Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc. |
|---|
Topics: Kia Niro
|
Raymond R. Posten
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
11 May 2017
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 90 (Thursday, May 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22048-22050]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09515]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, 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 Hyundai-Kia America Technical
Center, Inc.'s (HATCI) petition for exemption of the MY 2018 Kia Niro
vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the
Theft
[[Page 22049]]
Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has
determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). Hyundai 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, International
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West Building, W43-
439,1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's
phone number is (202) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated January 22, 2017,
Hyundai requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of
the Theft Prevention Standard for its Kia Niro 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, Hyundai provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for its Kia Niro vehicle line. Hyundai stated that the MY 2018
Kia Niro will include both hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) and plug in
hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) models in its vehicle line. Hyundai also
stated that the Kia Niro will be installed with an immobilizer device
as standard equipment on the entire vehicle line. Hyundai further
stated that it will offer two types of antitheft immobilizer systems on
its vehicle line. Specifically, Hyundai stated that its vehicle line
will be equipped with either a smart-key type of immobilizer system
(with alarm) or a transponder key type of immobilizer system (with
alarm) as standard equipment. Key components of the smart-key
immobilizer system are an engine control unit/engine management system
(EMS), vehicle control unit (VCU), smart-key unit (SMK), FOB smart-key,
and a low frequency antenna (LF). Key components of the transponder
immobilizer system are an engine control unit/engine management system
(EMS), FOB folding key, immobilizer control unit, and an antenna coil.
Hyundai further stated that it will also offer an audible and visual
alarm system as standard equipment on the vehicle line.
Hyundai'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 Sec. 543.6,
Hyundai provided information on the reliability and durability of the
device. Hyundai conducted and completed component tests for both
antitheft immobilizer systems in accordance with the UNECE R-116.00,
UNECE R-10.04, Korean standards 41.5.1, 41.5.2, 41.5.3, and Hyundai in-
house standards TDP Electronic 02-02-14 and 02-03-25. Hyundai reported
that all testing met its standard requirements. Hyundai also stated
that its smart-key immobilizer system is a push button system that
starts or stops the engine through an encrypted authentication and
authorization process of communication between the FOB smart-key and
the SMK. Hyundai stated that the SMK manages all functions related to
the communication between the start/stop button, the FOB key and the
VCU or EMS. The SMK communicates with the FOB smart-key by generating
an encrypted request as a modulated low frequency signal that the LF
antenna outputs to the FOB smart-key. Hyundai stated that when the two
encoded keys coincide with each other, the vehicle can be started,
stopped, and operated in accessory mode. Activation of the smart-key
immobilizer system occurs when the start/stop button is pushed to the
``OFF'' status and when the electronic key code of the FOB key is
removed from the smart-key immobilizer control unit or from the
vehicle.
According to Hyundai, the smart-key immobilizer system allows the
driver/operator to access and operate the vehicle by using a valid FOB
key. No other actions by a mechanical key or a remote control unit are
required. Hyundai stated that if a valid FOB key is in the range
defined by this device, the device will automatically detect and
authenticate the FOB via wireless communication between the FOB key and
the smart-key immobilizer unit. If communication is authenticated, the
device will allow passive accessibility to the doors and/or trunk, and/
or passive locking of all the doors. The audible and visual alarm
system is also automatically activated when the FOB key is removed from
the smart-key immobilizer control unit, all vehicle doors and the hood
are closed, and all the doors are locked. If the device is armed and
unauthorized entry is attempted, the vehicle's horn will sound and the
hazard lamps will flash.
Hyundai stated that its transponder key immobilizer system is a FOB
key immobilizer system that starts or stops the engine through an
encrypted authorization process between the FOB key, the immobilizer,
and the EMS. Hyundai stated that the system enables the start and stop
of the vehicle by insertion of a key into the ignition. Activation of
the device occurs when the ignition switch is turned to the ``OFF''
position. Deactivation occurs when the ignition key is turned to the
``ON'' position. The transponder in the FOB key transmits an ID code to
the immobilizer unit via the immobilizer coil; the EMS then transmits a
question code to the immobilizer unit using a serial line. The
immobilizer unit then transmits the answer code it received from the
FOB key to the EMS. If the key is validated, the EMS enables the engine
to start or prevents the engine from starting if the key is not
validated.
In support of its petition, Hyundai referenced a JP Research Report
on the ``Effectiveness of Parts-Marking and Antitheft Devices in
inhibiting Auto Theft,'' which looked at the relative effectiveness of
parts-marking and antitheft devices. The study concluded that for the
24 model lines used in its analysis, antitheft devices were 70% more
effective than parts-marking in deterring theft. Based on the report,
Hyundai also referenced the theft rates of other manufacturers' vehicle
lines, i.e., the Lincoln Town Car, Mazda MX-5 Miata, Mercedes-Benz
E210, and the Mazda 3, that were exempted from the theft prevention
standard. Hyundai stated that it believes the report showed that the
installation of antitheft devices is at least as effective as complying
with parts-marking requirements in reducing and deterring vehicle
thefts. The theft rates for these lines using an average of three model
years' data (2011-2013) are 1.0557, 0.2148, 0.9883, and 1.3535
respectively.
Based on the evidence submitted by Hyundai, the agency believes
that the antitheft device for the Kia Niro vehicle line is likely to be
as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle
[[Page 22050]]
theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). The agency concludes that the device
will provide the five types of performance listed in Sec. 543.6(a)(3):
Promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of
unauthorized persons to enter or operate 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 exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
supporting evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Hyundai has provided adequate reasons for its belief that
the antitheft device for the Hyundai Kia Niro 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
Hyundai provided about its device.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Hyundai's petition for an exemption for the Kia Niro vehicle line from
the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541 beginning with the
2018 model year. 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 with respect 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 Hyundai decides not to use the exemption for this vehicle line,
it must formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the
vehicle 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 Hyundai 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. 2017-09515 Filed 5-10-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P