Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Mitsubishi Motors, 28373-28375 [2017-12880]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 21, 2017 / Notices
Percent
Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere .....................................
2.500
The number assigned to this disaster
for physical damage is 15170 B and for
economic injury is 15171 0.
The States which received an EIDL
Declaration # is INDIANA.
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P
Fiftieth RTCA SC–224 Standards for
Airport Security Access Control
Systems Plenary
[FR Doc. 2017–12950 Filed 6–20–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025–01–P
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), U.S. Department
of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Fiftieth RTCA SC–224
Standards for Airport Security Access
Control Systems Plenary.
AGENCY:
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice: 10041]
Notice of Determinations; Culturally
Significant Objects Imported for
Exhibition Determinations: ‘‘India
Modern: The Paintings of M.F. Husain’’
Exhibition
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
[FR Doc. 2017–12860 Filed 6–20–17; 8:45 am]
Federal Aviation Administration
Dated: June 14, 2017.
Linda E. McMahon,
Administrator.
Notice is hereby given of the
following determinations: Pursuant to
the authority vested in me by the Act of
October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C.
2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the
Foreign Affairs Reform and
Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat.
2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et
seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of
October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority
No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as
appropriate, Delegation of Authority No.
257–1 of December 11, 2015), I hereby
determine that certain objects to be
included in the exhibition ‘‘India
Modern: The Paintings of M.F. Husain,’’
imported from abroad for temporary
exhibition within the United States, are
of cultural significance. The objects are
imported pursuant to a loan agreement
with the foreign owner or custodian. I
also determine that the exhibition or
display of the exhibit objects at The Art
Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois,
from on or about July 14, 2017, until on
or about March 4, 2018, and at possible
additional exhibitions or venues yet to
be determined, is in the national
interest. I have ordered that Public
Notice of these Determinations be
published in the Federal Register.
For further information, including a
list of the imported objects, contact the
Office of Public Diplomacy and Public
Affairs in the Office of the Legal
Adviser, U.S. Department of State
(telephone: 202–632–6471; email:
section2459@state.gov). The mailing
address is U.S. Department of State,
19:12 Jun 20, 2017
Alyson Grunder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Bureau
of Educational and Cultural Affairs,
Department of State.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Number 59008)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
L/PD, SA–5, Suite 5H03, Washington,
DC 20522–0505.
Jkt 241001
The FAA is issuing this notice
to advise the public of a meeting of
Fiftieth RTCA SC–224 Standards for
Airport Security Access Control
Systems Plenary.
DATES: The meeting will be held August
03, 2017 10:00 a.m.–1:00 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at:
RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karan Hofmann at khofmann@rtca.org
or 202–330–0680, or The RTCA
Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite
910, Washington, DC 20036, or by
telephone at (202) 833–9339, fax at (202)
833–9434, or Web site at https://
www.rtca.org.
SUMMARY:
Pursuant
to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–
463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is hereby
given for a meeting of the Fiftieth RTCA
SC–224 Standards for Airport Security
Access Control Systems Plenary. The
agenda will include the following:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Thursday, August 3, 2017, 10:00 a.m.–
1:00 p.m.
1. Welcome/Introductions/
Administrative Remarks
2. Review/Approve Previous Meeting
Summary
3. Report on TSA participation
4. Report on Document Distribution
Mechanisms
5. Report on the New Guidelines and
other Safe Skies Reports
6. Review of DO–230H Sections
7. Commencement of FRAC process
8. Action Items for Next Meeting
9. Time and Place of Next Meeting
10. Any Other Business
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28373
11. Adjourn
Attendance is open to the interested
public but limited to space availability.
With the approval of the chairman,
members of the public may present oral
statements at the meeting. Persons
wishing to present statements or obtain
information should contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section. Members of the public
may present a written statement to the
committee at any time.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 15,
2017.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership
Contracts Branch, ANG–A17, NextGen,
Procurement Services Division, Federal
Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017–12854 Filed 6–20–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
Petition for Exemption From the
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard;
Mitsubishi Motors
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
AGENCY:
This document grants in full
the Mitsubishi Motors R&D of America,
Inc.’s (Mitsubishi) petition for
exemption of the Mitsubishi
[Confidential] vehicle line in
accordance with 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 Federal
Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard. Mitsubishi also requested
confidential treatment for specific
information in its petition. While
official notification on granting or
denying Mitsubishi’s request for
confidential treatment will be addressed
by separate letter, no confidential
information provided for purposes of
this document has been disclosed.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
notice is effective beginning with the
2018 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hisham Mohamed, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and
Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43–437, 1200 New Jersey
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21JNN1.SGM
21JNN1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
28374
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 21, 2017 / Notices
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Mr.
Mohamed’s phone number is (202) 366–
0307. His fax number is (202) 493–2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a
petition dated March 30, 2017,
Mitsubishi requested exemption from
the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part
541) for the Mitsubishi [Confidential]
vehicle line, beginning with MY 2018.
The petition requested an exemption
from parts-marking pursuant to 49 CFR
543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard, based on the
installation of an antitheft device as
standard equipment for the 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, Mitsubishi provided a
detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the
components of the antitheft device for
the [Confidential] vehicle line.
Mitsubishi will install a passive,
transponder-based, electronic engine
immobilizer device as standard
equipment on its [Confidential] vehicle
line beginning with MY 2018. Key
components of the antitheft device will
include a transponder key, electronic
control unit (ECU), and a passive
immobilizer. Mitsubishi also stated that
it will be incorporating an audible and
visual alarm system as standard
equipment on these trim-line vehicles.
Mitsubishi’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.
Mitsubishi stated that its entry models
for the [Confidential] vehicle line will
be equipped with a Wireless Control
Module (WCM) immobilizer. Mitsubishi
explained that this is a key entry system
in which the transponder is located in
a traditional key that must be inserted
into the key cylinder in order to activate
the ignition. All other models of the
[Confidential] vehicle line are equipped
with a One-touch Starting System
(OSS), which utilizes a keyless system
that allows the driver to press a button
located on the instrument panel to
activate and deactivate the ignition
(instead of using a traditional key in the
key cylinder) as long as the transponder
is located in close proximity to the
driver.
Once the ignition switch is turned
(pushed) to the ignition-on position, the
transceiver module reads the specific
ignition key code for the vehicle and
transmits an encrypted message
containing the key code to the electronic
control unit (ECU). The immobilizer
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Jun 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
receives the key code signal transmitted
from either type of key (WCM or OSS)
and verifies that the key code signal is
correct. The immobilizer then sends a
separate encrypted start-code signal to
the engine ECU to allow the driver to
start the vehicle. The engine only will
function if the key code matches the
unique identification key code
previously programmed into the ECU. If
the codes do not match, the engine and
fuel system will be disabled.
In addressing the specific content
requirements of 543.6, Mitsubishi
provided information on the reliability
and durability of its proposed device.
To ensure reliability and durability of
the device, Mitsubishi conducted tests
based on its own specified standards.
Mitsubishi provided a detailed list of
the tests conducted and believes that the
device is reliable and durable since the
device complied with its specific
requirements for each test. Mitsubishi
additionally stated that its immobilizer
system is further enhanced by several
factors making it very difficult to defeat.
Specifically, Mitsubishi stated that
communication between the
transponder and the ECU are encrypted
and its WCM and OSS have over 4.3
billion different possible key codes that
make successful key code duplication
virtually impossible. Mitsubishi also
stated that its immobilizer system and
the ECU share security data during
vehicle assembly that make them a
matched set. These matched modules
will not function if taken out and
reinstalled separately on other vehicles.
Mitsubishi also stated that it is
impossible to mechanically override the
system and start the vehicle because the
vehicle will not be able to start without
the transmission of the specific code to
the electronic control module. Lastly,
Mitsubishi stated that the antitheft
device is extremely reliable and durable
because there are no moving parts, nor
does the key require a separate battery.
Mitsubishi also informed the agency
that its Eclipse vehicle line has been
equipped with the antitheft device
beginning with its MY 2000 vehicles.
Mitsubishi stated that the theft rate for
the MY 2000 Eclipse decreased by
almost 42% when compared with that
of its MY 1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse
(unequipped with an immobilizer
device). Mitsubishi also revealed that
the Galant, Endeavor, Outlander,
Lancer, Outlander Sport, i-MiEV and
Mirage vehicle lines have been
equipped with a similar type of
immobilizer device since January 2004,
April 2004, September 2006, March
2007, September 2010, October 2011
and July 2013, respectively. All eight
vehicle lines have been granted parts-
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
marking exemptions by the agency. The
average theft rates for the Mitsubishi
Galant, Endeavor, Outlander and Lancer
vehicle lines using an average of 3 MY’s
data are 3.6664, 1.7721, 0.7253 and
0.9747 respectively. Therefore,
Mitsubishi has concluded that the
antitheft device proposed for its vehicle
line is no less effective than those
devices in the lines for which NHTSA
has already granted full exemption from
the parts-marking requirements.
Based on the supporting evidence
submitted by Mitsubishi on the device,
the agency believes that the antitheft
device for the [Confidential] 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). The agency
concludes that the device will provide
the five types of performance listed in
§ 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation;
attract attention to the efforts of an
unauthorized person to enter or move a
vehicle by means other than a key;
preventing defeat or circumvention of
the device by unauthorized persons;
preventing operation of the vehicle by
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the
reliability and durability of the device.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49
CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a
petition for an 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 Mitsubishi
has provided adequate reasons for its
belief that the antitheft device for the
Mitsubishi [Confidential] 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
Mitsubishi provided about its device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
hereby grants in full Mitsubishi’s
petition for exemption for the
[Confidential] vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR
part 541, beginning with its MY 2018
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
E:\FR\FM\21JNN1.SGM
21JNN1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 21, 2017 / Notices
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. Mitsubishi stated
that an official nameplate for the vehicle
has not yet been determined. However,
as a condition to the formal granting of
Mitsubishi’s petition for exemption
from the parts-marking requirements of
49 CFR part 541 for the MY 2018
[Confidential] vehicle line, the agency
fully expects Mitsubishi to notify the
agency of the nameplate for the vehicle
line prior to its introduction into the
United States commerce for sale.
If Mitsubishi 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 Mitsubishi
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.
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017–12880 Filed 6–20–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:12 Jun 20, 2017
Jkt 241001
28375
location of the components of the
antitheft device for the (confidential)
National Highway Traffic Safety
vehicle line. Nissan stated that the MY
Administration
2018 (confidential) vehicle line will be
installed with a passive, electronic
Petition for Exemption From the
engine immobilizer antitheft device as
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention standard equipment. Key components of
Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.
the antitheft device will include an
engine immobilizer, engine control
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
module (ECM), security indicator light,
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
immobilizer antenna, Key FOB, and a
Department of Transportation (DOT).
specially-designed key with a
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
microchip. Nissan will not provide any
visible or audible indication of
SUMMARY: This document grants in full
unauthorized vehicle entry on the
the Nissan North America, Inc.’s,
(confidential) vehicle line.
(Nissan) petition for exemption of the
Nissan’s submission is considered a
(confidential) vehicle line in accordance
complete petition as required by 49 CFR
with the Exemption from the Theft
543.7, in that it meets the general
Prevention Standard. This petition is
requirements contained in § 543.5 and
granted because the agency has
the specific content requirements of
determined that the antitheft device to
§ 543.6.
be placed on the line as standard
In addressing the specific content
equipment is likely to be as effective in
requirements of 543.6, Nissan provided
reducing and deterring motor vehicle
information on the reliability and
theft as compliance with the partsdurability of its proposed device. Nissan
marking requirements of the Federal
stated that its antitheft device is tested
Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
for specific parameters to ensure its
Standard (Theft Prevention Standard).
reliability and durability. Nissan
Nissan also requested confidential
provided a detailed list of the tests
treatment for specific information in its
conducted and believes that the device
petition. While official notification
is reliable and durable since the device
granting or denying its request for
confidential treatment will be addressed complied with its specified
requirements for each test. Nissan
by separate letter, no confidential
further stated that its immobilizer
information provided for purposes of
device satisfies the European Directive
this document has been disclosed.
ECE R116, including tamper resistance.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
Nissan also stated that all control units
notice is effective beginning with the
for the device are located inside the
2018 model year (MY).
vehicle, providing further protection
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
from unauthorized accessibility of the
Carlita Ballard, Office of International
device from outside the vehicle.
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer
Nissan stated that activation of its
Programs, National Highway Traffic
immobilizer device occurs
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey automatically when the ignition switch
Avenue SE., West Building, Room W43– is turned to the ‘‘OFF’’ position which
439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms.
then causes the security indicator light
Ballard’s telephone phone number is
to flash notifying the operator that the
(202) 366–5222. Her fax number is (202) immobilizer device is activated. Nissan
493–2990.
stated that the immobilizer device
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a
prevents normal operation of the vehicle
without using a specially-designed
petition dated March 31, 2017, Nissan
microchip key with a pre-registered
requested an exemption from the parts‘‘Key-ID’’. Nissan also stated that, when
marking requirements of the Theft
the brake and clutch is on and the key
Prevention Standard for the
FOB is near the engine start switch, the
(confidential) vehicle line beginning
Key-ID is scanned via the immobilizer
with MY 2018. The petition requested
antenna. The microchip in the key
an exemption from parts-marking
pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption transmits the Key-ID to the BCM,
from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, beginning an encrypted communication
process. If the Key-ID and encrypted
based on the installation of an antitheft
code are correct, the ECM will allow the
device as standard equipment for the
engine to keep running and the driver
entire vehicle line.
Under 49 CFR part 543.5(a), a
to operate the vehicle. If the Key-ID and
manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
encrypted code are not correct, the ECM
grant an exemption for one vehicle line
will cause the engine to shut down.
Nissan stated that the proposed
per model year. In its petition, Nissan
device is functionally equivalent to the
provided a detailed description and
antitheft device installed on the MY
diagram of the identity, design, and
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\21JNN1.SGM
21JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28373-28375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12880]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Mitsubishi Motors
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Mitsubishi Motors R&D of
America, Inc.'s (Mitsubishi) petition for exemption of the Mitsubishi
[Confidential] vehicle line in accordance with Exemption from the Theft
Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has
determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard.
Mitsubishi also requested confidential treatment for specific
information in its petition. While official notification on granting or
denying Mitsubishi's request for confidential treatment will be
addressed by separate letter, no confidential information provided for
purposes of this document has been disclosed.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2018 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hisham Mohamed, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-437, 1200 New Jersey
[[Page 28374]]
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Mr. Mohamed's phone number is (202)
366-0307. His fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated March 30, 2017,
Mitsubishi requested exemption from the parts-marking requirements of
the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the Mitsubishi
[Confidential] vehicle line, beginning with MY 2018. The petition
requested an exemption from parts-marking pursuant to 49 CFR 543,
Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, based on the
installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment for the
entire vehicle line.
Under Sec. 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition,
Mitsubishi provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity,
design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the
[Confidential] vehicle line. Mitsubishi will install a passive,
transponder-based, electronic engine immobilizer device as standard
equipment on its [Confidential] vehicle line beginning with MY 2018.
Key components of the antitheft device will include a transponder key,
electronic control unit (ECU), and a passive immobilizer. Mitsubishi
also stated that it will be incorporating an audible and visual alarm
system as standard equipment on these trim-line vehicles. Mitsubishi'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.
Mitsubishi stated that its entry models for the [Confidential]
vehicle line will be equipped with a Wireless Control Module (WCM)
immobilizer. Mitsubishi explained that this is a key entry system in
which the transponder is located in a traditional key that must be
inserted into the key cylinder in order to activate the ignition. All
other models of the [Confidential] vehicle line are equipped with a
One-touch Starting System (OSS), which utilizes a keyless system that
allows the driver to press a button located on the instrument panel to
activate and deactivate the ignition (instead of using a traditional
key in the key cylinder) as long as the transponder is located in close
proximity to the driver.
Once the ignition switch is turned (pushed) to the ignition-on
position, the transceiver module reads the specific ignition key code
for the vehicle and transmits an encrypted message containing the key
code to the electronic control unit (ECU). The immobilizer receives the
key code signal transmitted from either type of key (WCM or OSS) and
verifies that the key code signal is correct. The immobilizer then
sends a separate encrypted start-code signal to the engine ECU to allow
the driver to start the vehicle. The engine only will function if the
key code matches the unique identification key code previously
programmed into the ECU. If the codes do not match, the engine and fuel
system will be disabled.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6,
Mitsubishi provided information on the reliability and durability of
its proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the
device, Mitsubishi conducted tests based on its own specified
standards. Mitsubishi provided a detailed list of the tests conducted
and believes that the device is reliable and durable since the device
complied with its specific requirements for each test. Mitsubishi
additionally stated that its immobilizer system is further enhanced by
several factors making it very difficult to defeat. Specifically,
Mitsubishi stated that communication between the transponder and the
ECU are encrypted and its WCM and OSS have over 4.3 billion different
possible key codes that make successful key code duplication virtually
impossible. Mitsubishi also stated that its immobilizer system and the
ECU share security data during vehicle assembly that make them a
matched set. These matched modules will not function if taken out and
reinstalled separately on other vehicles. Mitsubishi also stated that
it is impossible to mechanically override the system and start the
vehicle because the vehicle will not be able to start without the
transmission of the specific code to the electronic control module.
Lastly, Mitsubishi stated that the antitheft device is extremely
reliable and durable because there are no moving parts, nor does the
key require a separate battery.
Mitsubishi also informed the agency that its Eclipse vehicle line
has been equipped with the antitheft device beginning with its MY 2000
vehicles. Mitsubishi stated that the theft rate for the MY 2000 Eclipse
decreased by almost 42% when compared with that of its MY 1999
Mitsubishi Eclipse (unequipped with an immobilizer device). Mitsubishi
also revealed that the Galant, Endeavor, Outlander, Lancer, Outlander
Sport, i-MiEV and Mirage vehicle lines have been equipped with a
similar type of immobilizer device since January 2004, April 2004,
September 2006, March 2007, September 2010, October 2011 and July 2013,
respectively. All eight vehicle lines have been granted parts-marking
exemptions by the agency. The average theft rates for the Mitsubishi
Galant, Endeavor, Outlander and Lancer vehicle lines using an average
of 3 MY's data are 3.6664, 1.7721, 0.7253 and 0.9747 respectively.
Therefore, Mitsubishi has concluded that the antitheft device proposed
for its vehicle line is no less effective than those devices in the
lines for which NHTSA has already granted full exemption from the
parts-marking requirements.
Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Mitsubishi on the
device, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the
[Confidential] 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). The
agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of
performance listed in Sec. 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; attract
attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move a
vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention
of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the
vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and
durability of the device.
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for an 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 Mitsubishi has provided adequate reasons for its belief that
the antitheft device for the Mitsubishi [Confidential] 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 Mitsubishi provided about its device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Mitsubishi's petition for exemption for the [Confidential] vehicle line
from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with
its MY 2018 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
[[Page 28375]]
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.
Mitsubishi stated that an official nameplate for the vehicle has not
yet been determined. However, as a condition to the formal granting of
Mitsubishi's petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements
of 49 CFR part 541 for the MY 2018 [Confidential] vehicle line, the
agency fully expects Mitsubishi to notify the agency of the nameplate
for the vehicle line prior to its introduction into the United States
commerce for sale.
If Mitsubishi 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 Mitsubishi 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, under authority delegated in 49 CFR
part 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-12880 Filed 6-20-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P