25534 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 

consists of a one-paragraph description 

of the experiment and the eligibility 

requirements, along with a reply button 

that connects respondents to the 

eligibility questionnaire. Typically, 

more persons apply than are needed. 

Staff members from the Age Lab then 

contact applicants individually by email 

to match them with available time slots. 

For these experiments, the subject pool 

will be balanced across age and gender. 

About two-thirds of the subjects will be 

naı ̈ve to cars with keyless ignition 

systems, while one-third will be owners 

of vehicles with keyless ignitions 

systems. 

For evaluation of auditory warnings to 

prevent vehicle roll-away, a very short 

test (one response per subject) is 

proposed. This testing will be 

conducted in stationary vehicles in 

public parking lots using a convenience 

sample drawn from passers-by. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

∼135 for keyless/PRNDL experiment. 

∼240 for roll-away warning experiment. 

Estimated Number of Responses: One 

response per respondent to 7 to 10 

questions 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 

Three minutes per respondent to 

consider and respond to recruiting 

questions (18.75 hours total for number 

of respondents needed for study, but a 

substantially larger and unknown 

number may respond). 

Estimated Frequency: One time 

Public Comments Invited: You are 

asked to comment on any aspect of this 

information collection, including (a) 

Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the 

Department’s performance, (b) the 

accuracy of the estimated burden, (c) 

ways for the Department to enhance the 

quality, utility and clarity of the 

information collection and (d) ways that 

the burden could be minimized without 

reducing the quality of the collected 

information. The agency will summarize 

and/or include your comments in the 

request for OMB’s clearance of this 

information collection. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended; 

and 49 CFR 1:48. 

Issued on: April 24, 2012. 

Christopher J. Bonanti, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10300 Filed 4–27–12; 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; General Motors 

Corporation 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. 

SUMMARY: This document grants in full 

the petition of General Motors 

Corporation (GM) for an exemption of 

the Buick Verano 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 the 

2013 model year (MY). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Carlita Ballard, Office of International 

Policy, Fuel Economy, and Consumer 

Standards, NHTSA, 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 February 3, 2012, GM 

requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the theft 

prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) 

for the Buick Verano vehicle line 

beginning with MY 2013. 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, GM provided a detailed 

description and diagram of the identity, 

design and location of the components 

of the antitheft device for the Buick 

Verano vehicle line. GM will install a 

passive, transponder-based, electronic 

immobilizer device (PASS-Key III+) as 

standard equipment on its Buick Verano 

vehicle line beginning with MY 2013. 

GM stated that the device will provide 

protection against unauthorized use 

(i.e., starting and engine fueling), but 

will not provide any visible or audible 

indication of unauthorized vehicle entry 

(i.e., flashing lights or horn alarm). GM 

stated that it will also offer a keyless 

ignition version of the PASS-Key III+ as 

optional equipment for the vehicle line. 

The PASS-Key III+ device is designed 

to be active at all times without direct 

intervention by the vehicle operator. 

The device is fully armed immediately 

after the ignition has been turned off 

and the key removed. Components of 

the antitheft device include an 

electronically-coded ignition key, an 

antenna module, a controller module 

and a engine control module. The 

ignition key contains electronics 

molded into the key head, providing 

billions of possible electronic 

combinations. The electronics receive 

energy and data from the antenna 

module. Upon receipt of the data, the 

key will calculate a response using an 

internal encryption algorithm and 

transmit the response back to the 

vehicle. The antenna module translates 

the radio frequency signal received from 

the key into a digital signal and 

compares the received response to an 

internally calculated value. If the values 

match, the key is recognized as valid, 

and a password is then transmitted 

through a serial data link to the engine 

control module to enable fueling and 

vehicle starting. If an invalid key code 

is received, the PASS-Key III+ controller 

module will send a ‘‘Disable Password’’ 

to the engine control module and 

starting, ignition and fuel will be 

inhibited. 

In addressing the specific content 

requirements of 543.6, GM provided 

information on the reliability and 

durability of its proposed device. To 

ensure reliability and durability of the 

device, GM conducted tests based on its 

own specified standards. GM provided 

a detailed list of the tests conducted to 

validate the device’s integrity, durability 

and reliability, and stated that after each 

test, the components on the device must 

operate as designed. GM also stated that 

the design and assembly processes of 

the device and its components are 

validated for vehicle life and of 

performance. 

GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ 

device has been designed to enhance the 

functionality and theft protection 

provided by its first, second and third 

generation PASS-Key, PASS-Key II and 

PASS-Key III devices. GM also 

referenced data provided by the 

American Automobile Manufacturers 

Association (AAMA) in support of the 

effectiveness of GM’s PASS-Key devices 

in reducing and deterring motor vehicle 

theft. The AAMA’s comments to the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 83 / Monday, April 30, 2012 / Notices 25535 

agency’s Preliminary Report on ‘‘Auto 

Theft and Recovery Effects of the AntiCar Theft Act of 1992 and the Motor 

Vehicle Theft Law Enforcement Act of 

1984’’, (Docket 97–042; Notice 1), 

showed that between MYs 1987 and 

1993, the Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac 

Firebird vehicle lines experienced a 

significant theft rate reduction after 

installation of a Pass-Key like antitheft 

device as standard equipment on the 

vehicle lines. 

GM also stated that the theft data, as 

provided by the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation’s National Crime 

Information Center (NCIC) and 

compiled by the agency, show that theft 

rates are lower for exempted GM models 

equipped with the PASS-Key systems 

than the theft rates for earlier models 

with similar appearance and 

construction. Based on the performance 

of the PASS-Key, PASS-Key II and 

PASS-Key III devices on other GM 

models, and the advanced technology 

utilized in PASS-Key III+ and the 

Keyless Access Device, GM believes that 

these devices will be more effective in 

deterring theft than the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR part 541. 

Additionally, GM stated that the 

PASS-Key III+ is installed as standard 

equipment on the Cadillac CTS vehicle 

line. GM was granted an exemption 

from the parts-marking requirements by 

the agency for the Cadillac CTS vehicle 

line beginning with the 2011 MY (See 

74 FR 62385, November 27, 2009). The 

average theft rate using 3 MYs theft data 

(MYs 2007–2009) provided by the 

agency for the Cadillac CTS vehicle line 

is 1.5882. 

GM believes that these devices will be 

more effective in deterring theft than the 

parts-marking requirements and that the 

agency should find that inclusion of the 

PASS-Key III+ device on the Buick 

Verano vehicle line is sufficient to 

qualify it for full exemption from the 

parts-marking requirements. 

GM’s proposed device lacks an 

audible or visible alarm. Therefore, this 

device cannot perform one of the 

functions listed in 49 CFR 543.6(a)(3), 

that is, to call attention to unauthorized 

attempts to enter or move the vehicle. 

Based on comparison of the reduction in 

the theft rates of Chevrolet Corvettes 

using a passive theft deterrent system 

along with an audible/visible alarm 

system to the reduction in theft rates for 

the Chevrolet Camaro and the Pontiac 

Firebird models equipped with a 

passive theft deterrent device without 

an alarm, GM finds that the lack of an 

alarm or attention-attracting device does 

not compromise the theft deterrent 

performance of a device such as PASSKey III+ system. Theft data have 

indicated a decline in theft rates for 

vehicle lines equipped with comparable 

devices that have received full 

exemptions from the parts-marking 

requirements. In these instances, the 

agency has concluded that the lack of an 

audible or visible alarm has not 

prevented these antitheft devices from 

being effective protection against theft. 

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 GM has provided adequate 

reasons for its belief that the antitheft 

device for the Buick Verano 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 

GM 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. 

Based on the evidence submitted by 

GM, the agency believes that the 

antitheft device for the Buick Verano 

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). 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full GM’s petition for 

exemption for the Buick Verano vehicle 

line from the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR part 541, 

beginning with the 2013 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 GM decides not to use the 

exemption for this line, it shall 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 GM 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 § 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: April 24, 2012. 

Christopher J. Bonanti, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10301 Filed 4–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Fiscal Service 

Surety Companies Acceptable On 

Federal Bonds: Pacific Employers 

Insurance Company 

AGENCY: Financial Management Service, 

Fiscal Service, Department of the 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 18 to 

the Treasury Department Circular 570, 

2011 Revision, published July 1, 2011, 

at 76 FR 38892. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874–6850. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES