16472 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Reports, Forms and Record Keeping 

Requirements; Agency Information 

Collection Activity Under OMB Review 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice 

announces that the Information 

Collection Request (ICR) abstracted 

below has been forwarded to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and comment. The ICR describes 

the nature of the information collections 

and their expected burden. The Federal 

Register Notice with a 60-day comment 

period was published on September 3, 

2010 [FR Doc. 2010–22008]. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before April 22, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: KilJae Hong, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., W52–232, NPO–520, 

Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Hong’s 

telephone number is (202) 493–0524 

and e-mail address is kiljae.hong@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Title: 49 CFR 575—Consumer 

Information Regulations (sections 103 

and 105) Qualitative Research. 

OMB Number: Not Assigned. 

Type of Request: Request for public 

comment on collection of information 

request. 

Abstract: The Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), 

enacted in December 2007, included a 

requirement that the National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

develop a consumer information and 

education campaign to improve 

consumer understanding of automobile 

performance with regard to fuel 

economy, Greenhouse Gases (GHG) 

emissions and other pollutant 

emissions; of automobile use of 

alternative fuels; and of thermal 

management technologies used on 

automobiles to save fuel. A critical step 

in developing the consumer information 

program is to conduct proper market 

research to understand consumers’ 

knowledge surrounding these issues, 

evaluate potential consumer-facing 

messages in terms of clarity and 

understand the communications 

channels in which these messages 

should be present. The research will 

allow NHTSA to refine messaging to 

enhance comprehension and usefulness 

and will guide the development of an 

effective communications plan. NHTSA 

proposes a multi-phased research 

project to gather the data and apply 

analyses and results from the project to 

develop the consumer information 

program and education campaign. 

Affected Public: Passenger vehicle 

consumers. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 128. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments, within 30 

days, to the Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, 725–17th 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, 

Attention NHTSA Desk Officer. 

Comments are invited on: Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Department, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; the accuracy of 

the Departments estimate of the burden 

of the proposed information collection; 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

A Comment to OMB is most effective if 

OMB receives it within 30 days of 

publication. 

Gregory A. Walter, 

Senior Associate Administrator, Policy and 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6849 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket NHTSA–2010–00062] 

Consumer Information; Program for 

Child Restraint Systems; Correction 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Request for comments; 

correction. 

SUMMARY: NHTSA published in the 

Federal Register of February 25, 2011 a 

request for comments notice detailing 

observations from an agency pilot study 

conducted to determine reasonable 

conditions for participation in a new 

consumer information program, as part 

of the New Car Assessment Program, to 

help caregivers find a child restraint 

system (‘‘child safety seat’’) that fits their 

vehicle. This document corrects the 

public comments submission due date. 

DATES: Comments should be submitted 

early enough to ensure that they are 

received no later than April 26, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

non-legal issues related to the VehicleChild Restraint System (CRS) Fit 

program, you may contact Ms. Jennifer 

N. Dang, Office of Crashworthiness 

Standards (Telephone: 202–493–0598). 

For legal issues, you may contact Ms. 

Deirdre Fujita, Office of Chief Counsel 

(Telephone: 202–366–2992). You may 

send mail to these officials at the 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., West Building, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NHTSA 

published in the Federal Register of 

February 25, 2011 (76 FR 10637), a 

request for comments notice describing 

the new consumer information program 

that will help caregivers find a child 

restraint system that fits their vehicle. In 

that document, on page 10637, in the 

DATES section, it states that ‘‘comments 

should be submitted early enough to 

ensure that they are received no later 

than March 28, 2011.’’ In that section, 

change the date from ‘‘March 28, 2011’’ 

to ‘‘April 26, 2011.’’ 

Issued on: March 17, 2011. 

Joseph S. Carra, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6729 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

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 C–MAX 

vehicle line in accordance with 

§ 543.9(c)(2) of 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 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices 16473 

the parts-marking requirements of the 

Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 

541). Ford requested confidential 

treatment for an attachment it submitted 

in support of its petition. The agency 

has addressed Ford’s request for 

confidential treatment by letter dated 

March 1, 2011. 

DATES: The exemption granted by this 

notice is effective beginning with the 

2013 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) 

366–5222. Her fax number is (202) 493– 

2990. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

petition dated January 25, 2011, Ford 

requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) 

for the MY 2013 Ford C–MAX 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 § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may 

petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for 

one vehicle line per model year. 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 C–MAX 

vehicle line. Ford will install its Passive 

Antitheft Electronic Immobilizer System 

(PATS) on the 2013 C–MAX as standard 

equipment. Ford stated that it will also 

offer its Intelligent Access with Push 

Button Start (IAwPB) antitheft device as 

optional equipment. Ford stated that 

both systems are passive, electronic 

immobilizer devices that use encrypted 

transponder technology with 28 trillion 

different possible electronic key codes 

for the PATS system and 400 million 

different possible electronic key codes 

for the IAwPB system. Key components 

of the PATS antitheft device will 

include an electronic transponder key, 

transceiver module, ignition lock, and a 

passive immobilizer. Key components of 

the IAwPB device is an electronic 

keyfob, remote function actuator, body 

control module, power train control 

module and a passive immobilizer. Ford 

stated that its MY 2013 C–MAX vehicle 

line will also be equipped with several 

other standard antitheft features 

common to Ford vehicles, (i.e., 

counterfeit resistant VIN labels; 

secondary VINs, hood release inside 

vehicle, and cabin accessibility through 

the use of a valid key fob or keycode). 

Ford further stated that its C–MAX 

vehicles will also be available with an 

optional perimeter alarm system. The 

perimeter alarm system will utilize both 

an audible and visible 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 § 543.5 and 

the specific content requirements of 

§ 543.6. 

Ford stated that the devices 

integration of the transponder into the 

normal operation of the ignition key 

assures activation of the system. Ford 

further stated that both devices are 

always active and require no other 

operator action. Specifically, in the 

PATS device, when the ignition key is 

turned to the ‘‘start’’ position, the 

transceiver module reads the ignition 

key code and transmits an encrypted 

message from the keycode to the control 

module, which then determines key 

validity and authorizes engine starting 

by sending a separate encrypted 

message to the powertrain control 

module (PCM). In the IAwPB device, 

when the ‘‘startstop’’ button is pressed, 

the transceiver module reads the key 

code and transmits an encrypted 

message from the keycode to the control 

module to determine validity and 

authorizes engine starting by sending a 

separate encrypted message to the body 

control module, the PEP/RFA module 

and the PCM. Ford pointed out that in 

addition to the programmed key, the 

three modules that must be matched to 

start the vehicle adds even an additional 

level of security to the IAwPB device. In 

both devices, if the codes do not match, 

the vehicle will be inoperable. 

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 compared the device proposed 

for its vehicle line with other devices 

which NHTSA has determined to be as 

effective in reducing and deterring 

motor vehicle theft as would 

compliance with the parts-marking 

requirements. Ford stated that it 

believes that the standard installation of 

either the PATS device or the IAwPB 

device would be an effective deterrent 

against vehicle theft. 

Ford stated that it installed the PATS 

device on all MY 1996 Ford Mustang GT 

and Cobra models as standard 

equipment. Ford also stated that the 

PATS device was extended to the 

complete Ford Mustang vehicle line as 

standard equipment in MY 1997. Ford 

also stated that according to the 

National Insurance Crime Bureau 

(NICB) theft statistics, MY 1997 

Mustangs installed with the PATS 

device showed a 70% reduction in theft 

rate when compared to MY 1995 

Mustangs. Ford also stated that the 

PATS device is currently offered as 

standard equipment on most of its North 

American Ford, Lincoln and Mercury 

vehicles but is offered as optional 

equipment on its F-series Super Duty 

pickups, Econoline and Transit Connect 

vehicle. Ford stated that beginning with 

MY 2011, the IAwPB device will also be 

offered as standard equipment on the 

Lincoln MKT and optionally on the 

Lincoln MKS, MKX, Ford Taurus, Edge, 

Explorer, Focus and Fiesta vehicles. 

Ford referenced the agency’s 

published theft rate data for the Volvo 

S60 for comparison purposes because it 

stated that the Ford C–MAX is a new 

vehicle and would utilize the PATS and 

IAwPB systems that would be similar to 

the Volvo S60 in design and 

architecture. Ford stated that the Volvo 

S60’s theft rate is lower than the vehicle 

theft rate for all vehicles in four of the 

last five calendar years for which 

published data is available. Specifically, 

the agency’s data show that theft rates 

for the Volvo S60 for MYs 2006–2008 

are 1.3803, 0.6907 and 2.3543 

respectively. Using an average of 3 MYs 

data (2006–2008), the theft rate for the 

Volvo S60 vehicle line is well below the 

median at 1.4751. Ford stated that since 

either the PATS device or the IAwPB 

device are the primary theft devices on 

Ford C–MAX vehicles, it believes that 

theft rates similar to Volvo S60 are 

likely to continue or improve in the 

future. 

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 C–MAX 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 partsmarking requirements of Part 541 either 

in whole or in part, if it determines that, 

based upon substantial evidence, the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
16474 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 23, 2011 / Notices 

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 C–MAX 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 § 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 C–MAX 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 partsmarking 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 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. Section 

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 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: March 17, 2011. 

Joseph S. Carra, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6724 Filed 3–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 296X)] 

Union Pacific Railroad Company— 

Abandonment Exemption—in 

Riverside and San Bernardino 

Counties, CA 

On March 3, 2011, Union Pacific 

Railroad Company (UP) filed with the 

Surface Transportation Board (Board) a 

petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502 for 

exemption from the prior approval 

requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10903 to 

abandon 2 segments, totaling 5.0 miles, 

of the Riverside Industrial Lead in 

Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, 

Cal. The northern segment begins at 

milepost 540.15 near Colton and ends at 

milepost 543.88 near Riverside (North 

Segment), a distance of 3.73 miles, of 

which 2.27 miles are in San Bernardino 

County and 1.46 miles are in Riverside 

County. The southern segment begins at 

milepost 544.56 and extends to the end 

of the line at milepost 545.83 (South 

Segment), a distance of 1.27 miles in 

Riverside County (both segments 

collectively referred to as the Line). The 

Line traverses United States Postal 

Service Zip Codes 92324, 92313, 92507, 

and 92506. 

In addition to an exemption from the 

prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 

10903, UP seeks exemption from 49 

U.S.C. 10904 (offer of financial 

assistance (OFA) procedures) and 49 

U.S.C. 10905 (public use conditions). In 

support, UP contends that exemption 

from these provisions is necessary to 

ensure that a portion of the underlying 

right-of-way will be available for 

conveyance to the California State Road 

Authority for its Interstate 215 Project. 

Further, UP states that exemption from 

these provisions will allow the 

Interstate 215 Project to avoid costs 

associated with building a replacement 

bridge on the North Segment of the 

Line. These requests will be addressed 

in the final decision. 

UP is not seeking authority to 

abandon the portion of the Riverside 

Industrial Lead between the North 

Segment and the South Segment (from 

milepost 543.88 to milepost 544.56), a 

distance of .68 miles (the Remaining 

Segment). UP states that the Remaining 

Segment will still be part of the UP 

railroad system and will continue to 

serve the shippers on the Remaining 

Segment with BNSF Railway (BNSF) 

providing service via a haulage 

agreement and trackage rights, over a 

connection to be constructed between 

the Remaining Segment and a line of 

railroad owned by the Riverside County 

Transportation Commission. UP will 

remain the primary railroad obligated to 

serve the Remaining Segment. 

The Line does not contain Federally 

granted rights-of-way. Any 

documentation in UP’s possession will 

be made available promptly to those 

requesting it. 

The interest of railroad employees 

will be protected by the conditions set 

forth in Oregon Short Line— 

Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch 

Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & 

Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. 

91 (1979). 

By issuance of this notice, the Board 

is instituting an exemption proceeding 

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final 

decision will be issued by June 21, 

2011. 

Any OFA under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) 

will be due no later than 10 days after 

service of a decision granting the 

petition for exemption. Each OFA must 

be accompanied by a $1,500 filing fee. 

See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25). 

All interested persons should be 

aware that, following abandonment of 

rail service and salvage of the Line, the 

Line may be suitable for other public 

use, including interim trail use. Any 

request for a public use condition under 

49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail 

banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be 

due no later than April 12, 2011. Each 

trail request must be accompanied by a 

$250 filing fee. See 49 CFR 

1002.2(f)(27). 

All filings in response to this notice 

must refer to Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 

296X), and must be sent to: (1) Surface 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES