.S.C.
13906(b)(7),(c)(8)).
Since MAP–21’s enactment, various
parties have filed numerous complaints
with the agency pertaining to BMC–85
trust fund providers. Multiple entities
have sought guidance from the Agency,
pertaining to the portions of section
32918 not covered in the omnibus rule,
particularly regarding procedures to be
followed in connection with the
insolvency or financial failure of a
broker.
As an agency whose primary mission
is to promote motor carrier safety, 49
U.S.C. 113(c), FMCSA requests
additional input from stakeholders in
connection with broker/freight
forwarder financial security. The
Agency seeks to ensure that shippers
and motor carriers can collect on the
required broker/freight forwarder
financial instruments and that
appropriate guidance on section 32918
is available to interested parties while
avoiding the diversion of Agency
resources from critical safety functions.
The Agency believes that this
roundtable discussion will help gather
critical information on how to best meet
its responsibilities pursuant to section
32918.
FMCSA seeks attendance or
participation by all interested parties at
the roundtable discussion, including but
not limited to, various aspects of the
brokerage and freight forwarding
industries (including small business
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Apr 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
segments of the industry and their
representatives), motor carriers
(including the household goods
industry), shippers, owner-operators,
the surety bond industry, BMC–85 trust
fund filers, groups representing small
businesses, state regulators of loan and
finance companies and insurance
companies, Federal surety bond
regulators and all other interested
parties.
As a result of this roundtable
discussion, FMCSA hopes to develop a
clear path toward implementing fully
section 32918 of MAP–21.
Topics for Roundtable Discussion
FMCSA welcomes comments or
questions before and during the
roundtable discussion. The roundtable
will center on the following questions
but may be expanded as necessary for a
full discussion of the relevant issues:
(1) Which, if any, BMC–85 Trust Fund
holders routinely deny claims made by
shippers and motor carriers against
those trust funds?
(2) What is the nature of the assets
that are being held in BMC–85 trust
funds and what is the most desirable
composition of the assets? For example,
should trust funds consist solely of cash
or other highly liquid financial
instruments? What types of instruments
constitute ‘‘highly liquid?’’ Aside from
cash, what else can satisfy MAP–21’s
mandate that trust funds consist of
‘‘readily available assets . . . ?’’ Should
the Agency define the classes of
investments held in trust relative to risk
profile of the issuer and identify the
relative liquidity of such assets or
should it rely on other sources for such
information?
(3) Aside from FMCSA, are BMC–85
trust fund filers being regulated by any
other governmental entity? If so, what is
the nature of their regulation by state or
other authorities?
(4) What actions can FMCSA take to
ensure that motor carriers and shippers
are able to collect on BMC–85 trust
funds where legitimate claims are filed
with the financial institution?
(5) Should the Agency act to address
potential issues associated with the
solvency of BMC–85 trust funds? If so,
what type of action would be most
appropriate? What type of FMCSA
action pertaining to 49 U.S.C.
13906(b)(6) and (c)(7)(payment in cases
of financial failure or insolvency) is
necessary? Would agency guidance, as
opposed to rulemaking, be sufficient?
(6) Should FMCSA require brokers
and freight forwarders to demonstrate
the creditworthiness of the entity with
whom brokers or freight forwarders
intend to execute a trust fund, based on
PO 00000
Frm 00155
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24937
a determination of creditworthiness by
the applicable state regulatory authority
or the Department of Treasury Financial
Management Service?
FMCSA will utilize the comments
received in advance of the roundtable
discussion to further frame the issues.
Accessibility Needs
The U.S. Department of
Transportation is committed to
providing equal access to the roundtable
discussion. If you need special
accommodations for the roundtable,
such as sign language interpretation,
please contact Ms. Shannon L. Watson,
Senior Policy Advisor, FMCSA, by
telephone at 202–366–2551, at least one
week prior to the event to allow us
sufficient time to arrange for such
services. We will make every attempt to
fulfill requested accommodations.
Issued on: April 21, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016–09849 Filed 4–26–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption from the
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; BMW OF NORTH AMERICA,
LLC
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA)
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
AGENCY:
This document grants in full
the BMW of North America, LLC’s
(BMW) petition for an exemption of the
MINI Countryman multi-purpose
passenger vehicle (MPV) 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 49
CFR part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle
Theft Prevention Standard (Theft
Prevention Standard). BMW requested
confidential treatment for specific
information in its petition that the
agency will address by separate letter.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2017 model year (MY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Carlita Ballard, Office of International
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27APN1.SGM
27APN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24938
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2016 / Notices
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Programs, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., West Building, Room W43–
439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms.
Ballard’s telephone number is (202)
366–5222. Her fax number is (202) 493–
2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a
petition dated March 25, 2016, BMW
requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard for the MINI
Countryman MPV line beginning with
MY 2017. 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, BMW
provided a detailed description and
diagram of the identity, design, and
location of the components of the
antitheft device for its MINI
Countryman MPV line. Key features of
the antitheft device will include a key
with a transponder, loop antenna (coil),
engine control unit (DME/DDE) with
encoded start release input, an
electronically coded vehicle
immobilizer/car access system (EWS/
CAS) control unit and a passive
immobilizer. BMW stated that its MINI
Countryman MPV line will be installed
with a passive vehicle immobilizer
device as standard equipment. BMW
stated that the EWS immobilizer device
prevents the vehicle from being driven
away under its own engine power and
also fulfills the requirements of
European vehicle insurance companies.
BMW will not offer an audible or visible
alarm feature on the proposed device.
BMW’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.
In addressing the specific content
requirements of Part 543.6, BMW
provided information on the reliability
and durability of its device. To ensure
reliability and durability of the device,
BMW conducted tests and believes that
the device is reliable and durable
because it complied with its own
specific standards and is installed on
other vehicle lines for which the agency
has granted a parts-marking exemption.
Further assuring the reliability and
durability of the MINI Countryman’s
antitheft device, BMW stated that the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Apr 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
vehicle’s mechanical keys are unique
because they require a special key
blank, cutting machine and a unique
vehicle code to allow for key
duplication. BMW further stated that
the new keys will only be issued to
authorized persons and will incorporate
special guide-way millings, making the
locks almost impossible to pick and the
keys impossible to duplicate on the
open market.
BMW stated that activation of its
immobilizer device occurs
automatically when the engine is shut
off and the vehicle key is removed from
the ignition lock cylinder. Deactivation
of the device occurs when the Start/Stop
button is pressed and the vehicle
starting process begins. BMW stated that
deactivation cannot be carried out with
a mechanical key, but must occur
electronically. Specifically, BMW stated
that its transponder sends key data to
the EWS/CAS control unit. The correct
key data must be recognized by the
EWS/CAS control unit in order for the
vehicle to start. The transponder
contains a chip which is integrated in
the key and powered by a battery. The
transponder also consists of a
transmitter/receiver which
communicates with the EWS/CAS
control unit. The EWS/CAS control unit
provides the interface to the loop
antenna (coil), engine control unit and
starter. The ignition and fuel supply are
only released when a correct coded
release signal has been sent by the EWS/
CAS control unit to deactivate the
device and allow the vehicle to start.
When the EWS/CAS control unit has
sent a correct release signal, and after
the initial starting value, the release
signal becomes a rolling, ever-changing,
random code that is stored in the DME/
DDE and EWS/CAS control units. The
DME/DDE must identify the correct
release signal to release the ignition
signal and fuel supply.
BMW stated that the vehicle is also
equipped with a central-locking system
that can be operated to lock and unlock
all doors or to unlock only the driver’s
door, thereby preventing forced entry
into the vehicle through the passenger
doors. The vehicle can be further
secured by locking the doors and hood
using either the key lock cylinder on the
driver’s door or the remote frequency
remote control. BMW stated that the
frequency for the remote control
constantly changes to prevent an
unauthorized person from opening the
vehicle by intercepting the signals of its
remote control.
BMW further stated that all of its
vehicles are currently equipped with
antitheft devices as standard equipment,
including its MINI Countryman MPV
PO 00000
Frm 00156
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
line. BMW compared the effectiveness
of its antitheft device with devices
which NHTSA has previously
determined to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as would compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of Part 541.
Specifically, BMW has installed its
antitheft device on its X1 (MPV and
passenger cars), X3, X4 and X5 vehicle
lines, as well as its Carline 1, 3, 4, 5, 6,
7, Z4, and MINI vehicle lines, all which
have been granted parts-marking
exemptions by the agency. BMW asserts
that theft data have indicated a decline
in theft rates for vehicle lines that have
been equipped with antitheft devices
similar to that which it proposes to
install on the MINI Countryman MPV
line. BMW also stated that for MY/CY
2011, the agency’s data show that theft
rates for its lines are: 0.34 (1-series),
0.69 (3-series), 1.26 (5-series), 2.47 (6series) 1.66 (7-series), 0.24 (X1), 0.68
(X3), 2.02 (Z4), and 0.32 (MINI Cooper).
Using an average of 3 MYs data (2011–
2013), NHTSA’s theft rates for BMW’s 1
series, 3 series, 5 series, 6 series, 7
series, X1, X3, Z4 and MINI Cooper
vehicle lines are 0.4954, 0.6581, 0.9935,
2.8054, 1.4711, 0.2356, 0.4961, 1.2843
and 0.3385 respectively, all below the
median theft rate of 3.5826.
Based on the supporting evidence
submitted by BMW, the agency believes
that the antitheft device for the BMW
MINI Countryman MPV 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). The agency concludes that the
device will provide four of the five
types of performance listed in
§ 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation;
preventing defeat or circumvention of
the device by unauthorized persons;
preventing operation of the vehicle by
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the
reliability and durability of the device.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49
CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a
petition for exemption from the partsmarking requirements of Part 541, either
in whole or in part, if it determines that,
based upon supporting 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 BMW has provided adequate
reasons for its belief that the antitheft
device for the MINI Countryman MPV
line 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).
E:\FR\FM\27APN1.SGM
27APN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2016 / Notices
This conclusion is based on the
information BMW provided about its
device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full BMW’s petition for
exemption for the MY 2017 MINI
Countryman MPV line from the partsmarking requirements of 49 CFR part
541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part
541, Appendix A–1, identifies those
lines that are exempted from the Theft
Prevention Standard for a given MY. 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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard.
If BMW decides not to use the
exemption for this line, it must formally
notify the agency. If such a decision is
made, the line must be fully marked as
required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component
parts and replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if BMW 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,
§ 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 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Apr 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 18,
2016 under authority delegated in 49 CFR
part 1.95
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016–09767 Filed 4–26–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Information Collection
Renewal; Comment Request;
Interagency Guidance on Asset
Securitization Activities
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
The OCC, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to comment on a continuing
information collection, as required by
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA).
In accordance with the requirements
of the PRA, the OCC may not conduct
or sponsor, and the respondent is not
required to respond to, an information
collection unless it displays a currently
valid Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number.
The OCC is soliciting comment
concerning renewal of its information
collection titled, ‘‘Interagency Guidance
on Asset Securitization Activities.’’
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before June 27, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Because paper mail in the
Washington, DC area and at the OCC is
subject to delay, commenters are
encouraged to submit comments by
email, if possible. Comments may be
sent to: Legislative and Regulatory
Activities Division, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, Attention:
1557–0217, 400 7th Street SW., Suite
3E–218, Mail Stop 9W–11, Washington,
DC 20219. In addition, comments may
be sent by fax to (571) 465–4326 or by
electronic mail to prainfo@occ.treas.gov.
You may personally inspect and
photocopy comments at the OCC, 400
7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20219.
For security reasons, the OCC requires
that visitors make an appointment to
inspect comments. You may do so by
calling (202) 649–6700 or, for persons
who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY,
(202) 649–5597. Upon arrival, visitors
will be required to present valid
government-issued photo identification
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00157
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24939
and submit to security screening in
order to inspect and photocopy
comments.
All comments received, including
attachments and other supporting
materials, are part of the public record
and subject to public disclosure. Do not
include any information in your
comment or supporting materials that
you consider confidential or
inappropriate for public disclosure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shaquita Merritt, OCC Clearance
Officer, (202) 649–5490 or, for persons
who are deaf or hard of hearing, TTY,
(202) 649–5597, Legislative and
Regulatory Activities Division, Office of
the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th
Street SW., Suite 3E–218, Mail Stop
9W–11, Washington, DC 20219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal
agencies must obtain approval from
OMB for each collection of information
that they conduct or sponsor.
‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined
in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) to include agency requests or
requirements that members of the public
submit reports, keep records, or provide
information to a third party. Section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal agencies
to provide a 60-day notice in the
Federal Register concerning each
proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an
existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB
for approval. To comply with this
requirement, the OCC is publishing
notice of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
Title: Interagency Guidance on Asset
Securitization Activities.
OMB Control No.: 1557–0217.
Type of Review: Regular.
Description: This information
collection applies to institutions
engaged in asset securitization activities
and provides that any institution
engaged in these activities should
maintain a written asset securitization
policy, document the fair value of
retained interests, and maintain a
management information system to
monitor asset securitization activities.
Institution management uses the
information collected to ensure the safe
and sound operation of the institution’s
asset securitization activities. The OCC
uses the information to evaluate the
quality of an institution’s risk
management practices.
Affected Public: Businesses or other
for-profit.
Burden Estimates:
E:\FR\FM\27APN1.SGM
27APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24937-24939]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09767]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption from the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the BMW of North America, LLC's
(BMW) petition for an exemption of the MINI Countryman multi-purpose
passenger vehicle (MPV) 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 49 CFR part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle
Theft Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). BMW requested
confidential treatment for specific information in its petition that
the agency will address by separate letter.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2017 model year (MY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International
[[Page 24938]]
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room
W43-439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone number is (202)
366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated March 25, 2016, BMW
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard for the MINI Countryman MPV line beginning with MY
2017. 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, BMW provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for its MINI Countryman MPV line. Key features of the antitheft
device will include a key with a transponder, loop antenna (coil),
engine control unit (DME/DDE) with encoded start release input, an
electronically coded vehicle immobilizer/car access system (EWS/CAS)
control unit and a passive immobilizer. BMW stated that its MINI
Countryman MPV line will be installed with a passive vehicle
immobilizer device as standard equipment. BMW stated that the EWS
immobilizer device prevents the vehicle from being driven away under
its own engine power and also fulfills the requirements of European
vehicle insurance companies. BMW will not offer an audible or visible
alarm feature on the proposed device.
BMW's submission is considered a complete petition as required by
49 CFR 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in
Sec. 543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec. 543.6.
In addressing the specific content requirements of Part 543.6, BMW
provided information on the reliability and durability of its device.
To ensure reliability and durability of the device, BMW conducted tests
and believes that the device is reliable and durable because it
complied with its own specific standards and is installed on other
vehicle lines for which the agency has granted a parts-marking
exemption. Further assuring the reliability and durability of the MINI
Countryman's antitheft device, BMW stated that the vehicle's mechanical
keys are unique because they require a special key blank, cutting
machine and a unique vehicle code to allow for key duplication. BMW
further stated that the new keys will only be issued to authorized
persons and will incorporate special guide-way millings, making the
locks almost impossible to pick and the keys impossible to duplicate on
the open market.
BMW stated that activation of its immobilizer device occurs
automatically when the engine is shut off and the vehicle key is
removed from the ignition lock cylinder. Deactivation of the device
occurs when the Start/Stop button is pressed and the vehicle starting
process begins. BMW stated that deactivation cannot be carried out with
a mechanical key, but must occur electronically. Specifically, BMW
stated that its transponder sends key data to the EWS/CAS control unit.
The correct key data must be recognized by the EWS/CAS control unit in
order for the vehicle to start. The transponder contains a chip which
is integrated in the key and powered by a battery. The transponder also
consists of a transmitter/receiver which communicates with the EWS/CAS
control unit. The EWS/CAS control unit provides the interface to the
loop antenna (coil), engine control unit and starter. The ignition and
fuel supply are only released when a correct coded release signal has
been sent by the EWS/CAS control unit to deactivate the device and
allow the vehicle to start. When the EWS/CAS control unit has sent a
correct release signal, and after the initial starting value, the
release signal becomes a rolling, ever-changing, random code that is
stored in the DME/DDE and EWS/CAS control units. The DME/DDE must
identify the correct release signal to release the ignition signal and
fuel supply.
BMW stated that the vehicle is also equipped with a central-locking
system that can be operated to lock and unlock all doors or to unlock
only the driver's door, thereby preventing forced entry into the
vehicle through the passenger doors. The vehicle can be further secured
by locking the doors and hood using either the key lock cylinder on the
driver's door or the remote frequency remote control. BMW stated that
the frequency for the remote control constantly changes to prevent an
unauthorized person from opening the vehicle by intercepting the
signals of its remote control.
BMW further stated that all of its vehicles are currently equipped
with antitheft devices as standard equipment, including its MINI
Countryman MPV line. BMW compared the effectiveness of its antitheft
device with devices which NHTSA has previously determined to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541.
Specifically, BMW has installed its antitheft device on its X1 (MPV and
passenger cars), X3, X4 and X5 vehicle lines, as well as its Carline 1,
3, 4, 5, 6, 7, Z4, and MINI vehicle lines, all which have been granted
parts-marking exemptions by the agency. BMW asserts that theft data
have indicated a decline in theft rates for vehicle lines that have
been equipped with antitheft devices similar to that which it proposes
to install on the MINI Countryman MPV line. BMW also stated that for
MY/CY 2011, the agency's data show that theft rates for its lines are:
0.34 (1-series), 0.69 (3-series), 1.26 (5-series), 2.47 (6-series) 1.66
(7-series), 0.24 (X1), 0.68 (X3), 2.02 (Z4), and 0.32 (MINI Cooper).
Using an average of 3 MYs data (2011-2013), NHTSA's theft rates for
BMW's 1 series, 3 series, 5 series, 6 series, 7 series, X1, X3, Z4 and
MINI Cooper vehicle lines are 0.4954, 0.6581, 0.9935, 2.8054, 1.4711,
0.2356, 0.4961, 1.2843 and 0.3385 respectively, all below the median
theft rate of 3.5826.
Based on the supporting evidence submitted by BMW, the agency
believes that the antitheft device for the BMW MINI Countryman MPV 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). The agency concludes that the
device will provide four of the five types of performance listed in
Sec. 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; preventing defeat or
circumvention of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing
operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the
reliability and durability of the device.
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
supporting 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 BMW has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the MINI Countryman MPV 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).
[[Page 24939]]
This conclusion is based on the information BMW provided about its
device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full BMW's
petition for exemption for the MY 2017 MINI Countryman MPV line from
the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes
that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are
exempted from the Theft Prevention Standard for a given MY. 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 BMW decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked as required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of
major component parts and replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if BMW 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, Sec. 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend 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.
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 18, 2016 under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-09767 Filed 4-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
