[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 16 (Thursday, January 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4304-4305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1141]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention 
Standard; Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc.

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 Hyundai-Kia 
Motors Corporation (Hyundai) in accordance with Sec.  543.9(c)(2) of 49 
CFR Part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention Standard, for the 
Hyundai Genesis vehicle line beginning with model year (MY) 2009. 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. Hyundai requested confidential treatment for its 
information and attachments submitted in support of its petition. The 
agency will address Hyundai's request for confidential treatment in a 
separate letter.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, International 
Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's telephone number is 
(202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2290.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated October 22, 2007, 
Hyundai-Kia America Technical Center, Inc., on behalf of Hyundai-Kia 
Motors (Hyundai) requested an exemption from the parts-marking 
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the 
Hyundai Genesis vehicle line beginning with MY 2009. 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 of its vehicle lines per year. Hyundai has petitioned 
the agency to grant an exemption for its Genesis vehicle line beginning 
with MY 2009. In its petition, Hyundai provided a detailed description 
and diagram of the identity, design, and location of the components of 
the antitheft device for the Genesis vehicle line. Hyundai will install 
its passive antitheft device as standard equipment on the vehicle line. 
Features of the antitheft device will include a passive immobilizer 
consisting of an EMS (engine control unit), SMARTRA 3 (immobilizer 
unit), an antenna coil and transponder ignition keys. Additionally, the 
Hyundai Genesis will have a standard alarm system which will monitor 
all the doors, the trunk and the hood of the vehicle. The audible and 
visual alarms are activated when an unauthorized person attempts to 
enter or move the vehicle by unauthorized means. Hyundai'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.
    The antitheft device to be installed on the MY 2009 Hyundai is a 
transponder-based electronic immobilizer system. The vehicle 
immobilizer device consists of the EMS, the SMARTRA 3 and ignition keys 
with a built-in transponder. Hyundai stated that the EMS carries out 
the check of the ignition key by special encryption algorithm which 
runs in the transponder and in the EMS in parallel. The engine can only 
be started if the results of the ignition key check and algorithm are 
equal.
    Hyundai stated that the device is automatically activated by 
removing the key from the ignition switch and locking the vehicle door. 
In order to arm the device, the key must be removed from

[[Page 4305]]

the ignition switch, all of the doors and hood must be closed and the 
driver's door must be locked with the ignition key or all doors must be 
locked with the keyless entry. When the device is armed, the visual 
(flashing hazard lamps) and audible (horn sound) alarm system will be 
triggered if unauthorized entry is attempted through the doors, trunk 
or the hood. The device is disarmed when the driver's door is unlocked 
with the transponder key or keyless entry.
    Hyundai stated that its antitheft device has been installed as 
standard equipment on the Hyundai Azera which was previously approved 
for exemption from Part 541. There is currently no available theft rate 
data for Hyundai vehicle lines that have been installed with similar 
devices. However, Hyundai submitted data on the effectiveness of 
various antitheft devices to support its belief that its device will be 
at least effective as comparable devices installed on other vehicle 
lines previously granted exemptions by the agency. Hyundai further 
stated that it believes that the General Motors, Ford and Isuzu devices 
contain components that are functionally and operationally similar to 
its device. Hyundai also stated that the theft data from the National 
Crime Information Center (NCIC) show a clear reduction in vehicle 
thefts after the introduction of the GM and Ford devices. Therefore, 
Hyundai believes that its device will be at least as effective as those 
devices that have been installed on lines previously granted exemptions 
by the agency. Hyundai provided theft rate data for the Chevrolet 
Camaro and Pontiac Firebird vehicle lines showing a substantial 
reduction in theft rates comparing the lines between pre- and post 
introduction of the Pass-Key device. Hyundai also provided ``percent 
reduction'' data for theft rates between pre- and post-production years 
for the Ford Taurus and Mustang, and Oldsmobile Toronado and Riviera 
vehicle lines normalized to the three-year average of the Camaro and 
Firebird pre-introduction data. Hyundai stated that the data shows a 
dramatic reduction of theft rates due to the introduction of devices 
substantially similar to the Hyundai immobilizer device. Specifically, 
the Taurus, Mustang, Riviera and Toronado vehicle lines showed a 63, 
70, 80 and 58 percent theft rate reduction respectively between pre- 
and post-introduction of immobilizer devices as standard equipment on 
these vehicle lines.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Hyundai 
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed 
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Hyundai 
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Hyundai also 
provided a detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the 
device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its 
specified requirements for each test.
    Based on the evidence submitted by Hyundai, the agency believes 
that the antitheft device for the Genesis 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). Based on the information Hyundai 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.
    As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.6(a)(4) and (5), the 
agency finds that Hyundai has provided adequate reasons for its belief 
that the antitheft device will reduce and deter theft.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full 
Hyundai's petition for exemption for the Genesis 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 Hyundai 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 Hyundai 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, 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.

    Issued on: January 17, 2008.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
 [FR Doc. E8-1141 Filed 1-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P