Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2011 / Notices 12221 

the parts-marking requirements of the 

Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 

CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a 

petition for exemption from the partsmarking 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 Land Rover has provided 

adequate reasons for its belief that the 

antitheft device for the Range Rover 

Evoque 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 Land Rover provided about 

its device. 

The agency concludes that the device 

will provide the five types of 

performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): 

Promoting activation; attracting 

attention to the efforts of an 

unauthorized person to enter or move 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. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full Land Rover’s 

petition for exemption for the Range 

Rover Evoque 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 anti-theft 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 Land Rover decides not to use the 

exemption for this line, it should 

formally notify the agency. If such a 

decision is made, the line must be fully 

marked according to the requirements 

under 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking 

of major component parts and 

replacement parts). 

NHTSA notes that if Land Rover 

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 § 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: March 1, 2011. 

Joseph S. Carra, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2011–4952 Filed 3–3–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Petition for Exemption From the 

Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft 

Prevention Standard; Toyota 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. 

SUMMARY: This document grants in full 

the petition of Toyota Motor North 

America, Inc’s., (Toyota) petition for an 

exemption of the Corolla 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 

Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 

541). 

DATES: The exemption granted by this 

notice is effective beginning with model 

year (MY) 2012. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Deborah Mazyck, Office of International 

Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer 

Standards, NHTSA, W43–443, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck’s phone number 

is (202) 366–4139. Her fax number is 

(202) 493–2990. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

petition dated January 24, 2011, Toyota 

requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the theft 

prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) 

for the Toyota Corolla vehicle line 

beginning with MY 2012. The petition 

requested an exemption from partsmarking 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 § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may 

petition NHTSA to grant an exemption 

for one vehicle line per model year. In 

its petition, Toyota provided a detailed 

description and diagram of the identity, 

design, and location of the components 

of the antitheft device for the Corolla 

vehicle line. Toyota will install a 

passive, transponder-based, electronic 

engine immobilizer device as standard 

equipment on its Corolla vehicle line 

beginning with MY 2012. 

Key components of the antitheft 

device include an engine immobilizer, 

transponder key electronic control unit 

(ECE), assembly, transponder key 

amplifier, security indicator, ignition 

key and Electronic control module 

(ECM). The device’s security indicators 

provide the status of the immobilizer to 

users and others inside/outside the 

vehicle. When the immobilizer is 

activated, the indicator flashes 

continuously. When the immobilizer is 

not activated, the indicator is turned off. 

The antitheft device does not 

incorporate an audible or visual alarm 

as standard equipment. Toyota’s 

submission is considered a complete 

petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7 in 

that it meets the general requirements 

contained in 543.5 and the specific 

content requirements of 543.6. 

Toyota stated that the immobilizer is 

activated when the ignition key is 

turned from the ‘‘ON’’ position and/or 

removed from the vehicle’s ignition. 

The device is deactivated when the 

‘‘conventional key’’ is inserted into the 

key cylinder and turned toward the 

‘‘ON’’ position. Toyota stated that after 

the key is inserted into the key cylinder, 

the transponder chip in the key sends 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
12222 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2011 / Notices 

the ID codes to the Transponder Key 

ECU assembly to verify the code. When 

the key code has been verified, the 

immobilizer allows the ECM to start the 

engine. 

Toyota also stated that there will be 

position switches installed in the 

vehicle to protect the hood and doors. 

The sensors will trigger the antitheft 

device when it detects inappropriate 

opening of the hood (i.e., from outside 

the vehicle, instead of using the interior 

release) and inappropriate opening of 

the door (i.e., when the doors are 

opened without using a key or wireless 

switch/key FOB). 

In addressing the specific content 

requirements of 543.6, Toyota provided 

information on the reliability and 

durability of its proposed device. To 

ensure reliability and durability of the 

device, Toyota conducted tests based on 

its own specified standards. Toyota 

provided a detailed list of the tests 

conducted (i.e., high and low 

temperature, strength, impact, vibration, 

electro-magnetic interference, etc.). 

Toyota stated that it believes that its 

device is reliable and durable because it 

complied with its own specific design 

standards and it is installed in other 

vehicle lines for which the agency has 

granted a parts-marking exemption. 

Additionally, Toyota stated that there 

are approximately 20,000 combinations 

for the key cylinders and key plates for 

its outer gutter keys and approximately 

10,000 for its inner gutter keys, making 

it very difficult to unlock the doors 

without valid keys. 

Toyota informed the agency that its 

Corolla vehicle line has been equipped 

with the device beginning with its MY 

2005 vehicles. Toyota referenced 

NHTSA published theft rate data for 

several years before and after the Corolla 

vehicle line was equipped with a 

standard immobilizer. Toyota stated that 

the average theft rate for the Corolla 

dropped to 2.1 per 1,000 cars produced 

between MYs 2005–2008 (with a 

standard immobilizer) from 4.0 per 

1,000 cars produced between MYs 

1996–1999 (without a standard 

immobilizer). Toyota stated that this 

represents approximately a 47.5% 

decrease in the theft rate with 

installation of a standard immobilizer 

for the Toyota Corolla vehicle line when 

compared to the average for the Corolla 

when it was parts marked. Toyota 

believes that installing the immobilizer 

as standard equipment reduces the theft 

rate and therefore would be more 

effective than parts-marking labels. 

Toyota also revealed that the Toyota 

Camry and Lexus LS and GS vehicle 

lines have all been granted partsmarking exemptions by the agency. The 

theft rates for the Toyota Camry and 

Lexus LS and GS vehicle lines using an 

average of three model years data are 

1.6742, 1.3567 and 1.0961 respectively. 

Therefore, Toyota has concluded that 

the antitheft device proposed for its 

vehicle line is no less effective than 

those devices in the lines for which 

NHTSA has already granted full 

exemption from the parts-marking 

requirements. 

Based on the evidence submitted by 

Toyota, the agency believes that the 

antitheft device for the Corolla vehicle 

line is likely to be as effective in 

reducing and deterring motor vehicle 

theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 

CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants a 

petition for exemption from the partsmarking 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 Toyota has provided adequate 

reasons for its belief that the antitheft 

device for the Toyota Corolla vehicle 

line is likely to be as effective in 

reducing and deterring motor vehicle 

theft as compliance with the partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). 

This conclusion is based on the 

information Toyota provided about its 

device. 

The agency concludes that the device 

will provide four or five of the types of 

performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): 

Promoting activation; attract attention to 

the efforts of an unauthorized person to 

enter or move 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 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full Toyota’s petition 

for exemption for the Toyota Corolla 

vehicle line from the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR part 541, 

beginning with the 2012 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 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 Toyota decides not to use the 

exemption for this line, it should 

formally notify the agency. If such a 

decision is made, the line must be fully 

marked according to the requirements 

under 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking 

of major component parts and 

replacement parts). 

NHTSA notes that if Toyota 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 § 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: March 1, 2011. 

Joseph S. Carra, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2011–4951 Filed 3–3–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[Docket No. AB 303 (Sub-No. 37X)] 

Wisconsin Central, Ltd.— 

Abandonment Exemption—in 

Marathon County, WI 

Wisconsin Central, Ltd. (WCL), filed a 

verified notice of exemption under 49 

CFR part 1152 subpart F–Exempt 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES