Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2017 / Notices 48743 

device for the 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 part 

541). This conclusion is based on the 

information FCA provided about its 

device. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full FCA’s petition for 

exemption for its Jeep Wrangler vehicle 

line from the parts-marking 

requirements of 49 CFR part 541, 

beginning with its MY 2018 Jeep 

Wrangler vehicles. 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. FCA stated that an 

official nameplate for the vehicle has 

not yet been determined. 

If FCA decides not to use the 

exemption for this vehicle line, it must 

formally notify the agency. If such a 

decision is made, the vehicle line must 

be fully marked as required by 49 CFR 

parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major 

component parts and replacement 

parts). 

NHTSA notes that if FCA 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. 49 CFR 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 anti-theft device on 

which the line’s exemption is based. 

Further, 49 CFR 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 49 CFR 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. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95. 

Raymond R. Posten, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22659 Filed 10–18–17; 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; Toyota Motor North 

America, Inc. 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. 

SUMMARY: This document grants in full 

the Toyota Motor North America, Inc.’s, 

(Toyota) petition for an exemption of 

the Avalon vehicle line. 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 of the Federal 

Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention 

Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). 

DATES: The exemption granted by this 

notice is applicable beginning with the 

2019 model year (MY). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hisham Mohamed, International Policy, 

Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, 

NHTSA, W43–437, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Mr. 

Mohamed’s phone number is (202) 366– 

0307. His fax number is (202) 493–2990. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

petition dated June 19, 2017, Toyota 

requested an exemption from the partsmarking requirements of the Theft 

Prevention Standard for the Avalon 

vehicle line beginning with MY 2019. 

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 the entire 

vehicle line. 

Under 49 CFR part 543.5(a), a 

manufacturer may petition NHTSA to 

grant an exemption for one vehicle line 

per model year. In its petition, Toyota 

provided a detailed description and 

diagram of the identity, design, and 

location of the components of the 

antitheft device for the Avalon vehicle 

line. Toyota stated that its MY 2019 

Avalon vehicle line will be installed 

with a ‘‘smart entry and start’’ system 

and an engine immobilizer as standard 

equipment. Key components of the 

‘‘smart entry and start’’ system device 

on the Avalon vehicle line will include, 

a certification electronic control unit 

(ECU), engine switch, steering lock ECU, 

security indicator, door control receiver, 

electrical key, an engine immobilizer 

and an electronic control module 

(ECM). Toyota stated that there will also 

be position switches installed on the 

vehicle to protect the hood and doors 

from unauthorized tampering/opening. 

Toyota further explained that locking 

the doors can be accomplished through 

use of a key, wireless switch or its smart 

entry system, and that unauthorized 

tampering with the hood or door 

without using one of these methods will 

cause the position switches to trigger its 

antitheft device to operate. Toyota 

stated that it will not incorporate an 

audible and visual alarm system as 

standard equipment on its trim-line 

vehicles. 

Toyota’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. 

In addressing the specific content 

requirements of § 543.6, Toyota 

provided information on the reliability 

and durability of its proposed device. 

To ensure reliability and durability of 

the device, Toyota conducted tests 

based on its own specified standards. 

Toyota provided a detailed list of the 

tests conducted (i.e., high and low 

temperature operation, overvoltage, 

strength, impact, vibration, electromagnetic interference, etc.). Toyota 

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 parts-marking exemption. 

As an additional measure of reliability 

and durability, Toyota stated that its 

vehicle key cylinders are covered with 

casting cases to prevent the key cylinder 

from easily being broken. Toyota further 

explained that there are approximately 

10,000 combinations for inner cut keys 

which makes it difficult to unlock the 

doors without using a valid key because 

the key cylinders would spin out and 

cause the locks to not operate. 

Toyota stated that its ‘‘smart entry and 

start system’’ device is activated when 

the engine switch is pushed from the 


rmajette on DSKBCKNHB2PROD with NOTICES
48744 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 201 / Thursday, October 19, 2017 / Notices 

‘‘ON’’ ignition status to any other status. 

The certification ECU then performs the 

calculation for the immobilizer and the 

immobilizer signals the ECM to activate 

the device. Toyota also stated that key 

verification is also performed after the 

driver pushes the engine switch. 

Specifically, after the driver pushes the 

engine switch, the certification ECU and 

steering lock ECU receive confirmation 

of a valid key, and the certification ECU 

allows the ECM to start the engine. 

Toyota also stated that in the ‘‘smart 

entry and start system’’ installed 

vehicle, a security indicator notifies the 

users and others inside and outside the 

vehicle with the status of the 

immobilizer. Toyota further explained 

that the security indicator flashes 

continuously when the immobilizer is 

activated, and turns off when it is 

deactivated. 

Toyota stated that the proposed 

antitheft device has also been installed 

as standard equipment on its Avalon 

vehicle line beginning with its MY 2015 

vehicles. The theft rate for the MY 2015 

Avalon vehicle line is not available. 

However, Toyota compared its proposed 

device to other devices NHTSA has 

determined to be as effective in 

reducing and deterring motor vehicle 

theft as would compliance with the 

parts-marking requirements. Toyota 

compared its proposed device to that 

which has been installed on the Nissan 

Altima and granted a parts-marking 

exemption from 49 CFR part 541 by the 

agency beginning with its MY 2000 

vehicles. Toyota also referenced the 

NHTSA theft rate data published for 

several years before and after the Nissan 

Altima was equipped with a standard 

immobilizer device. Specifically, Toyota 

stated that the publication showed that 

the average theft rate for the Nissan 

Altima dropped to 3.0 per 1,000 cars 

produced between MY’s 2000–2006 

compared to 5.3 per 1,000 cars 

produced between MY’s 1996–1999. 

This represents approximately a 43% 

decrease in the theft rate for the Nissan 

Altima vehicle line installed with an 

immobilizer between MY’s 2000–2006 

as compared to the Nissan Altima 

vehicle line without an immobilizer 

between MY’s 1996–1999. The theft 

rates for the Nissan Altima vehicle line 

using an average of three model years’ 

data (2012–2014) are 2.4207, 1.7598 and 

2.1212 respectively, all well below the 

median theft rate of 3.5826. Therefore, 

Toyota has concluded that the antitheft 

device proposed for its Avalon vehicle 

line is no less effective than those 

devices on the lines for which NHTSA 

has already granted full exemption from 

the parts-marking requirements. Toyota 

stated that it believes that installing the 

immobilizer device as standard 

equipment reduces the theft rate for the 

Avalon vehicle line and expects it to 

experience comparable effectiveness 

and ultimately be more effective than 

parts-marking labels. 

Based on the supporting evidence 

submitted by Toyota on its device, the 

agency believes that the antitheft device 

for the Avalon 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. 

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

CFR 543.7 (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. The agency 

finds that Toyota has provided adequate 

reasons for its belief that the antitheft 

device for the Avalon 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 part 541). This 

conclusion is based on the information 

Toyota provided about its device. 

For the foregoing reasons, the agency 

hereby grants in full Toyota’s petition 

for exemption for the Avalon 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 Toyota 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 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. 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. 

Issued in Washington, DC, under authority 

delegated in 49 CFR 1.95. 

Raymond R. Posten, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2017–22657 Filed 10–18–17; 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; Nissan North America, 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 Nissan North America, Inc.’s, 

(Nissan) petition for exemption of the 

Infiniti QX50 vehicle line in accordance 

with the Exemption from the Theft 

Prevention Standard. This petition is 

granted because the agency has 

determined that the antitheft device to 

be placed on the line as standard 


rmajette on DSKBCKNHB2PROD with NOTICES