Document ID: NHTSA-2013-0009-0048
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Federal Vehicle Theft Prevention Standards; Petitions for Exemption: Nissan North America, Inc.
Posted Date: 2014-08-05T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45588-45590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18442]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal 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 an exemption of the NV200 Taxi vehicle line in 
accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from 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 parts-marking 
requirements of 49 CFR part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard (Theft Prevention Standard). Nissan also requested 
confidential treatment of specific information in its petition. The 
agency will address Nissan's request for confidential treatment by 
separate letter.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
the 2015 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of 
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, W43-
443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's 
phone number is (202) 366-4139. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated May 30, 2014, Nissan 
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft 
Prevention Standard for the Nissan NV200 Taxi vehicle line beginning 
with MY 2015. 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, Nissan provided a detailed description and diagram of the 
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft 
device for the NV200 Taxi vehicle line. Nissan stated that the MY 2015 
NV200 Taxi vehicle line will be equipped with a passive, transponder

[[Page 45589]]

based, electronic engine immobilizer antitheft device as standard 
equipment. Key components of its antitheft device will include a body 
control module (BCM), engine control module (ECM), security indicator 
light, immobilizer antenna, and a specially-designed key with a 
microchip. Nissan will not provide any visible or audible indication of 
unauthorized vehicle entry on the NV200 Taxi vehicle line. Nissan's 
submission is considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 
543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in Sec.  
543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    The immobilizer device is automatically armed when the ignition 
switch is turned to the ``OFF'' position. Authentication to deactivate 
the immobilizer occurs when the doors are unlocked with the key, the 
correct key is inserted into the key cylinder and the ignition switch 
is turned to the ``ON'' position. Nissan stated that the immobilizer 
device prevents normal operation of the vehicle without using a 
specially-designed microchip key with a pre-registered ``Key-ID''. 
Specifically, Nissan stated that, when the key is inserted into the key 
cylinder and the ignition switch is turned to the ``ON'' position, the 
BCM generates an electric field between the immobilizer antenna and the 
microchip incorporated into the ignition key. The microchip in the key 
transmits the Key-ID to the BCM, beginning an encrypted communication 
process. If the Key-ID and encrypted code are correct, the ECM will 
allow the engine to keep running and the driver to operate the vehicle. 
If the Key-ID and encrypted code are not correct, the ECM will cause 
the engine to shut down.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6, 
Nissan provided information on the reliability and durability of its 
proposed device. Nissan stated that its antitheft device is tested for 
specific parameters to ensure its reliability and durability. Nissan 
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. Nissan further stated that its 
immobilizer device satisfies the European Directive ECE R116, including 
tamper resistance and that all control units for the device are located 
inside the vehicle, providing further protection from unauthorized 
accessibility of the device from outside the vehicle.
    Nissan stated that the proposed device is functionally equivalent 
to the antitheft device installed on the Nissan Cube vehicle line which 
was granted a parts-marking exemption by the agency on April 14, 2010 
(75 FR 19458). The agency notes that the theft rates for the Nissan 
Cube using an average of 3 MYs data (2009-2011), are 0.2124, 0.7728 and 
1.1893 respectively.
    Nissan provided data on the effectiveness of the antitheft device 
installed on its NV200 Taxi vehicle line in support of the belief that 
its antitheft device will be highly effective in reducing and deterring 
theft. Nissan referenced the National Insurance Crime Bureau's data 
which it stated showed a 70% reduction in theft when comparing MY 1997 
Ford Mustangs (with a standard immobilizer) to MY 1995 Ford Mustangs 
(without an immobilizer). Nissan also referenced the Highway Loss Data 
Institute's data which reported that BMW vehicles experienced theft 
loss reductions resulting in a 73% decrease in relative claim frequency 
and a 78% lower average loss payment per claim for vehicles equipped 
with an immobilizer. Additionally, Nissan stated that theft rates for 
its Pathfinder vehicle experienced reductions from model year (MY) 2000 
to 2001 with implementation of the engine immobilizer device as 
standard equipment and further significant reductions subsequent to MY 
2001. Specifically, Nissan noted that the agency's theft rate data for 
MY's 2001 through 2006 reported theft rates of 1.9146, 1.8011, 1.1482, 
0.8102, 1.7298 and 1.3474 respectively for the Nissan Pathfinder.
    In support of its belief that its antitheft device will be as 
effective as compliance with the parts marking requirements in reducing 
and deterring vehicle theft, Nissan compared its device to other 
similar devices previously granted exemptions by the agency. 
Specifically, it referenced the agency's grant of full exemptions to 
General Motors Corporation for its Buick Riviera and Oldsmobile Aurora 
vehicle lines (58 FR 44872, August 25, 1993) and its Cadillac Seville 
vehicle line (62 FR 20058, April 24, 1997) from the parts-marking 
requirements of the theft prevention standard. Nissan stated that it 
believes that since its device is functionally equivalent to other 
comparable manufacturer's devices that have already been granted parts-
marking exemptions by the agency, along with the evidence of reduced 
theft rates for vehicle lines equipped with similar devices and 
advanced technology of transponder electronic security, the Nissan 
immobilizer device will have the potential to achieve the level of 
effectiveness equivalent to those vehicles already exempted the agency. 
The agency agrees that the device is substantially similar to devices 
installed on other vehicle lines for which the agency has already 
granted exemptions.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Nissan on its device, 
the agency believes that the antitheft device for the NV200 Taxi 
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).
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants 
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking 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 Nissan has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the 
antitheft device for the Nissan NV200 Taxi 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 
Nissan provided about its device.
    The agency concludes that the device will provide four of the five 
types of performance listed in Sec.  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.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full 
Nissan's petition for exemption for the Nissan NV200 Taxi 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 Nissan 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

[[Page 45590]]

according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of 
major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Nissan 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.
    Under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95.

David M. Hines,
Acting Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014-18442 Filed 8-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P