```

[House Report 105-6]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                      105-6
_______________________________________________________________________

 
               ARMORED CAR RECIPROCITY AMENDMENTS OF 1997

                                _______
                                

 February 25, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

  Mr. Bliley, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 624]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 624) to amend the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act of 
1993 to clarify certain requirements and to improve the flow of 
interstate commerce, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     4
Roll Call Votes..................................................     4
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     4
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.....................     4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     4
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................     4
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     4
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     6
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................     7
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................     7
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................     7
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................     7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     8

                          Purpose and Summary

    The bill clarifies certain requirements of the Armored Car 
Industry Reciprocity Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-55, codified at 15 
U.S.C. 5902 et seq.) and improves the flow of interstate 
commerce.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    Armored car companies continue to be an important part of 
our nation's economy, transporting billions of dollars annually 
in valuable goods, including currency, coin, negotiable 
securities, food stamps, and other valuables. For interstate 
shipments, the Federal government continues to be one of the 
armored car industry's largest customers, using private 
companies to transport food stamps, currency and coin, and 
other negotiable documents from central printing and 
distribution points to localities across the country. Typical 
shipments carried by armored car can range in value from 
$100,000 to $40 million. While most shipments are made within a 
350-mile area, the value of cargoes shipped interstate tends to 
be higher, making them more lucrative targets for thieves and 
domestic terrorists.
    The dangers faced by armored car crew members are 
significant. According to statistics from the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation's (FBI's) Violent Crimes Section, the FBI 
investigated 68 attempted robberies of armored vehicles during 
Fiscal Year 1995 and another 30 attempted robberies in the 
first six months of calendar year 1996. The National Armored 
Car Association estimates that there were 107 attempted 
robberies during calendar year 1995. Further, the Committee 
received testimony that, due to increased violence among 
juvenile offenders, there has been an increasing number of 
fatalities of armored car crew members during robberyattempts. 
Clearly there continues to be a need for these crew members to be armed 
to protect both themselves and their valuable cargoes.
    There are approximately 13,000 people employed nationwide 
as armored car crew members, although only approximately 3,000 
regularly travel in interstate commerce. However, until 
Congress enacted the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act of 
1993, there was no standardized method of obtaining weapons 
permits from those States in which armored car crews needed to 
travel. Each State had different requirements and procedures 
for obtaining weapons permits, which either placed a great 
burden on armored car companies to obtain licenses in every 
State in which a crew member conceivably might travel, or 
required the crews to travel without the necessary permits, an 
outcome which neither the crew members, the companies, nor law 
enforcement officials desired. These problems are discussed in 
greater detail in the Committee's report on the original Act 
(H. Rpt. 103-62).
    The Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Act of 1993 entitled 
certain armored car crew members with a weapons permit issued 
by the State in which they were primarily employed to lawfully 
carry a weapon in any State while protecting the security of 
valuable goods in interstate commerce in the service of an 
armored car company. However, reciprocity was only granted to 
crew members from those States requiring criminal background 
checks and regular weapons safety and marksmanship training.
    In the several years since passage of the original Act, a 
number of technical problems and drafting ambiguities have come 
to light. The first problem was that some States require a 
``private security officer's license'' in addition to a weapons 
license. Although individuals with a license issued by a State 
which met the requirements in the original Act would be granted 
reciprocity with respect to their weapons license, it was 
unclear to State regulators as to whether the requirement for a 
private security officer's license was superseded as well. 
While the clear intent of the original Act was to allow armored 
car crew members to travel freely in interstate commerce, State 
regulators have requested clarification of this issue.
    The second problem raised was an inconsistency between the 
annual reporting requirement for criminal background checks and 
training information required in the Act. Most States have 
instituted two-year renewal cycles for weapons permits, 
primarily as a cost-saving measure. In light of this fact, the 
annual requirement for training and criminal background checks 
would have imposed an additional burden on the States. While 
the States have indicated they believe that both continuing 
training and background monitoring are important, they have 
requested the flexibility to collect that information in 
accordance with their own preexisting procedures.
    The third major problem arose from a drafting ambiguity in 
the original Act which required the permit holder to provide 
the criminal background information. Since virtually every 
State requires the issuing agency to conduct background checks 
of permit applicants, this requirement was inconsistent with 
the normal practice and procedure employed by the responsible 
agencies. This does not reflect the intent of the Congress and 
requires clarification.
    Currently, of the 33 States which require regular criminal 
background checks and weapons training as requirements for the 
issuance of weapons permits, only 5--Illinois, Louisiana, 
Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia--meet the definitions 
set forth in the Act as originally enacted. After passage of 
H.R. 624, armored car crew members in an additional 28 States 
would qualify for reciprocity, and the Committee believes that 
the amended Act will serve as an incentive to other States to 
upgrade their licensing regimes.
    The intent of the Congress in enacting the original Act was 
to lift the burden on interstate commerce created by the 
diverse State licensing schemes in place at the time. With the 
changes contained in H.R. 624, the Act will better achieve that 
purpose.

                                Hearings

    The Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer 
Protection held a hearing on H.R. 624, the Armored Car 
Reciprocity Amendments of 1997, on February 11, 1997. The 
Subcommittee received testimony from Mr. James L. Dunbar, 
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Dunbar Armored, Inc., 
on behalf of the National Armored Car Association, and Mr. 
Wayne Rogillio, Executive Secretary, Louisiana State Board of 
Private Security Examiners, on behalf of the National 
Association of Security and Investigative Regulators. Both 
witnesses testified in favor of the legislation.

                        Committee Consideration

    On February 11, 1997, the Subcommittee on 
Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection met in open 
markup session and approved H.R. 624, the Armored Car 
Reciprocity Amendments of 1997, for Full Committee 
consideration, without amendment, by a voice vote.
    On February 13, 1997, the Committee on Commerce met in open 
markup session and ordered H.R. 624 reported to the House, 
without amendment, by a voice vote.

                            Roll Call Votes

    Clause 2(l)(2)(B) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list the recorded 
votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments 
thereto. There were no recorded votes taken in connection with 
ordering H.R. 624 reported. A motion by Mr. Bliley to order 
H.R. 624 reported to the House, without amendment, was agreed 
to by a voice vote, a quorum being present.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of Rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee held a legislative 
hearing and made findings that are reflected in this report.

              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(D) of Rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, no oversight findings have been 
submitted to the Committee by the Committee on Government 
Reform and Oversight.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(B) of Rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee finds that 
H.R. 624, the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity Improvement Act 
of 1996, would result in no new or increased budget authority 
or tax expenditures or revenues.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    The Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared 
by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of Rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the following is the cost 
estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office pursuant 
to section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, February 24, 1997.
Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate and intergovernmental 
mandates statement for H.R. 624, the Armored Car Reciprocity 
Amendments of 1997. The bill would impose no new private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995.
    If you wish further details on these estimates, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Susanne S. 
Mehlman (for federal costs), and Leo Lex (for the impact on 
state and local governments).
            Sincerely,
                                          Paul Van de Water
                                   (For June E. O'Neill, Director).
    Enclosures.

               congressional budget office cost estimate

    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 624 would result in no 
cost to the federal government. Because enactment of H.R. 624 
would not affect direct spending or receipts, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would not apply to the bill.
    H.R. 624 would amend the Armored Car Industry Reciprocity 
Act of 1993 to require reciprocity among states for the weapons 
license and all other necessary licenses if a member of an 
armored car crew is licensed and has met all requirements in 
the state in which he or she is primarily employed. This 
provision would apply only if the licensing agency meets 
certain minimum requirements. In order for reciprocity to 
apply, the bill also would require that a criminal background 
check be conducted when the armored car crew member is seeking 
the initial license. Finally, H.R. 624 would repeal the 
standard for reciprocity requiring that the weapons permit be 
renewed on an annual basis. Because the provisions of H.R. 624 
would not affect federal laws regarding the possession of 
weapons, CBO estimates that enacting this bill would result in 
no cost to the federal government.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Susanne S. 
Mehlman. This estimate was approved by Robert A. Sunshine, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

    congressional budget office intergovernmental mandates statement

Summary

    H.R. 624 would amend the Armored Car Reciprocity Act of 
1993 to require reciprocity among states for the licensing of 
members of armored car crews.

Intergovernmental mandates contained in bill

    State governments would be required to recognize the 
validity of licenses and certifications issued by other states 
for members of armored car crews, as long as those states 
comply with minimum federal standards and as long as time 
limits on the licenses are met.

Estimated direct costs of mandates to State, local, and tribal 
        governments

    Do the direct costs exceed the statutory threshold ($50 
million in 1996, adjusted annually for inflation)?
    No.
            Total direct costs of mandates
    CBO estimates that the mandate contained in H.R. 624 would 
impose direct costs on state, local, and tribal governments 
totaling less than $500,000 annually.
    The mandate imposed by H.R. 624 would affect states that 
have regulations governing the licensing of members of armored 
car crews that are more stringent than those of other states 
that meet minimum federal standards. For example, some states 
require that ever members be certified to carry firearms and 
that they possess a security guard license. Over 30 states have 
such requirements that either meet or exceed the federal 
minimum standards. H.R. 624 would preclude these states with 
higher standards from requiring out-of-state armored car crew 
members to acquire additional licenses before traveling through 
the state.
    CBO contacted officials from six states and spoke with 
industry representatives during the course of preparing this 
estimate. No state reported issuing a significant number of 
out-of-state licenses; however, states that license out-of-
state crew members may face some cost in terms of lost fee 
revenue under the terms of H.R. 624. On a state-by-state basis, 
this cost would be minimal because most crew members travel 
within a limited area; consequently, few crew members need to 
acquire more than one out-of-state license. Likewise, 
individual states receive few applications for such licenses. 
Approximately 3,000 armored car crew members nationwide travel 
across state lines. License fees for crew members range from 
$30 to $150 annually. Assuming that most interstate crew 
members procure a license from one neighboring state under 
current law, the aggregate annual revenue loss to states would 
be less than $500,000. This loss of revenue would be partly 
offset by reduced costs from issuing fewer licenses.

Appropriation or other Federal financial assistance provided in bill to 
        cover mandate costs

    None.

Other impacts on State, local, and tribal governments

    None.
    Estimate prepared by: Leo Lex.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the 
Constitutional authority for this legislation in Article I, 
section 8, clause 3, which grants Congress the power to 
regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several 
States, and with the Indian tribes.

                Applicability to the Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides the short title of the bill, the Armored 
Car Reciprocity Amendments of 1997.

Section 2. Clarification of State reciprocity of weapons licenses 
        issued to armored car company crew members

    Subsection (a) amends subsection 3(a) of the Armored Car 
Industry Reciprocity Act of 1993 (15 U.S.C. 5902(a)) to provide 
that if an armored car crew member employed by an armored car 
company has a weapons permit issued by an appropriate State 
agency in the State in which the crew member is primarily 
employed to carry a weapon or weapons while in the services of 
such company, and the State meets the statute's minimum 
criteria, and has met all other applicable requirements in the 
State in which the crew member is employed, then that crew 
member shall be entitled to lawfully carry any weapon 
authorized by the license and function as an armored car crew 
member in any State.
    Subsection (b) amends subsection 3(b) of the Armored Car 
Industry Reciprocity Act (15 U.S.C. 5902(b)) to clarify the 
minimum requirements for States' licenses to be granted 
reciprocity. When issuing an initial license to an armored car 
crew member, the State must determine to its satisfaction that 
(1) the crew member has received both classroom and range 
training in weapons safety and marksmanship during the current 
year from a qualified instructor for each weapon that the crew 
member is licensed to carry, and (2) that receipt or possession 
of a weapon by the crew member would not violate Federal law, 
as determined on the basis of a criminal records background 
check conducted during the current year. When issuing renewal 
licenses, the State must determine to its satisfaction that (1) 
the crew member received continuing training in weapons safety 
and marksmanship from a qualified instructor for each weapon 
that the crew member is licensed to carry, and (2) the receipt 
or possession of a weapon by the crew member would not violate 
Federal law, as determined by the agency.
    Paragraph (3) of subsection (b) places a further 
qualification on States seeking reciprocity for their weapons 
licenses under the Act. In order for a State's license to meet 
the minimum standards for reciprocity, a State may not issue 
either an initial or renewal license for a period to exceed two 
years, unless such State enacted a law prior to October 1, 
1996, which provided for a longer issuance period, in which 
case the license may be issued for no longer than five years.

Section 3. Effective date

    Section 3 sets the effective date of the amendments as 30 
days after enactment of this Act.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

     SECTION 3 OF THE ARMORED CAR INDUSTRY RECIPROCITY ACT OF 1993

SEC. 3. STATE RECIPROCITY OF WEAPONS LICENSES ISSUED TO ARMORED CAR 
                    COMPANY CREW MEMBERS.

  [(a) In General.--If an armored car crew member employed by 
an armored car company has in effect a license issued by the 
appropriate State agency (in the State in which such member is 
primarily employed by such company) to carry a weapon while 
acting in the services of such company in that State, and such 
State agency meets the minimum State requirements under 
subsection (b), then such crew member shall be entitled to 
lawfully carry any weapon to which such license relates in any 
State while such crew member is acting in the service of such 
company.
  [(b) Minimum State Requirements.--A State agency meets the 
minimum State requirements of this subsection if in issuing a 
weapons license to an armored car crew member described in 
subsection (a), the agency requires the crew member to provide 
information on an annual basis to the satisfaction of the 
agency that--
          [(1) the crew member has received classroom and range 
        training in weapons safety and marksmanship during the 
        current year by a qualified instructor for each weapon 
        that the crew member is licensed to carry; and
          [(2) the receipt or possession of a weapon by the 
        crew member would not violate Federal law, determined 
        on the basis of a criminal record background check 
        conducted during the current year.]
  (a) In General.--If an armored car crew member employed by an 
armored car company--
          (1) has in effect a license issued by the appropriate 
        State agency (in the State in which such member is 
        primarily employed by such company) to carry a weapon 
        while acting in the services of such company in that 
        State, and such State agency meets the minimum 
        requirements under subsection (b); and
          (2) has met all other applicable requirements to act 
        as an armored car crew member in the State in which 
        such member is primarily employed by such company;
then such crew member shall be entitled to lawfully carry any 
weapon to which such license relates and function as an armored 
car crew member in any State while such member is acting in the 
service of such company.
  (b) Minimum State Requirements.--A State agency meets the 
minimum State requirements of this subsection if--
          (1) in issuing an initial weapons license to an 
        armored car crew member described in subsection (a), 
        the agency determines to its satisfaction that--
                  (A) the crew member has received classroom 
                and range training in weapons safety and 
                marksmanship during the current year from a 
                qualified instructor for each weapon that the 
                crew member will be licensed to carry; and
                  (B) the receipt or possession of a weapon by 
                the crew member would not violate Federal law, 
                determined on the basis of a criminal record 
                background check conducted during the current 
                year;
          (2) in issuing a renewal of a weapons license to an 
        armored car crew member described in subsection (a), 
        the agency determines to its satisfaction that--
                  (A) the crew member has received continuing 
                training in weapons safety and marksmanship 
                from a qualified instructor for each weapon 
                that the crew member is licensed to carry; and
                  (B) the receipt or possession of a weapon by 
                the crew member would not violate Federal law, 
                as determined by the agency; and
          (3) in issuing a weapons license under paragraph (1) 
        or paragraph (2), as the case may be--
                  (A) the agency issues such license for a 
                period not to exceed two years; or
                  (B) the agency issues such license for a 
                period not to exceed five years in the case of 
                a State that enacted a State law before October 
                1, 1996, that provides for the issuance of an 
                initial weapons license or a renewal of a 
                weapons license, as the case may be, for a 
                period not to exceed five years.
```