Interpretation ID: aiam3203
Jr.
Hugh A. West
Inc.
Suite 303 Professional Building
Suffolk
Virginia 23434;
Dear Mr. Felton: This is in response to your letter of October 22, 1979, addressed t Mr. Nelson Erickson. Please accept my apologies for the lateness of our letter. Your letter asked whether Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 114, *Theft Protection*, was intended to prevent a small child or animal left unattended in a parked automobile (model year 1973) from which the keys have been removed, from intentionally or accidentally moving the gear selection level from the 'Park' position. The answer to your question is no, for the reasons noted below. You also requested a copy of any technical analysis that may have been done in the development of Safety Standard 114. Although the public docket contains analyses pertinent to later versions of Safety Standard 114 it contains none pertinent to any version of the standard applicable to passenger cars manufactured in 1973. The only analyses pertinent to these earlier versions of the standard are contained in documents which contain internal agency opinion and recommendations and thus are not publicly available.; When Safety Standard 114 was adopted in 1968 its stated purpose was t 'reduce the incidence of accidents resulting from unauthorized use.' (33 FR 6471, April 27, 1968). This goal was based on evidence which shoed that: 'cars operated by unauthorized persons are far more likely to cause unreasonable risk of accident, personal injury and death than those which are driven by authorized individuals,' (33 FR 6471, preamble). Neither the rule nor the preamble states that the standard was intended to accomplish any other goal.; As adopted, the standard required that all passenger cars manufacture on or after January 1, 1970, be equipped with a key locking system that (upon removal of the key) would prevent 'activation of the car's engine or other main source of motive power, and either steering or self-mobility or both.' Safety Standard 114 in its current form also provides manufacturers with this option. The preamble to the standard simply stated that a steering or self-mobility lock was needed in order '...to defeat car thieves who start cars with so-called 'master keys' and devices which bypass the [ignition] lock ...' (33 FR 6471).; In light of the compliance option described above and the purpose o Safety Standard 114 as expressed both in the standard its self and in the preambles of various Federal Register notices, it appears that Safety Standard 114 was not intended to apply to the situation described in your letter.; If you have any further questions, please fell free to contact Ms Debra Weiner of my staff at 202-426-2992.; Sincerely, Frank Berndt, Chief Counsel