Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 17
03/27/2012 01:00 PM House TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB345 | |
| HB212 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 345 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 212 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 27, 2012
1:09 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Peggy Wilson, Chair
Representative Lance Pruitt, Vice Chair
Representative Eric Feige
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Pete Petersen
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 345
"An Act relating to regulations adopted by the Department of
Administration waiving the commercial motor vehicle driving
skills test for certain drivers with military commercial motor
vehicle experience."
- MOVED HB 345 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 212
"An Act relating to requirements for persons holding provisional
drivers' licenses."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 345
SHORT TITLE: WAIVE CDL SKILL TEST FOR CERTAIN VETERANS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) SADDLER
02/22/12 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/12 (H) TRA, STA
03/27/12 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
BILL: HB 212
SHORT TITLE: PROVISIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STICKER
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) MILLETT BY REQUEST
03/29/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/29/11 (H) STA, TRA, FIN
03/13/12 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/13/12 (H) Moved CSHB 212(STA) Out of Committee
03/13/12 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/14/12 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) 3DP 3NR
03/14/12 (H) DP: JOHANSEN, KELLER, PETERSEN
03/14/12 (H) NR: GRUENBERG, SEATON, LYNN
03/27/12 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 17
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke as the sponsor of HB 345.
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director
Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV)
Department of Administration (DOA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
discussion of HB 345.
AVES THOMPSON, Executive Director
Alaska Trucking Association, Inc. (ATA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 345.
REPRESENTATIVE CHARISSE MILLETT
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 212.
JESSICA LUIKEN
Anchorage Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a PowerPoint presentation on HB
212.
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director
Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV)
Department of Administration (DOA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
discussion of HB 212.
GERALD LUCKHAUPT, Assistant Revisor of Statutes
Legislative Legal Counsel
Legislative Legal and Research Services
Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions as the drafter of HB
212.
RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant
Deputy Commander, A Detachment
Division of Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety (DPS)
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the discussion of
HB 212.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:09:26 PM
CHAIR PEGGY WILSON called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:09 p.m. Representatives
Gruenberg, Petersen, Johnson, and Wilson were present at the
call to order. Representatives Munoz, Feige, and Pruitt arrived
as the meeting was in progress.
HB 345-WAIVE CDL SKILL TEST FOR CERTAIN VETERANS
1:09:54 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON announced that the first order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 345, "An Act relating to regulations adopted
by the Department of Administration waiving the commercial motor
vehicle driving skills test for certain drivers with military
commercial motor vehicle experience."
1:10:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, Alaska State Legislature, speaking
as the sponsor of HB 345, stated that HB 345 will help Alaska's
returning personnel find good jobs and help Alaska businesses
find qualified drivers by acknowledging most military drivers
leaving the military service already possess the skills they
need to be productive and safe drivers on civilian roads. The
U.S. military depends on trucks and truck drivers, the so called
"88 Mike" - the military occupation specialty of motor transport
operators. The defense budget cuts indicate more veterans with
an "88 Mike" designation are seeking work in Alaska.
Fortunately there are many industries that are looking for
civilian truck drivers. The civilian commercial license or CVL
is a valuable credential that offers a significant boost for
anyone looking for work in the civilian job market. He
explained that CVLs are issued by the state but under strict
federal standards. This bill, HB 345, would direct the
Department of Administration (DOA) to adopt regulations in
accordance with federal standards, which will allow these
veterans to use their military driving experience in lieu of the
road skills test as long as the applicant meets other standards.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER explained that in order to qualify for a
waiver a driver must have spent the last two years or more
driving the type of equipment in the military he/she hopes to
use in the civilian jobs. Further, the drivers must have worked
for the past 90 days as a military driver and must meet federal
exemption standards outlined in federal [49] CFR 383.77. The
applicant cannot ever have had their driver's license suspended
or revoked, had more than one traffic violation, been convicted
of any driving offense involving drugs or alcohol, or been
convicted for any serious traffic violation involving an
accident. These standards, along with the requirement that
military drivers must still meet the knowledge test, endorsement
of specific knowledge tests, and medical tests, offer assurance
that Alaska roads will be just as safe after this bill passes as
they currently are today. He summarized the bill, noting that
Alaskans who hone their driving skills while still in service to
our nation deserve to have that experience validated and honored
in the civilian world. He offered his belief that HB 345 is an
important tool to help military members obtain credentials they
need to get good jobs in the civilian sector and also help
Alaska employers hire skilled drivers.
1:12:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked what type of documentation
veterans will need to show the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV)
to allow them to issue the waiver.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER deferred to the department to answer.
1:13:48 PM
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOA), stated several states have
implemented similar waiver programs for military personnel,
including Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Washington, New York, and
Nevada. She offered her belief that the DMV could fashion its
program after one adopted by Pennsylvania, which requires an
applicant to show a military driver's license that clearly
identifies the type of vehicle an individual is authorized to
drive. She outlined that if it is not clear on the military
license, Pennsylvania allows for use of a verification of
military experience and training document, or a letter on
military letterhead that indicates the type of vehicles the
person is or was authorized to operate. Additionally,
Pennsylvania also requires federal DD2 or DD214 forms to be used
within two years of honorable discharge. Many states have
already adopted similar programs and the DMV would review the
programs to determine allowable substitute documents and the DMV
would institute a similar program by regulation.
1:15:40 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON pointed to language in HB 345 which requires a
driver must have spent the last two years or more driving the
type of equipment he expects to use in the civilian job and must
have worked the past 90 days as a military driver. She
questioned whether the DMV will follow the specific requirements
of the bill.
MS. BREWSTER answered yes. Additionally, the DMV will make sure
its program would also meets the federal requirements since
commercial driver licensing is a federally-regulated program so
the DMV would need to meet the requirements of 49 CFR 383.77
that specifies what evidence is to be shown to the DMV.
1:16:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referenced the sponsor statement. He
asked if all of HB 345 provisions fall under the federal
regulations 49 CFR 383.77.
MS. BREWSTER answered that the 90-day requirement and two-year
requirement for operating a similar vehicle is listed in federal
regulations 49 CFR 383.77. She pointed out that the state could
make the requirements more restrictive since the federal law
sets out minimum law.
1:17:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG related his understanding the various
disqualifying items, such as not more than one conviction, or
having serious traffic violations is limited to those
convictions that occurred within the past two years.
MS. BREWSTER related her understanding that is the case.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG remarked that he did not think many
drivers who have been driving for any length of time would have
so few traffic violations. He acknowledged the bill addresses
the past two years, which seemed doable.
1:19:01 PM
AVES THOMPSON, Executive Director, Alaska Trucking Association,
Inc. (ATA) stated that the ATA is a statewide organization
representing the interests of nearly 200 member companies. He
asked to testify in support of HB 345. One of the pressing
problems in the industry is to find qualified drivers for
commercial vehicles to deliver freight. He said, "As you all
know, if you got it, a truck brought it." The ATA spends a lot
of time and effort retaining good drivers. The regulatory bar
has been raised in the past few years to further increase the
professionalism of drivers in the trucking industry. He offered
his belief that when someone says they are just a truck driver,
they miss the mark completely. He highlighted that truck
driving is a profession that requires a great deal of in-depth
knowledge of the regulations as well as driving skills to
navigate a large rig through Alaska's highway system. He
characterized Alaska's drivers as some of the best in the
nation. These Alaska become outstanding drivers through
training, experience, and their own enlightened self-interest
since sometimes their driving skills can save their own lives or
the lives of others. He acknowledged that the industry welcomes
veterans and appreciates this opportunity to support them. He
emphasized that with the proper certification as to a veteran's
experience, the ATA supports waiving the skills test for the
issuance of a commercial driver's license. He further said, "As
a veteran myself and on behalf of our membership, we are proud
to support HB 345 and urge that you pass this bill out of
committee with do pass recommendations.
1:20:59 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 345.
1:21:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON inquired as to whether there is a
similarity and correlation between military and private vehicles
so a veteran could easily come in and drive an 18 wheeler or
other big rig.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER responded that military personnel drive a
wide range of vehicles ranging from jeeps and humvees to large
lowboys. He offered his belief there is a correlation and a
wide range of experience. He suggested that since the 80s and
90s there has been a move towards automatic transmissions in
smaller vehicles. He pointed out that many commercial vehicles
have standard transmissions so there might be a small lag time
when a military driver may need to pick up an endorsement in
order to transition to some commercial vehicles.
1:22:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN moved to report HB 345 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being no objection, HB 345 was reported from the
House Transportation Standing Committee.
1:23:01 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 1.23 p.m. to 1:25 p.m.
HB 212-PROVISIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STICKER
1:25:24 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 212, "An Act relating to requirements for
persons holding provisional drivers' licenses." [Before the
committee was CSHB 212(STA).]
1:25:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHARISSE MILLETT, Alaska State Legislature,
speaking as the sponsor of HB 212, related that the concept of
the provisional driver's license sticker was brought to her by
Jessica Luiken during her Close Up participation last year. She
identified a problem, came up with a solution, and prepared a
bill. Representative Millett said she did very little work on
the bill, which is a product of Jessica's efforts.
1:26:33 PM
JESSICA LUIKEN, as the student who requested HB 212 as part of
her project for her Close-Up class, thanked the committee and
Representative Millett for their assistance. She said that in
February 2011, she had the opportunity to take part in the
Close-Up program, which allows students to learn about the
legislative process and state government by presenting a project
to a legislator. Her product is HB 212. She showed pie charts
that identify the number of deaths that occurred among teenagers
from 1999-2006 [slide 2]. She pointed out that out of the 48
percent of the deaths were due to unintentional injury and 73
percent of those are from motor vehicle traffic accidents.
1:28:04 PM
MS. LUIKEN provided Alaska's statistics for drivers ages 14-16
from 2004-2008 [slide 3]. She explained that the numbers for
fatal crashes and fatal injuries in 2008. She explained that
the computed average between the minor injury crashes, major
injury crashes will be higher than the numbers listed in 2008.
Thus although the figures seem to be declining on average they
remain the same. She reported on Alaska statistics for drivers'
ages 16-17 from 2002-2011, including that this slide lists the
ages and percentages of drivers involved in crashes from 2002-
2011, but the slide lacks the effects of the crashes on the
occupants and passengers in other vehicles involved [slide 4].
1:28:55 PM
MS. LUIKEN stated that provisional licensed drivers are
hazardous due to their apprehension or nervousness since they
may be driving by themselves for the first time [slide 5]. She
also stated that many young drivers are known to lack sound
judgment because of a lack of experience on the road. Weather
conditions can be variable ranging from rain or snow and icy
roadways. Alaska does not have any driver education
requirements. The state has most difficult driving
circumstances due to its long summer sunlight hours and wildlife
crossing the roadway.
1:29:52 PM
MS. LUIKEN suggested one solution is to identify a person
holding a provisional driver's license by requiring him/her to
display a sticker in the rear window of each vehicle operated by
the person [slides 6-7]. She stated that displaying a sticker
issued by the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) provides a simple
solution to alert other drivers the operator is a novice driver
[slide 8]. This bill, HB 212, is similar to one that passed in
New Jersey. Drivers with a learner's permit and provisional
license in New Jersey are required to display a red decal on the
back of their license plate. The DMV would issue the stickers
to those holding provisional licenses, which would be placed in
the rear window of the vehicle. Similar laws have been
implemented in New Jersey, British Columbia, Newfoundland,
Yukon, and in the United Kingdom and Australia. The bill
suggests failure to display as sticker would be considered an
infraction, punishable by a fine of not more than $300 [slide
9]. The enforcement of HB 212 would impress young drivers of
how imperative it is to have a sticker on their vehicle to
identify them as provisional drivers.
MS. LUIKEN outlined procedures for obtaining and using stickers
[slide 10]. The DMV would issue the stickers to those holding
provisional licenses, which would be placed in the rear window
of the vehicle. The cost of the provisional license will help
pay for the sticker.
MS. LUIKEN summarized that teen drivers with provision licenses
are statistically more hazardous to themselves and other
Alaskans. She suggested that provisional drivers should
identify themselves as a means of reducing accidents in Alaska
[slide 11].
1:32:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON referred to the enforcement of the
provisional sticker, which would be the failure to display a
sticker as an infraction published by a $300 fine. She related
her understanding that this would allow troopers or other law
enforcement personnel to stop anyone younger than 17 years of
age.
MS. LUIKEN answered that she was unsure whether the committee
had a copy of an amendment that was incorporated into HB 212 in
the House State Affairs Committee, which would make the
violation a secondary offense. Thus the drivers cannot be
pulled over for failure to display a sticker, but could be cited
if they are pulled over for some other reason.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON related her understanding the
legislature would be passing a bill that cannot be enforced.
MS. LUIKEN answered yes, that the provisional sticker use could
not be completely enforced.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT clarified that a secondary offense is
similar to Alaska's seat belt law, which is also a secondary
stop offense. She added that a primary stop is one in which a
law enforcement officer can make a stop for a primary cause.
She did not want to create a situation where police are pulling
people over because they look young or for other issues.
1:34:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG explained some concern that law
enforcement might pull over a young driver over just to search
the car. He normally agrees with primary offenses but this
offense is sufficiently minor.
CHAIR P. WILSON advised that she does not like laws that are not
primary enforcement laws since they are not enforced.
1:35:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his belief that this law could
be enforced.
CHAIR P. WILSON agreed, but only in the event the driver
violates another law.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out one instance of enforcement
could occur when the driver is doing something else wrong;
however, there are other cases. He related a scenario in which
there is a crash involving two cars - with one car rear-ending
the other - so when the law enforcement officer investigates the
accident, if the driver of car two has a provisional license,
but has not displayed the necessary sticker that the driver with
the provisional license could be cited even if the driver was
not at fault.
CHAIR P. WILSON offered her belief when someone rear-ends
another vehicle that the driver who rear-ends the other vehicle
is almost always found to be at fault.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG clarified in his scenario the driver of
vehicle one would not have had any fault.
1:37:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON expressed concerns with the bill. He
asked whether anyone recalled when rental cars in Florida had
stickers on them that identified the vehicle renters as
tourists. He recalled that some people tracked down the
visitors and shot some of the tourists. He further recalled
that the State of Florida forced the car rental agencies to
remove the identifying sticker. He expressed concern that this
bill, HB 212, would create an opportunity for nefarious people
to target juveniles. He said, "I just don't want to paint a big
target on kids' cars saying, 'I'm young, I'm vulnerable. Attack
me.'" Additionally, he said he always points out it is not the
state's job to be parents or for the state to be a "nanny"
state. He agreed with the bill's concept, but those are his two
concerns.
1:39:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that the state issues
handicapped stickers to a class of people who are more
vulnerable.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON responded that the state issues stickers
for parking, but the handicapped sticker is not a function of
driving. Further, he pointed out that specific program is a
voluntary program.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said there are other reasons to have a
provisional license sticker, such as to alert other drivers to
the novice driver so seasoned drivers would be more vigilant.
He highlighted that in both cases it tends to protect the
driver.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked whether the next step would be to
put a big "D" on vehicles if the owner has had a driving while
under the influence (DUI). He questioned how a "Scarlett
Letter" that creates a different standard would make young teen
drivers drive better drivers simply because they have stickers
on their cars.
1:41:47 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON asked whether this issue of being a possible
target had been raised in other committee hearings. She shared
the concern.
MS. LUIKEN answered no, stating that the issue was not raised in
other committee hearings. She has not been able to obtain any
facts, but she suggested that sexual predators can target young
women with or without the bill.
CHAIR P. WILSON asked whether the concern about predators made
her fearful.
MS. LUIKEN answered no.
1:43:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT highlighted that the sticker required
under HB 212 is designated as a removable sticker. She related
her understanding that the DMV will develop the static as a
suction or static cling sticker that drivers could remove when
the vehicle is not in operation. She highlighted one point
brought up at an earlier hearing - in the House State Affairs
Standing Committee hearing - is that student drivers' vehicles
often post a large sign to indicate the driver is a novice
driver in order for experienced drivers to approach them with
caution. She acknowledged that currently not all drivers have
opportunities to take student driver training courses; however,
this bill would help promote the idea that the responsibility to
drive is a privilege. Drivers could develop checklists to
include items such as checking to ensure the brake lights work,
having proof of insurance, drivers' licenses in their
possession, and the provisional sticker in their cars. She did
not view the requirements imposed under HB 212 as targeting
drivers, but rather as a means to emphasize that the
responsibility to drive is not a right, but is a privilege. She
suggested the bill could help build new drivers into good
drivers. She also suggested that new drivers may not take
driving as seriously as they should. She cautioned that a car
could be considered a weapon and people can be killed. She
concluded that the provisional sticker required under the bill
would just add an emphasis to young drivers. As a seasoned
driver she related she understands the seriousness of driving,
and while she understands Representative Johnson's concern this
may lead to the "nanny state," but she disagreed. She
emphasized her belief that the provisional license has merit.
She recently discovered that Greece has the same identification
provision although their law requires a sticker which nearly
fills the back window. She recapped that drivers need to take
driving seriously and this bill will help reinforce that
concept.
1:46:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ congratulated Ms. Luiken on her work and
progress on the bill. She asked her whether she has researched
other states to identify any with similar programs. She further
asked if the bill has a fiscal note.
MS. LUIKEN answered that the bill does not have a fiscal note
and the sponsor would like it waived from the finance committee.
She reported that the only other state she found that has
implemented the provisional drivers' license stickers is New
Jersey. She referred to a slide in her presentation on the New
Jersey law, but did not recall the slide number. She offered to
report back to committee members the slide which shows New
Jersey uses a red decal affixed to the license plates. She also
reported that other states have pending legislation although she
was unsure which states. She also offered to research and to
provide the information to the committee.
CHAIR P. WILSON clarified that the bill has a zero fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ wished Ms. Luiken good luck with her
project.
1:48:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE apologized if this issue was previously
addressed. He referred to the sponsor statement that indicates
teen drivers account for 20 percent of fatalities and the
provisional driver's sticker would help reduce the number of
accidents. He questioned the logic of how the sticker would
reduce accidents.
MS. LUIKEN responded that if other drivers observe the
provisional sticker they will be more cautious, which in the end
could help prevent crashes from happening. She indicated that
prevention cannot be measured. She explained that the New
Jersey law has only been in effect for about a year and a half
so data is not yet available; however, she offered her belief
that in the end people will take more precautions when they know
they the drivers are novices.
1:50:24 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Pruitt.
1:50:52 PM
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOA), pointed out the DMV would
implement the proposed program for provisional stickers. The
DMV would distribute stickers with the provisional license and
although a minor fee would be associated with producing the
sticker the cost is not significant enough to include in a
fiscal note. She researched various decals and the DMV is
considering using a static-cling sticker as a low-cost option,
which would allow the decal to be moved between vehicles. She
estimated that the cost of stickers at about $.20 per decal and
reported the DMV currently has 6,251 provisional licensees. She
suggested that the overall cost of the program would be less
than $1,000 per year and will be fairly easy to administer.
1:52:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON inquired as to whether the stickers would
be luminescent to increase visibility in the dark.
MS. BREWSTER said she has not considered that aspect, but agreed
the decals should be visible by law enforcement and others. She
offered to consult with law enforcement in the development of
the decals.
1:52:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked whether she had any idea of the
potential cost for luminescent stickers.
MS. BREWSTER answered that she was unsure, but will research the
cost and report back to the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON offered his belief that a glow in the
dark sticker will make the vehicle so much more of a target.
1:53:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN recalled testimony before the House
State Affairs Standing Committee that had suggested locating the
sticker on the back of the vehicle instead of the rear window
since the sticker might be scraped off along with the frost. He
inquired as to whether the bill should be amended to require it
to be affixed to the vehicle instead of the window.
MS. BREWSTER suggested leaving the option broad in the bill to
allow the DMV discretion to consider the best way to adhere a
sticker to vehicles in Alaska in the winter. She expressed
concern that if the sticker is on outside of vehicle could be
removed as a prank. She reiterated her preference to keep the
language broad.
1:55:05 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT returned the gavel to Chair P. Wilson.
1:55:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT indicated the bill allows a fee for the
sticker. He asked for an estimate of the fee.
MS. BREWSTER offered her belief the cost would be low so
initially she envisions the DMV would not be charging a fee;
however, if for some reason it became cost prohibitive to issue
a "free of charge" sticker the bill allows future directors to
implement a fee structure. She emphasized that during her
tenure it was not likely the DMV would charge the customer.
1:56:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked for the duration of provisional
licenses.
MS. BREWSTER answered that it is dependent upon when the
individual obtains a provisional license. She explained that an
individual must hold a valid instruction permit for a minimum of
six months prior to qualifying to apply for a provisional
license. Additionally, the driver must be traffic violation
free to graduate to a provisional license and at that point they
must hold the license for another six month period of traffic
violation free time to graduate to an unrestricted license.
Thus technically at 16 and a half years of age a person could
graduate to an unrestricted license. Once the person reaches 18
years of age the provisional license requirements are no longer
applicable.
1:57:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to a sheet in members' packets
listing other state laws on the subject, which was provided by
the National Council on State Legislatures (NCSL), which lists
Missouri, New Jersey, and Ohio. He asked if Missouri and Ohio
also have similar laws.
MS. LUIKEN offered to get back to the committee.
1:58:27 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON held public testimony open. She noted she had
not considered the possibility of someone targeting young girls
and would like to consult with parents. She asked Ms. Luiken
find out what the other two states have done with respect to
provisional licenses.
MS. LUIKEN agreed she would research the two states.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON thanked Ms. Luiken for her work on her
project and encouraged her to continue to work on the bill.
CHAIR P. WILSON also commended her for her work.
MS. LUIKEN, in closing, explained student driving is so
important to her, particularly since her family was involved in
a head-on collision six years ago in which the driver of the
other car was a teen driver. She noted that she included photos
of the crash in her PowerPoint presentation and added that it
was a miracle her family survived. Therefore, she said she
feels it is her responsibility to advocate for safe teen
driving. She said she understands that no bill is perfect and
ultimately it comes down to the benefits outweighing the costs.
She offered her belief that HB 212 will save lives. She thanked
members for their questions. She would like to make this bill
safe for Alaskans.
2:02:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed. He said the first amendment is
labeled Conceptual Amendment 1. On page 1, line 5 following
"a", insert "moveable" so the sticker would be a moveable
sticker. He explained this language was taken from the
companion bill in the Senate. He suggested that perhaps instead
of moveable it should be removable.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON suggested the committee consider
transferable.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG agreed.
2:04:29 PM
GERALD LUCKHAUPT, Assistant Revisor of Statutes, Legislative
Legal Counsel, Legislative Legal and Research Services,
Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA), stated that the Senate version
of the bill contains "moveable" and in his view it did not
matter which term was used, whether it was "moveable",
"removable" or "transferable."
2:04:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1
as previously stated.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ objected for purpose of discussion.
2:05:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT objected. He asked whether the language
should read "decal" instead of sticker.
MR. LUCKHAUPT answered that this was debated when the bill was
initially drafted. He suggested the sticker doesn't need to
have adhesive, but the bill would convey the concept that the
sticker or decal needs to be affixed. He offered his belief
that decal would work and basically either term would work.
CHAIR P. WILSON said she preferred to keep the language the
same.
2:06:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recalled previous discussion held in
the State Affairs Committee. He recalled Ms. Brewster testified
that her preference was to keep the term as sticker.
MS. BREWSTER responded that Mr. Luckhaupt is correct, that the
term sticker is broad enough to allow many options for the decal
or sticker to be affixed to the vehicle.
CHAIR P. WILSON envisioned the sticker would be hung on a
suction cup with a hook on it so the sticker could just be moved
from vehicle to vehicle; however, she agreed that what works for
the DMV would be satisfactory to her.
2:07:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT removed his objection. There being no
further objection Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
2:07:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Conceptual
Amendment 2, which would reduce the amount of the fine on page
1, line 8, from $300 to $200.
CHAIR P. WILSON objected. She said that the fine needs to be
substantial enough so teenagers will think about the amount of
the fine as a disincentive to break the law.
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN recalled when he was a teenager the only
televisions were black and white one. He noted that $200 was a
lot of money back then. He suggested $200 would still be
considered a lot of money.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON suggested that $200 is about the cost of
new pair of Air Jordan sneakers.
CHAIR P. WILSON offered her belief some parents hand out money
pretty readily to teenagers.
2:09:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked whether the bill addresses the
situation of when stickers accidentally falls off the windows so
the individuals are not held responsible.
MR. LUCKHAUPT answered that the provisional driver has one "get
out of jail free card" for the first offense, such that even if
the driver did not comply, he/she could show proof to the court
that the sticker was obtained and is now on the vehicle. Thus
the court would then waive the fine. Secondly, he envisioned
that law enforcement would use some discretion. He pointed out
that vehicle registration tabs on license plates may come off,
and an officer may decide not to cite. He pointed out that this
once happened to him, noting his license plate was not
completely clean and the tab came off. In his case the officer
did not cite him since his vehicle had been registered, although
technically the missing tab was a violation. He assumed that in
the instance of a provisional license that something similar
would likely happen, although he agreed there is not any
guarantee the officer would not cite.
2:11:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON pointed out that vehicle registration is
in the DMV's system and an officer can check to determine the
vehicle has been registered. He inquired as to whether a teen
driver would have proof that he/she purchased the sticker.
MR. LUCKHAUPT suggested Ms. Brewster could respond.
2:12:21 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON asked how a teenager would prove he/she affixed
the sticker.
MS. LUIKEN said she was unsure. She suggested that the DMV
would likely also keep the record, just as the division does
with the provisional license. She reiterated she was unsure.
CHAIR P. WILSON pointed out that someone's mother may observe
their daughter putting the sticker on the car, but the daughter
could later stop the vehicle and take it off. Thus while the
mother would be able to attest to the sticker being placed on
the vehicle, it does not necessarily mean the sticker remained
on the vehicle.
2:13:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN recalled Lieutenant Dial testified in a
prior committee that for the first offense a driver could bring
the vehicle in to demonstrate the sticker was in the car. He
acknowledged that numerous reasons exist as to why the sticker
is not on display, including that the sticker may have fallen
off or a sibling may have taken it off the vehicle. He further
recalled testimony that the offense would be treated as similar
to a headlight being out. In that instance the driver would fix
the headlight and bring the vehicle to the station for the
officer to sign off that the headlight had been fixed.
2:14:42 PM
RODNEY DIAL, Lieutenant, Deputy Commander, A Detachment,
Division of Alaska State Troopers, Department of Public Safety
(DPS), responded that the department is officially neutral on
the bill. The department would treat the first violation of a
missing provisional sticker as a correctable citation. He
stated that for whatever reason the decal was missing the person
would be issued a correctable citation and would go to the
nearest station or municipal office and show proof of
compliance. The citation would then be dismissed. He pointed
out since the provisional sticker is a secondary offense that
the enforcement would be limited. He suggested the department
would occasionally encounter violations through traffic contacts
in which the driver had been stopped for other reasons.
2:16:02 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON asked whether he had concerns that the bill
would pose a risk of targeting teenage girls.
LIEUTENANT DIAL answered he has not considered that aspect, but
he did not think the bill posed a significant concern since the
department has not currently observed specific groups of people
being targeted on Alaska's highways.
2:16:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked whether producing documents at the
local station would suffice to satisfy law enforcement that the
provisional sticker was in place or if the person would need to
appear in court.
MR. LUCKHAUPT pointed out that correctable tickets are typically
dealt with by local law enforcement agencies. He stated that
the bill also provides for court remedy. He explained that if
the ticket was issued in Fairbanks to someone visiting the
community to attend a sports competition, but the person
actually lives in Anchorage, that it may not be convenient for
him/her to appear in Fairbanks to the local law enforcement
agency. Thus the bill would also allow the individual to appear
in court. He acknowledged this instance is not exactly same as
the one described, but correctable tickets are often dealt by
law enforcement at their station.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT clarified that he wanted to ensure the
provisional driver did not need to appear in court.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked whether the Senate had considered
making this voluntary so the bill would read "may" instead of
"shall" and would remove the fees and compliance issues.
MR. LUCKHAUPT answered that he was unsure since he did not
attend the prior hearings. He suggested the sponsor or Ms.
Luiken may wish to make the bill voluntary; however, he
cautioned he was not aware of many teenagers who would want to
put the sticker in the window even if their parents would like
them to do so.
2:19:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked for the sponsor and Ms. Luiken to
weigh in on Conceptual Amendment 2.
MS. LUIKEN recalled that in the Senate version of the bill, the
Senate State Affairs Committee expressed concern about the high
fee of $300; however, the bill states the fine should not exceed
$300. She related her understanding that the Alaska Supreme
Court will set the fee. She reiterated that the charge for not
abiding by this law would be set by the court.
CHAIR P. WILSON related her understanding the fee could be set
at $100
2:21:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT said she did not have any preference.
She pointed out that her son had illegal tint on his window,
which required him to pay a $50 ticket. She related his
understanding the fines are set by the Department of Public
Safety (DPS) by regulation. Thus the department would pick the
appropriate fine. Further, the first charge would amount to a
"fix-it" ticket and would be treated just like a driver not
carrying his/her insurance card, in which the party would bring
proof of insurance to the law enforcement to sign off on. She
reiterated that this bill uses the same design for provisional
license stickers. She left it to the committee to decide
whether to set the cap or change it.
2:22:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG believes the bail is set by
administrative court rule.
MR. LUCKHAUPT responded that the bail forfeiture amount is set
by the Alaska Supreme Court, with input from the DPS and the
Department of Administration (DOA), although he was unsure how
much input the departments actually have in setting the bail.
He explained that every moveable violation or other violation,
such as the Division of State Park offenses, uses the bail
forfeiture schedule. The person can either pay the bail
forfeiture amount, which is something less than the maximum fine
for the offense or go to court. Everyone has the opportunity
for his/her day in court and the court customarily will not fine
the person more than bail forfeiture. He said he selected $300
for this offense since it is the amount set for motor vehicle
infractions. He pointed out that the Alaska State Legislature
sets that amount as the maximum for infractions, which is a non-
criminal offense and is not a misdemeanor. He reiterated it
would be up to the court to set the bail forfeiture amount. He
pointed out the schedule includes parking, speeding, other
violations, and all the amounts scheduled for the fine. He
offered his belief that the court would examine the seriousness
of the offense and matches the fine with how it fits together
with all the other offenses on the schedule.
2:24:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG maintained Conceptual Amendment 2 since
the fine would be an infraction paid for by a young person. He
suggested that $200 fine seemed more humane for teenagers to
pay.
2:25:08 PM
CHAIR P. WILSON maintained her objection. Conceptual Amendment
2 would reduce the amount of the fine on page 1, line 8 from
$300 to $200.
2:26:17 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, Gruenberg,
Petersen, and Munoz voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 2.
Representatives Johnson, Feige, and Representative P. Wilson
voted against it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 2 was adopted
by a vote of 4-3.
2:26:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his next amendment is similar to
one offered in the Senate to a companion bill.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT answered that the proposed amendment, not
yet stated, was developed due to concerns by rural legislators
whose communities that have less than five miles of road and
some villages with less than 20 cars. Many of these communities
currently have exemptions for vehicle registration or other
exemptions such as not having to take a commercial driver's
license test or a driving test. Thus this would mirror those
exemptions by not making it apply to rural communities.
CHAIR P. WILSON remarked that rural Alaskans did not need to
register their cars.
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE offered his belief that it costs
substantial money to go to town or to a DMV office in order to
do so.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG also suggested that rural Alaska has
different provisional licenses.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT pointed out that rural Alaskans have some
restrictions on their licenses that can also be waived. She
pointed out that legitimate reasons for the exemptions exist
including limited road system and a lack of law enforcement
personnel.
2:29:21 PM
MS. BREWSTER stated that numerous exemptions exist in AS 28 for
rural Alaskans, including an exemption in AS 28.10.011 from
registration requirements. She explained the same criteria for
rural is used and is that the land is not connected to state
highway system or that they have a highway or vehicular way with
an average daily volume 499 or less, which is measured by
DOT&PF. She recapped that if people are not connected to the
road system or the daily traffic volume is less than 499 are
exempt. Additionally, these communities are exempt from
insurance requirements under AS 28.22.011. She stated that the
exemption is also listed in federal regulations for commercial
driver's licenses under 49 CFR 383, which exempts these
communities form the road skills test for commercial driver's
licenses. Further the same criteria in found in the Alaska
Administrative Code, 2 AAC 90. 220, which allows drivers in
these communities to be exempt from the road skills test for
non-commercial driver's licenses.
2:31:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated Conceptual Amendment 3 was
originally drafted by the legal drafter, but he made several
changes to the amendment, including changing "does not apply" to
"do not apply."
CHAIR P. WILSON asked Ms. Brewster whether she has reviewed
Conceptual Amendment 3.
MR. BREWSTER related she has reviewed proposed Conceptual
Amendment 3. In further response to Chair P. Wilson, she agreed
she had the specific amendment before her.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG related he has citations for statutes,
federal, and state regulations. He questioned whether this is
best drafted to conform to those regulations.
MS. BREWSTER offered her belief that she understands the intent
of Conceptual Amendment 3, but suggested the amendment could be
modified to specifically identify the statute that sets the
criteria for rural communities off the road system. She
suggested on line 4 of Conceptual Amendment 4, after "areas" to
add "exempt under [AS] 28.10.011." She expressed concern that
some areas of the state, including Juneau, Sitka, and Ketchikan
could be exempted from the bill. She recapped that tying it to
the AS 28.10.011, would also tie it to a community with a
traffic volume of 499 or less, which would be more specific.
CHAIR P. WILSON said the amendment is conceptual and the bill
drafter is also present.
2:34:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew Conceptual Amendment 3 in
order to allow Ms. Brewster and the sponsor's staff to work on
language to satisfy the DMV's concern.
[The committee treated Conceptual Amendment 3 as withdrawn.]
2:35:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether any other technical
matters exist that should be added or deleted.
MS. BREWSTER offered to get back to Representative Gruenberg on
any additional concerns.
CHAIR P. WILSON asked Ms. Brewster to respond through the Chair
and she would get back to other committee members.
MS. BREWSTER agreed to do so.
[HB 212 was held over.]
2:36:27 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:36
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 345.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 Washington CDL Waiver.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 Pennsylvania CDL Waiver.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 New York CDL Waiver (1).pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 FederalCDL Statute and Waiver.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 Federal Medical Reqmnts.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 Federal Hours of Service Regs (1).pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 Connecticut CDL Waiver (1).pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB 345 AK CDL Statute (1).pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |
| HB0212A.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| HB0212B.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| HB 212 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| 05 HB212-DOA-DMV-3-8-12.pdf |
HSTA 3/13/2012 8:00:00 AM HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| HB 212 (H) STA Explanation of Changes 03232012.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| HB 212 Supporting Document - Luiken PowerPoint 03132012.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| HB 212 Supporting Document - NCSL Research 4-1-11.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 212 |
| HB345-DOA-DMV-3-23-12.pdf |
HTRA 3/27/2012 1:00:00 PM |
HB 345 |