Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/24/1998 01:35 PM Senate TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
February 24, 1998
1:35 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Jerry Ward, Chairman
Senator Gary Wilken, Vice Chair
Senator Lyda Green
Senator Rick Halford
Senator Georgianna Lincoln
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 304
"An Act relating to regulation of highways and motor vehicles; and
providing for an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS SENATE ACTION
SB 304 - No previous action.
WITNESS REGISTER
Senator Dave Donley
Alaska State Capitol
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 304
Henry Springer
Associated General Contractors of Alaska
4041 B Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 304
Captain Ted Bachman
Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety
5700 E. Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99507-1225
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 304
Don Shannon
Governor's Safety Advisory Council
232 Bentley Drive
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 304
Juanita Hensley, Chief
Driver Services
Department of Administration
P.O. Box 20020
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0020
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 304
Dennis Pouchard
Department of Transportation and Public Safety
3132 Channel Drive
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7898
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports Sections 4 and 5
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-4, SIDE A
CHAIRMAN WARD called the Senate Transportation Committee meeting to
order at 1:35 p.m. Present were Senators Ward, Wilken, Halford and
Green. SB 304 was up for consideration.
SB 304 - REGULATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES & HWYS
SENATOR DAVE DONLEY, sponsor of SB 304, explained the primary
intent of the bill is to double fines for moving traffic violations
in construction zones in Alaska, in an effort to protect highway
construction workers. SB 304 was requested by the Alaska
Associated General Contractors (AAGC) and is supported by unions
representing those workers. Serious work zone accidents have
occurred in Alaska and other states have implemented a similar
system of increasing fines within work zone areas to protect
workers in those areas. In addition, SB 304 contains several other
provisions. Section 2 amends the current statute that contains
items for which points are not awarded to drivers for certain types
of violations. It adds the offense of driving at between 55 mph
and 65 mph on a divided highway that has a maximum speed limit of
55 mph, if the driving was not reckless or negligent. In such a
case, the driver would receive a ticket that would not apply to the
point system that is cause for an increase in insurance rates.
Section 2 also adds a provision so that traffic citations issued by
an entity other than a member of a police force, such as photo-
radar, would not increase points on one's driver's license.
SENATOR DONLEY informed committee members that Section 3 affirms
driving tradition in many other states and requires drivers to
remain in the right lane unless passing. He believes that
tradition has not developed in Alaska because Alaska has not had
many divided highways. This provision would create a safer and
more efficient flow of traffic. He noted SB 304 does not deal with
criminal law, only with traffic violations.
Number 106
SENATOR HALFORD asked Senator Donley if he had any information on
the accident rate in construction zones in Alaska.
SENATOR DONLEY replied he has many articles and research from other
states regarding this issue but nothing specific to Alaska.
According to the National Work Zone Fatalities 1994 report, 33
people were killed nationwide. He noted there has been a movement
to adopt similar legislation in Utah, South Carolina and Texas and
as a former construction worker, he pointed out he is personally
aware of the dangers involved in work zones on highways.
SENATOR HALFORD stated on rural roads, construction signs might be
posted for a month, when workers might only be there for four hours
during that time. He asked Senator Donley if he thought about
specifying that the provision only applies in active construction
zones. He noted often construction signs are posted to warn
drivers of hazardous road conditions rather than actual
construction.
SENATOR DONLEY said he thought the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities (DOTPF) has very strict and specific regulations
regarding when and which construction signs can be posted because
it recognizes that the signage must be accurate or the public will
begin to disbelieve and discount it. He pointed out that making
the language specific to active construction zones would create an
affirmative defense, and be problematic for enforcement officials,
because people would argue they were not aware of any activity. He
thought the Legislature should encourage DOTPF to enforce its
existing regulations on contractors to ensure the signs are
accurate.
Number 191
SENATOR HALFORD explained the problem is not with the contractors
as much as it is with the regional offices of DOTPF. When a grader
operator starts down the Denali Highway, he puts out a sign warning
of roadwork ahead. The operator might grade for 40 miles and do
the same on the return trip the next day, yet the sign has remained
there the entire time even though there is no construction within
20 miles of the sign. He said it probably is not worth paying
someone to pick up the sign, yet he thought it is unreasonable to
change the speed limit and double the fine.
SENATOR DONLEY agreed those situations do occur however he
clarified that SB 304 does not directly impact the speed limit, it
doubles the fine if a driver violates the speed limit in a
construction zone.
SENATOR HALFORD pointed out his concern is that a driver could get
a double fine for driving 50 in a 45 mph speed zone because a
grader is 30 miles away.
SENATOR DONLEY said one can discuss hypothetical situations for any
bill because there is always a circumstance that does not fit. He
added police officers usually use good discretion when enforcing
traffic violations.
SENATOR HALFORD said he does not disagree that the affirmative
defense might have a negative effect but his concern about small
projects in rural areas remains.
CHAIRMAN WARD announced Senator Lincoln was present.
Number 241
SENATOR LINCOLN questioned who the language on page 2, line 6 that
reads "traffic citations that are issued by a person who is not a
member of the police force of the state or a municipality" refers
to.
SENATOR DONLEY said that could apply to Anchorage parking authority
employees or photo radar.
SENATOR LINCOLN thought that language was too open-ended. She also
expressed concern with language on page 2, line 26, that says
"whether or not work is actually being done at that time." She
questioned why the same regulation would be imposed when the
workforce is not at the site if the purpose of the bill is to
protect the workforce.
SENATOR DONLEY said that provision was included because often
people cannot tell whether the construction site is active. If the
bill says it is okay to drive faster if the driver cannot see
anyone working, it will seriously dilute protection to the workers
on the road.
SENATOR LINCOLN asked whether a fiscal note had been requested.
CHAIRMAN WARD informed committee members DOTPF had just delivered
the fiscal note.
SENATOR DONLEY said despite what the statutes say, no fiscal note
is prepared until a bill is scheduled for a hearing.
SENATOR WILKEN referred to language on page 2, line 2, and said he
drives between Anchorage and Fairbanks several times each year and
has questioned how DOTPF and the Troopers classify some of the 65
mph sections, which he thinks are dangerous. He is concerned that
the message in SB 304 is that it is kind of okay to speed a little.
He asked the sponsor to reconsider the inclusion of that language
because it does not do much for the bill.
Number 316
SENATOR DONLEY reported this idea originated before the oil
embargo, when the speed limit on all interstate highways was 70
mph. It then suddenly became unsafe to drive at 70 mph so the
speed limit was reduced to 55 mph. The State of Oregon issued
energy citations rather than speeding tickets to those driving
between 55 and 70 mph unless the driver was reckless, in which case
he/she would be issued a speeding ticket. He noted the provision
only applies to divided highways and most of the road between
Anchorage and Fairbanks is still two-lanes. He thought SB 304
offers a middle ground to increasing speed limits to 65 mph. The
bill encourages people to drive at 55 mph but recognizes that
people should not be overly punished for doing so if there is no
danger involved.
SENATOR HALFORD asked where the road between Anchorage and
Fairbanks is divided with a 55 mph speed limit. He pointed out SB
304 would not apply to that road because the speed limit is 65
coming out of Anchorage and remains so anywhere the highway is
divided.
CHAIRMAN WARD asked Senator Donley what ticketing procedure the
military police use in construction zones at Ft. Richardson.
SENATOR DONLEY did not know.
SENATOR GREEN asked what the upper fine limit is for an infraction.
SENATOR DONLEY replied those amounts are contained in a bail
schedule adopted by the Supreme Court; he was unsure of the dollar
amount.
SENATOR GREEN asked for clarification of the phrase "dense traffic
conditions" on line 15, page 2.
SENATOR DONLEY said it was a guideline to give the enforcement
officers clarification that there are times when driving in both
lanes is necessary, such as during traffic jams.
SENATOR GREEN questioned whether the requirement to drive in the
right lane is a duplication of existing statute.
SENATOR DONLEY replied one could read the existing law that way,
but that is not how it is being enforced. In his discussions with
police officers, he was told there is no law that requires people
to remain in the right lane on divided highways.
SENATOR GREEN said she did not think a driver could be cited for
driving full speed in the left lane if the driver was not driving
recklessly.
SENATOR HALFORD said a lot of states post signs warning slower
traffic to keep right. Those states have an enforceable law as the
basis for those signs. In some states it is also illegal to pass
on the right on a divided highway. He added it is the combination
of those two driving practices that allow for phenomenal speed
differences on the same roads with fewer accidents in Europe.
HENRY SPRINGER, Executive Director of the Associated General
Contractors of Alaska, made the following comments via
teleconference. He has been concerned about construction zone
safety for about 10 years and although it looks simple on the
surface, it is a complex problem. He suggested distinguishing
between construction zones and maintenance operations because there
are obvious differences. Construction zones should be considered
those areas of the highway that are under some kind of contractual
work obligation by a contractor with the owner, in most cases the
state or a municipality. The question of who has ultimate
responsibility and liability for safety for the workforce and
traveling public within those zones is a gray area. Court
decisions have favored both sides. Consequently, contracts contain
detailed provisions that spell out traffic safety. The safety of
both the workers and traveling public in construction zones is
different than in areas with unrestricted flow patterns. From a
statistical standpoint, 700 people were killed and 5,000 were
injured in the United States in accidents within road construction
sites last year. Most of the accidents were the direct result of
excessive speed. In 1996 there were two fatalities in Alaska
within construction zones. What is not known is the high number of
injuries.
In regard to Senator Halford's concern about maintenance
operations, MR. SPRINGER said those operations are usually
advertised and speed restrictions do not apply. The signs posted
in those situations are usually advisory and have no power of law
behind them. Even in construction zones where no workers are
present, there are concerns from a liability standpoint because the
normal safety standards in regard to roadway conditions are not in
compliance with the national standards. Therefore, the presence of
workers is not the sole criteria for SB 304.
Because of legal complications that surround this issue, MR.
SPRINGER said states with successful laws have the same approach
used in SB 304; doubling the points for infractions within
construction zones. The physical application is simple;
contractors can put up signs informing drivers the fines are
doubled within that construction area. He concluded by saying SB
304 does not present an inconvenience to the traveling public, it
provides increased safety efforts for workers and the traveling
public and has a positive effect on liability for the road owner
and contractor.
Number 519
SENATOR HALFORD stated he agrees with the intent of SB 304 but
asked Mr. Springer if he could suggest language to alleviate his
concerns about including maintenance operations.
MR. SPRINGER answered in his 20 years of road maintenance work
throughout the Interior and outside of Nome, he is not aware of any
standing operating procedure that would change speed limits with
advanced warnings of maintenance operations. Typically the minimum
requirements under the Uniform Traffic Control Standards are that
warning signs be posted about impeding restrictions to the
operations. He was unaware of any instances where the speed limit
is restricted.
SENATOR HALFORD clarified the bill was drafted to double the fine
for any speed violation, whether there is a further restriction on
speed or not.
MR. SPRINGER maintained that is correct, but explained that when
maintenance on the Denali Highway occurs, a warning sign is posted
but the speed limit remains the same. In a construction zone, a
speed limit restriction could be imposed.
Number 555
CAPTAIN TED BACHMAN, staff assistant to the Director of the Alaska
State Troopers (AST), testified via teleconference. AST does not
oppose the provision regarding highway work zone areas because it
is primarily involved in enforcement, not in fines. Regarding
Senator Halford's request for clarifying language, Captain Bachman
suggested crafting language to put the burden of proof as to
whether construction was occurring at the time on the violator.
AST does have two concerns. The first pertains to not giving
points to a violator for driving 65 mph in a 55 mph zone; AST
believes this is a safety issue. Fatality statistics almost
dropped off the chart after speed limits were reduced in reaction
to the oil embargo. He suggested reviewing the posted speed limits
on highways and changing them where appropriate, rather than
modifying the point system which is designed to identify
chronically poor drivers. AST's second concern is that the third
part of SB 304 mirrors 13AAC 02.005 which pertains to traffic
regulations. That regulation requires people to drive on the right
side of the roadway. He agreed with Senator Green that police
officers would be hard pressed to cite a driver who is driving at
the speed limit in the left lane. A person driving slower than
other traffic in the left lane could be cited under another
regulation, 13AAC 02.050, entitled "Obedience to Posted Traffic
Control Devices." He thought the issue is one of driver training,
rather than the need for a new statute.
TAPE 98-4, SIDE B
SENATOR HALFORD questioned whether there is a provision in the
Alaska Administrative Code that requires a driver to pull over if
there are a certain number of cars behind him/her, to let those
drivers pass.
CAPTAIN BACHMAN said that provision is also in 13AAC 02.050.
SENATOR GREEN asked Captain Bachman if he knew what the upper fine
limit is on infractions.
CAPTAIN BACHMAN believed the maximum fine limit on an infraction is
$300 unless otherwise stated in statute. He clarified it is the
judge who ultimately sets the fine.
SENATOR DONLEY asked Captain Bachman if he saw any problem with
placing Section 3 in statute, since that provision is already in
regulation.
CAPTAIN BACHMAN replied the language in Section 3 does create some
ambiguities that could be misinterpreted. He noted when he
reviewed Section 3 he questioned whether a driver could use the
left lane to continuously overtake vehicles, and whether a driver
could use the left lane to overtake a vehicle one mile ahead. He
questioned who would decide what "dense traffic conditions" means.
Finally, he was unsure what problem would be solved by the statute
if traffic conditions were not dense.
SENATOR DONLEY pointed out the existing regulations seem a lot more
vague than the language in SB 304.
CAPTAIN BACHMAN replied he could not disagree that particular
regulation could be better crafted.
SENATOR HALFORD suggested reviewing passer keep right statutes from
other states to find the most simple and concise one.
SENATOR DONLEY thought Captain Bachman's concerns were reasonable
because enforcement officials want as much guidance as they can
get. He noted however, traffic issues cannot always be described
in four pages. He said he included a June 30, 1999 effective date
to provide plenty of time for public education. SB 304 will require
discretionary calls on the part of Troopers, but many traffic laws
do, such as reckless driving.
DON SHANNON, a member of the Governor's Safety Advisory Council,
and a former surveyor and road construction worker, stated support
for parts of SB 304. He believes worker conditions in highway work
zones are dangerous enough to warrant the new offense. Hawaii
uses policemen as flagmen. If a driver does not slow down, the
policeman issues a citation. When a company is working on a road,
it should become like the owner of the road until the job is
completed. He pointed out HB 87 passed out of the House Judiciary
Committee the previous day. That bill also doubles fines for
speeding in a work zone.
SENATOR WILKEN indicated his previous comment about tacit approval
of speeding was directed to the Richardson Highway between
Fairbanks and Eielson. He asked Mr. Shannon if he shares the same
concern to prevent people from speeding on that highway.
MR. SHANNON said on parts of it he would. He noted, as a flagman,
many drivers questioned how he could dare stop them when driving on
their road.
Number 478
JUANITA HENSLEY, Chief of the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
gave the following testimony. DMV's only concern is with Section
2. The traffic point system was designed to get habitual traffic
law violators off of the road. To do away with points on a
speeding citation tells drivers they can speed with no
repercussions other than a small fine. She explained the bail
schedule for violation of a state law is $4 per mile over the speed
limit. Several years ago the Legislature allowed municipalities to
set their own bail schedules with approval of the Supreme Court.
MS. HENSLEY said the State of Oregon does not use a point system
suspension method. The Oregon system is based on the number of
violations issued in a three year period. That law models the
American Association of Motor Vehicles Model Driver Improvement
Program. If one is issued five citations in a three year period,
the license is suspended. If one receives three citations in a two
year period, the driver gets a warning. In Alaska, a driver who
drives between one and nine miles over the speed limit gets two
points. If that driver takes a driver improvement course, he/she
is not assessed the points. At present, the Court System will
dismiss a citation if the offender shows proof of having taken the
driver improvement course.
MS. HENSLEY reported two years ago she assisted the Alaska State
Troopers in writing regulations to control speed limits. The
regulations allow DOTPF to determine the appropriate speed limit
based on an engineer's study of the road. The speed limit from
Boniface to Fairbanks has been set at 65 mph. DOTPF will be doing
studies on various sections of road to determine appropriate speed
limits. A study of the Seward Highway did not recommend increasing
the speed limit at this time. The National Uniform Citation and
Traffic Law and Ordinance Group writes model traffic laws and
ordinances for the Uniform Vehicle Codes for all states to use.
Title 13 was written from the Uniform Vehicle Code in the 1970's.
She recommended looking at a driver improvement program that is
more proactive. The point system is not necessarily what traffic
experts are recommending at this time; they are recommending basing
driver programs on the number and type of violations received in a
specific time period. She explained that the posted speed limits
are not usually recorded on citations.
CHAIRMAN WARD said the committee would be in contact with her on
the subject of a more proactive driver improvement program.
SENATOR HALFORD asked if the national model code organizations have
a version of legislation regarding doubling fines in construction
zones that the committee could review. MS. HENSLEY replied she
would check and get back to the committee on that question.
SENATOR DONLEY asked why the posted speed is not recorded on
citations if it is necessary to calculate the fine. MS. HENSLEY
replied citations sometimes contain the amount of miles exceeding
the speed limit, rather than the posted speed.
DENNIS POSHARD, DOTPF, stated he would be testifying only on
Sections 4 and 5 that deal with the highway work zones which DOTPF
fully supports. DOTPF believes a problem exists with construction
zone safety and SB 304 is a step in the right direction in solving
that problem. He pointed out there are no statistics specific to
work zones in Alaska. He was aware that in 1994 a DOTPF paving
crew worker was struck by a vehicle on Badger Road. In 1987, on
Old Nenana and Parks Highway at Ester, a worker was hit by a truck
and killed, and another worker sustained a head injury. In 1995
the Glen Highway was repaved. During the one year that project
took to complete, 11 accidents occurred within the work zone and he
is aware of other stories that provide evidence to prove that
speeding in construction zones is a problem.
Regarding the problem with signs around maintenance projects
mentioned by Senator Halford, MR. POSHARD affirmed those signs are
warnings to travelers and do not have a commensurate speed
reduction. Regarding questions about whether it is apparent that
the construction crew is active, the reduction of speed is for the
safety of the construction workers as well as the traveling
passenger. As construction is taking place, road conditions are
less safe.
CHAIRMAN WARD announced his intent to hold the bill to draft an
amendment in cooperation with the sponsor, and bring it back for
presentation to the committee. There being no further discussion,
he adjourned the meeting at 2:12 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|