13358 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices 

7The agency wishes to minimize the 

administrative burden that section 543.10(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 a manufacturer with an 

exemption 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. 

1 49 CFR 543.7 specifies that the manufacturer 

must include a statement that their entire vehicle 

line is equipped with an immobilizer that meets 

one of the following standards: 

(1) The performance criteria (subsections 8 

through 21) of C.R.C, c. 1038.114, Theft Protection 

and Rollaway Prevention (in effect March 30, 2011), 

as excerpted in appendix A of [part 543]; 

(2) National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC– 

S338–98, Automobile Theft Deterrent Equipment 

and Systems: Electronic Immobilization (May 1998); 

(3) United Nations Economic Commission for 

Europe (UN/ECE) Regulation No. 97 (ECE R97), 

Uniform Provisions Concerning Approval of Vehicle 

Alarm System (VAS) and Motor Vehicles with 

Regard to Their Alarm System (AS) in effect August 

8, 2007; or 

(4) UN/ECE Regulation No. 116 (ECE R116), 

Uniform Technical Prescriptions Concerning the 

Protection of Motor Vehicles Against Unauthorized 

Use in effect on February 10, 2009. 

the manufacturer must formally notify 

the agency. If such a decision is made, 

the line must be fully marked as 

required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 

(marking of major component parts and 

replacement parts). 

NHTSA notes that if Toyota 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 

543.8(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, section 543.10(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 the 

exemption.’’ 7

The agency wishes to minimize the 

administrative burden that section 

543.10(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 Toyota 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. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full Toyota’s petition 

for exemption for the Lexus IS vehicle 

line from the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR part 541, 

beginning with its MY 2023 vehicles. 

Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 

1.95 and 501.8. 

Raymond R. Posten, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04929 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

Petition for Exemption From the 

Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention 

Standard; North American Subaru, Inc. 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. 

SUMMARY: This document grants in full 

the North American Subaru, Inc.’s 

(Subaru) petition for exemption from 

the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft 

Prevention Standard (theft prevention 

standard) for its BRZ vehicle line 

beginning in model year (MY) 2023. The 

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. Subaru also 

requested confidential treatment for 

specific information in its petition. 

Therefore, no confidential information 

provided for purposes of this notice has 

been disclosed. 

DATES: The exemption granted by this 

notice is effective beginning with the 

2023 model year. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carlita Ballard, Office of International 

Policy, Fuel Economy, and Consumer 

Programs, NHTSA, West Building, 

W43–439, NRM–310, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Ms. 

Ballard’s phone number is (202) 366– 

5222. Her fax number is (202) 493–2990. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 49 

U.S.C. chapter 331, the Secretary of 

Transportation (and the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

(NHTSA) by delegation) is required to 

promulgate a theft prevention standard 

to provide for the identification of 

certain motor vehicles and their major 

replacement parts to impede motor 

vehicle theft. NHTSA promulgated 

regulations at 49 CFR part 541 (theft 

prevention standard) to require partsmarking for specified passenger motor 

vehicles and light trucks. Pursuant to 49 

U.S.C. 33106, manufacturers that are 

subject to the parts-marking 

requirements may petition NHTSA for 

an exemption for a line of passenger 

motor vehicles equipped with an 

antitheft device as standard equipment 

that NHTSA decides is likely to be as 

effective in reducing and deterring 

motor vehicle theft as compliance with 

the parts-marking requirements. In 

accordance with this statute, NHTSA 

promulgated 49 CFR part 543, which 

establishes the process through which 

manufacturers may seek an exemption 

from the theft prevention standard. 

49 CFR 543.5 provides general 

submission requirements for petitions 

and states that each manufacturer may 

petition NHTSA for an exemption of 

one vehicle line per model year. Among 

other requirements, manufacturers must 

identify whether the exemption is 

sought under section 543.6 or section 

543.7. Under section 543.6, a 

manufacturer may request an exemption 

by providing specific information about 

the antitheft device, its capabilities, and 

the reasons the petitioner believes the 

device to be as effective at reducing and 

deterring theft as compliance with the 

parts-marking requirements. Section 

543.7 permits a manufacturer to request 

an exemption under a more streamlined 

process if the vehicle line is equipped 

with an antitheft device (an 

‘‘immobilizer’’) as standard equipment 

that complies with one of the standards 

specified in that section.1

Section 543.8 establishes 

requirements for processing petitions for 

exemption from the theft prevention 

standard. As stated in section 543.8(a), 

NHTSA processes any complete 

exemption petition. If NHTSA receives 

an incomplete petition, NHTSA will 

notify the petitioner of the deficiencies. 

Once NHTSA receives a complete 

petition the agency will process it and, 

in accordance with section 543.8(b), 

will grant the petition 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. 

Section 543.8(c) requires NHTSA to 

issue its decision either to grant or to 

deny an exemption petition not later 

than 120 days after the date on which 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices 13359 

2 49 U.S.C. 33106(d). 

3 49 CFR 543.6(a)(3). 

4 49 CFR 543.6(a)(4). 

5 49 CFR 543.6(a)(5). 

6 49 CFR 512.20(a). 

a complete petition is filed. If NHTSA 

does not make a decision within the 

120-day period, the petition shall be 

deemed to be approved and the 

manufacturer shall be exempt from the 

standard for the line covered by the 

petition for the subsequent model year.2

Exemptions granted under part 543 

apply only to the vehicle line or lines 

that are subject to the grant and that are 

equipped with the antitheft device on 

which the line’s exemption was based, 

and are effective for the model year 

beginning after the model year in which 

NHTSA issues the notice of exemption, 

unless the notice of exemption specifies 

a later year. 

Sections 543.8(f) and (g) apply to the 

manner in which NHTSA’s decisions on 

petitions are to be made known. Under 

section 543.8(f), if the petition is sought 

under section 543.6, NHTSA publishes 

a notice of its decision to grant or deny 

the exemption petition in the Federal 

Register and notifies the petitioner in 

writing. Under section 543.8(g), if the 

petition is sought under section 543.7, 

NHTSA notifies the petitioner in writing 

of the agency’s decision to grant or deny 

the exemption petition. 

This grant of petition for exemption 

considers North American Subaru, Inc.’s 

(Subaru) petition for its BRZ vehicle 

line beginning in MY 2023. 

I. Specific Petition Content 

Requirements Under 49 CFR 543.6 

Pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, 

Exemption from Vehicle Theft 

Prevention, Subaru petitioned for an 

exemption for its specified vehicle line 

from the parts-marking requirements of 

the theft prevention standard, beginning 

in MY 2023. Subaru petitioned under 49 

CFR 543.6, Petition: Specific content 

requirements, which, as described 

above, requires manufacturers to 

provide specific information about the 

antitheft device installed as standard 

equipment on all vehicles in the line for 

which an exemption is sought, the 

antitheft device’s capabilities, and the 

reasons the petitioner believes the 

device to be as effective at reducing and 

deterring theft as compliance with the 

parts-marking requirements. 

More specifically, section 543.6(a)(1) 

requires petitions to include a statement 

that an antitheft device will be installed 

as standard equipment on all vehicles in 

the line for which the exemption is 

sought. Under section 543.6(a)(2), each 

petition must list each component in the 

antitheft system, and include a diagram 

showing the location of each of those 

components within the vehicle. As 

required by section 543.6(a)(3), each 

petition must include an explanation of 

the means and process by which the 

device is activated and functions, 

including any aspect of the device 

designed to: (1) Facilitate or encourage 

its activation by motorists; (2) attract 

attention to the efforts of an 

unauthorized person to enter or move a 

vehicle by means other than a key; (3) 

prevent defeating or circumventing the 

device by an unauthorized person 

attempting to enter a vehicle by means 

other than a key; (4) prevent the 

operation of a vehicle which an 

unauthorized person has entered using 

means other than a key; and (5) ensure 

the reliability and durability of the 

device.3

In addition to providing information 

about the antitheft device and its 

functionality, petitioners must also 

submit the reasons for their belief that 

the antitheft device will be effective in 

reducing and deterring motor vehicle 

theft, including any theft data and other 

data that are available to the petitioner 

and form a basis for that belief,4 and the 

reasons for their belief that the agency 

should determine that the antitheft 

device is likely to be as effective as 

compliance with the parts-marking 

requirements of part 541 in reducing 

and deterring motor vehicle theft. In 

support of this belief, the petitioners 

should include any statistical data that 

are available to the petitioner and form 

the basis for the petitioner’s belief that 

a line of passenger motor vehicles 

equipped with the antitheft device is 

likely to have a theft rate equal to or less 

than that of passenger motor vehicles of 

the same, or a similar, line which have 

parts marked in compliance with part 

541.5

The following sections describe 

Subaru’s petition information provided 

pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption 

from Vehicle Theft Prevention. To the 

extent that specific information in 

Subaru’s petition is subject to a properly 

filed confidentiality request, that 

information was not disclosed as part of 

this notice.6

II. Subaru’s Petition for Exemption 

In a petition dated September 7, 2021, 

Subaru requested an exemption from 

the parts-marking requirements of the 

theft prevention standard for the BRZ 

vehicle line beginning with MY 2023. 

In its petition, Subaru provided a 

detailed description and diagram of the 

identity, design, and location of the 

components of the antitheft device for 

the BRZ vehicle line. Subaru stated that 

its MY 2023 BRZ vehicle line will be 

installed with an engine immobilizer 

device as standard equipment, as 

required by 543.6(a)(1). Subaru also 

stated it will offer a ‘‘Smart Key’’ system 

on all trim lines, which includes keyless 

access and push start functions. 

Specifically, key components of the 

‘‘smart entry’’ system will include a 

keyless access engine control unit 

(ECU), steering lock ECU, engine ECU, 

an interior antenna, push button 

ignition switch, and an access key. 

Subaru also stated that there is a 

diagnosis tool used to perform a key ID 

code registration to the immobilizer 

module. Subaru stated that its antitheft 

device will also include an alarm 

system as standard equipment. Subaru 

stated that its alarm system will monitor 

door status and key ID, and opening of 

a door or hood will activate the alarm 

system. Subaru further stated that visual 

and audio features will attract attention 

to the efforts of an unauthorized person 

to enter or move the vehicle by 

sounding the vehicle’s horn and 

illuminating the 4-way flashing hazard 

lamps. 

Pursuant to section 543.6(a)(3), 

Subaru explained the means and 

process by which the immobilizer 

device is activated and functions. 

Subaru stated that its antitheft system 

and immobilization features are 

designed and constructed within the 

vehicle’s overall CAN (controller area 

network) electrical architecture which 

means the antitheft system cannot be 

separated by rerouting or tapping into 

particular wires or connectors. Subaru 

further stated that the immobilization 

features will prevent operation of the 

vehicle by preventing the starting or 

operation of the engine even if an 

unauthorized person was to gain entry 

into the vehicle. 

Subaru stated that its BRZ antitheft 

system is activated when the ignition is 

at the ‘‘OFF’’ position or the door is 

opened/closed while propulsion system 

is off and ignition is at the ‘‘ON’’ or 

‘‘ACC’’ position. Deactivation occurs 

after the driver gets in the vehicle with 

the access key and pushes the button 

ignition switch while pressing the brake 

pedal, and random codes are then 

transmitted to the access key from the 

keyless access ECU through the interior 

antenna. Once the access key receives 

the signal, it returns the encrypted code. 

When pushing the push button ignition 

switch once again, the power is turned 

off and the security indicator lamp 

blinks. Subaru stated that this method of 

activation will facilitate and encourage 

its activation by motorists because it 

requires nothing more than the removal 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
13360 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2022 / Notices 

7 82 FR 57650 (Dec. 06, 2017). 

8The agency wishes to minimize the 

administrative burden that section 543.10(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 a manufacturer with an 

exemption 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. 

of the key from the ignition switch 

when the vehicle is not being used. 

As required in section 543.6(a)(3)(v), 

Subaru provided information on the 

reliability and durability of its proposed 

device. To ensure reliability and 

durability of the device, Subaru 

conducted tests based on its own 

specified standards and provided a 

detailed list of the tests conducted. 

Subaru stated that it believes that its 

device is reliable and durable because it 

complied with its own specific design 

standards and the antitheft device is 

installed on other vehicle lines for 

which the agency has granted a partsmarking exemption. 

Subaru stated that its theft rates have 

been low per the National Insurance 

Crime Bureau’s 2019 report on 

America’s 10 most stolen vehicles. 

However, Subaru compared its 

proposed device to other Subaru 

antitheft devices that NHTSA has 

determined to be as effective in 

reducing and deterring motor vehicle 

theft as would compliance with the 

parts-marking requirements. 

Specifically, Subaru stated that the theft 

rate of the MY 2008 Impreza (not parts 

marked, standard engine immobilizer) 

decreased by almost 51% as compared 

to the MY 2007 Impreza (parts marked 

with optional engine immobilizer). 

Subaru stated that the antitheft system 

included on the BRZ vehicle line is the 

same system employed on the Subaru 

Ascent car line, for which NHTSA 

determined that the system was likely as 

effective in reducing and deterring 

motor vehicle theft as compliance with 

the parts-marking requirements of the 

theft prevention standard.7

Subaru also stated that the National 

Crime Information Center’s (NCIC) theft 

data showed that there was a 70% 

reduction in theft experienced when 

comparing the MY 1997 Ford Mustang 

vehicle thefts (with immobilizers) to MY 

1995 Ford Mustang vehicle thefts 

(without immobilizers). On the basis of 

the above and other cited comparisons, 

Subaru has concluded that its proposed 

immobilizer system is no less effective 

than those devices installed on lines for 

which NHTSA has already granted full 

exemptions. 

III. Decision To Grant the Petition 

Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 

CFR 543.8(b), the agency grants a 

petition for exemption from the partsmarking 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 or if deemed 

approved under 49 U.S.C. 33106(d). 

NHTSA finds that Subaru has provided 

adequate reasons for its belief that the 

antitheft device for its 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. This conclusion is based on 

the information Subaru provided about 

its antitheft device. 

The agency concludes that Subaru’s 

antitheft device will provide the five 

types of performance features listed in 

section 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. 

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 543.8(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 Subaru decides not to use the 

exemption for its requested vehicle line, 

the manufacturer must formally notify 

the agency. If such a decision is made, 

the line must be fully marked as 

required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 

(marking of major component parts and 

replacement parts). 

NHTSA notes that if a manufacturer 

to which an exemption has been granted 

wishes in the future to modify the 

device on which the exemption is 

based, the company may have to submit 

a petition to modify the exemption. 

Section 543.8(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, section 543.10(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 the 

exemption.’’ 8

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby announces a grant in full of 

Subaru’s petition for exemption for the 

BRZ vehicle line from the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR part 541, 

beginning with its MY 2023 vehicles. 

Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 

1.95 and 501.8. 

Raymond R. Posten, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04928 Filed 3–8–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2021–0009] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission to the Office of 

Management and Budget for Review 

and Approval; Uniform Procedures for 

State Highway Safety Grant Programs 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments on a reinstatement of a 

previously approved information 

collection. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), this notice announces that the 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

abstracted below will be submitted to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval. The ICR 

describes the nature of the information 

collection and its expected burden. This 

is a request for approval for 

reinstatement of a previously-approved 

collection of information for NHTSA’s 

Highway Grant Program, which 

includes State Highway Safety Program 

grants, the National Priority Safety 

Program grants, and a separate grant on 

racial profiling data collection. The 

purpose of the information collection is 

to collect information necessary for 

NHTSA to issue grants to States. To 

receive grants, a State must submit a 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1