188 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 3, 2007 / Notices 

rates than NHTSA has used in the past, 

NHTSA agrees that both calculations 

show a substantial reduction in the theft 

rate since the installation of the device 

as standard equipment. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full DaimlerChrysler’s 

petition for exemption for the Dodge 

Magnum vehicle line from the partsmarking requirements of 49 CFR Part 

541, beginning with the 2008 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 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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard. 

If DaimlerChrysler decides not to use 

the exemption for this line, it must 

formally notify the agency, and, 

thereafter, 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 DaimlerChrysler 

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 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: December 27, 2006. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administration for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 06–9957 Filed 12–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Petition for Exemption From the 

Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; 

Nissan 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. 

SUMMARY: This document grants in full 

the Nissan North America, Inc.’s 

(Nissan) petition for exemption of the 

Versa 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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541). 

Nissan requested confidential treatment 

for the information and attachments it 

submitted in support of its petition. In 

a letter dated November 2, 2006, the 

agency granted the petitioner’s request 

for confidential treatment of most 

aspects of its petition. 

DATES: The exemption granted by this 

notice is effective beginning with the 

2008 model year. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Deborah Mazyck, Office of International 

Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer 

Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. 

Mazyck’s phone number is (202) 366–

0846. Her fax number is (202) 493–2290. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

petition dated September 29, 2006, 

Nissan requested exemption from the 

parts-marking requirements of the theft 

prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) 

for the MY 2008 Nissan Versa vehicle 

line. The petition requested an 

exemption from parts-marking pursuant 

to 49 CFR 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 exemptions for 

one line of its vehicle lines per model 

year. In its petition, Nissan provided a 

detailed description and diagram of the 

identity, design, and location of the 

components of the antitheft device fro 

the new vehicle line. Nissan will install 

its passive, transponder-based 

immobilizer device as standard 

equipment on its Versa vehicle line 

beginning with MY 2008. Key 

components of the antitheft device are 

in engine electronic control module 

(ECM), a passive immobilizer and a 

transponder key. The immobilizer 

system prevents normal operation of the 

vehicle without the use of the key. 

Nissan also stated that the system will 

not incorporated an audible or visible 

alarm. Nissan’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. 

Nissan also provided information on 

the reliability and durability of its 

proposed device, conducting tests based 

on its own specified standards. In a 

letter dated November 2, 2006, NHTSA 

granted Nissan confidential treatment 

for the test information. Nissan 

provided a list of the tests it conducted. 

Nissan based its belief that the device is 

reliable and durable on the fact that the 

device complied with the specific 

requirements for each test. 

Nissan 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. Nissan stated that its 

antitheft device will be no less effective 

than those devices in the lines for which 

NHTSA has already granted full 

exemption from the parts-marking 

requirements. 

Nissan stated that NHTSA’s theft data 

have shown a decline in theft rates for 

vehicle lines that have been equipped 

with antitheft devices similar to that 

which Nissan proposes to install on the 

new line. Nissan stated that based on 

the agency’s theft rate data, the Buick 

Riviera and the Oldsmobile Toronado/ 

Aurora vehicles equipped with the 

PASS-Key and PASS-Key II systems 

experienced a significant reduction in 

theft rates from 1987 to 1996. Nissan 

concluded that the data indicates that 

the immobilizer was effective in 

contributing to the theft rate reduction 

for these lines. Nissan stated that based 

on NHTSA’s theft data for 1987 through 

1996, the average theft rate for the Buick 

Rivieraand the Oldsmobile Toronado/ 

Aurora vehicles without the 

immobilizer was 4.8970 and 5.0760, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 3, 2007 / Notices 189 

respectively and 1.4288 and 2.0955 after 

installation of the immobilizer device. 

Further review of the agency’s theft data 

published through the 2004 MY 

revealed that, while there is some 

variation, the theft rates for both lines 

continued to stay below the median 

theft rate of 3.5826. The agency agrees 

that the device is substantially similar to 

devices in other vehicles for which the 

agency has already granted exemptions. 

For clarification purposes, the agency 

notes that it does not collect theft data. 

NHTSA publishes theft rates based on 

data provided by the National Crime 

Information Center (NCIC) of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation. NHTSA 

uses NCIC data to calculate theft rates 

and publishes these rates annually in 

theFederal Register. 

The agency also notes that the device 

will provide four of the five types of 

performances 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 an 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 Nissan has 

provided adequate reasons for its belief 

that the antitheft device will reduce and 

deter theft. This conclusion is based on 

the information Nissan provided about 

its device. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full Nissan’s petition 

for exemption for the Versa vehicle line 

from the parts-marking requirements of 

49 CFR Part 541, beginning with the 

2008 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 

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 partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard. 

If Nissan decides not to use the 

exemption for this line, it must formally 

notify the agency, and, thereafter, 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 Nissan 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. Parts 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: December 27, 2006. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 06–9958 Filed 12–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Community Development Financial 

Institutions Fund 

Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA) 

Inviting Applications for the FY 2007 

and FY 2008 Funding Rounds of the 

Bank Enterprise Award (BEA) Program 

Announcement Type: Initial 

announcement of funding opportunity. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CDFA) Number: 21.021. 

DATES: Applications for the FY 2007 

funding round must be received by 5 

p.m. ET on March 15, 2007 and 

applications for the FY 2008 funding 

round must be received by 5 p.m. ET on 

March 13, 2008. Applications must meet 

all eligibility and other requirements 

and deadlines, as applicable, set forth in 

this NOFA. Applications received after 

5 p.m. ET on the applicable deadline 

will be rejected and returned to the 

sender. 

Executive Summary: This NOFA is 

issued in connection with the FY 2007 

and FY 2008 funding rounds of the BEA 

Program. Through the BEA Program, the 

Community Development Financial 

Institutions Fund (the Fund) encourages 

Insured Depository Institutions to 

increase their levels of loans, 

investments, services, and technical 

assistance within Distressed 

Communities, and financial assistance 

to Community Development Financial 

Institutions (CDFIs) through grants, 

stock purchases, loans, deposits, and 

other forms of financial and technical 

assistance, during a specified period. 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

A. Baseline Period and Assessment 

Period Dates 

A BEA Program award is based on an 

Applicant’s increases in Qualified 

Activities from the Baseline Period to 

the Assessment Period. For the FY 2007 

funding round, the Baseline Period is 

calendar year 2005 (January 1, 2005 

through December 31, 2005), and the 

Assessment Period is calendar year 2006 

(January 1, 2006 through December 31, 

2006). For the FY 2008 funding round, 

the Baseline Period is calendar year 

2006 (January 1, 2006 through December 

31, 2006), and the Assessment Period is 

calendar year 2007 (January 1, 2007 

through December 31, 2007). 

B. Program Regulations 

The regulations governing the BEA 

Program can be found at 12 CFR part 

1806 (the Interim Rule) and provide 

guidance on evaluation criteria and 

other requirements of the BEA Program. 

The Fund encourages Applicants to 

review the Interim Rule. Detailed 

application content requirements are 

found in the application related to this 

NOFA. Each capitalized term in this 

NOFA is more fully defined either in 

the Interim Rule or the application. 

C. Qualified Activities 

Qualified Activities are defined in the 

Interim Rule to include CDFI Related 

Activities, Distressed Community 

Financing Activities, and Service 

Activities (12 CFR 1806.103(mm)). CDFI 

Related Activities include Equity 

Investments, Equity-Like Loans, and 

CDFI Support Activities (12 CFR 

1806.103(p)). Distressed Community 

Financing Activities include Affordable 

Housing Loans, Affordable Housing 

Development Loans and related Project 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES