This is what the Government is proposing:
Vol. 141, No. 48 — December 1, 2007
Regulations Amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (Importation of
Vehicles — Section 12)
Statutory authority
Motor Vehicle Safety Act
Sponsoring department
Department of Transport
REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT
(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)
Description
Starting September 1, 2007, vehicles manufactured for sale in Canada and imported into Canada have been required to be equipped with an electronic immobilization system. The introduction of this requirement has resulted in the need to clarify the process for private importation of motor vehicles. This clarification is needed as vehicles, which were purchased in the United States by many Canadian consumers at the retail level, are being denied entry into Canada. This amendment will mitigate the economic hardship to Canadian consumers who have purchased vehicles in the United States and are unable to license them in Canada.
This proposed amendment modifies section 12, "Importation of a Vehicle Purchased in the United States," of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (MVSR), to clarify the vehicle theft immobilization requirements for vehicles imported into Canada that are sold at the retail level in the United States. This proposed amendment clarifies that vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States, that are equipped at the time of manufacture with an electronic immobilization system, may be imported into Canada and that those vehicles that do not have an electronic immobilization system may be imported if the vehicle can be safely fitted with an aftermarket immobilization system.
This amendment is intended to offer more flexibility to vehicle importers while maintaining comparable safety requirements for imported vehicles as are provided by vehicles sold at the retail level in Canada. This amendment would not impose any new requirement on vehicle manufacturers or importers; rather, it facilitates consumer choice and clarifies the importation process for vehicles regarding theft immobilization systems, while maintaining safety for Canadians.
Background
The Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (CMVSS) 114, Theft Protection and Rollaway Prevention, hereafter referred to as the Canadian safety standard, governs the design and performance of theft and inadvertent rollaway protection. This Canadian safety standard was modified in 2005 (see footnote 1) to include the requirement that every light-duty, non-emergency vehicle must be equipped with an electronic immobilization system as of September 1, 2007.
The Canadian safety standard includes the following requirements:
• Starting September 1, 2007, every passenger car, every three-wheeled vehicle and every multi-purpose passenger vehicle and truck with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 4 536 kg or less, except walk-in vans and emergency vehicles, must be equipped with an immobilization system that, at the option of the manufacturer, meets one of the following standards:
• National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98, entitled Automobile Theft Deterrent Equipment and Systems: Electronic Immobilization; (see footnote 2)
• Part III of ECE Regulation No. 97, entitled Uniform Provisions Concerning the Approval of Vehicle Alarm Systems (VAS) and of Motor Vehicles with Regard to Their Alarm Systems (AS); (see footnote 3) and
• Part IV of ECE Regulation No. 116, entitled Uniform Technical Prescriptions Concerning the Protection of Motor Vehicles Against Unauthorized Use. (see footnote 4)
The requirement for vehicles to be equipped with electronic immobilization systems was prompted by research, (see footnote 5) which indicated that the installation of immobilization systems that make it difficult for the car engine to be started would reduce vehicle theft. Immobilizers are noted for significantly reducing theft for convenience, which frequently involves youth offenders. Studies have estimated the direct dollar losses from motor vehicle theft in Canada to be $600 million per year. (see footnote 6) Furthermore, these studies have demonstrated that an average of 244 to 345 serious injuries and 11 lives could be saved each year if immobilization systems were installed on all Canadian vehicles.
During the development of the Canadian safety standard, Canada focused its efforts on improving road safety by reducing theft for convenience, which frequently involves youth offenders. Youth offender theft represents a significant road safety issue, as youth have limited driving experience and often engage in risky behaviours when driving stolen vehicles. Thus, youth theft significantly increases the risk of injury and death to themselves, the other occupants of the vehicle, other road users and police officers.
While Canada has focused its safety efforts on reducing theft for convenience by making the vehicle difficult to steal, the United States' National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has focused its efforts on the identification of vehicles that have been stolen for profit, in other words, vehicles that have been stolen with the intention of disassembling them and selling the individual parts. This regulation is specified in Title 49, Part 541 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, and requires that several parts of passenger cars and some trucks be marked for identification purposes.
The NHTSA parts marking regulation allows the alternative of installing theft protection devices as an option in lieu of parts marking, in some specific instances. It also provides, in its Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 114, (see footnote 7) an exclusion from requiring steering locks for vehicles equipped with theft systems. While the NHTSA does support, in limited instances, the installation of theft protection systems, there are no specific federal standards or performance requirements for immobilization systems installed on vehicles sold in the United States.
The absence of a technical requirement for theft protection systems in the United States has resulted in an issue with regards to the private importation into Canada of vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States. Since September 1, 2007, many Canadians have purchased vehicles in the United States and now cannot import them into Canada. As the Canadian and U.S. vehicle safety regulatory regimes are highly harmonized, it is common practice for vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States to be imported into Canada, as provided for under the North American Free Trade Agreement. With the advent of the strong Canadian dollar, there has been an upward trend in the volume of vehicle importations from the United States into Canada from 28 019 vehicles in the year 2000 to 112 826 in 2006, and to a projected 160 000 vehicles for 2007. (see footnote 8)
This proposed amendment clarifies that vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States, that are equipped at the time of manufacture with an electronic immobilization system, may be imported into Canada, and that those vehicles that do not have an electronic immobilization system may be imported if the vehicle can be safely fitted with an immobilization system that conforms to the National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98, entitled Automobile Theft Deterrent Equipment and Systems: Electronic Immobilization, and the importer declares that they will install such a system before registering the vehicle under the laws of a province, and that the registrar of imported vehicles certifies that the vehicle is in accordance with section 12.
This amendment proposes to deem factory-installed electronic immobilization systems as acceptable on vehicles privately imported from the United States by Canadians. Electronic immobilization systems are very difficult to defeat, as they have over 50 000 different code combinations for the electronic signal. In addition, they frequently require the use of software to allow for the replacement of the vehicle key (transponder) or other system components. Even with the requisite knowledge, replacement parts and the computer software, many systems have a built-in replacement time lag so that any component cannot be immediately replaced and the vehicle driven; often it must sit for five minutes or more. These features, which are built into electronic immobilization systems, greatly restrict the ability of vehicles to be stolen for convenience.
A few vehicle manufacturers have noted lately that they cannot be certain that immobilization systems installed on their vehicles sold in the United States would meet the Canadian safety standard or be modified to make them conform. In addition, manufacturers are reluctant to publicly share the technical information on any potential differences between vehicles destined for the United States and Canadian markets. Information on how to defeat anti-theft immobilization systems should not be commonly available and thus it is in the best interest for the safety of Canadians to find an alternative means of certification for vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States which will be imported into Canada.
Some manufacturers have also noted concern regarding tampering with the electronic system of the vehicle in the event that a second electronic immobilization system would be required. Manufacturers have noted that they cannot ensure that such features as air bag activation will not be compromised. Finally, installing two electronic immobilization systems can create technical challenges and in-use problems, as each system uses an antenna, which can result in interference issues. Requiring the installation of a second electronic immobilization system would also be unnecessarily expensive. Thus, in the interest of safety, this proposed amendment includes the provision that vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States that have, at the time of manufacture, an electronic immobilization system, may be imported into Canada without further modification.
During the development of the Canadian safety standard, clear evidence was brought forward by the insurance industry noting that it is possible to defeat mechanical immobilization systems with limited knowledge and using only simple tools. If the installed system is mechanical, there will not be any interference between it and any additional electronic immobilization system. Thus, regardless of the presence of a mechanical immobilization system, this proposed amendment clarifies the requirement for the installation of an aftermarket immobilization system that meets the National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98 standard, entitled Automobile Theft Deterrent Equipment and Systems: Electronic Immobilization (May 1998), published by the Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada (ULC), provided the manufacturer has not indicated that the vehicle cannot be safely fitted with this type of aftermarket immobilizer. The CAN/ULC-S338-98 standard has been chosen because it is recognized by the insurance industry as a reference for aftermarket immobilization systems, and electronic immobilization systems meeting this requirement are readily available in Canada for aftermarket installation.
While the Canadian safety standard allows for the installation of both European ECE and Canadian ULC approved systems, this proposed amendment permits only the aftermarket installation of systems meeting the CAN/ULC-S338-98 standard on vehicles that do not have an immobilization system or have only a mechanical immobilization system. This requirement is not expected to cause any burden on importers as ULC-approved aftermarket systems are readily available in Canada and there is a corresponding standard relating to the installation of these devices which the installers can follow.
This proposed amendment would facilitate the private importation of vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States to be imported into Canada, provided the vehicle is equipped with an electronic immobilization system. It would also provide for the installation of an aftermarket immobilization system meeting the CAN/ULC-S338-98 standard, for a vehicle that has a mechanical immobilization system or no immobilization system and the manufacturer has not indicated that the vehicle cannot be safely fitted with this type of aftermarket immobilizer. Consumers will continue to need to verify the list of vehicles that can be imported, which is maintained by Transport Canada, as there may be some vehicles which do not have an electronic immobilization system and cannot be safely retrofitted with an immobilization system.
Alternatives
Status quo
This alternative would continue to have a negative effect on consumers. This would prevent the importation of some vehicles into Canada without presenting a safety disadvantage to the Canadian public. In addition, if manufacturers are required to publicly share information on their specific immobilization system software or hardware to attempt to bring vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States up to the Canadian safety standard, there could be a significant reduction in safety or possibly, higher insurance costs as information on how to defeat the manufacturers' immobilization system would be more easily obtainable.
Eliminate the requirement for imported vehicles to have an immobilization system
Allowing the importation of U.S. vehicles without immobilization systems will, in the cases of vehicles sold with no immobilization system, reduce safety and result in vehicles that can easily be stolen. Past research has shown that once young offenders are aware of how to easily steal one vehicle model, the information spreads quickly and that vehicle model becomes a target for youth theft. Following this option would negate the tremendous success that has been achieved in Canada due to the continued efforts of the insurance industry and several vehicle manufacturers to move towards the voluntary installation of vehicle immobilizers.
Allow for the private importation of vehicles from the United States which have an electronic immobilizer and permit the installation of an aftermarket immobilizer where safety is not compromised
This option will facilitate additional consumer choice by giving Canadians the opportunity of purchasing vehicles at the retail level in the United States, while at the same time providing Canadians with safe vehicles. This alternative proposes two options: accepting vehicles equipped with electronic immobilization systems installed at the time of their manufacture; and, allowing vehicles which have a mechanical immobilizer, or alternatively have no immobilizer, to be fitted with an aftermarket immobilization system that meets the requirements of the CAN/ULC-S338-98 standard, provided that the manufacturer has not indicated that such an immobilization system cannot be safely installed.
Requiring a vehicle to be equipped with an electronic immobilization system has been shown to significantly decrease the risk of property loss, injury and death. This option stipulates the requirements for the installation of aftermarket systems and clarifies when an aftermarket system is needed, thus maintaining the same level of safety for Canadians as would be provided if the vehicle were sold at the retail level in Canada. In addition, it only requires that an aftermarket immobilization system, which is estimated to cost $300 per vehicle, be installed if needed. This option will also require that manufacturers clearly identify the vehicle models that cannot be safely modified, and these vehicle models will be identified as not permitted for importation into Canada.
Benefits and costs
The Government has previously demonstrated the benefit and importance of installing electronic immobilization systems on Canadian vehicles. In addition, it is paramount that all new vehicles have strong immobilization systems. Once young offenders find a means to easily steal a vehicle, this information spreads quickly and that vehicle model becomes a target. This amendment maintains the desire for advanced theft protection systems, while recognizing that no immobilization standard exists in the United States.
This proposed amendment is not expected to have a significant cost implication. In the case where vehicles have an installed electronic immobilization system, there will be no cost implications. In the alternative where the importer will need to install an immobilization system, at an estimated cost of $300, the cost related to this installation is part of the process to make vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States comply with all of the Canadian safety standards. As ECE-approved immobilizers meeting the Canadian safety standard are not available for aftermarket purchase in Canada, no cost implication is expected with the introduction of the CAN/ULC-S338-98 standard as the sole aftermarket performance requirement for immobilizers.
This proposed amendment is not expected to have any significant negative security impact on Canadians.
Consultation
Specific consultations
Recently, the Government has experienced a surge of telephone calls and letters, from the public as a result of the increased number of vehicles which cannot be privately imported from the United States and licensed in Canada. The Government maintains several 1-800 call centers to provide aid to Canadians. The Department of Transport maintains a call centre for issues pertaining to vehicle safety and importation. These operators have been receiving up to 500 telephone calls per day from Canadians interested in additional information on the importation of vehicles.
The Registrar of Imported Vehicles (RIV) [
www.riv.ca] operates the national program of vehicle inspection, certification and registration on behalf of Transport Canada. Coincident with the rise of the Canadian dollar and with the introduction of the Canadian safety standard for theft protection, the RIV has been receiving between 5 000 and 7 000 calls daily regarding the importation into Canada of vehicles sold at the retail level in the United States.
The Department of Transport has been consulting and will continue to consult with manufacturers to update the list of vehicles meeting the requirements for importation in Canada.
General communication process
The Department of Transport has instituted a systematic and extensive information process that is intended to keep the automotive industry, public safety organizations, and the general public informed of projected and recent changes to the regulatory requirements governing motor vehicle safety in Canada. This process includes information sessions with the provinces and territories, as well as with the authorities of other countries, and it provides a mechanism for interested parties to comment on the Department's planned initiatives.
In particular, meetings are held three times a year with the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association (CVMA), which represents Canada's leading motor vehicle manufacturers. (see footnote 9) Departmental representatives meet three times a year with the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers of Canada (AIAMC), which represents international motor vehicle manufacturers and importers. (see footnote 10) There are semi-annual meetings with the Motorcycle and Moped Industry Council and The Rubber Association of Canada. As well, semi-annual meetings are held with the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Mainly through the Department's membership in the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators, discussions that deal with a broad range of issues take place on a regular basis with the provinces and territories. There are also semi-annual meetings with national public safety organizations in order to discuss future regulatory changes and emerging safety problems.
Compliance and enforcement
Motor vehicle manufacturers and importers are responsible for ensuring that their products comply with the requirements of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations. The Department of Transport monitors the self-certification programs of manufacturers and importers by reviewing their test documentation, inspecting vehicles, and testing vehicles obtained in the open market. When a defect is found, the manufacturer or importer must issue a notice of defect to owners and to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. If a vehicle does not comply with a safety standard, the manufacturer or importer is subject to prosecution and, if found guilty, may be fined as prescribed in the Motor Vehicle Safety Act.
Transport Canada has contracted with Livingston International to establish and operate the national program of vehicle inspection, certification and registration, known as the RIV. The RIV program was set in place to ensure that vehicles imported for use in Canada meet Canadian safety standards. The RIV maintains a network across Canada of over 500 facilities authorized to perform federal inspections. The safety compliance status of inspected vehicles is shared with all provincial and territorial licensing jurisdictions in Canada and a vehicle cannot be licensed before successfully passing the RIV inspection program.
Contact
Daniel B. T. Davis
Chie
fRegulations and Standards
Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate
Transport Canada
330 Sparks Street, 8th Floor, Tower C
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N5
Telephone: 613-998-1956
Fax: 613-990-2913
Email:
Davisda@tc.gc.ca
PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to subsection 11(3) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (see footnote a), that the Governor in Council, pursuant to subsections 7(2) and 11(1) of that Act, proposes to make the annexed Regulations Amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (Importation of Vehicles — Section 12).
Interested persons may make representations to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities with respect to the proposed Regulations within 15 days after the date of publication of this notice. All such representations must be in writing and cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Daniel B. T. Davis, Chief, Regulations and Standards, Road Safety and Motor Vehicle Regulation Directorate, Department of Transport, Place de Ville, Tower C, 8th Floor, 330 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5 (tel.: 613-998-1956; fax: 613-990-2913; e-mail:
davisda@tc.gc.ca).
Ottawa, November 29, 2007
MARY PICHETTE
Acting Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council
REGULATIONS AMENDING THE MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY REGULATIONS (IMPORTATION OF VEHICLES — SECTION 12)
AMENDMENT
1. Section 12 of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations (see footnote 11) is amended by adding the following after subsection (4):
(4.1) For the purposes of subsection 7(2) of the Act, a vehicle that has been sold at the retail level in the United States and that has not been certified by the manufacturer as conforming to subsection 114(4) of Schedule IV to these Regulations may be imported into Canada despite not being certified to conform to subsection 114(4) if
(a) the vehicle was fitted at the time of manufacture with an electronic immobilization system; or
(b) unless the manufacturer has indicated in writing that the vehicle cannot be fitted with an immobilization system, the person importing the vehicle states in their declaration that the vehicle
(i) will be fitted with an immobilization system that conforms to National Standard of Canada CAN/ULC-S338-98, entitled Automobile Theft Deterrent Equipment and Systems: Electronic Immobilization (May 1998), published by the Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada, before it is presented for registration under the laws of a province, and
(ii) will be taken, within 45 days after its importation, to an inspection station authorized by the registrar of imported vehicles to carry out an inspection function to determine that the vehicle has been made to conform to the standard.
COMING INTO FORCE
2. These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.
[48-1-o]
Footnote 1
SOR/2005-45
Footnote 2
May 1998, published by the Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada (ULC)
Footnote 3
Dated October 14, 2002
Footnote 4
Dated March 6, 2006
Footnote 5
The Motor Vehicle Theft Problem: An Exploration and Development of Future Options, Michael Parkes, October 15, 1999; Fatalities and Injuries as a Result of Stolen Motor Vehicles (1999-2001), prepared for Project 6116 by Matthew J. Miceli, December 2002
Footnote 6
The Auto Theft Industry — The Cost to Canadians, prepared for the Insurance Bureau of Canada by Standard & Poor's DRI, Toronto, Ontario, April 2000
Footnote 7
Title 49, Part 571, of the Code of Federal Regulations, Docket No. NHTSA- 2005-22093, published on April 7, 2006
Footnote 8
Registrar of Imported Vehicles, November 19, 2007
Footnote 9
The CVMA represents DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc.; Ford Motor Company of Canada, Limited; General Motors of Canada Limited; and International Truck and Engine Corporation Canada
Footnote 10
The AIAMC represents the following automotive manufacturers and importers as voting members: BMW Canada Inc.; Honda Canada Inc.; Hyundai Auto Canada; Kia Canada Inc.; Mazda Canada Inc.; Mercedes-Benz Canada Inc.; Mitsubishi Motor Sales of Canada, Inc.; Nissan Canada Inc.; Porsche Cars Canada Ltd.; Subaru Canada Inc.; Suzuki Canada, Inc.; Toyota Canada Inc.; and Volkswagen Canada Inc.
Footnote a
S.C. 1993, c. 16
Footnote 11
C.R.C., c. 1038
NOTICE:
The format of the electronic version of this issue of the Canada Gazette was modified in order to be compatible with hypertext language (HTML). Its content is very similar except for the footnotes, the symbols and the tables.
If you have any comments about this, please post them here or at
www.carswithoutborders.com
Corvette Store
MP's email addresses and message from CDN car buyers
