Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24587

Issued on: April 27, 1998. In its petition dated October 25, 1997, Information Center, are lower for GM L. Robert Shelton, GM requested an exemption from the models equipped with ‘‘PASS-Key’’-like Associate Administrator for Safety parts-marking requirements of the Theft devices which have been granted Performance Standards. Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) exemptions from the parts-marking [FR Doc. 98–11783 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am] for the Oldsmobile Alero car line. The requirements than theft rates for similar, BILLING CODE 4910±59±P petition is pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, earlier models that have been parts- Exemption From Vehicle Theft marked. Therefore, GM concludes that Prevention Standard, based on the the ‘‘PASS-Key’’-like devices are more DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION installation of an antitheft device as effective in deterring motor vehicle theft standard equipment for the entire line. than the parts-marking requirements of National Highway Traffic Safety GM’s submittal is considered a 49 CFR part 541. GM also concluded Administration complete petition, as required by 49 that based on the system performance of CFR 543.7, in that it met the general the ‘‘PASS-Key’’-like devices on other Petition for Modification of Exemption requirements contained in § 543.5 and GM models, and the similarity of design From the Vehicle Theft Prevention the specific content requirements of and functionality of the device on the Standard; General Motors Corp. § 543.6. Oldsmobile Alero to the ‘‘PASS-Key’’ In its petition, GM provided a detailed device, GM believes that the agency AGENCY: National Highway Traffic description and diagram of the identity, should determine that the ‘‘Passlock’’ Safety Administration (NHTSA) design, and location of the components device will be at least as effective in Department of Transportation (DOT). of the antitheft device for the new line. reducing and deterring motor vehicle ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. GM will install its ‘‘Passlock’’ antitheft theft as the parts-marking requirements device as standard equipment on its MY of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 SUMMARY: This notice grants in full the 1999 Oldsmobile Alero car line. CFR part 541). petition of General Motors Corporation In order to ensure the reliability and Based on comparison of the reduction (GM) for an exemption of a high-theft durability of the device, GM conducted in theft rates of Corvettes using a line, the Oldsmobile Alero (formerly the tests based on its own specified passive antitheft system and audible/ Oldsmobile Achieva), from the parts- standards. GM provided a detailed list visible alarm with the reduction in theft marking requirements of the Federal of the tests conducted. GM stated its rates for Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention belief that the device is reliable and Firebird models equipped with a Standard. This petition is granted durable since the device complied with passive antitheft device without an because the agency has determined that GM’s specified requirements for each alarm, GM believes that an alarm or the antitheft device to be placed on the test. similar attention attracting device is not line as standard equipment is likely to GM compared the ‘‘Passlock’’ device necessary and does not compromise the be as effective in reducing and deterring proposed for the Alero car line with its antitheft performance of these systems. motor vehicle theft as compliance with first generation ‘‘PASS-Key’’ and The agency notes that the reason that the parts-marking requirements of the ‘‘PASS-Key II’’ devices which the the vehicle lines whose theft data GM Theft Prevention Standard. GM agency has determined to be as effective cites in support of its petition received requested confidential treatment for in reducing and deterring motor vehicle only a partial exemption from parts- some of the information and theft as would compliance with the marking was that the agency did not attachments submitted in support of its parts-marking requirements. GM believe that the antitheft device on these petition. In a letter to GM dated believes that its ‘‘Passlock’’ antitheft vehicles (‘‘PASS-Key’’ and ‘‘PASS-Key November 26, 1997, the agency granted device will be at least as effective as the II’’) by itself would be as effective as the petitioner’s request for confidential ‘‘PASS-Key’’ and ‘‘PASS-Key II’’ parts-marking in deterring theft because treatment of most aspects of its petition. devices. it lacked an alarm system. On that basis, DATES: The exemption granted by this The following GM car lines have the it decided to require GM to mark the notice is effective beginning with model ‘‘Passlock’’ device as standard vehicle’s most interchangeable parts year (MY) 1999. equipment and have been granted a full (the engine and the transmission), as a exemption from the parts-marking supplement to the antitheft device. Like FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. requirements: The Chevrolet Cavalier, those earlier antitheft devices GM used, Rosalind Proctor, Office of Planning and beginning with MY 1997 (see 61 FR the new ‘‘Passlock’’ device on which Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400 12132, March 25, 1996) and the Pontiac this petition is based also lacks an alarm Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, DC Sunfire, beginning with MY 1998 (see system. Accordingly, it cannot perform 20590. Ms. Proctor’s telephone number 62 FR 20240, April 25, 1997). The one of the functions listed in 49 CFR is (202) 366–0846. Her fax number is ‘‘Passlock’’ device provides the same Part 542.6(a)(3), that is, to call attention (202) 493–2739. kind of functionality as the ‘‘PASS-Key’’ to unauthorized attempts to enter or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a and ‘‘PASS-Key II’’ devices, but features move the vehicle. petition dated October 25, 1997, General a coded lock cylinder rather than an Since deciding those petitions, Motors Corporation (GM) informed the electrically coded ignition key. The however, the agency became aware that agency of its planned nameplate change ‘‘Passlock’’ device utilizes an electronic theft data shows declining theft rates for for its Oldsmobile Achieva car line sensor located near the ignition lock GM vehicles equipped with either beginning with model year (MY) 1999. instead of a coded key, allowing the version of the ‘‘PASS-Key’’ system. GM also informed the agency that the device to incorporate a standard key. Based on that data, it concluded that the nameplate for the Oldsmobile Achieva GM stated that when the sensor detects lack of a visual or audio alarm had not will be changed to Oldsmobile Alero, proper lock rotation, it sends a code to prevented the antitheft system from and that the Alero car line will be a the controller. If the correct code is being effective protection against theft continuation of the Achieva line. The received, fuel is enabled. If an incorrect and granted two GM petitions for full Achieva car line is subject to the parts- code is received, fuel is disabled. exemptions for car lines equipped with marking requirements of the theft GM also stated that the theft rates, as ‘‘PASS-Key II’’. See 60 FR 25939 (May prevention standard. reported by the National Crime 15, 1995) granting in full the petition for 24588 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices

Chevrolet Lumina and Buick Regal car permit the use of an antitheft device Copies of the written comments will lines equipped with ‘‘PASS-Key II’’; and similar to but differing from the one be available from the Board’s contractor, 58 FR 44874 (August 25, 1993), granting specified in that exemption.’’ The D.C. News and Data, Inc., located in in full the petition for exemption of agency wishes to minimize the Room 210 in the Board’s building. D.C. Buick Riviera and Oldsmobile Aurora administrative burden which News can be reached at (202) 289–4357. car lines equipped with ‘‘PASS-Key II’’. § 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted The comments will also be available for In both of those instances, the agency vehicle manufacturers and itself. viewing and self copying in the Board’s concluded that a full exemption was The agency did not intend in drafting Microfilm Unit, Room 755. warranted because ‘‘PASS-Key II’’ had part 543 to require the submission of a In addition to an original and 12 shown itself as likely as parts-marking modification petition for every change copies of all paper documents filed with to be effective protection against theft to the components or design of an the Board, the parties shall submit their despite the absence of a visual or audio antitheft device. The significance of pleadings, including any graphics, on a alarm. many such changes could be de 3.5-inch diskette formatted for The agency concludes that, given the minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests WordPerfect 7.0 (or in a format readily similarities between the ‘‘Passlock’’ that if the manufacturer contemplates convertible into WordPerfect 7.0). All device and the ‘‘PASS-Key’’ and ‘‘PASS- making any changes the effects of which textual material, including cover letters, Key II’’ systems, it is reasonable to might be characterized as de minimis, it certificates of service, appendices and assume that ‘‘Passlock’’, like those should consult the agency before exhibits, shall be included in a single systems, will be as effective as parts- preparing and submitting a petition to file on the diskette. The diskettes shall marking in deterring theft. Accordingly, modify. be clearly labeled with the filer’s name, it has granted this petition for Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of the docket number of this proceeding, exemption in full and will not require authority at 49 CFR 1.50. STB Ex Parte No. 627, and the name of any parts to be marked on the the electronic format used on the Oldsmobile Alero car line beginning Issued on: April 29, 1998. L. Robert Shelton, diskette for files other than those with MY 1999. formatted in WordPerfect 7.0. All The agency believes that the device Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards. pleadings submitted on diskettes will be will provide the types of performance posted on the Board’s website [FR Doc. 98–11782 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am] listed in 49 CFR 543.6(a)(3): promoting (www.stb.dot.gov). The electronic activation; preventing defeat or BILLING CODE 4910±59±P submission requirements set forth in circumvention of the device by this notice supersede, for the purposes unauthorized persons; preventing DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION of this proceeding, the otherwise operation of the vehicle by applicable electronic submission unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the [STB Ex Parte No. 627] requirements set forth in the Board’s reliability and durability of the device. regulations. See 49 CFR 1104.3(a), as As required by 49 U.S.C. 33106 and Market Dominance DeterminationsÐ amended in Expedited Procedures for 49 CFR 543.6(a)(4) and (5), the agency Product and Geographic Competition Processing Rail Rate Reasonableness, finds that GM has provided adequate Exemption and Revocation Proceedings, reasons for its belief that the antitheft AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. STB Ex Parte No. 527, 61 FR 52710, 711 device will reduce and deter theft. This ACTION: Notice of Proposal to Eliminate (Oct. 8, 1996), 61 FR 58490, 58491 (Nov. conclusion is based on the information Product and Geographic Competition 15, 1996).1 GM provided about its antitheft device. From Consideration in Market Dominance Determinations. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This confidential information included Joseph H. Dettmar, (202) 565–1600. a description of reliability and SUMMARY: Pursuant to its decision in [TDD for the hearing impaired: (202) functional tests conducted by GM for Review of Rail Access and Competition 565–1695.] the antitheft device and its components. For the foregoing reasons, the agency Issues, STB Ex Parte No. 575 (STB SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In STB Ex hereby grants in full GM’s petition for served Apr. 17, 1998), the Board is Parte No. 575, the Board conducted two exemption for the MY 1999 Oldsmobile instituting a proceeding to consider days of informational hearings, on April Alero car line from the parts-marking removing product and geographic 2 and 3, 1998, to examine issues of rail requirements of 49 CFR part 541. competition as factors in market access and competition in today’s If GM decides not to use the dominance determinations in railroad railroad industry, and the statutory exemption for this line, it must formally rate proceedings. The Board requests remedies and agency regulations and notify the agency, and, thereafter, the that persons intending to participate in procedures that relate to those matters. line must be fully marked as required by this proceeding notify the agency of that As a result of those hearings, we 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of intent. A separate service list will be announced, inter alia, that we would major component parts and replacement issued based on the notices of intent to commence a proceeding to consider parts). participate that the Board receives. eliminating the product and geographic NHTSA notes that if GM wishes in the DATES: Notices of intent to participate in competition factors of our market future to modify the device on which this proceeding are due May 12, 1998. dominance guidelines in cases this exemption is based, the company Comments on this proposal are due May challenging the reasonableness of rail may have to submit a petition to modify 29, 1998. Replies are due June 29, 1998. rates.2 the exemption. § 543.7(d) states that a ADDRESSES: An original plus 12 copies Under 49 U.S.C. 10707, the Board can part 543 exemption applies only to of all comments and replies, referring to entertain a challenge to the vehicles that belong to a line exempted STB Ex Parte No. 627, must be sent to reasonableness of a rail rate only if we under this part and equipped with the the Office of the Secretary, Case Control antitheft device on which the line’s Unit, ATTN: STB Ex Parte No. 627, 1 A copy of each diskette submitted to the Board should be provided to any other party upon request. exemption is based. Further, Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K 2 The current market dominance guidelines are § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423– set forth in Product and Geographic Competition, of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to 0001. 2 I.C.C.2d 1, 20–22 (1985) (Market Dominance III).