DOCSLIB.ORG

Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 13 / Friday, January 18, 2013 / Notices 4195 vehicle by means other than a key; similar to but differing from the one SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a promoting activation; preventing defeat specified in that exemption.’’ petition dated October 26, 2012, or circumvention of the device by The agency wishes to minimize the MBUSA requested an exemption from unauthorized persons; preventing administrative burden that Part the parts marking requirements of the operation of the vehicle by 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the vehicle manufacturers and itself. The 541) for the new MY 2014 NGCC Line reliability and durability of the device. agency did not intend Part 543 to Chassis vehicle line. The petition Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 require the submission of a modification requested an exemption from parts- CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants a petition for every change to the marking pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, petition for exemption from the parts- components or design of an antitheft Exemption from Vehicle Theft marking requirements of Part 541, either device. The significance of many such Prevention Standard, based on the in whole or in part, if it determines that, changes could be de minimis. Therefore, installation of an antitheft device as based upon supporting evidence, the NHTSA suggests that if the standard equipment for an entire standard equipment antitheft device is manufacturer contemplates making any vehicle line. likely to be as effective in reducing and changes the effects of which might be Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may deterring motor vehicle theft as characterized as de minimis, it should petition NHTSA to grant an exemption compliance with the parts-marking consult the agency before preparing and for one vehicle line per model year. In requirements of Part 541. The agency submitting a petition to modify. its petition, MBUSA provided a detailed finds that Volvo has provided adequate description and diagram of the identity, reasons for its belief that the antitheft Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of design, and location of the components device for the S60 vehicle line is likely authority at 49 CFR 1.50. of the antitheft device for its new to be as effective in reducing and Issued on: January 11, 2013. vehicle line. MBUSA stated that its MY deterring motor vehicle theft as Christopher J. Bonanti, 2014 NGCC Line Chassis will include compliance with the parts-marking Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. CLA-Class vehicles (CLA250, CLA250 requirements of the Theft Prevention [FR Doc. 2013–00999 Filed 1–17–13; 8:45 am] 4MATIC and CLA45 4MATIC AMG) Standard (49 CFR part 541). This BILLING CODE 4910–59–P that will be equipped with a passive conclusion is based on the information ignition immobilizer (FBS III/FBS IV) Volvo provided about its device. and an access code-protected locking For the foregoing reasons, the agency DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION system as standard equipment. The hereby grants in full Volvo’s petition for immobilizer, transmitter key, electronic exemption for the MY 2014 S60 vehicle National Highway Traffic Safety ignition starter switch control unit (EIS), line from the parts-marking Administration the engine control module (ECM) and requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The the transmission control module (TCM) agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Petition for Exemption From the collectively perform the immobilizer appendix A–1, identifies those lines that Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; function. MBUSA stated that its are exempted from the Theft Prevention Mercedes-Benz immobilizer device is an interlinked Standard for a given MY. 49 CFR system of control units which 543.7(f) contains publication AGENCY: National Highway Traffic collectively perform the immobilizer requirements incident to the disposition Safety Administration (NHTSA), function. The interlinked system of all Part 543 petitions. Advanced Department of Transportation (DOT). includes the engine, EIS, transmitter listing, including the release of future ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. key, TCM and ECM (including the fuel product nameplates, the beginning injection system) which independently model year for which the petition is SUMMARY: This document grants in full calculates and matches a unique code. granted and a general description of the the Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA) MBUSA stated that it is impossible to antitheft device is necessary in order to petition for an exemption of the New read the code from the vehicle in order notify law enforcement agencies of new Generation Compact Car (NGCC) Line to defeat the system. MBUSA stated that vehicle lines exempted from the parts- Chassis vehicle line in accordance with if a relevant query from the vehicle to marking requirements of the Theft 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the the transmitter key is valid, operation of Prevention Standard. Theft Prevention Standard. This the vehicle will be authorized. MBUSA If Volvo decides not to use the petition is granted because the agency stated that the device will not be exemption for this line, it must formally has determined that the antitheft device equipped with an audible or visible notify the agency. If such a decision is to be placed on the line as standard alarm feature. MBUSA’s submission is made, the line must be fully marked as equipment is likely to be as effective in considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 reducing and deterring motor vehicle required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it (marking of major component parts and theft as compliance with the parts meets the general requirements replacement parts). marking requirements of the Theft contained in § 543.5 and the specific NHTSA notes that if Volvo wishes in Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). content requirements of § 543.6. the future to modify the device on MBUSA stated that activation of the DATES: which this exemption is based, the The exemption granted by this device occurs automatically when the company may have to submit a petition notice is effective beginning with the key is removed from the ignition switch, to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) 2014 model year (MY). whether the doors are open or not. Once states that a Part 543 exemption applies FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. activated, only a valid key with the only to vehicles that belong to a line Carlita Ballard, Office of International correct code inserted into the ignition exempted under this part and equipped Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer switch will disable immobilization and with the anti-theft device on which the Programs, NHTSA,1200 New Jersey allow the vehicle to start and operate. line’s exemption is based. Further, Avenue SE., West Building, W43–439 MBUSA further stated that no other § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Ballard’s action by the operator other than of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to telephone number is (202) 366–5222. turning the key is required to activate or permit the use of an antitheft device Her fax number is (202) 493–2990. deactivate the immobilizer. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:52 Jan 17, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18JAN1.SGM 18JAN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with 4196 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 13 / Friday, January 18, 2013 / Notices In its submission, MBUSA stated that standard equipment. MBUSA stated that requirements of the Theft Prevention a locking/unlocking function is also the data indicated its immobilizer Standard. incorporated into the device. The device was effective in contributing to If MBUSA decides not to use the unlocking signal from the remote key an average reduction of 31.8% in the exemption for this line, it must formally sends a message to the vehicle’s central theft rate of the SL-Line Chassis when notify the agency. If such a decision is electronic control unit and a permanent theft rates for the vehicle line dropped made, the line must be fully marked code is verified and compared to the from 1.0460 (CY 2007) to 0.7938 (CY according to the requirements under 49 stored code in the Signal Acquisition 2009). CFR 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major Module (SAM). MBUSA stated that Based on the supporting evidence component parts and replacement when both codes match, the locking submitted by MBUSA on the device, the parts). system will unlock the doors, tailgate agency believes that the antitheft device NHTSA notes that if MBUSA wishes and fuel filler cover. for the NGCC Line Chassis vehicle line in the future to modify the device on In addressing the specific content is likely to be as effective in reducing which this exemption is based, the requirements of 543.6, MBUSA and deterring motor vehicle theft as company may have to submit a petition provided information on the reliability compliance with the parts-marking to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) and durability of its proposed device. requirements of the Theft Prevention states that a Part 543 exemption applies To ensure reliability and durability of Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency only to vehicles that belong to a line the immobilizer device, MBUSA concludes that the device will provide exempted under this part and equipped conducted performance tests based on four of the five types of performance with the anti-theft device on which the the Economic Commission for Europe’s listed in § 543.6(a)(3): promoting line’s exemption is based. Further, Part specified standards. MBUSA provided a activation; preventing defeat or 543.9(c)(2) provides for the submission detailed list of the tests conducted and circumvention of the device by of petitions ‘‘to modify an exemption to believes that the device is reliable and unauthorized persons; preventing permit the use of an antitheft device durable because the device complied operation of the vehicle by similar to but differing from the one with the specified requirements for each unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the specified in that exemption.’’ test.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sunset Self-Evaluation Report
    TxDMV Self-Evaluation Report Sunset Self-Evaluation Report Texas Department of Motor Vehicles September 1, 2017 1 Sunset Advisory Commission TxDMV Self-Evaluation Report Sunset Advisory Commission 2 TxDMV Self-Evaluation Report Table of Contents I. Agency Contact Information .................................................................................... 5 II. Key Functions and Performance ............................................................................. 5 III. History and Major Events ...................................................................................... 14 IV. Policymaking Structure .......................................................................................... 17 V. Funding ................................................................................................................. 22 VI. Organization .......................................................................................................... 29 VII. Guide to Agency Programs ................................................................................... 32 1. Registration Services .................................................................................... 32 2. Title Services ................................................................................................ 43 3. Commercial Fleet Services ........................................................................... 53 4. Credentialing (authority to operate on highways) .......................................... 60 5. Oversize/Overweight Permits ......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations Contents
    QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE TO Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations Contents Title 49: Chapter V – National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation Page Foreword . iii Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Parts 571.101 through 571.500 . 1 Other Regulations Relating To Transportation: Parts 531 through 595 . 5 Summary Description of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Standard No. 101 through Standard No. 139 . 7 Standard No. 201 through Standard No. 225 . 20 Standard No. 301 through Standard No. 500 . 30 Summary Description of Other Regulations Relating To Transportation . 35 Parts 531; 533; 541; 555; 557; 564; 565; 566; 567; 568; 569; 570; 572; 573; 575; 577; 579; 580; 581; 582; 583; 591; 595 Procedures for Declaring and Certifying Imported Motor Vehicles . 53 How to Obtain Copies of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations . 53 i Foreword The National Highway Traffic Safety Adminis- tration (NHTSA) has a legislative mandate under Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety, to issue Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) and Regulations to which manufac- turers of motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment must conform and certify compliance. FMVSS 209, Seat Belt Assemb- lies, was the first standard to become effective on March 1, 1967. A number of FMVSS became effective for vehicles manufactured on and after January 1, 1968. Subsequently, other FMVSS have been issued. For instance, NHTSA has issued seven new FMVSS and has amended six FMVSS and two consumer infor- mation regulations and requirements since this booklet was revised in March 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Motor Vehicle Theft: Crime and Spatial Analysis in a Non-Urban Region
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Motor Vehicle Theft: Crime and Spatial Analysis in a Non-Urban Region Author(s): Deborah Lamm Weisel ; William R. Smith ; G. David Garson ; Alexi Pavlichev ; Julie Wartell Document No.: 215179 Date Received: August 2006 Award Number: 2003-IJ-CX-0162 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Crime and Spatial Analysis of Vehicle Theft in a Non-Urban Region Motor vehicle theft in non-urban areas does not reveal the well-recognized hot spots often associated with crime in urban areas. These findings resulted from a study of 2003 vehicle thefts in a four-county region of western North Carolina comprised primarily of small towns and unincorporated areas. While the study suggested that point maps have limited value for areas with low volume and geographically-dispersed crime, the steps necessary to create regional maps – including collecting and validating crime locations with Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates – created a reliable dataset that permitted more in-depth analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Auto Theft Prevention
    Auto Theft Prevention The National Conference of State Legislatures is the bipartisan organization that serves the legislators and staffs of the states, commonwealths and territories. NCSL provides research, technical assistance and opportunities for policymakers to exchange ideas on the most pressing state issues and is an effective and respected advocate for the interests of the states in the American federal system. Its objectives are: • To improve the quality and effectiveness of state legislatures. • To promote policy innovation and communication among state legislatures. • To ensure state legislatures a strong, cohesive voice in the federal system. The Conference operates from offices in Denver, Colorado, and Washington, D.C. Printed on recycled paper © 2008 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-58024-531-9 Auto Theft Prevention By Donna Lyons and Anne Teigen NATIO N AL CO N FERE nc E OF STATE LEGI S LATURE S William T. Pound, Executive Director 7700 East First Place Denver, Colorado 80230 (303) 364-7700 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 515 Washington, D.C. 20001 (202) 624-5400 www.ncsl.org December 2008 4 Auto Theft Prevention PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In 2007, the National Conference of State Legislatures Foundation for State Legislatures joined with the NCSL Criminal Justice and Transportation programs in an Auto Theft Prevention Partner’s Project. Like other Foundation for State Legislatures’ projects, it was designed as a partnership between selected state lawmakers, legislative staff and Foundation members. The work group assembled for the project learned from federal, state and local government officials and the insurance and auto industries to identify and discuss best practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Motor Vehicle Theft: How Insurance and Rental/Leasing Companies Are Helping Vehicle Owners and Law Enforcement Prevent and Discourage Vehicle Theft
    Reducing Motor Vehicle Theft: How Insurance and Rental/Leasing Companies Are Helping Vehicle Owners and Law Enforcement Prevent and Discourage Vehicle Theft Insurance and rental/leasing companies are vital partners with consumers and law enforcement in reducing the number of vehicle thefts every year and decreasing overall losses from vehicle theft. Each year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) collects and analyzes data from these companies on their efforts to prevent and discourage vehicle theft. This fact sheet summarizes NHTSA’s key insights from the most recent reports and arms companies, citizens and law enforcement with the information they need to educate people in their communities and to promote vehicle theft prevention. To read the full report, visit http://www.nhtsa.gov/Vehicle+Safety/Vehicle-Related+Theft/ Analysis+of+Insurer+Reports. How Common is Vehicle Theft? • Nearly 357,000 people filed insurance claims for stolen vehicles in 2006. Almost 30 percent of those were for late-model vehicles – the four most recent model years (MY 2003-2007). • More than 97,000 late model vehicles were stolen in 2006, but only 65 percent were recovered. The rate is higher for passenger cars – 72 percent – and significantly lower for motorcycles – 21 percent. What is the Cost of Vehicle Theft? • Vehicle theft directly and indirectly costs insurance companies, vehicle owners and law enforcement agencies. • Insurer payments for vehicle theft claims totaled more than $1.4 billion in 2006, the highest amount since NHTSA began tracking in 1987. Most of the payments – between 86 and 100 percent – were for the theft of the vehicle itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Vehicle Anti-Theft Security ...System Design. Volume II Technical Report
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF CE National Technical InformationService PB-296 809 Vehicle Anti-Theft Security ...... i System Design. Volume II Technical Report Arthur O. Little, Inc., Cambridge, MA Prepared for National~Fli~]hwayTraffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC Dec 78 / / J ~Vo ? L r PB 4" 296809 ............ DOT H$o804340 " / VEHICLE ANTI-THE~ SECURITY SYSTEM DESiG.N Volume !1. Technical Report e,/ John So H0wland Arthur D. Little, Inc. Acorn Perk Cambridge, Massachusetts 02140 Contract No. DOT HS-7-01723 Contract Amt: $121,280 "f December 1978 FINAL REPORT mmooucrmBy NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION. SERVICE U~8. DEPARTMENTOF OOMMERGE SPRIFJGFIELD,VA, 223,61 This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Service, e Springfield, Virginia 22161 : Prepared For U.S. DEPARTMENTOF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Washington. D.C. 20590~_ II T'.I ~ . / :.:.'!.. / Th~s document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation .in the interest of information exchange. The United States Govern- ment assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. /. p / :.m PORTIONS OF THIS REPORT ARE NOT LEGIBLE, HO~';EVER, IT IS THE BEST REPRODUCTION AVAILABLE FROM THE COPY SENT TO NTIS, .' ~i ." .,:" / ! Technical Rep~r~ Doc~,~Ho, Pegs 1. R~port No. | 2. GoYernme.ntAccession'No. 3. I% 1 PB296809 ~. Title end Subt'IHe 5, Report Date VEHICLE AI~T~-THEFT SECURITY SYSTEM DESIGN December 1978... -t 6. Performing Organization Code Voiu~ H: Technical Report 8. Parf0rming Organization Repo. No. 7. Aufl~orl=) W" J~n S.
    [Show full text]
  • Offense Cross Reference List
    Office of Attorney General Bureau of Criminal Investigation Offense Cross-Reference List for North Dakota Century Code (NDCC), Incident Based Reporting (IBR), National Crime Information Center (NCIC) Offense Codes, and Offender Registration Generated 9/13/2021 OFFENSE CROSS-REFERENCE LIST The NCIC codes on this list should not be used for entering NCIC Wants and Warrants. Use the official NCIC Code Manual. CST No. Offense Name Offense NDCC Section *FP *OR NCIC/IBR Description* Class C00001 Leading a criminal association-Organize FB 12.1-06.1-02(1)(a) F - 7399 90Z C00002 Leading a criminal association-Incite violence FB 12.1-06.1-02(1)(b) F - 7399 90Z C00003 Leading a criminal association-Furnish advice FB 12.1-06.1-02(1)(c) F - 7399 90Z C00004 Leading a criminal association-Induce act by public servant FB 12.1-06.1-02(1)(d) F - 7399 90Z C00005 Illegal control of an enterprise FB 12.1-06.1-03(1) F - 7399 90Z C00006 Illegally conducting an enterprise FB 12.1-06.1-03(2) F - 7399 90Z C00007 Unlawful release of information in a racketeering investigation MB 12.1-06.1-07(4) - - 7399 90Z C00008 Computer fraud FC 12.1-06.1-08(1) F - 2609 26G C00009 Computer crime MA 12.1-06.1-08(2) F - 2609 26G C00010 Criminal street gang FC 12.1-06.2-02 F - 7399 90Z C00011 Encouraging minors to participate in criminal street gang FC 12.1-06.2-03(1) F - 7399 90Z C00012 Treason FA 12.1-07-01 F - 0101 90Z C00013 Desecrating the flag of the United States MA 12.1-07-02(1) F - 5310 90C C00014 Unlawful display of certain flags-Parade MB 12.1-07-03(1) - - 7399 90Z C00015
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Trends and Best Practices of Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Programs, Final Report
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Assessing Trends and Best Practices of Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Programs, Final Report Author(s): Patrick Curtin, David Thomas, Daniel Felker, Eric Weingart Document No.: 209826 Date Received: May 2005 Award Number: ASP-T-033 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. ASSESSING TRENDS AND BEST PRACTICES OF MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT PREVENTION PROGRAMS Final Report Prepared by: Caliber Associates 10530 Rosehaven Street Suite 400 Fairfax, VA 22030 (703) 385-3200 DUNS #15-069-8421 Authors: Patrick Curtin David Thomas Daniel Felker Eric Weingart National Institute of Justice May, 2004 (original) February, 2005 (revised) This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Activity and Funds Report for the Automobile Burglary & Theft Prevention Authority
    Activity and Funds Report for the Automobile Burglary & Theft Prevention Authority Prepared for the Texas Legislature for Fiscal Year 2018 April 1, 2019 Texas Automobile Burglary and Theft Prevention Authority Board Lieutenant Tommy Hansen – Presiding Officer Law Enforcement Representative Hitchcock Ms. Linda Kinney Ms. Ashley Hunter Consumer Representative Insurance Representative Dripping Springs Austin Mr. Armin Mizani Mr. Steven C. McCraw Consumer Representative Ex-Officio, Department of Public Safety Keller Designee: Major Justin Owen Austin Mr. Shay Gause Assistant Chief Mike Rodriguez Insurance Representative Law Enforcement Representative Helotes Laredo ABTPA Director Bryan Wilson 512-465-4012 [email protected] Executive Summary The Automobile Burglary and Theft Prevention Authority (ABTPA) Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Activity and Funds Report is required by Texas Revised Civil Statutes, Article 4413(37), §6(d) and (i). The ABTPA is led by a governor- appointed board and the Director of the Texas Department of Public Safety (TxDPS) serves as an ex-officio member. The program is administratively attached to Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (TxDMV) and staffed as a division of TxDMV. The ABTPA Board and the local law enforcement teams that comprise the ABTPA network present this FY2018 Activity and Funds Report. This report demonstrates that ABTPA funding of highly trained and specialized motor vehicle burglary and theft investigators is effective in meeting the statutory goals of recovering vehicles, arresting offenders and clearing cases. For over 25 years, the ABTPA has been an essential part of Texas law enforcement. The ABTPA law enforcement agencies promote safety and work to reduce losses for all Texans by working to reduce motor vehicle crimes.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 40723
    Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 40723 § 381.302 [Amended] certain specified conditions, and take The California Department of the 2. In § 381.302, paragraph (a) is reasonable steps to determine whether Highway Patrol raised the following amended by removing ``$11,550'' and the vehicle is being operated with the concerns: (1) Whether an officer has adding ``$12,790'' in its place. owner's consent. There are two program probable cause to stop a vehicle conditions proposed in this rule. Under displaying a decal; (2) the ease with § 381.303 [Amended] the first condition, the owner may which a thief can remove a decal; (3) the 3. In § 381.303, paragraph (a) is consent to have the car stopped if it is necessity for extensive public awareness amended by removing ``$16,860'' and operated between the hours of 1:00 a.m. campaigns; and (4) the transferability or adding ``$18,680'' in its place. and 5:00 a.m. Under the second renewal of a decal from one vehicle to condition, the owner may consent to another. § 381.304 [Amended] have the car stopped if it crosses, is The Department of Justice takes the 4. In § 381.304, paragraph (a) is about to cross, or about to be position that under section § 29.8 of the amended by removing ``$8,840'' and transported across a United States land rule, Motor vehicle owner participation, adding ``$9,790'' in its place. border, or if it enters a port. States and the owner of the vehicle has already granted permission to law enforcement § 381.305 [Amended] localities may elect to participate in the program solely at their option.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation Program Plan 1998-2002
    People Saving People U.S. Department of Transportation http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov National Highway Traffic Safety Administration DOT HS 808 709* May 1998* Evaluation Program Plan 1998-2002 *With "Summaries of Published Evaluation Reports" updated through March 2003 PREFACE The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has rigorously evaluated its major programs as a matter of policy since 1970. The evaluation of the effectiveness of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) began in 1975. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and Executive Order 12866, "Regulatory Planning and Review," issued in October 1993, now oblige all Federal agencies to evaluate their existing programs and regulations. Previously, Executive Order 12291, issued in February 1981, also required reviews of existing regulations. Even before 1981, however, NHTSA was a leader among Federal agencies in evaluating the effectiveness of existing regulations and technologies. There are large data bases of motor vehicle crashes which can be analyzed to find out what vehicle and traffic safety programs work best. This five-year plan presents and discusses the programs, regulations, technologies and related areas NHTSA proposes to evaluate, and it summarizes the findings of past evaluations. Depending on scope, evaluations typically take a year or substantially more, counting initial planning, contracting for support, OMB clearance for surveys, internal reviews, approvals, publication, review of public comments, and the last phase of preparing recommendations for subsequent agency action. Most of NHTSA's crashworthiness and several crash avoidance standards have been evaluated at least once since 1975. A number of consumer-oriented regulations, e.g., bumpers, theft protection, fuel economy and NCAP have also been evaluated.
    [Show full text]
  • Automobile Theft Leonard D
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 50 Article 6 Issue 2 July-August Summer 1959 Automobile Theft Leonard D. Savitz Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Leonard D. Savitz, Automobile Theft, 50 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 132 (1959-1960) This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. AUTOMOBILE THEFT LEONARD D. SAVITZ The author is a member of the staff of the Department of Sociology in the University of Pennsyl- vania. He has published an article on "Capital Crime as Defined in American Statutory Law" in our Volume 46 (September-October, 1955), and another on "A Study in Capital Punishment" in Volume 49 (November-December, 1958.)-EDITOIZ. A. THE NATURE OF AUTO THEF' (1, 11, 12) narrowly restrict this offense within the federal The necessary first step in any discussion of auto jurisdiction. theft in the United States is to become aware of B. THE PRESENT STATUS OF AUTO THEFT certain legalistic peculiarities in American law as they apply to the crime of theft. The common law I. EXTENT definition of larceny (or theft) hias, historically, The Uniform Crime Report for 1956 (S-5) shows come to include in it an element of attempted, or an estimated 250,000 cars stolen for that year.
    [Show full text]