Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2002/05/17/02-12424/petition-for-exemption-from-the-vehicle-theft-prevention-standard-ford
Timestamp: 2018-02-21 13:45:21
Document Index: 453503790

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 541', 'art 543', 'art 541', '§\u2009543', '§\u2009543', 'art 541', 'art 541']

67 FR 35189
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/02-12424 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/02-12424
This document grants in full the petition of Ford Motor Company (Ford) for an exemption of a high-theft line, the Lincoln Town Car, from the parts-marking requirements of the Federal Motor 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 the Theft Prevention Standard.
Ms. Rosalind Proctor, Office of Planning and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington DC 20590. Ms. Proctor's telephone number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2290.
In a petition dated January 25, 2002, Ford requested an exemption from the parts marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, for the Lincoln Town Car vehicle line beginning in MY 2003. The petition was 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 the entire line. Based on the evidence submitted by Ford, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Ford Lincoln Town Car 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).
Ford's submittal 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. Ford requested confidential treatment for information and attachments in support of its petition. In a letter to the manufacturer dated March 14, 2002, the agency granted Ford's request for confidential treatment of its petition.
In its petition, Ford provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft device for the line. Ford will install its antitheft device, the SecuriLock Passive Anti-Theft Electronic Engine Immobilizer System (SecuriLock) as standard equipment on the MY 2003 Lincoln Town Car. The system has been voluntarily installed as standard equipment on its Lincoln Town Car line since MY 1998.
In order to ensure the reliability and durability of the device, Ford conducted tests, based on its own specified standards. Ford provided a detailed list of the tests conducted and stated its belief that the device is reliable and durable since it complied with Ford's specified requirements for each test. The environmental and functional tests conducted were for thermal shock, high temperature exposure, low-temperature exposure, powered/thermal cycle, temperature/humidity cycling, constant humidity, end-of-line, functional, random vibration, tri-temperature parametric, bench drop, transmit current, lead/lock strength/integrity, output frequency, resistance to solvents, output field strength, dust, and electromagnetic compatibility.
The Ford SecuriLock is a transponder-based electronic immobilizer system. The device is activated when the driver/operator turns off the engine by using the properly coded ignition key. When the ignition key is turned to the start position, the transponder (located in the head of the key) transmits a code to the powertrain's electronic control module (PCM). The vehicle's engine can only be started if the transponder code matches the code previously 2 programmed into the powertrain's electronic control module. If the code does not match, the engine will be disabled.
Ford stated that there are four quadrillion different codes and each transponder is hard-coded with a unique code at the time of vehicle assembly. Additionally, Ford stated that communication between the SecuriLock transponder and the powertrain's electronic control module is encrypted, making key duplication nearly impossible.
Ford stated that its SecuriLock system incorporates a theft indicator using a light-emitting diode (LED) that provides a visual indicator to the driver/operator as to the “set” and “unset” condition of the device. When the ignition is initially turned to the “ON” position, a 3-second continuous LED indicates that the device is “unset.” When the ignition is turned to “OFF,” a flashing LED indicates the device is “set” and provides visual information that the vehicle is protected by the SecuriLock system. Ford states that the integration of the setting/unsetting device (transponder) into the ignition key assures activation of the device.
Ford believes that its new device is reliable and durable because its does not have any moving parts, nor does it require a separate battery in the key. If the correct code is not transmitted to the electronic control module (accomplished only by having the correct key), there is no way to mechanically override the system and start the vehicle. Furthermore, Ford stated that with the sophisticated design and operation of the electronic engine immobilizer system, conventional theft methods are ineffective (i.e., hot-wiring or attacking the ignition-lock cylinder). Ford reemphasized that any attempt to slam-pull the ignition-lock cylinder will have no effect on a thief's ability to start the vehicle.
Ford stated that the effectiveness of its SecuriLock device is best reflected in the reduction of the theft rates for its Mustang GT and Cobra models from MY 1995 to 1996. The SecuriLock antitheft device was voluntarily installed on all Mustang GT and Cobra models, and the Taurus LX and SHO models as standard equipment in MY 1996. In MY 1997, the SecuriLock system was installed on the entire Mustang vehicle line as standard equipment. Ford notes that a comparison of the National Crime Information Center's (NCIC) calendar year (CY)1995 theft data for MY 1995 Mustang GT and Cobra vehicles without an immobilizer device installed with MY 1997 data for Mustang GT and Start Printed Page 35191Cobra vehicles with an immobilizer device installed, shows a reduction in thefts of approximately 70% for the vehicles with the immobilizer. With the introduction of SecuriLock on all 2000 Taurus models, the NCIC data show a 63% drop in theft rate compared with the non-SecuriLock equipped 1999 Taurus models.
As part of its submission, Ford also provided a Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) theft loss bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 1, September 1997, which evaluated 1996 Ford Mustang and Taurus models fitted with the SecuriLock device and corresponding 1995 models without the SecuriLock device. The results as reported by HLDI indicated a reduction in overall theft losses by approximately 50% for both Mustang and Taurus models.
Based on the evidence submitted by Ford, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Lincoln Town Car 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).
The agency believes that the device will provide four of the five types of performance listed in 49 CFR 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 Ford Motor Company's petition for an exemption for the MY 2003 Lincoln Town Car vehicle line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541.
[FR Doc. 02-12424 Filed 5-16-02; 8:45 am]