[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45180-45182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-17008]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard; BMW

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the petition of BMW of North 
America, LLC (BMW) for an exemption of a high-theft line, the BMW 
[confidential nameplate], from the parts-marking requirements of the 
Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard. The BMW vehicle line 
will replace the current Z3 vehicle line. 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. BMW 
requested confidential treatment for some of the information submitted 
in support of its petition. The agency will address BMW's request for 
confidential treatment by separate letter.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with 
the 2003 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: In a petition dated May 17, 2002, BMW of 
North America, LLC (BMW), requested

[[Page 45181]]

exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention 
standard (49 CFR part 541) for the BMW [confidential] vehicle line, 
beginning with MY 2003. The petition has been 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 an 
entire vehicle line. Based on the evidence submitted by BMW, the agency 
believes that the antitheft device for the BMW [confidential] 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).
    Section 33106(b)(2)(D) of Title 49, United States Code, authorized 
the Secretary of Transportation to grant an exemption from the parts-
marking requirements for not more than one additional line of a 
manufacturer for MYs 1997-2000. However, it does not address the 
contingency of what to do after model year 2000 in the absence of a 
decision under Section 33103(d). 49 U.S.C. 33103(d)(3) states that the 
number of lines for which the agency can grant an exemption is to be 
decided after the Attorney General completes a review of the 
effectiveness of antitheft devices and finds that antitheft devices are 
an effective substitute for parts-marking. The Attorney General has not 
yet made a finding and has not decided the number of lines, if any, for 
which the agency will be authorized to grant an exemption. Upon 
consultation with the Department of Justice, we determined that the 
appropriate reading of Section 33103(d) is that the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) may continue to grant parts-
marking exemptions for not more than one additional model line each 
year, as specified for model years 1997-2000 by 49 U.S.C. 
33106(b)(2)(C). This is the level contemplated by the Act for the 
period before the Attorney General's decision. The final decision on 
whether to continue granting exemptions will be made by the Attorney 
General at the conclusion of the review pursuant to Section 
330103(d)(3).
    BMW's submittal is considered a complete petition, as required by 
49 CFR part 543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained 
in Sec. 543.5 and the specific content requirements of Sec. 543.6.
    In its petition, BMW provided a detailed description and diagram of 
the identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft 
device for the new line. BMW will install its antitheft device as 
standard equipment on the MY 2003 BMW [confidential] vehicle line. The 
antitheft device is a passive, electronically-coded vehicle immobilizer 
(EWS) system. The device will prevent the vehicle from being driven 
away under its own engine power in the event the ignition lock and 
doors have been manipulated. The device is automatically activated when 
the engine is shut off and the vehicle key is removed from the ignition 
lock cylinder. In addition to the key, the antitheft device can be 
activated by the use of its radio frequency remote control. Locking the 
vehicle door and trunk by using the key cylinder or the radio frequency 
remote control will further secure the vehicle. BMW stated that the 
frequency codes for the remote control constantly change to prevent an 
unauthorized person from opening the vehicle by intercepting the 
signals of its remote control.
    The EWS system consists of a key with a transponder, a loop antenna 
(coil) around the steering lock cylinder, an EWS control unit and an 
engine control unit (DME/DDE) with encoded start release input.
    BMW stated that in the key is a transponder, a special transmitter/
receiver that communicates with the EWS control through the transceiver 
module. The transponder chip which is integrated in the key consists of 
a transmitter/receiver, a small antenna coil, and a memory which can be 
written to and read from. The memory contains its own unique key and 
customer service data.
    BMW states that the EWS control unit provides the interface to the 
loop antenna (coil), engine control unit and starter. BMW also states 
that the engine control unit with coded start release input has been 
designed in such a manner that the ignition and the fuel supply are 
only released when a correct release signal has been sent by the EWS 
control unit. The EWS control unit inspects the key data for 
correctness and allows the ignition to operate and fuel supply to be 
released when a correct signal has been received.
    The vehicle is also equipped with a central locking system which 
locks all doors, the hood, the trunk and fuel filler lid. The central 
locking system also allows the driver to unlock the driver's door while 
the passenger doors remain locked. This feature offers additional 
security by preventing unauthorized entry of the vehicle through the 
passenger doors. BMW also states that it is also possible to unlock all 
doors via the central locking system. To prevent locking the keys in 
the car upon exiting, the driver's door can only be locked with a key 
or by use of the radio frequency remote control after it is closed. 
This also locks the other doors. If the doors are open at the time of 
locking, they are automatically locked when they are closed.
    BMW discussed the uniqueness of its locks and its ignition key. The 
keys have guide-ways milled in the middle of both sides of the key bit. 
The same key operates the door locks and the ignition/steering lock and 
it can be inserted in a keyhole in either direction. However, BMW 
stated that its vehicle's locks are almost impossible to pick, and its 
ignition key cannot be duplicated on the open market.
    BMW also stated that a special key blank, key-cutting machine and 
owner's individual key code are needed to cut a new key, and that its 
key blanks, machines and codes will be closely controlled. 
Additionally, new keys will only be issued to authorized persons and 
spare keys can only be obtained through the dealership because they are 
not copies of lost originals, but new keys with their original 
electronic identification. As an additional security measure, lost keys 
can be disabled at the vehicle and enabled again. BMW also stated that 
every key request is documented so that any inquiries by insurance 
companies and investigative authorities can be followed up on.
    BMW states that the steering/ignition lock is hardened against the 
grip of a screw and the housing is reinforced to prevent removal of the 
lock. When the key is removed, a mechanism causes the lock to engage, 
thereby preventing steering wheel movement without any additional 
action. Additionally, vehicles equipped with automatic transmission 
have an ignition/transmission interlock that prevents ignition key 
removal unless the shift lever is in the ``Park'' position preventing 
movement of the shift lever until the key is turned in the lock.
    The BMW [confidential nameplate] battery will be covered and 
inaccessibly located. Disconnecting the battery will not unlock the 
doors. However, in the event of an accident, an inertia switch will 
automatically unlock all the doors.
    BMW also stated that its antitheft device does not incorporate any 
audible or visual alarms. However, based on the declining theft rate 
experience of other vehicles equipped with devices that do not have an 
audio or visual alarm for which NHTSA has already exempted from the 
parts-marking requirements, the agency has concluded that the data 
indicate that lack of a visual or audio alarm has not prevented these 
antitheft devices from being effective protection against theft.

[[Page 45182]]

    BMW compared the device proposed for its new line with devices 
which NHTSA has previously determined to be as effective in reducing 
and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-
marking requirements of part 541, and has concluded that the antitheft 
device proposed for this line is no less effective than those devices 
in the lines for which NHTSA has already granted exemptions from the 
parts-marking requirements. The antitheft system that BMW intends to 
install on its new vehicle line for MY 2003 exactly the same system 
that is currently installed on its Carline 3, Carline 5, Carline 7, X5 
and MINI vehicle lines. The agency granted BMW's petition for 
modification of its Carline 7 beginning with MY 1995 (See 59 FR 47973, 
September 19, 1994); and its petitions for exemptions granted in full 
for Carline 5 beginning with MY 1997, Carline 3 beginning with MY 1999, 
the X5 vehicle line beginning with MY 2000, and the MINI beginning with 
MY 2002. (See 61 FR 6292, February 16, 1996, 62 FR 62800, November 25, 
1997, 64 FR 33947, June 24, 1999 and 66 FR 33604, June 22, 2001 
respectively).
    In order to ensure reliability and durability of the device, BMW 
conducted performance tests based on its own specified standards. BMW 
provided a detailed list of the following tests conducted: climatic 
tests, high temperature endurance run, thermoshock test in water, 
chemical resistance, vibrational load, electrical ranges, mechanical 
shock tests, and electromagnetic field compatibility.
    Additionally, BMW stated that its immobilizer system fulfills the 
requirements of the European vehicle insurance companies which became 
standard as of January 1995. The requirements prescribe that the 
vehicle must be equipped with an electronic vehicle immobilizing device 
which works independently from the mechanical locking system and 
prevents the operation of the vehicle through the use of coded 
intervention in the engine management system. In addition, the device 
must be self-arming (passive), become effective upon leaving the 
vehicle, or not later than the point at which the vehicle is locked, 
and allow deactivation of the vehicle by electronic means and not by 
use of the mechanical key.
    Based on evidence submitted by BMW, the agency believes that the 
antitheft device for the 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 part 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. The device lacks the ability to attract attention to the 
efforts of unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by a 
means other than a key (Sec. 541.6(a)(3)(ii)).
    As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR part 543.6(a)(4) and (5), 
the agency finds that BMW has provided adequate reasons for its belief 
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion 
is based on the information BMW provided about its antitheft device. 
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full BMW of 
North America's petition for an exemption for the MY 2003 vehicle line 
from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541. If BMW decides 
not to use the exemption for this line, it must formally notify the 
agency, and, thereafter, the line must be fully marked as required by 
49 CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and 
replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if BMW 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, 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 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.

    Issued on: July 2, 2002.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Safety, Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 02-17008 Filed 7-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P