
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 192 (Monday, October 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60243-60245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25202]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft 
Prevention Standard; Ford Motor Company

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Ford Motor Company's (Ford) 
petition for an exemption of the MKC 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 the 49 CFR part 
541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard (Theft Prevention 
Standard). Ford also requested confidential treatment for specific 
information in its petition that the agency will address by separate 
letter.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
the 2017 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 June 25, 2015, Ford 
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft 
Prevention Standard for the Lincoln MKC vehicle line beginning with MY 
2017. The petition requested 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, Ford provided a detailed description and diagram of the 
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft 
device for its Lincoln MKC vehicle line. Ford stated that the Lincoln 
MKC will be installed with its Intelligent Access with Push Button 
Start (IAwPB) system as standard equipment on the entire vehicle line. 
The IAwPB system is a passive, electronic engine immobilizer device 
that uses encrypted transponder technology. Key components of the IAwPB 
device will include an Intelligent Access electronic Push-Button Start 
key fob, keyless ignition system, body control module (BCM), powertrain 
control module (PCM) and a passive immobilizer. Ford further stated 
that its Lincoln MKC vehicle line will be offered with a perimeter 
alarm system as standard equipment. The perimeter alarm system will 
activate a visible and audible alarm whenever unauthorized access is 
attempted.
    Ford stated that the device's integration of the transponder into 
the normal operation of the ignition key assures activation of the 
system. Ford also stated that the MKC vehicle line's electronic key 
will be programmed into the vehicle during system initialization at the 
manufacturing plant. Ford further stated that the vehicle engine can 
only be started when the key is present in the vehicle and the 
``StartStop'' button inside the vehicle is pressed. Ford stated that 
when the ``StartStop'' button is pressed, the transceiver module will 
read a key code and transmit an encrypted message to the control module 
to determine key validity and engine start by sending a separate 
encrypted message to the BCM and the PCM. The powertrain will function 
only if the key code matches the unique identification key code 
previously programmed into the BCM. If the codes do not match, the 
powertrain engine will be inoperable. Ford also expressed that any 
attempt to short the ``StartStop'' button will have no effect on a 
thief's ability to start the vehicle without the correct code being 
transmitted to the electronic control modules. Ford stated

[[Page 60244]]

that the two modules must be matched together in order for the vehicle 
to start. According to Ford, deactivation of the device occurs 
automatically each time the engine is started.
    Ford'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.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Ford 
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed 
device. To ensure 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 believes that the device is 
reliable and durable since the device complied with its own specified 
requirements for each test.
    Ford stated that incorporation of several features in the device 
further support the reliability and durability of the device. 
Specifically, some of those features include: Encrypted communication 
between the transponder, BCM control function and the PCM; virtually 
impossible key duplication; and shared security data between the body 
control module/remote function actuator and the powertrain control 
module. Additionally, Ford stated that its antitheft device has no 
moving parts (i.e., BCM, PCM, and electrical components) to perform 
system functions which eliminate the possibility for physical damage or 
deterioration from normal use; and mechanically overriding the device 
to start the vehicle is also impossible.
    Ford stated that its MY 2017 Lincoln MKC vehicle line will also be 
equipped with several other standard antitheft features common to Ford 
vehicles, (i.e., hood release located inside the vehicle, counterfeit 
resistant VIN labels, secondary VINs, and cabin accessibility only with 
the use of a valid key fob).
    Ford compared the device proposed for its vehicle line with other 
antitheft devices which NHTSA has determined to be as effective in 
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the 
parts-marking requirements. Ford stated that it believes that the 
standard installation of the IAwPB device would be an effective 
deterrent against vehicle theft.
    Ford further stated that its antitheft device was installed on all 
MY 1996 Ford Mustang GT and Cobra models as well as other selected 
models. Ford stated that on its 1997 models, the installation of its 
antitheft device was extended to the entire Ford Mustang vehicle line 
as standard equipment. Ford also stated that according to the National 
Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) theft statistics, MY 1997 Mustangs 
installed with the SecuriLock device showed a 70% reduction in theft 
rate compared to its MY 1995 Mustangs without an antitheft device.
    Ford stated that the proposed antitheft device is very similar to 
the system that was offered in its MY 2016 Lincoln MKX vehicle line. 
The Lincoln MKX vehicle line was granted a parts-marking exemption on 
November 25, 2014 by NHTSA (See 79 FR 70276) beginning with its MY 2016 
vehicles. The agency notes that current theft rate data for MYs 2010 
through 2012 Lincoln MKX vehicle line are 0.5670, 0.4056 and 0.5841 
respectively.
    Ford also reported that beginning with MY 2010, its antitheft 
device was installed as standard equipment on all of its North American 
Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles but was offered as optional 
equipment on its 2010 F-series Super Duty pickups, Econoline and 
Transit Connect vehicles. Ford further stated that beginning with MY 
2010, the IAwPB was installed as standard equipment on its Lincoln MKT 
vehicles and starting in MY 2011, offered as standard equipment on the 
Lincoln MKX and optionally on the Lincoln MKS, Ford Taurus, Edge, 
Explorer and the Focus vehicles. Beginning with MY 2013, the device was 
offered as standard equipment on the Lincoln MKZ and optionally on the 
Ford Fusion, C-Max and Escape vehicles.
    Ford referenced the agency's published theft rate data by calendar 
year for all vehicles and the Ford Escape for comparison purposes 
because it stated that the Lincoln MKC will use the IAwPB system that 
will be similar to the Ford Escape in design and architecture. Ford 
further stated that the Lincoln MKC is comparably similar to the Ford 
Escape in vehicle segment, size and equipment. Ford reported that the 
Escape's theft rate is lower than the vehicle theft rate for all 
vehicles in each of the last five calendar years for which published 
data is available. Specifically, the agency's data show that theft 
rates for the Ford Escape for MYs 2010-2012 are 0.7265, 0.6409, and 
0.8336 respectively. Using an average of the most current of three MYs 
data (2010-2012), the theft rate for the Ford Escape vehicle line is 
well below the median at 0.7336. Ford stated that with the installation 
of its IAwPB device as standard equipment, the Lincoln MKC will have a 
very low theft rate comparable to the theft rate of the Ford Escape 
vehicle line.
    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 Ford on the device, 
the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Lincoln MKC 
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 Ford has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the 
antitheft device for the Lincoln MKC 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 Ford 
provided about its device.
    The agency concludes that the device will provide the five types of 
performance listed in Sec.  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.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Ford's 
petition for exemption for the Lincoln MKC 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.

[[Page 60245]]

    If Ford 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 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 Ford 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.

Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2015-25202 Filed 10-2-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


