[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 3, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 186-188]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9957]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption from the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; DaimlerChrysler
AGENCY: National Highway traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT)
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the DaimlerChrysler Corporation's
(DaimlerChrysler) petition for exemption of the Dodge Magnum 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
[[Page 187]]
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).
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2008 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's phone number
is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2290.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated June 2, 2006,
DaimlerChrysler requested an exemption from the parts-marking
requirements of the theft prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the
Dodge Magnum vehicle line, beginning with the 2008 model year. The
petition has been filed pursuant to 49 CFR Part 543, Exemption from
Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, based on the installation of an
antitheft device as standard equipment for an entire vehicle line.
DaimlerChrysler'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.
Under Sec. 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
exemptions for one line of its vehicle lines per year. In its petition,
DaimlerChrysler provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for the Dodge Magnum vehicle line. DaimlerChrysler stated that
all Dodge Magnum vehicles will be equipped with a standard Sentry Key
Immobilizer System (SKIS) antitheft device. The SKIS, a transponder-
based, passive immobilizer antitheft device will provide vehicle
protection by preventing the engine from operating unless a valid
electronically encoded key is detected in the ignition lock cylinder.
The SKIS consists of a Wireless Ignition Node Module (WIN), a
Powertrain Control Module (PCM), and a FOB Integrated Key (FOBIK) which
collectively perform the immobilizer function. The immobilizer feature
is activated when the key is removed from the ignition switch. Once
activated, only a valid key inserted into the ignition switch will
disable immobilization and allow the vehicle to start and continue to
run.
According to DaimlerChrysler, each new FOBIK is programmed for
operation of the Remote Keyless Entry (RKE) system and has a unique
transponder identification code that is permanently programmed into it
by the manufacturer. The ignition key must be programmed into the WIN
module to be recognized by the SKIS as a valid key. The FOBIK
transponder cannot be adjusted or repaired. once the FOBIK has been
programmed to a particular vehicle, it cannot be used on another
vehicle. If it is faulty or damaged, the entire key and RKE transmitter
unit must be replaced.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6,
DaimlerChrysler provided information on the reliability and durability
of its proposed device. To ensure the reliability and durability of the
device, DaimlerChrysler conducted tests based on its own specific
standards. DaimlerChrysler provided information on the tests conducted
and believes that the device is reliable and durable since the device
complied with its specified requirements for each test. According to
DaimlerChrysler, the device has met stringent performance standards
which demonstrated a minimum 95 percent reliability. The SKIS also
undergoes daily short-term durability tests and all of the devices
undergo a series of three functional tests prior to being shipped from
the supplier to the vehicle assembly plant for installation in the
vehicles.
DaimlerChrysler also stated that the proposed antitheft device does
not provide any visible or audible indication of unauthorized entry.
DaimlerChrysler believes that the immobilizer system proposed for
the Dodge Magnum will be at least as effective as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention standard.
DaimlerChrysler also stated that its experience with vehicles subject
to the parts-marking requirement that are later equipped with ignition
immobilizer systems as standard equipment indicate that even lower
theft rates can be expected from vehicles initially equipped with
standard ignition immobilizer systems as that proposed. It has
concluded that the proposed antitheft device is no less effective than
those devices installed on lines for which NHTSA has already granted
full exemption from the parts-marking requirements.
For comparative purposes, DaimlerChrysler offered the Jeep Grand
Cherokee vehicles as an example of vehicles subject to the parts-
marking requirements that have been equipped with ignition immobilizer
systems as standard equipment. The Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicle line was
granted an exemption from the parts-marking requirements beginning with
MY 2004 vehicles, however it has had a SKIS system installed as
standard equipment since the 1999 model year. DaimlerChrysler stated
that NHTSA's theft data for the Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicle line for
model years prior to 1999 (MY 1995 through 1998) provides evidence that
the average theft rate is significantly higher than the 1990/1991
median theft rate of 3.5826. For clarification purposes, the agency
would like to note that it does not collect theft data. NHTSA publishes
theft rates based on data provided by the National Crime Information
Center (NCIC) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. NHTSA uses the
NCIC data to calculate theft rates and publishes these rates annually
in the Federal Register. DaimlerChrysler also indicated that, since the
introduction of immobilizer systems as standard equipment on Jeep Grand
Cherokee vehicles, the average theft rate for the five model years (MY
1999 through 2003) is significantly lower than the 1990/1991 median
theft rate of 3.5826.
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 devices is
likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft
as compliance with the parts-making requirements of part 541. As
explained below, the agency finds that DaimlerChrysler has provided
adequate reasons for its belief that the antitheft device will reduce
and deter theft. This conclusion is based on the information
DaimlerChrysler provided and additional investigation by NHTSA about
the device for the Dodge Magnum vehicle line.
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. The agency
agrees that the device is substantially similar to the device the
agency approved for the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which was also a SKIS
which did provide a visual or audible indication. As cited by
DaimlerChrysler, the average theft rate for the Jeep Grand Cherokee has
decreased substantially since the installation of this device as
standard equipment. While DaimlerChrysler used a different method of
calculating the average theft
[[Page 188]]
rates than NHTSA has used in the past, NHTSA agrees that both
calculations show a substantial reduction in the theft rate since the
installation of the device as standard equipment.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
DaimlerChrysler's petition for exemption for the Dodge Magnum vehicle
line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, beginning
with the 2008 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 DaimlerChrysler decides not to use the exemption for this line,
it must formally notify the agency, and, thereafter, 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 DaimlerChrysler 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.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.
Issued on: December 27, 2006.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administration for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 06-9957 Filed 12-29-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-M