20400 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday April 24, 2007 / Notices 

Yakima, Washington, 98909–2560; 

telephone: (509) 577–1780; e-mail: 

ArmsR@wsdot.wa.gov. The Washington 

State Department of Transportation’s 

regular office hours are between 8 a.m. 

and 5 p.m. (Pacific Time). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that the FHWA and other 

Federal agencies have taken final agency 

actions subject to 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) by 

issuing licenses, permits, and approvals 

for the following highway project in the 

State of Washington: Yakima Grade 

Separation: Lincoln Avenue and B 

Street Project in Yakima County, 

Washington. The purpose of the Yakima 

Grade Separation project is to improve 

freight mobility through the city of 

Yakima by creating grade separation of 

the Burlington Northern Santa Fe 

(BNSF) railroad tracks at the Lincoln 

Avenue and Martin Luther King 

Boulevard, formerly known as B Street, 

crossings in downtown Yakima, and 

includes the realignment of Front Street. 

The project will be constructed over no 

more than two years, and the FHWA 

project reference number is 000S062. 

The actions by the Federal agencies on 

this project, and the laws under which 

such actions were taken, are described 

in the Environmental Assessment (EA) 

for the project, approved on April 11, 

2006, in the FHWA Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) issued 

August 17, 2006, and in other 

documents in the FHWA project files. 

The EA, FONSI, and other project 

records are available by contacting 

FHWA or the Washington State 

Department of Transportation at the 

addresses provided above. The EA and 

FONSI can be viewed and downloaded 

form the project Web site at http:// 

www.wsdot.wa.gov/TA/Operations/ 

Environmental/Yakima_EA.pdf or 

viewed at public libraries in the project 

area. 

This notice applies to all Federal 

agency decisions as of the issuance date 

of this notice and all laws under which 

such actions were taken, including but 

not limited to: 

1. General: National Environmental 

Policy Act [42 U.S.C. 4321–4351]; 

Federal-Aid Highway Act [23 U.S.C. 109 

and 23 U.S.C. 128]. 

2. Air: Clean Air Act, as amended [42 

U.S.C. 7401–7671(q)]. 

3. Land: Section 4(f) of the 

Department of Transportation Act of 

1966 [49 U.S.C. 303]; Landscaping and 

Scenic Enhancement (Wildflowers) [23 

U.S.C. 319]. 

4. Wildlife: Endangered Species Act 

[16 U.S.C. 1531–1544 and Section 

1536]; Anadromous Fish Conservation 

Act [16 U.S.C. 757(a)-757(g)]; Fish and 

Wildlife Coordination Act [16 U.S.C. 

661–667(d)]; Magnuson-Stevenson 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act of 1976, as amended [16 U.S.C. 1801 

et seq.]. 

5. Historic and Cultural Resources: 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966, as amended 

[16 U.S.C. 470(f) et seq.]; Archaeological 

Resources Protection Act of 1977 [16 

U.S.C. 470(aa)-470(ll)]; Archaeological 

and Historic Preservation Act [16 U.S.C. 

469–469(c)]; Native American Grave 

Protection and Repatriation Act 

(NAGPRA) [25 U.S.C. 3001–3013]. 

6. Social and Economic: Civil Rights 

Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000(d)- 

2000(d)(1)]; American Indian Religious 

Freedom Act [42 U.S.C. 1996]; Farmland 

Protection Policy Act [7 U.S.C. 4201–

4209]; the Uniform Relocation 

Assistance and Real Property 

Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as 

amended [42 U.S.C. 61]. 

7. Wetlands and Water Resources: 

Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251–1377 

(Section 404, Section 401, Section 319) 

[33 U.S.C. 1251–1377]; Coastal Zone 

Management Act [16 U.S.C. 1451–1465]; 

Land and Water Conservation Fund [16 

U.S.C. 4601–4604]; Safe Drinking Water 

Act [42 U.S.C. 300(f)-300(j)(6)]; Rivers 

and Harbors Act of 1899 [33 U.S.C. 401–

406]; TEA–21 Wetlands Mitigation [23 

U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(m), 133(b)(11)]; Flood 

Disaster Protection Act [42 U.S.C. 4001–

4128]. 

8. Hazardous Materials: 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act [42 U.S.C. 9601–9675]; Superfund 

Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

of 1986 [Pub. L. 99–499]; Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act [42 

U.S.C. 6901–6992(k)]. 

9. Executive Orders: E.O. 11990 

Protection of Wetlands; E.O. 11988 

Floodplain Management; E.O. 12898, 

Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low Income 

Populations; E.O. 11593 Protection and 

Enhancement of Cultural Resources; 

E.O. 13007 Indian Sacred Sites; E.O. 

13287 Preserve America; E.O. 13175 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments; E.O. 11514 

Protection and Enhancement of 

Environmental Quality; E.O. 13112 

Invasive Species. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning 

and Construction. The regulations 

implementing Executive Order 12372 

regarding intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities apply to this 

program.) 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 139(l)(1) 

Bryan L. Dillon, 

South Central Region Area Engineer, 

Olympia, Washington. 

[FR Doc. E7–7829 Filed 4–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–RY–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Petition for Exemption From the 

Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; 

Ford 

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 Ford Motor Company 

(Ford) in accordance with § 543.9(c)(2) 

of 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the 

Theft Prevention Standard, for the Ford 

Taurus X (formerly the Ford Freestyle) 

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. 

Deborah Mazyck, Office of International 

Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer 

Standards, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. 

Mazyck’s telephone number is (202) 

366–0846. Her fax number is (202) 493–

2290. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

petition dated December 15, 2006, Ford 

requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) 

for the Ford Taurus X (formerly the Ford 

Freestyle) vehicle line beginning with 

MY 2008. 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 of its vehicle lines per year. Ford 

has petitioned the agency to grant an 

exemption for its Ford Taurus X vehicle 

line beginning with MY 2008. In its 

petition, Ford provided a detailed 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 78 / Tuesday April 24, 2007 / Notices 20401 

description and diagram of the identity, 

design, and location of the components 

of the antitheft device for the Ford 

Taurus X vehicle line. Ford will install 

its passive antitheft device as standard 

equipment on the vehicle line. Features 

of the antitheft device will include an 

electronic key, ignition lock, and a 

passive immobilizer. Additionally, the 

Ford Taurus X will have a standard 

perimeter alarm system which will 

monitor all the doors, the decklid and 

the hood of the vehicle. 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. 

The antitheft device to be installed on 

the MY 2008 Ford Taurus X is the 

SecuriLock Passive Anti-Theft 

Electronic Engine Immobilizer System 

(SecuriLock). The Ford SecuriLock is a 

transponder-based electronic 

immobilizer system. Ford stated that the 

integration of the transponder into the 

normal operation of the ignition key 

assures activation of the system. When 

the ignition key is turned to the start 

position, the transceiver module reads 

the ignition key code and transmits an 

encrypted message to the cluster. 

Validation of the key is determined and 

start of the engine is authorized once a 

separate encrypted message is sent to 

the powertrain’s control module (PCM). 

The powertrain will function only if the 

key code matches the unique 

identification key code previously 

programmed into the PCM. If the codes 

do not match, the powertrain engine 

starter will be disabled. Ford also stated 

that the SecuriLock electronic engine 

immobilizer device makes conventional 

theft methods such as hot-wiring or 

attacking the ignition lock cylinder 

ineffective and virtually eliminates 

drive-away thefts. 

Ford stated that the Ford Freestyle 

(renamed Taurus X for MY 2008) has 

experienced very low theft rates. The 

agency’s theft rate data is not available 

for calendar year/model year (CY/MY) 

2005 and 2006, however, Ford 

calculated its own theft rate data for the 

MY 2005 and 2006 Ford Freestyle 

vehicle line based on its CAFE 

production volumes and the National 

Insurance Crime Bureau theft data per 

one thousand vehicles produced. Ford 

stated that the theft rate for CY/MY 2005 

and 2006 were 0.6744 and 1.3473, 

respectively. Accordingly, Ford stated 

that, although the NICB theft data 

indicates that there was an increase in 

the overall theft rate for CY/MY 2006 

vehicles, its calculations showed that 

the rate for the Ford Freestyle continued 

to stay below the agency’s median theft 

rate of 3.5826. 

Additionally, Ford noted the 

reduction in theft rate for other vehicle 

lines equipped with the SecuriLock 

device. Ford’s SecuriLock device was 

first introduced as standard equipment 

on its MY 1996 Mustang GT and Cobra. 

In MY 1997, the SecuriLock system was 

installed on the entire Mustang vehicle 

line as standard equipment. Ford stated 

that the 1997 model year Mustang with 

SecuriLock shows a 70% reduction in 

theft compared to the MY 1995 

Mustang, according to National 

Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) theft 

statistics. There were 149 reported thefts 

for 1997 compared to 500 reported 

thefts in 1995. 

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 also 

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. 

Based on the evidence submitted by 

Ford, the agency believes that the 

antitheft device for the Ford Taurus X 

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). 

Based on the information Ford provided 

about its device, the agency concludes 

that the device will provide the five 

types of performance listed in 

§ 543.6(a)(3): Promoting activation; 

attracting attention to the efforts of 

unauthorized persons to enter or operate 

a vehicle by means other than a key; 

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 543.6(a)(4) and (5), the agency 

finds that Ford has provided adequate 

reasons for its belief that the antitheft 

device will reduce and deter theft. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full Ford’s petition for 

exemption for the Ford Taurus X 

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 parts-marking 

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 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 § 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 18, 2007. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. E7–7719 Filed 4–23–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES