You are on page 1of 2

39890 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

139 / Friday, July 20, 2007 / Notices

year for treadwear testing. NHTSA Issued on: July 16, 2007. will be equipped with a passive,
estimates it cost $0.60 per vehicle mile Stephen R. Kratzke, transponder-based electronic
including salaries, overhead and Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. immobilizer device as standard
reports. This brings the annual [FR Doc. E7–14094 Filed 7–19–07; 8:45 am] equipment beginning with MY 2008.
treadwear testing cost to $2,160,000. For BILLING CODE 4910–59–P Features of the antitheft device will
the traction testing, it is estimated that include an electronic key, a passive
1,900 tires are tested annually with an immobilizer system (FBS III) which
estimated cost of $38,000 for use of the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION includes an electronic ignition starter
government test facility. Using a factor switch control unit (EIS) and an engine
of 3.5 times to cover salary and National Highway Traffic Safety control unit (ECU). The device will also
overhead of test contractors, the Administration have a visible and audible alarm. The
estimated cost of traction testing is alarm system will provide protection for
$133,000. A separate temperature grade Petition for Exemption From the all four doors, the trunk and the engine
testing for tires is required, since the test Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; hood. If any of the protected areas are
will not be an extension of the high Mercedes-Benz violated, the four turn signal lamps and
speed performance test of 49 CFR AGENCY: National Highway Traffic the left and right side turn signal marker
571.109 which is required for safety Safety Administration (NHTSA), lamps will flash, the interior lamps will
certification. Section 571.109 is Department of Transportation (DOT). switch on and the alarm will sound.
replaced by § 571.139, which has MBUSA’s submission is considered a
ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.
different test speeds. For the complete petition as required by 49 CFR
temperature testing, it is estimated that SUMMARY: This document grants in full 543.7, in that it meets the general
1,900 tires are tested annually with an the Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC.’s, requirements contained in § 543.5 and
estimated average cost per test of $423. (MBUSA) petition for exemption of the the specific content requirements of
Therefore, the estimated UTQGS C-Line Chassis vehicle line in § 543.6.
temperature annual testing is $803,700. accordance with 49 CFR part 543, MBUSA stated that the transmitter
Thus the total estimated cost for UTQGS Exemption from the Theft Prevention key, the electronic ignition starter
testing is $3,096,700. The cost of Standard. This petition is granted switch control unit and the engine
printing the tread labels is because the agency has determined that control unit will work collectively to
approximately 21,890,000 and estimate the antitheft device to be placed on the perform the immobilizer function. The
for printing brochures is at $999,000. line as standard equipment is likely to immobilizer will prevent the engine
This yields a total annual financial be as effective in reducing and deterring from running unless a valid key is used
burden of approximately $25,985,700 motor vehicle theft as compliance with in the ignition switch. Immobilization is
(approximately $26 million) on the tire the parts-marking requirements of the activated when the key is removed from
manufacturers. Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part the ignition switch, whether the doors
541). are open or closed. Once activated, a
Estimated Annual Burden to the
valid, coded-key must be inserted into
Government: The estimated annual cost DATES: The exemption granted by this
the ignition switch to disable
of UTQGS to the Federal government is notice is effective beginning with model
immobilization and permit the vehicle
$1,278,000. The cost consists of year (MY) 2008.
to start.
approximately $152,000 for data FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. In addressing the specific content
management $730,000 for enforcement Carlita Ballard, Office of International requirements of § 543.6, MBUSA
testing, and about $396,000 for general Vehicle, Fuel Economy and Consumer provided information on the reliability
administration of the program. Standards, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey and durability of its proposed device.
Number of Respondents: There are Avenue, SE., NVS–131, Room W43–439 To ensure reliability and durability of
approximately 163 individual tire (4th Floor), Washington, DC 20590. Ms. the device and to verify its ability to
brands sold in the United States. The Ballard’s phone number is (202) 366– satisfactory perform under extreme
actual number of respondents is much 5222. Her fax number is (202) 493–2990. conditions, MBUSA conducted various
less than 163 due to company SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a tests based on its own specified
acquisitions, mergers, and in most cases, petition dated August 8, 2006, MBUSA standards. MBUSA provided a detailed
the manufacturer will report for the requested exemption from the parts- list of the various tests conducted and
various individual brand names that marking requirements of the theft believes that the device is reliable and
they produce tires for. The actual prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) durable since the device complied with
number of respondents is about 65 for the C-Line Chassis vehicle line, its own specific test conditions.
individual responses. beginning with the 2008 model year. MBUSA also compared the device
Comments are invited on: Whether The petition has been filed pursuant to proposed for its vehicle line with other
the proposed collection of information 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from devices which NHTSA has determined
is necessary for the proper performance Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, to be as effective in reducing and
of the functions of the Department, based on the installation of an antitheft deterring motor vehicle theft as would
including whether the information will device as standard equipment for an compliance with the parts-marking
have practical utility; the accuracy of entire vehicle line. requirements. MBUSA stated that its
the Department’s estimate of the burden Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may proposed device is functionally
of the proposed information collection; petition NHTSA to grant exemptions for equivalent to the systems used in the S-
ways to enhance the quality, utility and one line of its vehicle lines per model Line Chassis and E-Line Chassis
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

clarity of the information to be year. In its petition, MBUSA provided a vehicles which the agency has granted
collected; and ways to minimize the detailed description and diagram of the exemptions from the parts-marking
burden of the collection of information identity, design, and location of the requirements of the theft prevention
on respondents, including the use of components of the antitheft device for standard. MBUSA concluded that the
automated collection techniques or the C-Line Chassis vehicle line. MBUSA antitheft device for its C-Line Chassis
other forms of information technology. stated that all C-Line Chassis vehicles vehicle line is no less effective than

VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:19 Jul 19, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 139 / Friday, July 20, 2007 / Notices 39891

those devices in lines for which NHTSA publication requirements incident to the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
has already granted full exemption. disposition of all Part 543 petitions.
On the basis of this comparison, Advanced listing, including the release Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
MBUSA informed the agency that the C- of future product nameplates, the Safety Administration Office of
Line Chassis vehicle line was first beginning model year for which the Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of
introduced as a model year 1994 petition is granted and a general Application for Special Permits
vehicle. MBUSA stated that based on description of the antitheft device is
NHTSA’s theft rates from 1994 to 2004, AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
necessary in order to notify law
the average theft rate of the C-Line Materials Safety Administration
enforcement agencies of new vehicle
Chassis vehicles without the (PHMSA), DOT.
lines exempted from the parts-marking
immobilizer was 1.6437 (CY 1994–1997) requirements of the Theft Prevention ACTION: List of Applications for Special
and 1.4167 after installation of the Standard. Permits.
immobilizer device. MBUSA concluded
that the data indicates that the If MBUSA decides not to use the SUMMARY: In accordance with the
immobilizer was effective in exemption for this line, it must formally procedures governing the application
contributing to the theft rate reduction notify the agency, and, thereafter, the for, and the processing of, special
for its C-Line Chassis vehicles. line must be fully marked as required by permits from the Department of
Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of Transportation’s Hazardous Material
CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a major component parts and replacement Regulations (49 CFR Part 107, Subpart
petition for an exemption from the parts). B), notice is hereby given that the Office
parts-marking requirements of part 541 NHTSA notes that if MBUSA wishes of Hazardous Materials Safety has
either in whole or in part, if it in the future to modify the device on received the application described
determines that, based upon substantial which this exemption is based, the herein. Each mode of transportation for
evidence, the standard equipment company may have to submit a petition which a particular special permit is
antitheft device is likely to be as to modify the exemption. Section requested is indicated by a number in
effective in reducing and deterring 543.7(d) states that a Part 543 exemption the ‘‘Nature of Application’’ portion of
motor vehicle theft as compliance with applies only to vehicles that belong to the table below as follows: 1—Motor
the parts-marking requirements of part a line exempted under this part and vehicle, 2—Rail freight, 3—Cargo vessel,
541. The agency finds that MBUSA has equipped with the anti-theft device on 4—Cargo aircraft only, 5—Passenger-
provided adequate reasons for its belief which the line’s exemption is based. carrying aircraft.
that the antitheft device will reduce and Further, § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the DATES: Comments must be received on
deter theft. This conclusion is based on submission of petitions ‘‘to modify an or before August 20, 2007.
the information MBUSA provided about exemption to permit the use of an Address Comments To: Record
its device. antitheft device similar to but differing Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
The agency concludes that the device from the one specified in that Materials Safety Administration, U.S.
will provide the five types of exemption.’’ Department of Transportation,
performance listed in § 543.6(a)(3): Washington, DC 20590.
The agency wishes to minimize the
Promoting activation; attracting Comments should refer to the
administrative burden that
attention to the efforts of unauthorized application number and be submitted in
§ t 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted
persons to enter or operate a vehicle by triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of
vehicle manufacturers and itself. The
means other than a key; preventing comments is desired, include a self-
agency did not intend Part 543 to
defeat or circumvention of the device by addressed stamped postcard showing
require the submission of a modification
unauthorized persons; preventing the special permit number.
petition for every change to the
operation of the vehicle by
components or design of an antitheft FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the
device. The significance of many such Copies of the applications are available
reliability and durability of the device.
changes could be de minimis. Therefore, for inspection in the Records Center,
The agency agrees that the device is
NHTSA suggests that if the Nassif Building, 400 7th Street, SW.,
substantially similar to devices in other
manufacturer contemplates making any Washington, DC or at http://
vehicles lines for which the agency has
changes the effects of which might be
already granted exemptions. In addition,
characterized as de minimis, it should This notice of receipt of applications
the theft rate has reduced since the
consult the agency before preparing and for special permit is published in
installation of this device on the line.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency submitting a petition to modify. accordance with Part 107 of the Federal
hereby grants in full MBUSA’s petition Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of hazardous materials transportation law
for exemption for the vehicle line from authority at 49 CFR 1.50. (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).
the parts-marking requirements of 49 Issued on: July 16, 2007. Issued in Washington, DC, on July 11,
CFR Part 541. The agency notes that 49 2007.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
CFR Part 541, Appendix A–1, identifies Delmer Billings,
those lines that are exempted from the Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
Director, Special Permits & Approvals
Theft Prevention Standard for a given [FR Doc. E7–14093 Filed 7–19–07; 8:45 am] Programs, Office of Hazardous Materials,
model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains BILLING CODE 4910–59–P Special Permits & Approvals.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:19 Jul 19, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\20JYN1.SGM 20JYN1