Legislature(2011 - 2012)BARNES 124
04/03/2012 01:30 PM House TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB212 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 212 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
April 3, 2012
1:37 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Lance Pruitt, Vice Chair
Representative Eric Feige
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Pete Petersen
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Peggy Wilson, Chair
Representative Craig Johnson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 212
"An Act relating to requirements for persons holding provisional
drivers' licenses."
- MOVED CSHB 212(TRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
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
03/27/12 (H) Heard & Held
03/27/12 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
04/03/12 (H) TRA AT 1:30 PM BARNES 124
WITNESS REGISTER
JESSICA LUIKEN, Self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 212 as a Close-Up student
requestor of the bill, on behalf of the sponsor, Representative
Charisse Millett.
MILES BROOKES, Staff
Representative Max Gruenberg
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on amendments to HB 212 on behalf
of Representative Max Gruenberg.
JEFF TURNER, Staff
Representative Charisse Millett
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of 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.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:37:03 PM
VICE CHAIR LANCE PRUITT called the House Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:37 p.m. Representatives Feige,
Gruenberg, Petersen, and Pruitt were present at the call to
order. Representative Munoz arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 212-PROVISIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE STICKER
1:37:26 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT announced that the only 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).]
1:37:53 PM
JESSICA LUIKEN, as a Close-Up student requestor of the bill, on
behalf of the sponsor, Representative Charisse Millett,
introduced herself. She said she was a Close-Up student and as
part of the Close-Up program she was required to bring a project
to a state Representative or Senator. She related that her
project resulted in HB 212 when Representative Millett agreed to
sponsor HB 212 at Ms. Luiken's request. She explained the bill
would require provisional license holders to display stickers on
their car. She indicated she agrees with the proposed
amendments.
1:38:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG remarked that his wife was Ms. Luiken's
teacher for the Close-Up program.
1:39:52 PM
MILES BROOKES, Staff, Representative Max Gruenberg, Alaska State
Legislature, introduced himself.
1:40:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 1,
labeled 27-LS0738\B.6, Luckhaupt, 4/2/12, which read as follows:
Page 1, line 5, following "each ":
Insert "motor"
Page 1, line 7, following "sticker.":
Insert "The department may by regulation exempt
the operation of certain types of motor vehicles from
the requirement to display a sticker under this
subsection."
VICE CHAIR Pruitt objected for the purpose of discussion.
1:40:36 PM
MR. BROOKES stated that Amendment 1 was developed after
discussions with the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV). He
explained that there could be vehicles as defined broadly in
statute as, (16) "motor vehicle" means a vehicle which is self-
propelled except a vehicle moved by human or animal power;" and
in some areas all-terrain vehicles (ATV) or snow machines may be
allowed on a road system. He said that under the bill these
vehicles would be required to have a provisional sticker.
1:41:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that Ms. Brewster asked to
list the types of vehicles that are exempt. He asked his staff
to list the types of vehicles.
MR. BROOKES responded that the vehicles that would be exempt
under Amendment 1 are ATVs, snow machines, motorcycles, or motor
driven scooters.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if the sponsor, Ms. Luiken, and
the DMV is agreeable.
1:42:20 PM
JEFF TURNER, Staff, Representative Charisse Millett, Alaska
State Legislature, answered yes. He said that Representative
Millett supports Amendment 1.
MS. LUIKEN agreed with Amendment 1.
1:43:01 PM
WHITNEY BREWSTER, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Department of Administration (DOA), stated that the DMV is
agreeable to Amendment 1.
1:43:22 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT removed his objection. There being no
objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
1:43:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 2,
labeled as Conceptual Amendment, which read, as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Page 1, line 6, after "licensee."
Insert "If he DMV chooses a location other than
the rear window to display the sticker, it shall do so
by regulation."
VICE CHAIR PRUITT objected for the purpose of discussion.
1:43:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked his staff to explain Conceptual
Amendment 2.
MR. BROOKES stated that Conceptual Amendment 2 was developed
after holding discussions with the Division of Motor Vehicles
(DMV) and the bill sponsor. He explained that there may be
vehicles that are covered by the bill but do not have a rear
window. He stated that the DMV could adopt a regulation to
indicate an area other than the rear window in the event that a
window is not available.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG clarified that the Conceptual Amendment
2 is not limited to vehicles without rear windows, but will give
the DMV the right to determine the specific location if it
wishes to do so.
1:44:50 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT asked whether provisional licenses are issued
for motorcycles.
MS. BREWSTER answered yes. She said there is a provisional
license for Class D and motorcycles.
VICE CHAIR PRUITT answered that this gives the DMV an
opportunity to decide where to place a sticker or decal.
MS. LUIKEN answered yes, that is correct.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether the sponsor, Ms. Luiken,
and the DMV is agreeable to Conceptual Amendment 2.
MR. TURNER answered yes.
MS. LUIKEN answered yes.
MS. BREWSTER answered yes, DMV agrees with Amendment 2.
VICE CHAIR PRUITT removed his objection. There being no further
objection, Conceptual Amendment 2 was adopted.
1:46:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 3,
labeled 27-LS0738\B.3, Luckhaupt, 4/2/12, which read, as
follows:
Page 2, following line 4:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(d) The requirement in (b) of this section does
not apply to
(1) provisional licenses issued to persons
to operate motor vehicles in areas of the state off
the road system when operating motor vehicles in those
areas; and
(2) a person holding a provisional license
when the person is operating a motor vehicle in a
municipality with a population of less than 500."
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE objected for the purpose of discussion.
1:46:57 PM
MR. BROOKES stated that Amendment 3 stemmed from concerns raised
by the DMV in terms of applying this to rural areas of the
state. He explained that in some areas the traffic count is
less than 500 vehicles and some areas in have populations of
less than 500 people. Additionally, some villages have less
than two miles of roads and the provisional license may not
apply.
1:47:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out members should have a
lengthy list of locations that meet this requirement. He
explained when the population exceeds 500 that the village is
removed from the list. He asked whether the sponsor, Ms.
Luiken, and the DMV have any objections to Amendment 3.
MR. TURNER answered that the sponsor agrees with Amendment 3.
MS. LUIKEN agreed with Amendment 3.
MS. BREWSTER answered that the DMV is agreeable to Amendment 3.
1:48:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to line 5, and pointed out
that he has crossed out "or" and inserted "and" per the DMV's
request.
MS. BREWSTER answered that is correct. She stated that there
was some concern that not having a definition of what is
considered a road system would leave communities such as Juneau,
Ketchikan, and Sitka are exempt under the bill. She explained
that the DMV prefers that the road system requirement still be
allowed for the exemption, but also includes the caveat of 500
or less to ensure an exemption for those areas that are truly
rural.
1:49:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked whether a municipality of less
than 500 chose to be included in the program if the municipality
could be included.
MS. BREWSTER said she was not sure how to answer. She offered
that it is more of a question for local government if they chose
to opt in to the program. She offered her belief that local law
enforcement could provide enforcement if the ordinance was
adopted.
1:50:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE asked for clarification on how HB 212 would
affect someone who operates a vehicle off the road system. He
related a scenario in which he buys an off road vehicle for his
daughter who would only use it off the road system. He asked
whether the point of the bill is remove off-road vehicles from
the requirement or if it is intended to exempt small villages.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG responded that the way Amendment 3 is
drafted, in order to not be required to have the sticker, both
paragraphs (1) and (2) would need to be satisfied. Thus the
vehicle would have to be operated off the road system and also
operated in municipality of less than 500. He concluded that a
person not in a municipality who lives off the road system would
not need to comply.
MS. BREWSTER answered agreed, that is her understanding, as
well.
1:52:45 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT asked whether an individual who holds a
provisional license and lives in an area that fits into the
requirements, but visits Anchorage - which is on road system -
would need a sticker during time spent in the urban area.
MS. BREWSTER answered yes; it was her understanding the person
visiting Anchorage would be required to display the provisional
sticker.
1:53:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE asked whether a person would need a
driver's license to operate a vehicle off the road system.
MS. BREWSTER answered yes; that anyone operating a vehicle on a
public roadway is required to be licensed.
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE related a scenario in which a person is
moose hunting off the road north of Eureka. He commented that
the license requirement for operating a vehicle on a state
roadway made sense. He removed his objection.
1:55:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested that part of the record
should include the list of municipalities and he also hopes Ms.
Brewster has the list.
MS. BREWSTER answered that she can follow-up with staff after
the hearing and will obtain the list.
1:55:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recalled that Representative Petersen
asked whether a municipality could opt-in to the program in HB
212, but he did was unsure the current language envisioned a
municipality opting-in to the program.
MS. BREWSTER offered her belief believe a municipality can adopt
an ordinance to opt-in, although she would defer to the DOL.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG concurred that the municipality would
do so by adoption of a local ordinance.
VICE CHAIR PRUITT stated there being no further objection,
Amendment 3 is adopted.
1:57:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to adopt Amendment 4,
labeled 27-LS0738\B.4, Luckhaupt, 4/2/12, which read, as
follows:
Page 1, line 1, following "licenses":
Insert "; and providing for an effective date"
Page 2, following line 4:
Insert new bill sections to read:
"* Sec. 2. AS 28.15.055(b) and 28.15.055(c) are
repealed December 31, 2016.
* Sec. 3. This Act takes effect January 1, 2013."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to line 6, which allows the
legislature to reconsider the bill during the sunset of December
31, 2016. He offered his belief that four years seemed to be a
reasonable period of time to obtain a track record. The second
part of the Amendment would delay the effective date to January
1, 2013 to allow time for young people and their families to be
aware of the law.
1:58:46 PM
MR. BROOKES added that the delayed effective date was added
since 6,000 provisional licensees exist and this would avoid
having the bulk of them to need to comply. He explained that
New Jersey has had the program in effect for two years, but
there is not a lot of data available. He offered that a four-
year window would allow time to study the data and if the
program is a good program the legislature could extend it or it
will expire
VICE CHAIR PRUITT objected for purpose of discussion. He asked
how the DMV would envision this program would be implemented.
2:00:19 PM
MS. BREWSTER offered her belief there would be extensive public
outreach. The DMV would likely contact the existing 6,000
provisional licensees to let them know about the requirements.
She related that for new provisional licensees the sticker would
be given out at time the license is issued.
VICE CHAIR PRUITT related his understanding there would need to
be outreach by the DMV to everyone to advise them to get their
sticker.
MS. BREWSTER responded that that the DMV could send licensees
the provisional sticker at time of notification. She cautioned
against overly burdening the customer if there is another means
to distribute the sticker.
VICE CHAIR PRUITT stated that he is not objecting to the January
1 date, but does not want to burden people. He asked whether
the language should indicate the sticker will be issued with
every new license after January 1, 2013, as opposed to capturing
those currently hold provisional licenses.
MS. BREWSTER agreed it would be helpful.
2:02:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he did not a problem with that
aspect of the bill. He inquired as to whether the DMV could
notify licensees by mail or e-mail so the licensees can apply
on-line or if the bill needs to be amended.
MS. BREWSTER answered that she did not think the bill needed to
be amended. She highlighted that the bill does not specifically
require people to apply for the sticker. She explained that
simply having provisional licenses would automatically make
licensees eligible for the sticker. She agreed the DMV could
correspond via mail to get them the sticker versus requiring
them to come into an office.
2:03:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked Ms. Brewster to comment on the sunset
provision.
MS. BREWSTER stated that a sunset provision is easily
implemented at the DMV and the DMV does not have strong feelings
on the sunset provision, which is a policy call.
2:04:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked whether provisional licenses are
called provisional licenses for the first six months.
MS. BREWSTER answered that it is dependent upon the individual.
She explained that if the person receives a traffic violation
the provisional requirements are extended another six months
from the conviction date. She stated that in the best case the
provisional license would be a six-month provision or it could
continue until they were 18, depending on the individual's
driving record.
2:05:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked whether the DMV would be able to
tell provisional licensees that they may need sticker.
MS. BREWSTER asked whether he was referring to permit holders.
REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN asked whether the DMV would notify
everyone who receives provisional license on and after July 1,
which is six months prior to the effective date to inform them
they will need to get a sticker when the law goes into effect.
He suggested that would avoid the issue of having to contact
them at a later time.
MS. BREWSTER agreed the DMV could certainly do so, could also
have posters in office, and make sure DMV's employees are aware
of the new requirements.
2:06:42 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT expressed two concerns with that concept; one,
that it may be difficult for 16 year-olds to remember to come
back in to the DMV by end of year for the sticker. Second, most
may delay and come in one to two weeks before the end of January
and create a rush for the DMV.
2:07:24 PM
VICE CHAIR PRUITT made a motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1
to Amendment 4, on line 7 after, add, "for provisional licenses
issued after January 1, 2013."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested the amendment to Amendment 4
should be conceptual.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT agreed.
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 to Amendment 4
was adopted.
2:08:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether the sponsor, Ms. Luiken,
and the DMV supports Amendment 4, as amended.
MR. TURNER answered that the sponsor is fine with Amendment 4.
MS. LUIKEN answered that she approves Amendment 4.
MS. BREWSTER answered that the DMV is agreeable, to Amendment 4,
as amended.
VICE CHAIR PRUITT removed his objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 4, as amended, was adopted.
2:09:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that several amendments
were previously adopted. He asked whether the amendments should
be renumbered and staff responded the amendment numbering was
fine.
2:10:09 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 2:10 p.m. to 2:11 p.m.
2:11:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE expressed concern about the requirements
for the sticker since some family members may operate farm
equipment. He asked whether an exemption is in order. He
referred to the statutes and noted a person when driving an
implement of animal husbandry is exempt from a driver's license.
He asked whether an amendment is necessary to exempt
agricultural operations.
2:12:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to Amendment 1, which allows
the department, by regulation, to exempt certain types of motor
vehicles from the requirement to display a sticker. He said it
is not his intent to have farm vehicles to comply even if the
farm vehicle is on the roadway. He agreed a pickup would need
to comply, but as the author of the amendment clarified it was
not his intention to have the requirement apply to farm
implements. He pointed out that he listed some vehicles as
illustrative to provide legislative history. He asked whether
the farm implements should be listed or if doing so would
suffice for the DMV's purposes.
MS. BREWSTER answered that it would not be the DMV's intent to
include vehicles of animal husbandry as vehicles needing the
provisional sticker. As Representative Feige indicated earlier,
a person is not required to be licensed to operate those types
of vehicles. If the vehicles are operated on a public roadway
they are allowed for crossing and are not to be utilized to
operate on the roadway. She offered her belief that they do not
need to be exemption, but she offered to further consult with
the Department of Law. She reiterated that these individuals
are not required to have a license to operate the vehicles so
she doubted an exemption was necessary.
2:15:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE said he could foresee parcels of land not
necessarily connected except by road. He could envision that
the farmer may have to move equipment along local road. He
suggested that the committee may wish to express its intent. He
referred to AS 28.990, and stated that farm vehicles and
exempted from being commercial vehicles. He read, "Farm
vehicles that are controlled and operated by a farmer used to
transport agricultural products, farm machinery, or farm
supplies to or from that farmers farm not using the operations
of a common or contract motor carrier and used within 150 miles
of a farmer's farm." He suggested that any vehicle operated
under that language would be exempt from using the sticker.
2:16:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested the committee has a choice of
placing the language in statute or the clarification could be
done by regulation, noting the committee's intent that the
regulation specifically exempts those farm vehicles.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked whether this provides sufficient
directive to the DMV.
MS. BREWSTER answered absolutely.
2:17:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE moved to report the CSHB 212 (STA), as
amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying zero fiscal note. There being no objection,
the CSHB 212(TRA) was reported from the House Transportation
Standing Committee.
2:19:11 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Transportation Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:19
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|