Federal register. Gives Tesla anti thefts information
Federal Register, Volume 77 Issue 72 (Friday, April 13, 2012)
- - - Updated - - -
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22383-22384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [
http://www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8893]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Motor Theft
Prevention Standard; TESLA
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 Tesla Motors
Inc's. (Tesla) for an exemption of the Model S 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, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard. Tesla requested confidential treatment for
specific information in its petition. The agency granted Tesla's
request for confidential treatment by a letter dated December 5, 2011.
DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2012 model year (MY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carlita Ballard, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, W43-
439, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard's
phone number is (202) 366-5222. Her fax number is (202) 493-2990.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated October 24, 2011, Tesla
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft
prevention standard (49 CFR Part 541) for the Model S vehicle line
beginning with MY 2012. 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 the 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, Tesla
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design and
location of the components of the antitheft device for the Model S
vehicle line. Tesla will install a passive, transponder-based,
electronic engine immobilizer device as standard equipment on its Model
S vehicle line beginning with MY 2012. Key components of the antitheft
device include an engine immobilizer, security controller, gateway
function, drive inverter and a passive entry transponder (PET). Tesla
stated that its immobilizer device, which will be installed beginning
with its MY 2012 vehicle line, will be an upgraded version with a more
robust design than the antitheft device already installed as standard
equipment on its MYs 2008-2011 Tesla roadsters. Tesla stated that the
new design of its immobilizer device will have enhanced communications
between components, prevent tampering and also provide additional
features to enhance its overall effectiveness.
In addition to Tesla's immobilizer device, an audible alarm (horn)
will be incorporated as standard equipment, but no visual feature will
be provided with the alarm system. Tesla stated that its alarm system
will activate with any unauthorized attempt to break in the front and
rear cargo areas. Tesla also stated that any unauthorized entry without
the correct PET will trigger the audible alarm. Tesla stated that its
antitheft device has a two-step activation process with a vehicle code
query being conducted at each stage. The first stage allows access to
the vehicle when an authorization cycle occurs between the PET and the
Security Controller as long as the PET is in close proximity to the car
and the driver either pushes the lock/unlock button on the key fob,
pushes the exterior door handle to activate the handle sensors or
inserts a hand into the handle to trigger the latch release. During the
second stage, vehicle operation will be enabled when the driver has
depressed the brake pedal and moves the gear selection stalk to drive
or reverse. When one of these actions is performed, the security
controller will poll to verify if the appropriate PET is inside the
vehicle. Upon location of the PET, the security controller will run an
authentication cycle with the key confirming the correct PET is being
used inside the vehicle. Tesla stated that once authentication is
successful, the security controller initiates an encrypted message
through the gateway enabling the drive inverter to receive the
encrypted message which then processes the message generating an
encrypted response posting the message back to the security controller.
If the encrypted exchange yields a result that meets the security
code's expectations of the security controller, the correct exchange
will authorize the drive inverter to deactivate immobilization allowing
the vehicle to be driven under its own power. Tesla stated that if the
results are not correct and there is no response to the drive inverter
from the security controller, the vehicle will remain immobilized and
the drive inverter will retry the exchange until there is a proper
response or it times out. Tesla's submission is considered a complete
petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7 in that it meets the general
requirements contained in 543.5 and the specific content requirements
of 543.6.
Tesla stated that the immobilizer functions will ensure maximum
theft protection when the immobilizer is active, the vehicle is off and
the doors are locked. Tesla stated that it will incorporate an
additional security measure that performs when the car is unlocked and
immobilization is deactivated. Specifically, immobilization will
reactivate when there are no user inputs to the vehicle within a
programmed period of time. Tesla stated that any attempt to operate the
vehicle without performing and completing each task, will render the
vehicle inoperable.
In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Tesla
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, Tesla
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. Tesla provided a
detailed list of the test conducted and stated that it believes that
its device is reliable and durable because it complied with its own
specific design standards. Additionally, Tesla stated that it has
incorporated other measures of ensuring reliability and durability of
the device. Those measures include the inaccessible location of all
immobilizer device components within the passenger compartment of the
vehicle or their containment in other vehicle
[[Page 22384]]
components. Tesla stated that these measures protect the immobilizer
device from exposure to the elements and limit its access by
unauthorized persons. Additionally, Tesla stated that the immobilizer
relies on electronic functions versus mechanical functions and
therefore expects the components to last at least the life of the
vehicle.
Tesla also compared the device proposed for its vehicle line with
other devices which NHTSA has already determined to be as effective in
reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard. Tesla
compared the BMW 5 series and the Mercedes-Benz E-Class to its Model S
vehicle line. Specifically, the agency's data show that theft rates for
the BMW 5 series are 0.9044, 0.6550 and 0.4098 and for the Mercedes-
Benz E-Class, 0.5898, 0.6286 and 0.9041 respectively. Using an average
of 3 MYs data (2007-2009), the agency theft rate data show that the
average theft rate for the BMW 5 series is 0.6564 and 0.7075 for the
Mercedes-Benz E-Class, well below the median theft rate of 3.5826.
Tesla also stated that its 2008-2011 roadsters are already equipped
with an antitheft device as standard equipment. Agency theft rate data
for the roadster vehicles using an average of the most current theft
rate data available is 0.0000.
Based on the evidence submitted by Tesla, the agency believes that
the antitheft device for the Model S 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).
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 Tesla has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Model S 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 Tesla
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 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.
For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Tesla's
petition for exemption for the Model S vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, beginning with the 2012 model
year vehicles. 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 MY. 49 CFR 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 Tesla decides not to use the exemption for this line, it shall
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5 and
541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
NHTSA notes that if Tesla 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. Section 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 Sec.
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: April 10, 2012.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-8893 Filed 4-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
