
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 96 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28762-28763]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12072]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard; Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Jaguar Land Rover North 
America LLC's, (Jaguar Land Rover) petition for an exemption of the 
Jaguar XF 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 
model year (MY) 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Hisham Mohamed, Office of 
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 March 23, 2015, Jaguar 
Land Rover requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements 
of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2016 
Jaguar XF vehicle line. 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 an entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an 
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Jaguar 
Land Rover provided a detailed description and diagrams of the 
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft 
device for the XF vehicle line. Jaguar Land Rover stated that its XF 
vehicles will be equipped with a passive, transponder based, electronic 
engine immobilizer device as standard equipment beginning with the 2016 
model year. Key components of its antitheft device will include a power 
train control module (PCM), instrument cluster, body control module 
(BCM), remote frequency receiver (RFR), remote frequency actuator 
(RFA), immobilizer antenna unit (IAU), Smart Key, door control units 
(DCU), and a visual and audible perimeter alarm system. Jaguar Land 
Rover also stated that the audible and visual perimeter alarm system 
will be installed as standard equipment and can be armed with the Smart 
Key or programmed to be passively armed. Jaguar Land Rover further 
stated that the siren will sound and the vehicle's exterior lights will 
flash if unauthorized entry is attempted by opening the hood, doors or 
luggage compartment. Jaguar Land Rover'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.
    Jaguar Land Rover stated that the Smart Key is programmed and 
synchronized to the vehicle through means of an identification key code 
and a randomly generated secret code that are unique to each vehicle. 
Jaguar Land Rover further stated that the immobilizer device is armed 
automatically when the Smart Key is removed from the vehicle.
    Jaguar Land Rover also stated that there are three methods the 
driver can approach the vehicle and start the engine. Method one is 
through automatic detection of the Smart Key via a remote frequency 
challenge response sequence. Jaguar stated that when the driver 
approaches the vehicle and pulls the driver's door handle (after 
authentication of the correct Smart Key), the doors will unlock. 
Specifically, when the ignition start button is pressed, a search to 
find and authenticate the Smart Key commences within the vehicle 
interior. If successful, this information is passed by a coded data 
transfer to the BCM via the Remote Function Actuator. The BCM in turn, 
will pass the ``valid key'' status to the instrument cluster, via a 
coded data transfer. The BCM sends the key valid message to the PCM 
which initiates a coded data transfer authorizing the engine to start. 
Method two is accomplished by unlocking the vehicle with the Smart Key 
unlock button. As the driver approaches the vehicle, the Smart Key 
unlock button is pressed and the doors will unlock. Once the driver 
presses the ignition start button, the operation process is the same as 
method one. Method three is accomplished by using the emergency key 
blade. If the Smart Key has a discharged battery or is damaged, there 
is an emergency key blade that can be removed from the Smart Key and 
used to unlock the doors. When the ignition start button is pressed a 
search is commenced to find and authenticate the Smart Key within the 
vehicle. Once the Smart Key is docked in the correct position and the 
ignition start button is pressed again, the BCM and Smart key completes 
a coded data exchange via the IAU. If successful, the BCM passes the 
valid key status to the instrument cluster, via a coded data transfer. 
The BCM then sends the key valid message to the PCM which initiates a 
coded data transfer. If

[[Page 28763]]

successful, the engine will be authorized to start.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Jaguar 
Land Rover provided information on the reliability and durability of 
its proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the 
device, Jaguar Land Rover conducted tests based on its own specified 
standards. Jaguar Land Rover provided a detailed list of the tests 
conducted (i.e., temperature and humidity cycling, high and low 
temperature cycling, mechanical shock, random vibration, thermal 
stress/shock tests, material resistance tests, dry heat, dust and fluid 
ingress tests). Jaguar Land Rover stated that it believes that its 
device is reliable and durable because it complied with specified 
requirements for each test. Additionally, Jaguar Land Rover stated that 
its key recognition sequence includes more than a billion code 
combinations, which include encrypted data that are secure against 
copying. Jaguar Land Rover also stated that the coded data transfer 
between its modules use a unique secure identifier, a random number and 
a secure public algorithm. Jaguar Land Rover further explained that 
since its XF vehicle line will utilize push button vehicle ignition, it 
does not have a conventional mechanical key barrel and therefore 
believes that forcibly bypassing the key-locking system would be 
virtually impossible.
    Jaguar Land Rover also stated that the current generation Jaguar XF 
vehicle line produced since MY 2009, is installed with an engine 
immobilizer device as standard equipment. Jaguar Land Rover noted that 
since the current generation Jaguar XF vehicles have only been 
available with an engine immobilizer, there is no comparative data 
available for the XF vehicle line without an immobilizer. However, 
Jaguar Land Rover stated that the immobilizer is substantially similar 
to the antitheft device installed on the Jaguar XK, Jaguar XJ, Land 
Rover LR2, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, and Land Rover Discovery 
Sport vehicle lines previously granted an exemption by the agency. 
Jaguar Land Rover stated that based on the MY 2012 final theft data 
published by NHTSA, the Jaguar Land Rover vehicles equipped with 
immobilizers had a theft rate of 0.76 per thousand vehicles, 
comparatively below NHTSA's overall theft rate of 1.13 thefts per 
thousand vehicles for MY 2012 passenger vehicles stolen in CY 2012. The 
theft rates for the Jaguar XK, XJ, Land Rover Evoque, and Land Rover 
LR2 using an average of 3 MY's data are 1.0803, 0.9199, 0.5501 and 
0.4141, respectively. Jaguar Land Rover believes these low theft rates 
further demonstrate the effectiveness of its immobilizer device. 
Additionally, as further evidence of the effectiveness of its 
immobilizer device, Jaguar Land Rover submitted a Highway Loss Data 
Institute news release (July 19, 2000) showing an average reduction in 
theft losses of about 50 percent for vehicles installed with an 
immobilizer device.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Jaguar Land Rover on 
its device, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the XF 
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 the five types of performance listed in 
Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting attention to the 
efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move 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.
    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 Jaguar Land Rover has provided adequate reasons for its 
belief that the antitheft device for its XF 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 
Jaguar Land Rover provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Jaguar 
Land Rover's petition for exemption for the Jaguar Land Rover XF 
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 Jaguar Land Rover 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 Jaguar Land Rover 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.

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

    Under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 1.95.
Raymond R. Posten,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2015-12072 Filed 5-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


