Chop Shops and
the Federal Government Response
By 1982, the federal government
stepped up its efforts to reduce auto thefts, particularly from the organized
crime sector, by taking direct aim on chop shops. The House Subcommittee on
Consumer Protection advanced a bill that mandated the marking of critical car
parts, and the Senate concurred with a companion bill. While Congress was
behind these measures, manufacturers and the Reagan Administration were not. In
fact, during one hearing on the bill, one Administration official spoke in
favor of the bill, and another testified against it.
Diane K. Steed, Deputy Administrator
of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), gave the
Administration’s position at the hearing. She said, “The industry is already
facing a serious cash-flow problem . . . and $100 million worth of regulatory
burdens on the motor vehicle industry is not keeping with the regulatory relief
effort.”15
Congress ultimately prevailed, and
the 1984 Motor Vehicle Theft Law Enforcement Act was made into law. The Theft
Act was designed to reduce the incidence of motor vehicle thefts and simplify
the tracing and recovery of stolen parts from stolen vehicles. The Act directed
the secretary of transportation to issue a theft prevention standard requiring
manufacturers to inscribe or affix numbers or symbols on major parts of high
theft passenger cars for identification purposes. Additionally, this
legislation also addressed other issues such as criminal penalties, export or
stolen motor vehicles, and comprehensive insurance premiums.
In October 1985, the Department of
Transportation implemented the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard
(49 CFR Part 541) which required manufacturers of designated vehicles to
inscribe or affix the VIN onto the following major parts: engines,
transmissions, fenders, doors, bumpers, quarter panels, hoods, and deck
lids/tailgates and/or hatchbacks. In the case of engines and transmissions,
either the 17-digit VIN or an eight digit VIN derivative had to be engraved or
stamped. Manufacturers could meet the affixation requirements with indelibly
marked labels that could not be removed without being torn or rendering the
number on the label illegible. The labels also had to leave a residue on the
part after being removed.
As a further theft deterrent, the
1984 Act allowed for an exemption from the parts-marking requirements for
certain brands where anti-theft devices were installed as standard equipment in
factory-delivered cars. The Act limited each manufacturer to exemptions on two
models per year. The manufacturer had to petition NHTSA for an exemption, which
would be granted if the devices were determined to be as effective in reducing
and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with parts marking. The common
features of anti-theft devices installed as standard equipment for which
exemptions were granted included “passive” systems, namely, those that engaged
automatically without any extra action by motorists. Such systems were activated
automatically by removing the key from the ignition and locking the doors.
Sensors located in the doors, hood, trunk, and key cylinders activated an alarm
after an unauthorized entry attempt. Also, approved systems had a starter or
ignition interrupt and power (battery) protection. Most systems that were
granted full exemptions featured an audio and/or visual alarm, and some of the
General Motors systems used a pass key. Systems that were granted a partial
exemption had marked engines and transmissions.
Later, after Congress acquired more
information, the Anti Theft Act of 1992 was passed. This legislation built on
the 1984 Act in several ways: Federal penalties for auto theft were enhanced; a
grant program was authorized to help state and local law enforcement agencies
concerned with auto theft; and finally, experts were called on the look into
and report on motor vehicle titling, registration, and salvage. In 1994, the
National Motor Vehicle Title Information System was established and states were
required to participate in the system. Consequently, the Theft Prevention
Standard was expanded, rules were established to check if salvage or junk
vehicles were stolen, and the US attorney general was charged with maintaining
a National Stolen Auto Part Information System. Selling or distributing stolen
marked parts became a federal crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment