Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Notices 71185 

DDE and EWS (CAS control modules). 

The DME/DDE must identify the release 

signal and only then will the ignition 

signal and fuel supply be released. 

Additionally, BMW stated that the 

mechanical keys for the Carline X1 are 

unique. A special key blank, a special 

key cutting machine and the vehicle’s 

unique code are needed to duplicate a 

key. BMW stated that new keys will 

only be issued to authorized persons. 

BMW stated that the proposed 

antitheft device does not provide any 

visible or audible indication of 

unauthorized entry. BMW asserts that 

theft data have indicated a decline in 

theft rates for vehicle lines that have 

been equipped with antitheft devices 

similar to that which it proposes to 

install on the Carline X1 line. 

BMW 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. The antitheft 

device that BMW intends to install on 

its Carline X1 vehicle line for MY 2012 

is the same device that BMW installed 

on its BMW X3 and X5 vehicle lines, 

and its Carline 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, Z4, and MINI 

vehicle lines. BMW has concluded that 

the antitheft device proposed for the 

Carline X1 vehicle line is no less 

effective than those devices and similar 

devices for which NHTSA has already 

been granted exemptions from the partsmarking requirements. 

BMW stated that the agency’s theft 

rate data indicate that antitheft devices 

installed on BMW vehicles have been 

very effective in decreasing thefts. 

Specifically, BMW stated that all of its 

vehicle lines are installed with antitheft 

devices as standard equipment and the 

agency’s data show that theft rates for 

those vehicle lines are very low. 

Specifically, BMW stated that for MY/ 

CY 2008, the agency’s data show that 

theft rates for those lines are: 0.08 (1- 

series), 0.74 (3-series), 0.65 (3-series), 

0.66 (6-series), 2.79 (7-series), 0.63 (M3), 

1.12 (M5), 0.68 (Z4(M)), and 0.26 (MINI 

Cooper) respectively. Using an average 

of 3 MYs data (2006–2008), theft rates 

for those lines are: 0.0841, 0.7719, 

0.9636, 1.4791, 2.2942, 2.0251, 1.7992, 

0.6916, 0.3299, respectively. 

In addressing the specific content 

requirements of 543.6, BMW provided 

information on the reliability and 

durability of its device. To ensure 

reliability and durability of the device, 

BMW conducted tests based on its own 

specified standards and believes that the 

device is reliable and durable since the 

device complied with its specified 

requirements for each test. BMW 

provided a detailed list of the tests 

conducted. 

Based on the supporting evidence 

submitted by BMW, the agency believes 

that the antitheft device for the BMW 

Carline X1 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). 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. 

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 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 BMW has provided adequate 

reasons for its belief that the antitheft 

device for the Carline X1 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 

BMW provided about its device. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full BMW’s petition for 

exemption for the MY 2012 Carline X1 

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 part 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 BMW 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 as 

required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and 

541.6 (marking of major component 

parts and replacement parts). 

NHTSA notes that if BMW 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 anti-theft 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 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: November 16, 2010. 

Joseph S. Carra, 

Acting Associate Administrator for 

Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29289 Filed 11–19–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

[Summary Notice No. PE–2010–52] 

Petition for Exemption; Summary of 

Petition Received 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption 

received. 

SUMMARY: This notice contains a 

summary of a petition seeking relief 

from specified requirements of 14 CFR. 

The purpose of this notice is to improve 

the public’s awareness of, and 

participation in, this aspect of FAA’s 

regulatory activities. Neither publication 

of this notice nor the inclusion or 

omission of information in the summary 

is intended to affect the legal status of 

the petition or its final disposition. 

DATES: Comments on this petition must 

identify the petition docket number 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
71186 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 224 / Monday, November 22, 2010 / Notices 

involved and must be received on or 

before December 2, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2010–0897 using any of the following 

methods: 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov 

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to the Docket 

Management Facility; U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 

20590. 

• Fax: Fax comments to the Docket 

Management Facility at 202–493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Bring comments to 

the Docket Management Facility in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Privacy: We will post all comments 

we receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. 

Using the search function of our docket 

web site, anyone can find and read the 

comments received into any of our 

dockets, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78). 

Docket: To read background 

documents or comments received, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time 

or to the Docket Management Facility in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keira Jones (202) 267–4025, Tyneka 

Thomas (202) 267–7626 or David 

Staples (202) 267–4058, Office of 

Rulemaking, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. 

This notice is published pursuant to 

14 CFR 11.85. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 

16, 2010. 

Dennis Pratte, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Rulemaking. 

Petition for Exemption 

Docket No.: FAA–2010–0897. 

Petitioner: Everts Air Fuel. 

Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 

91.313(a)(1), (2) & (c). 

Description of Relief Sought: Relief is 

sought to allow Everts Air Fuel to 

operate Air Tractor AT–802 or AT–1002 

(or equivalent) aircraft modified to haul 

fuel (either company- or customerowned) with an FAA-approved tanks 

system to Alaskan villages, mines, 

cabins, and other remote Alaskan sites. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29377 Filed 11–19–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Petition for Waiver of Compliance 

In accordance with Part 211 of Title 

49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

notice is hereby given that the Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA) has 

received a request for a waiver of 

compliance from certain requirements 

of its safety standards. The individual 

petition is described below, including 

the party seeking relief, the regulatory 

provisions involved, the nature of the 

relief being requested, and the 

petitioner’s arguments in favor of relief. 

Union Pacific Railroad Company 

[Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA–2004– 

17565] 

The Union Pacific Railroad Company 

(UPRR) seeks an amendment to an 

existing waiver of compliance from 

certain provisions of Title 49 CFR parts 

231 and 232, concerning the operation 

of RoadRailer® and RailRunner®

equipment on their railroad. Subject to 

certain conditions, the existing waiver 

in this docket authorizes UPRR to 

operate RoadRailer equipmen on their 

railroad. UPRR now seeks relief from 

certain provisions of the Railroad Safety 

Appliance Standards in Title 49 CFR 

part 231, that stipulate the number, 

location, and dimensions for handholds, 

ladders, sill steps, uncoupling levers, 

and handbrakes to operate RailRunner 

equipment commingled with RoadRailer 

equipment. UPRR also seeks relief from 

Title 49 CFR 231.31, which sets the 

standard height for drawbars. UPRR 

states that this relief is necessary to 

allow them to operate and commingle 

the RoadRailer® and RailRunner®

equipment on dedicated trains operating 

from Chicago, Illinois, to Minneapolis, 

Minnesota. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–2004– 

17565) and may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

Communications received within 45 

days of the date of this notice will be 

considered by FRA before final action is 

taken. Comments received after that 

date will be considered as far as 

practicable. All written communications 

concerning these proceedings are 

available for examination during regular 

business hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) at the 

above facility. All documents in the 

public docket are also available for 

inspection and copying on the Internet 

at the docket facility’s Web site at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of any written 

communications and comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

document (or signing the document, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Page 19477) or at 

http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html. 

Issued in Washington, DC on November 15, 

2010. 

Michael Logue, 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety 

Compliance and Program Implementation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29291 Filed 11–19–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES