Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 34943 

rule does not impose additional 

information collection requirements that 

require the approval of the Office of 

Management and Budget under 44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 

D. Determination To Issue an Interim 

Rule 

A determination has been made under 

the authority of the Secretary of Defense 

that urgent and compelling reasons exist 

to publish an interim rule prior to 

affording the public an opportunity to 

comment. This interim rule authorizes 

and establishes conditions under which 

the Department of Defense may enter 

into a contract for a period not to exceed 

10 years for the purchase of electricity 

from sources of renewable energy, 

pursuant to section 828 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2008. It is necessary to publish this 

rule prior to obtaining public comments 

because the statute became effective 

upon enactment, and it is imperative 

that DoD contracting officers be aware of 

the conditions under which DoD may 

enter into such contracts to ensure that 

they are in compliance with the 

requirements of the Act. However, DoD 

will consider public comments received 

in response to this interim rule in the 

formation of the final rule. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 217 and 

241 

Government procurement. 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

■ Therefore, 48 CFR parts 217 and 241 

are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 217 and 241 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 217—SPECIAL CONTRACTING 

METHODS 

■ 2. Section 217.175 is added to read as 

follows: 

217.175 Multiyear contracts for electricity 

from renewable energy sources. 

(a) The head of the contracting 

activity may enter into a contract for a 

period not to exceed 10 years for the 

purchase of electricity from sources of 

renewable energy, as that term is 

defined in section 203(b)(2) of the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 

15852(b)(2)). 

(b) Limitations. The head of the 

contracting activity may exercise the 

authority in paragraph (a) of this section 

to enter into a contract for a period in 

excess of five years only if the head of 

the contracting activity determines, on 

the basis of a business case analysis (see 

PGI 217.1, Supplemental Information 

TAB, for a business case analysis 

template and guidance) prepared by the 

requiring activity, that— 

(1) The proposed purchase of 

electricity under such contract is cost 

effective; and 

(2) It would not be possible to 

purchase electricity from the source in 

an economical manner without the use 

of a contract for a period in excess of 

five years. 

(c) Nothing in this section shall be 

construed to preclude the DoD from 

using other multiyear contracting 

authority of DoD to purchase renewable 

energy. 

PART 241—ACQUISITION OF UTILITY 

SERVICES 

■ 3. Section 241.103 is amended by 

redesignating existing paragraph (2) as 

paragraph (3); and by adding new 

paragraph (2) to read as follows: 

241.103 Statutory and delegated authority. 

* * * * * 

(2) See 217.175 for authority to enter 

into multiyear contracts for electricity 

from renewable energy sources. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–14938 Filed 6–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 225 and 252 

[DFARS Case 2008–D024] 

RIN 0750–AG13 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Para-Aramid 

Fibers and Yarns Manufactured in a 

Qualifying Country 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is adopting as final, with 

changes, the interim rule amending the 

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement (DFARS) to implement 

determinations made by the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 

Technology, and Logistics with regard 

to the acquisition of items containing 

para-aramid fibers and yarns 

manufactured in foreign countries that 

have entered into a reciprocal defense 

procurement memorandum of 

understanding with the United States. 

DATES: Effective Date: June 21, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amy Williams, 703–602–0310. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

DoD published an interim rule in the 

Federal Register on December 18, 2008 

(73 FR 76970). The comment period 

closed on February 17, 2009. 

10 U.S.C. 2533a restricts DoD 

procurement of foreign synthetic fabric 

or coated synthetic fabric, including 

textiles, fibers, and yarns for use in such 

fabrics. Section 807 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 1999 (Pub. L. 105–261) provides 

authority for DoD to waive the 

restriction at 10 U.S.C. 2533a with 

regard to para-aramid fibers and yarns. 

On February 12, 1999, the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 

Technology (USD(AT&L)) waived the 

restriction at 10 U.S.C. 2533a for paraaramid fibers and yarns manufactured 

in the Netherlands. On August 15, 2008, 

the USD(AT&L) expanded the existing 

waiver to permit the acquisition of paraaramid fibers and yarns manufactured 

in any qualifying country listed in 

DFARS 225.003(10). 

The interim rule also clarified the 

definition of ‘‘qualifying countries’’ at 

DFARS 225.003 and 252.225–7012 by 

including a list of the qualifying 

countries within the definition instead 

of referring to the list at DFARS 

225.872–1. 

DoD received comments on the 

interim rule from nine respondents. 

Based on public comments, changes 

were made to the interim rule. The 

differences between the interim rule and 

this final rule include— 

• Restricting the authority to acquire 

para-aramid fibers and yarns 

manufactured in a qualifying country to 

apply to para-aramid fibers (both staple 

and continuous) and continuous 

filament para-aramid yarns, based on a 

new USD(AT&L) determination and 

findings, dated November 9, 2009, 

which contains a five year review 

requirement. 

• Amplifying the definition of 

‘‘qualifying country’’ to make clear that 

these are countries with which DoD has 

negotiated reciprocal defense 

procurement memoranda of 

understanding. 

B. Public Comments 

The following is a discussion of the 

comments and the changes included in 

this final rule as a result of those 

comments: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

34944 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1. Limit the Rule to Staple Para-Aramid 

Fibers and Continuous Filament ParaAramid Yarns 

Two respondents opposed the interim 

rule acceptance of para-aramid yarns 

other than continuous filament yarns 

from any qualifying country (not just the 

Netherlands) because they believe it 

will increase competition from yarn 

producers outside the United States. 

They do not want the interim rule to 

apply to ‘‘yarns spun from staple paraaramid fibers.’’ They believe the rule 

should only apply to staple para-aramid 

fibers and continuous filament paraaramid yarns. 

Response: The respondents’ rationale 

is that section 807 says that DoD may 

only procure articles containing paraaramid fibers and yarns manufactured 

in a qualifying country if— 

• Procuring articles containing paraaramid fibers and yarns manufactured 

from suppliers in the national 

technology industrial base (U.S. & 

Canada) would result in sole source 

contracts or subcontracts; and 

• To do so would not be in the best 

interests of the Government. 

DoD’s 1999 Findings of Fact stated 

that DuPont is the sole manufacturer of 

para-aramid (continuous and staple) 

fiber in the United States and Canada. 

This is a correct statement. Therefore, 

the request by the respondents to limit 

this rule to staple para-aramid fiber is 

unfounded. 

However, the Findings also stated that 

DuPont is the sole producer of paraaramid yarn. DuPont is the sole 

producer of continuous filament paraaramid yarn, but it does not produce 

within the U.S. yarns made from staple 

para-aramid fiber. DoD has now 

identified 72 yarn producers in the U.S. 

and Canada, and three of these advertise 

that they produce yarn products made 

from DuPont Kevlar. DuPont supplies 

its Kevlar staple fiber to four major and 

six minor yarn producers in the U.S. 

and Canada, and it believes that there 

are several dozen more companies in 

Europe who produce yarn of this type. 

Therefore, the Under Secretary of 

Defense (AT&L) issued on November 9, 

2009, a revised determination and 

findings that limits the findings to 

staple and continuous para-aramid 

fibers and continuous filament paraaramid yarn. The final rule has been 

revised accordingly. 

2. Review in Five Years To Establish 

Continued National Defense Need 

One respondent commented that this 

exception should be reviewed in five 

years and extended only if needed for 

national defense purposes. Another 

respondent notes that DuPont is in the 

process of building a new plant in South 

Carolina and that this would boost the 

availability of these products in the U.S. 

Response: DoD concurs. The request 

from industry that precipitated the USD 

(AT&L)’s determination to waive the 

restriction for all qualifying countries 

was based on DoD’s immediate and 

increasing need for ballistic strength 

fiber in support of MRAP, ballistic 

armor, and other defense requirements 

in support of the Global War on Terror. 

It is reasonable to assume that this need 

will continue for at least five years, but 

a review at that time is a good idea. This 

requirement has been included in the 

new determination and findings. 

3. Detrimental to U.S. Manufacturing 

Base 

Several respondents opposed this rule 

on the basis that it would be detrimental 

to the U.S. textile manufacturing base. 

One respondent was concerned about 

negative impact on spinners, knitters, 

weavers, finishers, and garment makers 

in the supply chain. Another 

respondent expressed concern over 

more foreign imports, when the jobs are 

so desperately needed in our own 

country (see also discussion of 

Regulatory Flexibility at paragraph 6). A 

third respondent referred to detrimental 

impact on the textile manufacturing 

base. He cited the exodus of textile 

manufacturing from the United States 

for decades and stated that the textile 

manufacturing that remains has moved 

into high performance and niche 

specialty areas. This respondent stated 

that by allowing items containing these 

fibers and the importation of yarns to 

move forward will continue to erode the 

U.S. textile manufacturing base. 

Response: There are only two 

companies in the United States or a 

qualifying country that make paraaramid fibers and continuous filament 

para-aramid yarns: DuPontTM which 

makes Kevlar®, and the Teijin Group 

which makes Twaron. DuPontTM is the 

sole producer of these items in the 

United States. Therefore, this rule, when 

amended to exclude yarn produced 

from staple para-aramid fibers, will not 

deprive any U.S. companies of business. 

The concern for the well-being of the 

textile industry, including knitters, 

weavers, finishers, and garment makers, 

is misplaced. This rule does not allow 

acquisition of items containing paraaramid fibers and continuous filament 

yarns from qualifying countries, but 

only the fibers and yarns (see DFARS 

225.7002–2(m)). 

4. Domestic Para-Aramid Sewing 

Thread May Be of Lower Quality 

One respondent fully supported the 

interim rule and recommended that it 

should be made permanent. The 

respondent cited an experience with the 

specification to use para-aramid thread 

that was heavier and weaker than the 

commercial thread that was used in the 

commercial marketplace, in order to 

comply with the domestic source 

restriction. 

Response: The Berry Amendment 

does not require the use of domestic 

fibers at the expense of satisfactory 

quality. There is an exception that can 

be applied if domestic products of a 

satisfactory quality are not available. 

5. Need To Expand the Nations From 

Which Fiber Can Be Procured 

One respondent proposed we add 

other friendly nations of quality ballistic 

fiber, such as Japan and India, to the list 

of nations from which these fibers can 

be procured. 

Response: The authority provided to 

DoD in section 807 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 1999 (Pub. L. 105–261) specifically 

applies only to foreign countries that are 

a party to a reciprocal defense 

procurement memorandum of 

understanding (MOU) entered into 

under section 2531 of title 10 of the 

United States Code and that permits 

United States firms that manufacture 

para-aramid fibers and yarns to compete 

with foreign firms for the sale of paraaramid fibers and yarns in that country, 

as determined by the Secretary of 

Defense. Section 2531 begins as follows: 

(a) Considerations in Making and 

Implementing MOUs and Related 

Agreements. In the negotiation, 

renegotiation, and implementation of 

any existing or proposed memorandum 

of understanding, or any existing or 

proposed agreement related to a 

memorandum of understanding, 

between the Secretary of Defense, acting 

on behalf of the United States, and one 

or more foreign countries (or any 

instrumentality of a foreign country) 

relating to research, development, or 

production of defense equipment, or to 

the reciprocal procurement of defense 

items, the Secretary of Defense shall— 

(1) Consider the effects of such 

existing or proposed memorandum of 

understanding or related agreement on 

the defense technology and industrial 

base of the United States; and 

(2) Regularly solicit and consider 

comments and recommendations from 

the Secretary of Commerce with respect 

to the commercial implications of such 

memorandum of understanding or 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 34945 

related agreement and the potential 

effects of such memorandum of 

understanding or related agreement on 

the international competitive position of 

United States industry. 

Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2531, 

DoD has negotiated reciprocal defense 

procurement (RDP) MOUs with 

‘‘qualifying’’ countries. These RDP MOU 

partners have committed to remove 

barriers to purchases of supplies 

produced in the other country or 

services performed by sources in the 

other country. The qualifying countries 

listed at DFARS 225.003(10) are the 

countries with which DoD has 

reciprocal defense procurement MOUs. 

DoD has not negotiated reciprocal 

defense procurement MOUs with Japan 

or India. 

6. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

One respondent commented on the 

statement with regard to regulatory 

flexibility analysis that small entities 

normally are not involved in the 

production of para-aramid fibers and 

yarns. The respondent stated that there 

are many small entities involved in the 

weaving and production of para-aramid 

fabrics and that it would be devastating 

to the textile industry to expand the rule 

to cover the import of woven fabric or 

finished products. 

Response: Since the rule does not 

cover the import of woven fabric or 

finished products, but addresses only 

fibers and yarns, this statement does not 

affect the requirement for a regulatory 

flexibility analysis. The reinstated 

requirement for domestic manufacture 

of yarn from staple para-aramid fiber 

removes any possible impact on 

domestic small entities. 

7. Clarify the Definition of ‘‘Qualifying 

Country’’ 

One respondent stated that the 

interim rule insufficiently defined 

‘‘qualifying country.’’ Alternate language 

was provided to expand this definition: 

‘‘Qualifying country’’ means a country 

with a memorandum of understanding 

or international agreement with the 

United States in which both agree to 

remove barriers to purchases of supplies 

produced in the other country or 

services performed by sources of the 

other country, and the memorandum or 

agreement complies, where applicable, 

with the requirements of section 36 of 

the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2776) and with 10 U.S.C. 2457. 

Response: DoD has adopted the 

expanded definition. 

8. Outside Scope of Case 

a. One respondent recommends that 

DoD should also exempt meta-aramid 

fibers from qualifying countries. 

Response: This comment is outside 

the scope of this case. The law which 

DoD is implementing only authorizes 

the exceptions for para-aramid fibers. 

b. One respondent has comments 

regarding other changes to the clause at 

DFARS 252.212–7001. 

Response: These comments relate to 

DFARS Case 2008–D002 and have been 

considered under that case. 

This rule was subject to Office of 

Management and Budget review under 

Executive Order 12866, dated 

September 30, 1993. This rule is not a 

major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

DoD certifies that this rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., 

because there are no small entities in 

the United States that can produce paraaramid fibers or continuous filament 

para-aramid yarns. The impact on 

spinners of para-aramid yarn other than 

continuous filament yarn has been 

removed by the change to the final rule. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply, because the rule does not 

impose any information collection 

requirements that require the approval 

of the Office of Management and Budget 

under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 225 and 

252 

Government procurement 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

■ Accordingly, the interim rule 

amending 48 CFR parts 225 and 252, 

which was published at 73 FR 76970 on 

December 18, 2008, is adopted as a final 

rule with the following changes: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 225 and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

■ 2. Section 225.003 is amended by 

revising the introductory text of 

paragraph (10) to read as follows: 

225.003 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(10) Qualifying country means a 

country with a reciprocal defense 

procurement memorandum of 

understanding or international 

agreement with the United States in 

which both countries agree to remove 

barriers to purchases of supplies 

produced in the other country or 

services performed by sources of the 

other country, and the memorandum or 

agreement complies, where applicable, 

with the requirements of section 36 of 

the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2776) and with 10 U.S.C. 2457. 

Accordingly, the following are 

qualifying countries: 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 225.7002–2 is amended by 

revising paragraph (m)(2) to read as 

follows: 

225.7002–2 Exceptions. 

* * * * * 

(m) * * * 

(2) The fibers and yarns are paraaramid fibers and continuous filament 

para-aramid yarns manufactured in a 

qualifying country. 

* * * * * 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

■ 4. Section 252.212–7001 is amended 

by revising the clause date and revising 

paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows: 

252.212–7001 Contract terms and 

conditions required to implement statutes 

or Executive orders applicable to Defense 

acquisitions of commercial items. 

* * * * * 

CONTRACT TERMS AND 

CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO 

IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR 

EXECUTIVE ORDERS APPLICABLE TO 

DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS OF 

COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JUN 2010) 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(8) ______ 252.225–7012, Preference for 

Certain Domestic Commodities (JUN 2010) 

(10 U.S.C. 2533a). 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 252.225–7012 is amended 

by revising the clause date; revising the 

introductory text of paragraph (a)(3); 

and revising paragraph (c)(6)(ii) to read 

as follows: 

252.225–7012 Preference for certain 

domestic commodities. 

* * * * * 

PREFERENCE FOR CERTAIN 

DOMESTIC COMMODITIES (JUN 2010) 

(a) * * * 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

34946 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(3) Qualifying country means a 

country with a reciprocal defense 

procurement memorandum of 

understanding or international 

agreement with the United States in 

which both countries agree to remove 

barriers to purchases of supplies 

produced in the other country or 

services performed by sources of the 

other country, and the memorandum or 

agreement complies, where applicable, 

with the requirements of section 36 of 

the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 

2776) and with 10 U.S.C. 2457. 

Accordingly, the following are 

qualifying countries: 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(ii) The fibers and yarns are paraaramid fibers and continuous filament 

para-aramid yarns manufactured in a 

qualifying country. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–14937 Filed 6–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Part 239 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Technical 

Amendment 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System. Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is issuing a technical 

amendment to the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to change a DoD Directive 

number for DoD Directive 8570.01 

Information Assurance Training, 

Certification, and Workforce 

Management, certified current as of 

April 23, 2007. 

DATES: Effective Date: June 21, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Ynette R. Shelkin, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) 

DPAP (DARS), Room 3B855, 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3060. Telephone 703–602–8384; 

facsimile 703–602–0350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule amends DFARS text at 239.7102– 

1(a)(7) by correcting the DoD Directive 

number from 8570.1 to 8570.01 in a list 

of current information assurance 

policies, procedures, and statutes 

pertaining to information technology. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 239 

Government procurement 

Ynette R. Shelkin, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

■ Therefore DoD is amending 48 CFR 

part 239 as follows: 

PART 239—ACQUISITION OF 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

part 239 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

■ 2. In 239.7102–1, revise paragraph 

(a)(7) to read as follows: 

239.7102–1 General. 

(a) * * * 

(7) DoD Directive 8570.01, 

Information Assurance Training, 

Certification, and Workforce 

Management; and 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–14936 Filed 6–18–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 541 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2010–0070] 

RIN 2127–AK68 

Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention 

Standard; Final Listing of 2011 Light 

Duty Truck Lines Subject to the 

Requirements of This Standard and 

Exempted Vehicle Lines for Model Year 

2011 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule announces 

NHTSA’s determination that there are 

no new model year (MY) 2011 light duty 

truck lines subject to the parts-marking 

requirements of the Federal motor 

vehicle theft prevention standard 

because they have been determined by 

the agency to be high-theft or because 

they have a majority of interchangeable 

parts with those of a passenger motor 

vehicle line. This final rule also 

identifies those vehicle lines that have 

been granted an exemption from the 

parts-marking requirements because the 

vehicles are equipped with antitheft 

devices determined to meet certain 

statutory criteria. 

DATES: Effective Date: The amendment 

made by this final rule is effective June 

21, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Rosalind Proctor, Consumer Standards 

Division, Office of International Policy, 

Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, 

NHTSA, West Building, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue, SE., (NVS–131, Room 

W43–302) Washington, DC 20590. Ms. 

Proctor’s telephone number is (202) 

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

0073. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The theft 

prevention standard applies to (1) all 

passenger car lines; (2) all multipurpose 

passenger vehicle (MPV) lines with a 

gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 

6,000 pounds or less; (3) low-theft lightduty truck (LDT) lines with a GVWR of 

6,000 pounds or less that have major 

parts that are interchangeable with a 

majority of the covered major parts of 

passenger car or MPV lines; and (4) 

high-theft light-duty truck lines with a 

GVWR of 6,000 pounds or less. 

The purpose of the theft prevention 

standard (49 CFR Part 541) is to reduce 

the incidence of motor vehicle theft by 

facilitating the tracing and recovery of 

parts from stolen vehicles. The standard 

seeks to facilitate such tracing by 

requiring that vehicle identification 

numbers (VINs), VIN derivative 

numbers, or other symbols be placed on 

major component vehicle parts. The 

theft prevention standard requires motor 

vehicle manufacturers to inscribe or 

affix VINs onto covered original 

equipment major component parts, and 

to inscribe or affix a symbol identifying 

the manufacturer and a common symbol 

identifying the replacement component 

parts for those original equipment parts, 

on all vehicle lines subject to the 

requirements of the standard. 

Section 33104(d) provides that once a 

line has become subject to the theft 

prevention standard, the line remains 

subject to the requirements of the 

standard unless it is exempted under 

§ 33106. Section 33106 provides that a 

manufacturer may petition annually to 

have one vehicle line exempted from 

the requirements of § 33104, if the line 

is equipped with an antitheft device 

meeting certain conditions as standard 

equipment. The exemption is granted if 

NHTSA determines that the antitheft 

device is likely to be as effective as 

compliance with the theft prevention 

standard in reducing and deterring 

motor vehicle thefts. 

The agency annually publishes the 

names of those LDT lines that have been 

determined to be high theft pursuant to 

49 CFR Part 541, those LDT lines that 

have been determined to have major 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES