

[Federal Register: November 6, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 214)]
[Notices]               
[Page 62728-62729]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06no07-128]                         


[[Page 62728]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

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

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Chrysler, LLC, (Chrysler) 
petition for exemption of the Jeep Wrangler vehicle line in accordance 
with 49 CFR part 543, 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 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 (49 CFR part 541).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
the 2009 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, International 
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's phone number is (202) 
366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated August 30, 2007, 
Chrysler requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of 
the theft prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) for the Jeep Wrangler 
vehicle line, beginning with MY 2009. The petition requested an 
exemption from parts-marking requirements 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 Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant 
exemptions for one line of its vehicle lines per year. Chrysler has 
petitioned the agency to grant an exemption for its Wrangler vehicle 
line beginning with MY 2009. In its petition, Chrysler provided a 
detailed description and diagram of the identity, design, and location 
of the components of the antitheft device for the new vehicle line. 
Chrysler will install its antitheft device as standard equipment on the 
MY 2009 Jeep Wrangler vehicle line. The antitheft device to be 
installed on the MY 2009 Jeep Wrangler, the Sentry Key Immobilizer 
System (SKIS) incorporates an ignition immobilizer system and an 
unauthorized vehicle start telltale light.
    Chrysler stated that the (SKIS) prevents the engine from running 
for more than 2 seconds unless a valid electronically encoded key is in 
the ignition switch. The immobilizer feature is activated when the key 
is removed from the ignition switch whether the vehicle doors are open 
or closed. Once activated, only a valid key inserted into the ignition 
switch will disable immobilization and allow the vehicle to start and 
continue to run. The SKIS has a visual telltale located in the vehicle 
ElectroMechanical Instrument Cluster (EMIC). The components performing 
the immobilizer function in the SKIS are the Sentry Key Remote Entry 
Module (SKREEM), the Powertrain Control Module (PCM), and the Sentry 
Key. The ElectroMechanical Instrument Cluster (EMIC) controls the 
telltale function only.
    Chrysler also stated that the SKREEM is the primary component of 
the SKIS and is also the receiver for the Remote Keyless Entry system 
and the Tire Pressure Monitor system. When the ignition switch is 
turned to the ``ON'' position, the SKREEM transmits a radio frequency 
(RF) signal to the transponder in the ignition key. If the response 
received identifies the key as valid, the SKREEM sends a valid key 
message to PCM over the PCI data bus, and the PCM allows the engine to 
continue to run. To avoid any perceived delay when starting the vehicle 
with a valid key and to prevent unburned fuel from entering the 
exhaust, the engine is permitted to run for no more than 2 seconds if 
an invalid key is used. If the response identifies the key as invalid, 
or if no response is received from the key transponder, the SKREEM 
sends an invalid key message to the PCM. The PCM will disable engine 
operation (after the initial 2-second run) based upon the status of the 
SKREEM messages. Chrysler stated that only six consecutive invalid 
vehicle start attempts are allowed and all other invalid attempts would 
be locked out by preventing the fuel injectors from firing and 
disabling the starter. Only communication with a valid key will permit 
the engine to start and run.
    The telltale feature operates as a security indicator in the EMIC. 
The telltale alerts the owner that an unauthorized vehicle start 
attempt has been made. Upon an unauthorized start attempt, the telltale 
will flash on and off when the ignition switch is turned to the ``ON'' 
position. Besides acting as a security indicator, the telltale acts as 
a diagnostic indicator. If the SKREEM detects a system malfunction and/
or the SKIS has become inoperative, the security indicator will stay on 
solid. If the SKREEM detects an invalid key or if a key transponder-
related fault exists, the security indicator will flash.
    Each ignition key used in the SKIS has an integral transponder chip 
included on the circuit board beneath the cover of the integral Remote 
Keyless Entry (RKE) transmitter. In addition to having to be cut to 
match the mechanical coding of the ignition lock cylinder and 
programmed for operation of the RKE system, each new Sentry Key has a 
unique transponder identification code that is permanently programmed 
into it by the manufacturer, and which must be programmed into the 
SKREEM to be recognized by the SKIS as a valid key. Once a Sentry Key 
has been programmed to a particular vehicle, it cannot be used on any 
other vehicle.
    Chrysler stated that the proposed antitheft device does not provide 
any visible or audible indication of unauthorized entry. Chrysler also 
stated that the (SKIS) is designed to provide passive protection 
against unauthorized vehicle use and that the theft data has indicated 
a decline in theft rates for vehicle lines that have been equipped with 
antitheft devices similar to that which it proposes to install on the 
Wrangler vehicle line. The agency has concluded that the lack of a 
visual or audio alarm has not prevented these antitheft devices from 
being effective protection against theft.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Chrysler 
provided information on the reliability and durability of the device, 
Chrysler conducted tests based on its own specified standards and 
stated its belief that the device meets the stringent performance 
standards prescribed. Specifically, Chrysler stated that its device 
must demonstrate a minimum of 95 percent reliability with 90 percent 
confidence. In addition to the design and production validation test 
criteria, Chrysler stated that the SKIS also undergoes a daily short 
term durability test. In this test, three randomly chosen systems are 
tested for durability, once per shift at Chrysler's production 
facility. Chrysler also stated that 100% of its systems undergo a 
series of three functional tests prior to being shipped from the 
supplier to the vehicle assembly plant for installation in its 
vehicles.
    Chrysler stated that its actual theft experience with Jeep Wrangler 
vehicles, not currently installed with an immobilizer system as 
standard equipment, indicates that these vehicles have a theft rate 
significantly lower than the 1990/1991 median theft rate of

[[Page 62729]]

3.5826. Chrysler stated that NHTSA's theft rates for the Jeep Wrangler 
vehicles for model years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 are 1.9208, 
2.4561, 1.9980, 1.4609 and 1.4406 respectively. Chrysler stated that 
vehicles subject to the parts marking requirements that subsequently 
are equipped with ignition immobilizer systems as standard equipment 
indicate that even lower theft rates can be expected from a vehicle 
equipped with standard ignition immobilizer systems.
    Chrysler offered the Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles as an example of 
vehicles subject to part 541 parts marking requirements that 
subsequently are equipped with ignition immobilizer systems as standard 
equipment. NHTSA's theft rates for the Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles for 
model years prior to 1999 (1995 through 1998) when an immobilizer was 
not offered as standard equipment is 5.3574, which is significantly 
higher than the 1990/1991 median theft rate. Chrysler indicated that, 
since the introduction of immobilizer systems as standard equipment on 
the Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles, the average theft rate for the MY 
1999 through 2004 is 2.6713, which is significantly lower than the 
1990/1991 median theft rate of 3.5826. The Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles 
were granted an exemption from the parts marking requirements beginning 
with MY 2004 vehicles.
    On the basis of this comparison, Chrysler has concluded that the 
proposed antitheft device is no less effective than those devices 
installed on lines for which NHTSA has already granted full exemption 
from the parts-marking requirements.
    Based on the information Chrysler has provided about its device, 
the agency concludes that the antitheft device for the Jeep Wrangler 
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 
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.
    As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.6(a)(4) and (5), the 
agency finds that Chrysler has provided adequate reasons for its belief 
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion 
is based on the information Chrysler provided about its antitheft 
device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full 
Chrysler's petition for an exemption for the MY 2009 Jeep Wrangler 
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 Chrysler 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 as required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major 
component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Chrysler 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 anti-theft device on which the 
line's exemption is based. Further, Sec.  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 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.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 
1.50.

    Issued on: October 31, 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. E7-21756 Filed 11-5-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
