Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Ford Motor Company |
|---|
Topics: Ford Fusion
|
Joseph S. Carra
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
January 13, 2011
[Federal Register: January 13, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2444-2445]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13ja11-133]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Ford Motor Company
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Ford Motor Company's (Ford)
petition for an exemption of the Fusion 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 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 49 CFR Part
541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2012 model year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's telephone
number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated September 21, 2010, Ford
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the MY 2012 Ford Fusion
vehicle line. 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 an entire vehicle line.
Under Sec. 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
exemptions for one vehicle line per model year. Ford has petitioned the
agency to grant an exemption for its Fusion vehicle line beginning with
MY 2012. In its petition, Ford provided a detailed description and
diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of the
antitheft device for the Fusion vehicle line. Ford will install its
``SecuriLock'' passive transponder-based electronic immobilizer
antitheft device as standard equipment on the vehicle line. Features of
the antitheft device will include an electronic key, ignition lock, and
a passive immobilizer. Ford stated that since it's MY 2006
introduction, the Fusion has been equipped with the ``SecuriLock''
device as standard equipment. The device does not incorporate an
audible or visual alarm as standard equipment however, Ford stated that
the Fusion vehicles will come equipped with a separate perimeter alarm
system that utilizes both a visible and audible alarm if unauthorized
access is attempted. Ford'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.
Ford stated that the devices integration of the transponder into
the normal operation of the ignition key assures activation of the
system. When the ignition key is turned to the ``start'' position, the
transceiver module reads the ignition key code and transmits an
encrypted message to the cluster. Validation of the key is determined
and start of the engine is authorized once a separate encrypted message
is sent to the powertrain control module/transmission control module
(PCM/TCM). The powertrain will function only if the key code matches
the unique identification key code previously programmed into the PCM.
If the codes do not match, the engine starter, ignition and fuel
systems will be disabled. Ford stated that the device functions
automatically each time an engine start sequence occurs. Therefore, no
owner/operator actions are required to deactivate the device.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Ford
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Ford
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Ford 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.
Ford stated that incorporation of several features in both devices
further support reliability and durability of the device. Specifically,
some of those features include: encrypted communication between the
transponder, control function and the power train control module; no
moving parts; inability to mechanically override the device to start
the vehicle; and the body control module/remote function actuator and
the power train control module share security data that form matched
modules during vehicle assembly that if separated from each other will
not function in other vehicles. Ford stated that the Fusion will be
equipped with several other standard antitheft features (i.e., a hood
release, counterfeit resistant VIN plates, secondary VINs inscribed on
the body, and an exterior key lock that will be located only on the
driver door to limit cabin access). Ford also stated that the device's
encrypted transponder technology will make key duplication virtually
impossible.
Additionally, Ford noted that with the prevalence of electronic
engine immobilizer systems on nearly all new
[[Page 2445]]
retail vehicles, the overall theft rates have been decreasing and the
theft rate for the Fusion vehicles have remained very close to the
overall theft rate trend. Specifically, the agency's data show that
theft rates for the Fusion for MYs 2006-2008 are 1.7314, 1.8161 and
1.8797 respectively. Using an average of 3 MYs data (2006-2008), the
theft rate for the Fusion vehicle line is well below the median at
1.8090.
Ford compared the effectiveness of its antitheft device with
devices which NHTSA has previously determined to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of Part 541. Specifically, Ford provided
information on the reduction in the theft rate for other vehicle lines
equipped with the ``SecuriLock'' device. Ford's ``SecuriLock'' device
was first introduced as standard equipment on it's MY 1996 Mustang GT
and Cobra vehicle lines. The ``SecuriLock'' system was installed on the
entire Mustang vehicle line as standard equipment in MY 1997. Ford also
stated that the ``SecuriLock'' device has been installed as standard
equipment on all North American Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles
except for the F-Super Duty, Econoline and Crown Victoria Police
Interceptor vehicles. Ford stated that according to National Insurance
Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics, the 1997 model year Mustang with
``SecuriLock'' showed a 70% reduction in theft compared to its MY 1995
Mustang vehicles. Comparatively, Ford stated that there were 149 thefts
reported in 1997 and 500 thefts reported in 1995. Ford also stated that
the proposed device is very similar in design and implementation to the
device offered on the Ford Escape vehicle line. The agency granted
Ford's petition for exemption for the Escape vehicle line on April 18,
2008. Ford stated that it believes that the standard installation of
the ``SecuriLock'' device on the Fusion vehicle line would be an
effective deterrent against vehicle theft and that the low theft rate
experienced by the line in CY 2008 is likely to continue or improve in
future years.
The agency agrees that the device is substantially similar to
devices in other vehicle lines for which the agency has already granted
exemptions. Based on the evidence submitted by Ford, the agency
believes that the antitheft device for the Fusion 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).
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 Ford has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Ford Fusion 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 Ford
provided about its device.
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.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Ford's
petition for exemption for the Fusion 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 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 Ford 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 Ford 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.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.
Issued on: January 7, 2011.
Joseph S. Carra,
Acting, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011-567 Filed 1-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P