82 FR 48744 - 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 201 (October 19, 2017)
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 201 (October 19, 2017)
| Page Range | 48744-48746 | |
| FR Document | 2017-22658 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 48744-48746] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-22658] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 Infiniti QX50 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 [[Page 48745]] 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. Therefore, no confidential information provided for purposes of this notice has been disclosed. DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is applicable beginning with the 2019 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 July 8, 2017, Nissan requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard for the Infiniti QX50 vehicle line beginning with MY 2019. 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 Infiniti QX50 vehicle line. Nissan stated that the MY 2019 Infiniti QX50 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), body control module (BCM), security indicator light, immobilizer antenna, Key FOB, and a specially-designed key with a microchip. Nissan stated that its vehicle's security indicator light will be a warning to a potential thief, and an added deterrence to a thief's decision to enter the vehicle. However, Nissan stated that its antitheft device will not provide any visible or audible indication if unauthorized vehicle entry (i.e., flashing lights and horn alarm) on its Infiniti QX50 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 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 Infiniti QX50 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 line experienced reductions from model year (MY) 2000 to 2001 and subsequent years with implementation of an engine immobilizer device as standard equipment. Specifically, Nissan stated 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 Infiniti QX50 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. [[Page 48746]] 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 Infiniti QX50 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 Infiniti QX50 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. 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. 2017-22658 Filed 10-18-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
![48744 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2017 / Notices
‘‘ON’’ ignition status to any other status. stated that it believes that installing the formally notify the agency. If such a
The certification ECU then performs the immobilizer device as standard decision is made, the line must be fully
calculation for the immobilizer and the equipment reduces the theft rate for the marked according to the requirements
immobilizer signals the ECM to activate Avalon vehicle line and expects it to under 49 CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6
the device. Toyota also stated that key experience comparable effectiveness (marking of major component parts and
verification is also performed after the and ultimately be more effective than replacement parts).
driver pushes the engine switch. parts-marking labels. NHTSA notes that if Toyota wishes in
Specifically, after the driver pushes the Based on the supporting evidence the future to modify the device on
engine switch, the certification ECU and submitted by Toyota on its device, the which this exemption is based, the
steering lock ECU receive confirmation agency believes that the antitheft device company may have to submit a petition
of a valid key, and the certification ECU for the Avalon vehicle line is likely to to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d)
allows the ECM to start the engine. be as effective in reducing and deterring states that a Part 543 exemption applies
Toyota also stated that in the ‘‘smart motor vehicle theft as compliance with only to vehicles that belong to a line
entry and start system’’ installed the parts-marking requirements of the exempted under this part and equipped
vehicle, a security indicator notifies the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). with the antitheft device on which the
users and others inside and outside the The agency concludes that the device line’s exemption is based. Further, Part
vehicle with the status of the will provide four of the five types of 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission
immobilizer. Toyota further explained performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to
that the security indicator flashes Promoting activation; preventing defeat permit the use of an antitheft device
continuously when the immobilizer is or circumvention of the device by similar to but differing from the one
activated, and turns off when it is unauthorized persons; preventing specified in that exemption.’’
deactivated. operation of the vehicle by The agency wishes to minimize the
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the administrative burden that Part
Toyota stated that the proposed
reliability and durability of the device. 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted
antitheft device has also been installed Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49
as standard equipment on its Avalon vehicle manufacturers and itself. The
CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants a agency did not intend in drafting part
vehicle line beginning with its MY 2015 petition for exemption from the parts-
vehicles. The theft rate for the MY 2015 543 to require the submission of a
marking requirements of Part 541, either modification petition for every change
Avalon vehicle line is not available. in whole or in part, if it determines that,
However, Toyota compared its proposed to the components or design of an
based upon substantial evidence, the antitheft device. The significance of
device to other devices NHTSA has standard equipment antitheft device is
determined to be as effective in many such changes could be de
likely to be as effective in reducing and minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests
reducing and deterring motor vehicle deterring motor vehicle theft as
theft as would compliance with the that if the manufacturer contemplates
compliance with the parts-marking making any changes, the effects of
parts-marking requirements. Toyota requirements of Part 541. The agency
compared its proposed device to that which might be characterized as de
finds that Toyota has provided adequate minimis, it should consult the agency
which has been installed on the Nissan reasons for its belief that the antitheft
Altima and granted a parts-marking before preparing and submitting a
device for the Avalon vehicle line is petition to modify.
exemption from 49 CFR part 541 by the likely to be as effective in reducing and
agency beginning with its MY 2000 deterring motor vehicle theft as Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
vehicles. Toyota also referenced the delegated in 49 CFR 1.95.
compliance with the parts-marking
NHTSA theft rate data published for requirements of the Theft Prevention Raymond R. Posten,
several years before and after the Nissan Standard (49 CFR part 541). This Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
Altima was equipped with a standard conclusion is based on the information [FR Doc. 2017–22657 Filed 10–18–17; 8:45 am]
immobilizer device. Specifically, Toyota Toyota provided about its device. BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
stated that the publication showed that For the foregoing reasons, the agency
the average theft rate for the Nissan hereby grants in full Toyota’s petition
Altima dropped to 3.0 per 1,000 cars for exemption for the Avalon vehicle DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
produced between MY’s 2000–2006 line from the parts-marking
compared to 5.3 per 1,000 cars requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The National Highway Traffic Safety
produced between MY’s 1996–1999. agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Administration
This represents approximately a 43% Appendix A–1, identifies those lines
decrease in the theft rate for the Nissan that are exempted from the Theft Petition for Exemption From the
Altima vehicle line installed with an Prevention Standard for a given model Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
immobilizer between MY’s 2000–2006 year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f) contains Standard; Nissan North America, Inc.
as compared to the Nissan Altima publication requirements incident to the AGENCY: National Highway Traffic
vehicle line without an immobilizer disposition of all Part 543 petitions. Safety Administration (NHTSA),
between MY’s 1996–1999. The theft Advanced listing, including the release Department of Transportation (DOT).
rates for the Nissan Altima vehicle line of future product nameplates, the ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
using an average of three model years’ beginning model year for which the
data (2012–2014) are 2.4207, 1.7598 and petition is granted and a general SUMMARY: This document grants in full
2.1212 respectively, all well below the description of the antitheft device is the Nissan North America, Inc.’s,
rmajette on DSKBCKNHB2PROD with NOTICES
median theft rate of 3.5826. Therefore, necessary in order to notify law (Nissan) petition for exemption of the
Toyota has concluded that the antitheft enforcement agencies of new vehicle Infiniti QX50 vehicle line in accordance
device proposed for its Avalon vehicle lines exempted from the parts-marking with the Exemption from the Theft
line is no less effective than those requirements of the Theft Prevention Prevention Standard. This petition is
devices on the lines for which NHTSA Standard. granted because the agency has
has already granted full exemption from If Toyota decides not to use the determined that the antitheft device to
the parts-marking requirements. Toyota exemption for this line, it should be placed on the line as standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:13 Oct 18, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM 19OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_48945/page/1.svg)
![48746 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2017 / Notices
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 vehicle manufacturers and itself. The be received by October 23, 2017. In
CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a agency did not intend in drafting Part order to provide the public with a
petition for exemption from the parts- 543 to require the submission of a sufficient opportunity to submit
marking requirements of Part 541 either modification petition for every change comments, the due date to receive
in whole or in part, if it determines that, to the components or design of an written comments has been extended to
based upon substantial evidence, the antitheft device. The significance of Tuesday, November 28, 2017.
standard equipment antitheft device is many such changes could be de Approved: October 12, 2017.
likely to be as effective in reducing and minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests L. Brimmer,
deterring motor vehicle theft as that if the manufacturer contemplates
Senior Tax Analyst.
compliance with the parts-marking making any changes, the effects of
requirements of Part 541. The agency [FR Doc. 2017–22596 Filed 10–16–17; 4:15 pm]
which might be characterized as de
finds that Nissan has provided adequate minimis, it should consult the agency BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
reasons for its belief that the antitheft before preparing and submitting a
device for the Infiniti QX50 vehicle line petition to modify.
is likely to be as effective in reducing DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
and deterring motor vehicle theft as delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95. AFFAIRS
compliance with the parts-marking Raymond R. Posten,
requirements of the Theft Prevention Cooperative Studies Scientific
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. Evaluation Committee; Notice of
Standard (49 CFR part 541). This
[FR Doc. 2017–22658 Filed 10–18–17; 8:45 am] Meeting
conclusion is based on the information
Nissan provided about its device. BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
The Department of Veterans Affairs
For the foregoing reasons, the agency
gives notice under the Federal Advisory
hereby grants in full Nissan’s petition
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Committee Act that the Cooperative
for exemption for the Nissan Infiniti
Studies Scientific Evaluation Committee
QX50 vehicle line from the parts-
Internal Revenue Service will hold a meeting on December 13,
marking requirements of 49 CFR part
2017, at the American Association of
541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part
Proposed Collection; Comment Airport Executives, 601 Madison Street,
541, Appendix A–1, identifies those
Request for Form 1024–A; Extension Alexandria, VA. The meeting will begin
lines that are exempted from the Theft
Prevention Standard for a given model of Comment Period at 8:30 a.m. and end at 3:30 p.m.
year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f) contains The Committee advises the Chief
AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Research and Development Officer on
publication requirements incident to the Treasury.
disposition of all Part 543 petitions. the relevance and feasibility of proposed
ACTION: Notice and request for projects and the scientific validity and
Advanced listing, including the release comments; extension of comment
of future product nameplates, the propriety of technical details, including
period. protection of human subjects.
beginning model year for which the
petition is granted and a general SUMMARY: This document extends the The session will be open to the public
description of the antitheft device is comment period for a notice and request for approximately 30 minutes at the
necessary in order to notify law for comments that was published in the start of the meeting for the discussion of
enforcement agencies of new vehicle Federal Register on Monday, August 28, administrative matters and the general
lines exempted from the parts-marking 2017. The notice and request for status of the program. The remaining
requirements of the Theft Prevention comments relates to the Application for portion of the meeting will be closed to
Standard. Recognition of Exemption Under the public for the Committee’s review,
If Nissan decides not to use the Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal discussion, and evaluation of research
exemption for this line, it must formally Revenue Code. and development applications.
notify the agency. If such a decision is DATES: The comment period for the
During the closed portion of the
made, the line must be fully marked notice and request for comments meeting, discussions and
according to the requirements under 49 published on August 28, 2017 (82 FR recommendations will deal with
CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of 40228), is extended to November 28, qualifications of personnel conducting
major component parts and replacement 2017. the studies, staff and consultant
parts). critiques of research proposals and
NHTSA notes that if Nissan wishes in ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments similar documents, and the medical
the future to modify the device on to L. Brimmer, Internal Revenue records of patients who are study
which this exemption is based, the Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution subjects, the disclosure of which would
company may have to submit a petition Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224. constitute a clearly unwarranted
to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: invasion of personal privacy. As
states that a Part 543 exemption applies Requests for additional information or provided by section 10(d) of Public Law
only to vehicles that belong to a line copies of the form and instructions 92–463, as amended, closing portions of
exempted under this part and equipped should be directed to LaNita Van Dyke this meeting is in accordance with 5
with the antitheft device on which the at (202) 317–6009, Internal Revenue U.S.C. 552b(c)(6) and (c)(9)(B).
line’s exemption is based. Further, Part Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution The Committee will not accept oral
543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224, or comments from the public for the open
rmajette on DSKBCKNHB2PROD with NOTICES
of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to through the Internet at portion of the meeting. Those who plan
permit the use of an antitheft device Lanita.VanDyke@irs.gov. to attend or wish additional information
similar to but differing from the one SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice should contact Dr. Grant Huang, Acting
specified in that exemption.’’ and request for comments that appeared Director, Cooperative Studies Program
The agency wishes to minimize the in the Federal Register on Monday, (10P9CS), Department of Veterans
administrative burden that Part August 28, 2017 (82 FR 40228) Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW.,
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted announced that written comments are to Washington, DC 20420, at (202) 443–
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:13 Oct 18, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM 19OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_48945/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2017-10-19 02:56:36
Document Modified: 2017-10-19 02:56:36
| 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 applicable beginning with the 2019 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 48744 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR