82 FR 28375 - Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 118 (June 21, 2017)

Page Range		28375-28376
FR Document		2017-12881

This document grants in full the Nissan North America, Inc.'s, (Nissan) petition for exemption of the (confidential) vehicle line in accordance with the 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 (Theft Prevention Standard). Nissan also requested confidential treatment for specific information in its petition. While official notification granting or denying its request for confidential treatment will be addressed by separate letter, no confidential information provided for purposes of this document has been disclosed.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28375-28376]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12881]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft 
Prevention Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Nissan North America, Inc.'s, 
(Nissan) petition for exemption of the (confidential) vehicle line in 
accordance with the 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 (Theft Prevention Standard). Nissan 
also requested confidential treatment for specific information in its 
petition. While official notification granting or denying its 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 (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of 
International 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 
phone number is (202) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated March 31, 2017, Nissan 
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft 
Prevention Standard for the (confidential) vehicle line beginning with 
MY 2018. 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, Nissan provided a detailed description and diagram of the 
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft 
device for the (confidential) vehicle line. Nissan stated that the MY 
2018 (confidential) vehicle line will be installed with a passive, 
electronic engine immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment. 
Key components of the antitheft device will include an engine 
immobilizer, engine control module (ECM), security indicator light, 
immobilizer antenna, Key FOB, and a specially-designed key with a 
microchip. Nissan will not provide any visible or audible indication of 
unauthorized vehicle entry on the (confidential) vehicle line.
    Nissan'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 543.6, Nissan 
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed 
device. Nissan stated that its antitheft device is tested for specific 
parameters to ensure its reliability and durability. Nissan provided a 
detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the device is 
reliable and durable since the device complied with its specified 
requirements for each test. Nissan further stated that its immobilizer 
device satisfies the European Directive ECE R116, including tamper 
resistance. Nissan also stated that all control units for the device 
are located inside the vehicle, providing further protection from 
unauthorized accessibility of the device from outside the vehicle.
    Nissan stated that activation of its immobilizer device occurs 
automatically when the ignition switch is turned to the ``OFF'' 
position which then causes the security indicator light to flash 
notifying the operator that the immobilizer device is activated. Nissan 
stated that the immobilizer device prevents normal operation of the 
vehicle without using a specially-designed microchip key with a pre-
registered ``Key-ID''. Nissan also stated that, when the brake and 
clutch is on and the key FOB is near the engine start switch, the Key-
ID is scanned via the immobilizer antenna. The microchip in the key 
transmits the Key-ID to the BCM, beginning an encrypted communication 
process. If the Key-ID and encrypted code are correct, the ECM will 
allow the engine to keep running and the driver to operate the vehicle. 
If the Key-ID and encrypted code are not correct, the ECM will cause 
the engine to shut down.
    Nissan stated that the proposed device is functionally equivalent 
to the antitheft device installed on the MY

[[Page 28376]]

2011 Nissan Cube vehicle line which was granted a parts-marking 
exemption by the agency on April 14, 2010 (75 FR 19458). The agency 
notes that the theft rates for the Nissan Cube using an average of 3 
MYs data (2012-2014), are 0.3322, 0.6471 and 2.0373 respectively.
    Nissan provided data on the effectiveness of the antitheft device 
installed on its (confidential) vehicle line in support of the belief 
that its antitheft device will be highly effective in reducing and 
deterring theft. Nissan referenced the National Insurance Crime 
Bureau's data which it stated showed a 70% reduction in theft when 
comparing MY 1997 Ford Mustangs (with a standard immobilizer) to MY 
1995 Ford Mustangs (without an immobilizer). Nissan also referenced the 
Highway Loss Data Institute's data which reported that BMW vehicles 
experienced theft loss reductions resulting in a 73% decrease in 
relative claim frequency and a 78% lower average loss payment per claim 
for vehicles equipped with an immobilizer. Additionally, Nissan stated 
that theft rates for its Pathfinder vehicle experienced reductions from 
model year (MY) 2000 to 2001 with implementation of the engine 
immobilizer device as standard equipment and further significant 
reductions subsequent to MY 2001. Specifically, Nissan noted that the 
agency's theft rate data for MY's 2001 through 2006 reported theft 
rates of 1.9146, 1.8011, 1.1482, 0.8102, 1.7298 and 1.3474 respectively 
for the Nissan Pathfinder.
    Nissan compared its device to other similar devices previously 
granted exemptions by the agency. Specifically, it referenced the 
agency's grant of full exemptions to General Motors Corporation for its 
Buick Riviera and Oldsmobile Aurora vehicle lines (58 FR 44872, August 
25, 1993) and its Cadillac Seville vehicle line (62 FR 20058, April 24, 
1997) from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention 
standard. Nissan stated that it believes that since its device is 
functionally equivalent to other comparable manufacturer's devices that 
have already been granted parts-marking exemptions by the agency, along 
with the evidence of reduced theft rates for vehicle lines equipped 
with similar devices and advanced technology of transponder electronic 
security, the Nissan immobilizer device will have the potential to 
achieve the level of effectiveness equivalent to those vehicles already 
exempted by the agency. The agency agrees that the device is 
substantially similar to devices installed on other vehicle lines for 
which the agency has already granted exemptions
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Nissan, 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 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 
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 Nissan has provided adequate reasons for its belief 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). This conclusion is based on the information Nissan 
provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full 
Nissan's petition for exemption for the Nissan (confidential) vehicle 
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 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. As a condition to the 
formal granting of Nissan'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 Nissan to notify the agency of 
the nameplate for the vehicle line prior to its introduction into the 
United States commerce for sale.
    If Nissan 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 according to the requirements under 49 CFR parts 541.5 
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Nissan 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.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under authority delegated in 49 CFR 
part 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2017-12881 Filed 6-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 21, 2017 / Notices 28375

nameplates, the beginning model year DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION location of the components of the
for which the petition is granted and a antitheft device for the (confidential)
general description of the antitheft National Highway Traffic Safety vehicle line. Nissan stated that the MY
device is necessary in order to notify Administration 2018 (confidential) vehicle line will be
law enforcement agencies of new installed with a passive, electronic
Petition for Exemption From the engine immobilizer antitheft device as
vehicle lines exempted from the parts- Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention standard equipment. Key components of
marking requirements of the Theft Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.
Prevention Standard. Mitsubishi stated the antitheft device will include an
that an official nameplate for the vehicle AGENCY: National Highway Traffic engine immobilizer, engine control
Safety Administration (NHTSA), module (ECM), security indicator light,
has not yet been determined. However,
Department of Transportation (DOT). immobilizer antenna, Key FOB, and a
as a condition to the formal granting of
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
specially-designed key with a
Mitsubishi’s petition for exemption microchip. Nissan will not provide any
from the parts-marking requirements of SUMMARY: This document grants in full visible or audible indication of
49 CFR part 541 for the MY 2018 the Nissan North America, Inc.’s, unauthorized vehicle entry on the
[Confidential] vehicle line, the agency (Nissan) petition for exemption of the (confidential) vehicle line.
fully expects Mitsubishi to notify the (confidential) vehicle line in accordance Nissan’s submission is considered a
agency of the nameplate for the vehicle with the Exemption from the Theft complete petition as required by 49 CFR
line prior to its introduction into the Prevention Standard. This petition is 543.7, in that it meets the general
United States commerce for sale. granted because the agency has requirements contained in § 543.5 and
If Mitsubishi decides not to use the determined that the antitheft device to the specific content requirements of
exemption for this line, it must formally be placed on the line as standard § 543.6.
equipment is likely to be as effective in In addressing the specific content
notify the agency. If such a decision is
reducing and deterring motor vehicle requirements of 543.6, Nissan provided
made, the line must be fully marked as information on the reliability and
required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and theft as compliance with the parts-
marking requirements of the Federal durability of its proposed device. Nissan
541.6 (marking of major component stated that its antitheft device is tested
parts and replacement parts). Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). for specific parameters to ensure its
NHTSA notes that if Mitsubishi Nissan also requested confidential reliability and durability. Nissan
wishes in the future to modify the treatment for specific information in its provided a detailed list of the tests
device on which this exemption is petition. While official notification conducted and believes that the device
based, the company may have to submit granting or denying its request for is reliable and durable since the device
a petition to modify the exemption. Part confidential treatment will be addressed complied with its specified
543.7(d) states that a part 543 exemption by separate letter, no confidential requirements for each test. Nissan
applies only to vehicles that belong to information provided for purposes of further stated that its immobilizer
a line exempted under this part and this document has been disclosed. device satisfies the European Directive
equipped with the antitheft device on ECE R116, including tamper resistance.
DATES: The exemption granted by this
Nissan also stated that all control units
which the line’s exemption is based. notice is effective beginning with the for the device are located inside the
Further, § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the 2018 model year (MY). vehicle, providing further protection
submission of petitions ‘‘to modify an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. from unauthorized accessibility of the
exemption to permit the use of an Carlita Ballard, Office of International device from outside the vehicle.
antitheft device similar to but differing Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Nissan stated that activation of its
from the one specified in that Programs, National Highway Traffic immobilizer device occurs
exemption.’’ Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey automatically when the ignition switch
The agency wishes to minimize the Avenue SE., West Building, Room W43– is turned to the ‘‘OFF’’ position which
administrative burden that part 439, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. then causes the security indicator light
Ballard’s telephone phone number is to flash notifying the operator that the
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted
(202) 366–5222. Her fax number is (202) immobilizer device is activated. Nissan
vehicle manufacturers and itself. The
493–2990. stated that the immobilizer device
agency did not intend part 543 to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a prevents normal operation of the vehicle
require the submission of a modification
petition dated March 31, 2017, Nissan without using a specially-designed
petition for every change to the
requested an exemption from the parts- microchip key with a pre-registered
components or design of an antitheft
marking requirements of the Theft ‘‘Key-ID’’. Nissan also stated that, when
device. The significance of many such Prevention Standard for the the brake and clutch is on and the key
changes could be de minimis. Therefore, (confidential) vehicle line beginning FOB is near the engine start switch, the
NHTSA suggests that if the with MY 2018. The petition requested Key-ID is scanned via the immobilizer
manufacturer contemplates making any an exemption from parts-marking antenna. The microchip in the key
changes, the effects of which might be pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption transmits the Key-ID to the BCM,
characterized as de minimis, it should from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, beginning an encrypted communication
consult the agency before preparing and
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES

based on the installation of an antitheft process. If the Key-ID and encrypted
submitting a petition to modify. device as standard equipment for the code are correct, the ECM will allow the
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority entire vehicle line. engine to keep running and the driver
delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95. 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
Raymond R. Posten,
grant an exemption for one vehicle line will cause the engine to shut down.
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. per model year. In its petition, Nissan Nissan stated that the proposed
[FR Doc. 2017–12880 Filed 6–20–17; 8:45 am] provided a detailed description and device is functionally equivalent to the
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P diagram of the identity, design, and antitheft device installed on the MY

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Jun 20, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21JNN1.SGM 21JNN1

28376 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 21, 2017 / Notices

2011 Nissan Cube vehicle line which which the agency has already granted line prior to its introduction into the
was granted a parts-marking exemption exemptions United States commerce for sale.
by the agency on April 14, 2010 (75 FR Based on the supporting evidence If Nissan decides not to use the
19458). The agency notes that the theft submitted by Nissan, the agency exemption for this line, it must formally
rates for the Nissan Cube using an believes that the antitheft device for the notify the agency. If such a decision is
average of 3 MYs data (2012–2014), are (confidential) vehicle line is likely to be made, the line must be fully marked
0.3322, 0.6471 and 2.0373 respectively. as effective in reducing and deterring according to the requirements under 49
Nissan provided data on the motor vehicle theft as compliance with CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of
effectiveness of the antitheft device the parts-marking requirements of the major component parts and replacement
installed on its (confidential) vehicle Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part parts).
line in support of the belief that its 541). The agency concludes that the NHTSA notes that if Nissan wishes in
antitheft device will be highly effective device will provide four of the five the future to modify the device on
in reducing and deterring theft. Nissan types of performance listed in which this exemption is based, the
referenced the National Insurance Crime § 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; company may have to submit a petition
Bureau’s data which it stated showed a preventing defeat or circumvention of to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d)
70% reduction in theft when comparing the device by unauthorized persons; states that a Part 543 exemption applies
MY 1997 Ford Mustangs (with a preventing operation of the vehicle by only to vehicles that belong to a line
standard immobilizer) to MY 1995 Ford unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the exempted under this part and equipped
Mustangs (without an immobilizer). reliability and durability of the device. with the antitheft device on which the
Nissan also referenced the Highway Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 line’s exemption is based. Further, Part
Loss Data Institute’s data which CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission
reported that BMW vehicles petition for exemption from the parts- of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to
experienced theft loss reductions marking requirements of Part 541 either permit the use of an antitheft device
resulting in a 73% decrease in relative in whole or in part, if it determines that, similar to but differing from the one
claim frequency and a 78% lower based upon substantial evidence, the specified in that exemption.’’
average loss payment per claim for standard equipment antitheft device is The agency wishes to minimize the
vehicles equipped with an immobilizer. likely to be as effective in reducing and administrative burden that Part
Additionally, Nissan stated that theft deterring motor vehicle theft as 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted
rates for its Pathfinder vehicle compliance with the parts-marking vehicle manufacturers and itself. The
experienced reductions from model year requirements of Part 541. The agency agency did not intend in drafting Part
(MY) 2000 to 2001 with implementation finds that Nissan has provided adequate 543 to require the submission of a
of the engine immobilizer device as reasons for its belief that the antitheft modification petition for every change
standard equipment and further device for the (confidential) vehicle line to the components or design of an
significant reductions subsequent to MY is likely to be as effective in reducing antitheft device. The significance of
2001. Specifically, Nissan noted that the and deterring motor vehicle theft as many such changes could be de
agency’s theft rate data for MY’s 2001 compliance with the parts-marking minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests
through 2006 reported theft rates of requirements of the Theft Prevention that if the manufacturer contemplates
1.9146, 1.8011, 1.1482, 0.8102, 1.7298 Standard (49 CFR part 541). This making any changes, the effects of
and 1.3474 respectively for the Nissan conclusion is based on the information which might be characterized as de
Pathfinder. Nissan provided about its device. minimis, it should consult the agency
Nissan compared its device to other For the foregoing reasons, the agency before preparing and submitting a
similar devices previously granted hereby grants in full Nissan’s petition petition to modify.
exemptions by the agency. Specifically, for exemption for the Nissan Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
it referenced the agency’s grant of full (confidential) vehicle line from the delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95.
exemptions to General Motors parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Raymond R. Posten,
Corporation for its Buick Riviera and part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
Oldsmobile Aurora vehicle lines (58 FR part 541, Appendix A–1, identifies [FR Doc. 2017–12881 Filed 6–20–17; 8:45 am]
44872, August 25, 1993) and its Cadillac those lines that are exempted from the BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
Seville vehicle line (62 FR 20058, April Theft Prevention Standard for a given
24, 1997) from the parts-marking model year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f)
requirements of the theft prevention contains publication requirements DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
standard. Nissan stated that it believes incident to the disposition of all Part
that since its device is functionally 543 petitions. Advanced listing, National Highway Traffic Safety
equivalent to other comparable including the release of future product Administration
manufacturer’s devices that have nameplates, the beginning model year
already been granted parts-marking for which the petition is granted and a Petition for Exemption From the
exemptions by the agency, along with general description of the antitheft Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
the evidence of reduced theft rates for device is necessary in order to notify Standard; BMW of North America, LLC
vehicle lines equipped with similar law enforcement agencies of new AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES

devices and advanced technology of vehicle lines exempted from the parts- Safety Administration (NHTSA)
transponder electronic security, the marking requirements of the Theft Department of Transportation (DOT).
Nissan immobilizer device will have the Prevention Standard. As a condition to ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
potential to achieve the level of the formal granting of Nissan’s petition
effectiveness equivalent to those for exemption from the parts-marking SUMMARY: This document grants in full
vehicles already exempted by the requirements of 49 CFR part 541 for the the BMW of North America, LLC’s
agency. The agency agrees that the MY 2018 (confidential) vehicle line, the (BMW) petition for exemption of the X2
device is substantially similar to devices agency fully expects Nissan to notify the vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR
installed on other vehicle lines for agency of the nameplate for the vehicle 543, Exemption from the Theft

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:12 Jun 20, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21JNN1.SGM 21JNN1

Document Created: 2018-11-14 10:08:57
Document Modified: 2018-11-14 10:08:57

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Grant of petition for exemption.
Dates		The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with the 2018 model year (MY).
Contact		Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of International 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 phone number is (202) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
FR Citation		82 FR 28375

82 FR 28375 - Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 118 (June 21, 2017)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration