62800 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 1997 / Notices

20590. It is requested, but not required,

that two copies be submitted.

All comments received before the

close of business on the closing date

indicated below will be considered. The

application and supporting materials,

and all comments received after the

closing date, will also be filed and will

be considered to the extent possible.

When the application is granted or

denied, the notice will be published in

the Federal Register pursuant to the

authority indicated below.

Comment closing date: December 26,

1997.

(49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120; delegations of

authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8)

Issued on: November 20, 1997.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–30905 Filed 11–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

Petition for Exemption From the

Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard;

BMW

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

SUMMARY: This notice grants in full the

petition of BMW of North America, Inc.,

(BMW) for an exemption of a high-theft

line, the Carline 3, from the partsmarking requirements of the vehicle

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.

DATES: The exemption granted by this

notice is effective beginning with the

1999 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Sanjay Patel, Office of Planning and

Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400

Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20590. Mr. Patel’s telephone number is

(202) 366–0846. His fax number is (202)

493–2739.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a

petition dated August 28, 1997, BMW of

North America, Inc. (BMW), requested

exemption from the parts-marking

requirements of the theft prevention

standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the

Carline 3, beginning with MY 1999. The

petition has been filed 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.

BMW’s submittal is considered a

complete petition, as required by 49

CFR Part 543.7, in that it meets the

general requirements contained in

§ 543.5 and the specific content

requirements of § 543.6. In its petition,

BMW provided a detailed description

and diagram of the identity, design, and

location of the components of the

antitheft device for the new line. This

antitheft device includes an electronic

immobilizer system, consisting of a key

with a transponder (a transmitter/

receiver) that is a microchip that is

integrated into the key. This

transponder will allow the ignition to

operate and fuel supply to be released

when a correct signal has been received.

BMW states that its electronically-coded

vehicle immobilizer (EWS) will prevent

the vehicle from being driven away

under the power of its own engine by

manipulations on the ignition lock and

on the doors. The immobilizer device is

automatically activated when the engine

is shut off and the vehicle key is

removed from the ignition lock cylinder.

In addition to the key, the antitheft

device can be activated by use of its

radio frequency remote control. The

frequency codes of the remote control

are ever-changing which prevents an

unauthorized person from opening the

vehicle by intercepting the signals.

The vehicle is also equipped with a

central-locking system which locks all

doors, the hood, the trunk and fuel filler

lid. To prevent locking the keys in the

car upon exiting, the driver door can

only be locked with a key or by the

radio frequency remote control after it is

closed. This also locks the other doors,

and if they are open at the time of

locking, the doors are locked when they

are closed.

BMW mentioned the uniqueness of its

locks and its ignition key. BMW stated

that its vehicle’s locks are almost

impossible to pick, and its ignition key

cannot be duplicated on the open

market. BMW also stated that a special

key blank, key-cutting machine and

owner’s individual code are needed to

cut a new key and that its key blanks,

machines and codes will be closely

controlled and new keys will only be

issued to authorized persons.

Additionally, spare keys can only be

obtained through the BMW dealer

because they are not a copy of lost

originals, but new keys with their

original electronic identification. Every

key request is also documented so that

any inquiries by insurance companies

and investigative authorities can be

followed up on.

The battery for BMW’s Carline 3 will

be inaccessibly located and covered as

an additional security measure.

Therefore, even if a thief does manage

to penetrate and disconnect the battery,

it will not unlock the doors. However,

in the event of a crash, an inertia switch

will automatically unlock all the doors.

BMW also stated that its antitheft

device does not incorporate any audible

or visual alarms. However, based on the

declining theft rate experience of other

vehicles equipped with devices that do

not have an audio or visual alarm for

which NHTSA has already exempted

from the parts-marking requirements,

the agency has concluded that the data

indicate that lack of a visual or audio

alarm has not prevented these antitheft

devices from being effective protection

against theft.

BMW compared the device proposed

for its new line 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, and has

concluded that the antitheft device

proposed for this new line is no less

effective than those devices in the lines

for which NHTSA has already granted

exemptions from the parts-marking

requirements. The antitheft system that

BMW intends to install on its Carline 3

for the MY 1999 is exactly the same

system that BMW installed on its

Carline 5 for MY 1997. The agency

granted BMW’s petition for exemption

of its Carline 5 in full beginning with

the 1997 model year (See 61 FR 6292,

February 16, 1996).

In order to ensure reliability and

durability of the device, BMW stated

that it conducted performance tests

under BMW Standard 600 13.0, Parts 1

and 2, e.g., climatic tests, high

temperature endurance run,

thermoshock test in water, chemical

resistance, vibrational load, electrical

ranges, mechanical shock tests, and

electromagnetic field compatibility.

Additionally, BMW stated that its

immobilizer system fulfills the

requirements of the European vehicle

insurance companies which became

standard as of January 1995. The

requirements prescribe that the vehicle

must be equipped with an electronic

vehicle immobilizing device which

works independently from the

mechanical locking system and prevents

the operation of the vehicle through the

use of coded intervention in the engine

management system. In addition, the

device must be self-arming (passive),
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 25, 1997 / Notices 62801

and must become effective upon leaving

the vehicle, or not later than the point

at which the vehicle is locked, and must

deactivate the vehicle only by electronic

means and not with the mechanical key.

BMW also stated that the doors and

ignition locks for the Carline 3 conform

to Swedish Regulation F42–1975, which

requires a minimum of five minutes

resistance to the application of

commonly available tools.

Based on evidence submitted by

BMW, the agency believes that the

antitheft device for the Carline 3 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 the 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.

The device lacks the ability to attract

attention to the efforts of unauthorized

persons to enter or operate a vehicle by

a means other than a key

(§ 543.6(a)(3)(ii)).

As required by 49 U.S.C. § 33106 and

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

agency finds that BMW has provided

adequate reasons for its belief that the

antitheft device will reduce and deter

theft. 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 Carline 3 from the partsmarking requirements of 49 CFR Part

541.

If BMW 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 542.6

(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 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 Part

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: November 18, 1997.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety

Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–30903 Filed 11–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

[Notice No. 97–14]

Notice of Information Collection

Approval

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Information Collection

Approval.

SUMMARY: This notice announces OMB

approval of information collection

request for OMB No. 2137–0595,

entitled Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles in

Liquefied Compressed Gas Service. This

information collection has been

extended until March 31, 1999.

DATES: The expiration date of this

information collection is March 31,

1999.

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of an

information collection should be

directed to Deborah Boothe, Office of

Hazardous Materials Standards (DHM–

10), Research and Special Programs

Administration, Room 8102, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590–0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Deborah Boothe, Office of Hazardous

Materials Standards (DHM–10),

Research and Special Programs

Administration, Room 8102, 400

Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC

20590–0001, Telephone (202) 366–8553.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

regulations (5 CFR 1320) implementing

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (P.L. 104–13) require that

interested members of the public and

affected agencies have an opportunity to

comment on information collection and

recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR

1320.8(s)) and specify that no person is

required to respond to an information

collection unless it displays a valid

OMB control number. RSPA published

a final rule in the Federal Register (62

FR 44038) on August 18, 1997, entitled

‘‘Hazardous Materials: Cargo Tank

Motor Vehicles in Liquefied

Compressed Gas Service’’. RSPA

received approval from OMB for the

information collection in that final rule

under OMB No. 2137–0595. The

approval expires on February 28, 1998.

RSPA published Notice No. 97–4 (62

FR 44169) on August 19, 1997,

requesting comments on this

information collection. The comment

period on Notice No. 97–4 closed on

September 18, 1997. Based on

comments received on Notice 97–4,

RSPA submitted a request to OMB for

extension of the information collection

approval until March 31, 1999, which is

the expiration date for requirements in

the final rule. RSPA received no

comments to Notice No. 97–4. RSPA has

received approval from OMB for

information collection OMB No. 2137–

0595, entitled ‘‘Hazardous Materials:

Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles in Liquefied

Compressed Gas Service.’’

This information collection approval

expires on March 31, 1999.

Issued in Washington, DC on November 20,

1997.

Edward T. Mazzullo,

Director, Office of Hazardous Materials

Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–30963 Filed 11–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Treasury Advisory Committee on

Commercial Operations of the U.S.

Customs Service; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Departmental Offices, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

date and location of the next meeting

and the agenda for consideration by the

Treasury Advisory Committee on

Commercial Operations of the U.S.

Customs Service.

DATE: The next meeting of the Treasury

Advisory Committee on Commercial

Operations of the U.S. Customs Service

will be held on December 11, 1997. The