[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54152-54154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27597]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
[Docket No. 97-041; Notice 01]
Denial of Petition To Adopt a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard To Require That New Vehicles Be Equipped With Technology
(Computer Chips) Embedded in Ignition Keys To Deter Theft
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document denies the Consumers for Auto Reliability and
Safety's (CARS) petition to adopt a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard ( FMVSS) to require that new motor vehicles be equipped with
specific technology, such as computer chips in the ignition keys, to
deter theft. CARS believes that the standard it proposed would ensure a
safer and more effective means of deterring theft than the steering
lock systems presently required by 49 CFR Section 571.114, Theft
Protection.
[[Page 54153]]
The agency is denying this petition because it cannot mandate
specific technologies that motor vehicle manufacturers are to use to
deter theft. The definition of ``motor vehicle safety standard'' in the
vehicle safety law limits the agency's discretion with respect to
petitions that seek to specify the design of vehicles or equipment
rather than their performance. In addition, the Department of
Transportation (DOT) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are currently
assessing the existing theft prevention program to determine what, if
any, changes are needed to further deter motor vehicle theft.
Accordingly, the agency believes it would be premature to promulgate
additional requirements before this comprehensive assessment is
completed.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rosalind Proctor, Motor Vehicle
Theft Group, Office of Planning and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, 400
Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590. Ms. Proctor's telephone
number is (202) 366-0846. Her fax number is (202) 493-2739.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By facsimile dated April 21, 1997, CARS
petitioned the agency to adopt a new Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard (FMVSS) which will require new motor vehicles to be equipped
with specific technology, such as computer chips embedded in the
ignition keys, to deter theft. CARS believes that adopting such a
standard would reduce crime and ensure a safer and more effective means
of deterring theft than that offered by the steering lock systems
presently required by 49 CFR Section 571.114, Theft Protection.
Additionally, CARS notes that the European Union has mandated that
model year (MY) 1999 vehicles must use some form of this technology to
deter motor vehicle theft in its market. CARS contention is that
adopting the proposed standard would be compatible with the agency's
goal of moving toward harmonization with other countries without
jeopardizing a stronger U.S. standard.
Agency Analysis
Because there is already a standard (FMVSS 114) covering theft
protection, the agency is treating CARS' petition as a petition to
amend the existing standard rather than to adopt a new standard as the
petitioner requests. FMVSS 114 specifies requirements primarily for
theft protection to reduce the incidence of crashes resulting from
unauthorized operation of motor vehicles, or from rollaway of parked
vehicles. Specifically, this standard requires that each vehicle have a
key-locking system that requires the vehicle transmission lever to be
in ``park'' before removal of the key is permitted; and that, whenever
the key is removed, prevents the vehicle from starting, and prevents
the steering and/or forward mobility of the vehicle.
Although NHTSA is interested in actions that would reduce motor
vehicle theft and provide for a safer and more effective means of
deterring theft than that presently offered by steering lock systems,
the definition of ``motor vehicle safety standard'' in the vehicle
safety law, 49 U.S.C. 30102(9), provides that a safety standard is ``a
minimum standard for motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment
performance.'' This definition limits the agency's discretion with
respect to petitions that seek to specify the design of vehicles or
equipment rather than their performance. This prohibits the agency from
mandating specific technologies that motor vehicle manufacturers are to
use to deter theft, as the CARS petition requests.
In addition to FMVSS 114, Congress and NHTSA recognized the
economic impact and seriousness of motor vehicle theft and have taken
actions aimed at alleviating theft in a cost-effective manner. The
Motor Vehicle Theft Law Enforcement Act (the Theft Act) was passed by
Congress in 1984. The purpose of the Theft Act was to reduce the
incidence of motor vehicle thefts and to facilitate the tracing and
recovery of stolen motor vehicles and parts from stolen vehicles. The
Department of Transportation implemented this legislation by issuing
the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541),
which requires manufacturers of designated high-theft passenger cars to
inscribe or affix the vehicle identification number onto the major
parts of that vehicle. In 1992, the Theft Act was amended to provide
tougher law enforcement against auto theft, impede automobile title
fraud, and extend the parts-marking requirements to light-duty trucks
and multipurpose passenger vehicles.
49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard, provides that manufacturers of high-theft vehicle lines may
petition the agency for an exemption from the parts-marking
requirements if an antitheft device is installed as standard equipment
on the entire vehicle line. A manufacturer may be exempted from the
parts-marking requirements for any line of passenger motor vehicles
equipped with an antitheft system that is determined to be as effective
in reducing and deterring theft as parts marking would be.
The exemption provisions of the Theft Act have already resulted in
manufacturers installing antitheft systems, including systems that
incorporate the technology advocated by CARS, in many high-theft
models. Thus, vehicles with higher-than-median theft rates are already
equipped with theft deterrents (parts marking and/or antitheft systems)
that add to the protection provided by FMVSS No. 114.
All manufacturers are attempting to reduce motor vehicle theft
through development and installation of effective antitheft devices as
standard equipment. Additionally, along with meeting mandatory
requirements, all manufacturers have moved forward in manufacturing new
vehicles with other improved antitheft deterrents, such as hardened
collars that shield the upper and lower casing of the steering column.
These deter theft by increasing significantly the time required to
disable the locking mechanism for the ignition, steering wheel and
automatic transmission gear selector.
In its petition, CARS also asserts that by adopting a new FMVSS
comparable to the European Union's, NHTSA would be meeting its goal of
moving toward harmonization without jeopardizing the U.S. standard. The
European Union has mandated that its model year (MY) 1999 vehicles must
use some form of antitheft technology. Some manufacturers have already
developed and installed antitheft devices which utilize specific
ignition keys and sophisticated electronic control modules similar to
that required by the European Union. The agency has also granted
exemptions from parts marking under 49 CFR part 543 for models equipped
with PASS-KEY and other antitheft devices with computer chips imbedded
in the ignition key.
The statutory basis for granting these exemptions under the vehicle
theft law is a finding by the agency, on a case-by-case basis, that
these systems are at least as effective as the parts-marking
requirements of the theft prevention standard in reducing and deterring
theft (49 U.S.C. 33106(b). Part 543 does not specify how the antitheft
device is to perform or be designed. Instead, it requires a
manufacturer applying for an exemption to provide information on how
the device is activated and functions. The agency then uses the
information provided about these functions to decide whether the system
will be sufficiently effective in deterring theft to warrant an
exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard.
[[Page 54154]]
It should be noted that by October 25, 1997, the Department of
Transportation is required to provide a Report to Congress which will
evaluate the effects of federal regulations on auto theft and
comprehensive insurance premiums, and recommend what changes, if any,
to these regulations are appropriate. Specifically, the Report to
Congress will evaluate the effects of the Anti Car Theft Act of 1992
and the Motor Vehicle Theft Law Enforcement Act of 1984. This report
will provide information on the efficacy of parts-marking and antitheft
devices. It will also recommend whether the Theft Prevention Standard
should be continued without change, modified to cover more or fewer
lines of passenger motor vehicles; modified to cover other classes of
motor vehicles or to terminate the standard for all future motor
vehicles. The notice seeking public review and comment on the report
prior to its submission to Congress was published in the Federal
Register on June 26, 1997 (See 62 FR 34494). The Department of
Transportation and the Department of Justice are assessing the current
theft prevention program to determine what, if any, changes are needed
to further deter motor vehicle theft. Upon review of the public
comments, recommendations for changes, if any, to the regulations will
be considered.
The agency believes that the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part
541), in conjunction with FMVSS No. 114 and Part 543, provides a
comprehensive scheme for deterring motor vehicle theft. Until DOT and
DOJ complete their assessment of the existing theft prevention program,
it would be premature to promulgate any regulatory requirement under
the vehicle safety law even if a way could be found to develop
performance criteria rather than the design criteria suggested by the
CARS petition.
In accordance with 49 CFR part 552, this completes the agency's
review of the petition. The agency has concluded that there is no
reasonable possibility that the request by the petitioner would be
amended at the conclusion of a rulemaking proceeding. Accordingly, it
denies CARS' petition.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30103, 30162; delegation of authority at 49
CFR 1.50 and 501.8
Issued on: October 9, 1997.
L. Robert Shelton,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 97-27597 Filed 10-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
