17616 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Notices 

performance of a system such as PASSKey III+. In past petitions, the agency 

has concluded that the lack of a visual 

or audio alarm has not prevented these 

antitheft devices from being effective 

protection against theft. 

On the basis of this comparison, GM 

believes that the antitheft device (PASSKey III+) for model years 2010 and later 

will provide essentially the same 

functions and features as found on its 

MY 1990–2002 PASS-Key device and 

therefore, its modified device will 

provide at least the same level of theft 

prevention as parts-marking. GM 

believes that the antitheft device 

proposed for installation on its MY 2010 

Chevrolet Camaro is likely to be as 

effective in reducing thefts as 

compliance with the parts marking 

requirements of Part 541. 

In addressing the specific content 

requirements of 543.6, GM provided 

information on the reliability and 

durability of the 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 and 

believes that the device is reliable and 

durable since it complied with the 

specified requirements for each test. GM 

also stated that since the authorization 

code is not handled or contacted by the 

vehicle operator, the reliability of the 

PASS-Key III+ is significantly improved 

over the PASS-Key and PASS-Key II 

devices. This reliability allows the 

system to return to the ‘‘Go/No Go’’

based system, eliminating the ‘‘fail 

enabled’’ mode of operation. 

The agency has evaluated GM’s MY 

2010 petition to modify the exemption 

for the Chevrolet Camaro vehicle line 

from the parts-marking requirements of 

49 CFR Part 541, and has decided to 

grant it. It has determined that the 

PASS-Key III+ system is likely to be as 

effective as parts-marking in preventing 

and deterring theft of these vehicles, 

and therefore qualifies for an exemption 

under 49 CFR Part 543. The agency 

believes that the proposed device will 

continue to 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. 

If GM 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 Parts 541.5 and 541.6 

(marking of major component parts and 

replacement parts). 

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. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. E7–6525 Filed 4–6–07; 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, 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 in 

accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) of 49 CFR 

Part 543, Exemption from the Theft 

Prevention Standard, for the Saturn 

Aura vehicle line beginning with model 

year (MY) 2008. 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. 

DATES: The exemption granted by this 

notice is effective beginning with model 

year (MY) 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Rosalind Proctor, Office of International 

Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer 

Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. 

Proctor’s phone number is (202) 366–

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

petition dated October 6, 2006, GM 

requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the theft 

prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) 

for the Saturn Aura vehicle line 

beginning with MY 2008. The petition 

requested an exemption from partsmarking 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 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 new 

vehicle line. The antitheft device is a 

transponder-based, electronic, 

immobilizer system. GM will install its 

passive antitheft device as standard 

equipment on its Saturn Aura vehicle 

line beginning with MY 2008. 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’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. 

The antitheft device to be installed on 

the MY 2008 Saturn Aura is the PASSKey III+. The PASS-Key III+ device is 

designed to be active at all times 

without direct intervention by the 

vehicle operator. The system is fully 

armed immediately after the ignition 

has been turned off and the key 

removed. The system will provide 

protection against unauthorized starting 

and fueling of the vehicle engine. 

Components of the antitheft device 

include an electronically-coded ignition 

key, a PASS-Key III+ controller module 

and an engine control module. The 

ignition key contains electronics 

molded into the key head. These 

electronics receive energy and data from 

the control module. Upon receipt of the 

data, the key will calculate a response 

to the data using secret information and 

an internal encryption algorithm, and 

transmit the response back to the 

vehicle. The controller 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 the vehicle can 

be operated. 

GM indicated that the theft rates, as 

reported by the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation’s National Crime 

Information Center (NCIC), are lower for 

GM models equipped with the ‘‘PASSKey’’-like systems which have 

exemptions from the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, than 

the theft rates for earlier, similarlyconstructed models which were partsmarked. Based on the performance of 

the PASS-Key, PASS-Key II, and PASSKey III systems on other GM models, 

and the advanced technology utilized by 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 67 / Monday, April 9, 2007 / Notices 17617 

the modification, GM believes that the 

MY 2008 antitheft device will be more 

effective in deterring theft than the 

parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR 

Part 541. 

For clarification purposes, the agency 

notes that it does not collect theft data. 

NHTSA publishes theft rates based on 

data provided by the NCIC of the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation. NHTSA 

uses NCIC data to calculate theft rates 

and publishes these rates annually in 

the Federal Register. 

In addressing the specific content 

requirements of 543.6, GM provided 

information on the reliability and 

durability of the 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 and 

believes that the device is reliable and 

durable since it complied with the 

specified requirements for each test. 

GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ 

system has been designed to enhance 

the functionality and theft protection 

provided by GM’s first, second, and 

third generation PASS-Key, PASS-Key 

II, and PASS-Key III systems. 

GM 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. GM stated that the theft 

rates for the 2003 and 2004 Cadillac 

CTS and the MY 2004 Cadillac SRX 

currently installed with the PASS-Key 

III+ antitheft device exhibit theft rates 

that are lower than the median theft rate 

(3.5826) established by the agency. The 

Cadillac CTS introduced as a MY 2003 

vehicle line has been equipped with the 

PASS-Key III+ device since the start of 

production. The theft rates for the MY 

2003 and 2004 Cadillac CTS is 1.0108 

and 0.7681 respectively. Similarly, the 

Cadillac SRX introduced as a MY 2004 

vehicle has been equipped with the 

PASS-Key III+ device since production. 

The theft rate for MY 2004 Cadillac SRX 

is 0.7789. GM stated that the theft rates 

experienced by these lines with 

installation of the PASS-Key III+ device 

demonstrate the effectiveness of the 

device. The agency agrees that the 

device is substantially similar to devices 

for which the agency has previously 

approved exemptions. 

Based on comparison of the reduction 

in the theft rates of GM vehicles using 

a passive theft deterrent device with an 

audible/visible alarm system to the 

reduction in theft rates for GM vehicle 

models equipped with a passive 

antitheft 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 system such as PASSKey III+. 

GM’s proposed device, as well as 

other comparable devices that have 

received full exemptions from the partsmarking requirements, lack an audible 

or visible alarm. Therefore, these 

devices cannot perform one of the 

functions listed in 49 CFR Part 

543.6(a)(3), that is, to call attention to 

unauthorized attempts to enter or move 

the vehicle. However, theft data have 

indicated a decline in theft rates for 

vehicle lines that have been equipped 

with devices similar to that which GM 

proposes. In these instances, the agency 

has concluded that the lack of a visual 

or audio alarm has not prevented these 

antitheft devices from being effective 

protection against theft. 

Based on the evidence submitted by 

GM, the agency believes that the 

antitheft device for the GM 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 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. 

As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 

49 CFR Part 543.6(a)(4) and (5), the 

agency finds that GM has provided 

adequate reasons for its belief that the 

antitheft device will reduce and deter 

theft. This conclusion is based on the 

information GM provided about its 

device. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full GM’s petition for 

exemption for the Saturn Aura 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 GM 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 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. 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, Part 

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 3, 2007. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. E7–6528 Filed 4–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[NHTSA–04–17217] 

Insurer Reporting Requirements; 

Reports Under 49 U.S.C. on Section 

33112(c) 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces 

publication by NHTSA of the annual 

insurer report on motor vehicle theft for 

the 2001 reporting year. Section 

33112(h) of Title 49 of the U.S. Code, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES