03/01/2018 01:30 PM Senate TRANSPORTATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB163 | |
| HB204 | |
| HB82 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 163 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 204 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 82 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE TRANSPORTATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 1, 2018
1:31 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Bert Stedman, Chair
Senator Anna MacKinnon
Senator Click Bishop
Senator David Wilson
Senator Dennis Egan
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 163
"An Act relating to commercial motor vehicles."
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 204(JUD)
"An Act relating to overtaking and passing certain stationary
vehicles."
- HEARD & HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 82(STA) AM
"An Act relating to vehicle registration; relating to off-
highway restricted areas; and relating to motor vehicle
liability insurance."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 163
SHORT TITLE: DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/26/18 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/26/18 (S) TRA, STA
03/01/18 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 204
SHORT TITLE: OVERTAKING/PASSING ROAD WORK VEHICLES
SPONSOR(s): KAWASAKI
03/29/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/29/17 (H) TRA, JUD
04/06/17 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
04/06/17 (H) Moved HB 204 Out of Committee
04/06/17 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
04/07/17 (H) TRA RPT 2DP 5AM
04/07/17 (H) DP: KOPP, DRUMMOND
04/07/17 (H) AM: CLAMAN, SULLIVAN-LEONARD, NEUMAN,
WOOL, STUTES
04/13/17 (H) JUD AT 5:30 PM GRUENBERG 120
04/13/17 (H) Moved CSHB 204(JUD) Out of Committee
04/13/17 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
04/14/17 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) 4DP 3NR
04/14/17 (H) DP: KOPP, KREISS-TOMKINS, FANSLER,
CLAMAN
04/14/17 (H) NR: EASTMAN, LEDOUX, REINBOLD
04/17/17 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/17/17 (H) VERSION: CSHB 204(JUD)
05/01/17 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/01/17 (S) TRA, JUD
03/01/18 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
BILL: HB 82
SHORT TITLE: OFF HWY DRIVER'S LIC; REGISTRATION; INSUR.
SPONSOR(s): KREISS-TOMKINS
01/25/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/25/17 (H) STA, TRA
02/02/17 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
02/02/17 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
02/23/17 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
02/23/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
02/28/17 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
02/28/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/28/17 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/09/17 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/09/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/09/17 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/14/17 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/14/17 (H) Moved CSHB 82(STA) Out of Committee
03/14/17 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/20/17 (H) STA RPT CS(STA) NT 3DP 2NR
03/20/17 (H) DP: KNOPP, TUCK, KREISS-TOMKINS
03/20/17 (H) NR: WOOL, LEDOUX
03/28/17 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/28/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/28/17 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
03/30/17 (H) TRA AT 1:00 PM BARNES 124
03/30/17 (H) Moved CSHB 82(STA) Out of Committee
03/30/17 (H) MINUTE(TRA)
03/31/17 (H) TRA RPT CS(STA) NT 5DP 1NR
03/31/17 (H) DP: CLAMAN, DRUMMOND, SULLIVAN-LEONARD,
KOPP, WOOL
03/31/17 (H) NR: NEUMAN
04/08/17 (H) NOT TAKEN UP 4/8 - ON 4/9 CALENDAR
04/10/17 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/10/17 (H) VERSION: CSHB 82(STA) AM
04/11/17 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/11/17 (S) TRA, STA
03/01/18 (S) TRA AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
JOHN BINDER, Deputy Commissioner
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an introduction of SB 163.
DAN SMITH, Director
Division of Measurement Standards and Commercial Vehicle
Enforcement
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a sectional overview of SB 163.
AVES THOMPSON, Executive Director
Alaska Trucking Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 163.
WILLIAM JODWALIS, Staff
Representative Kawasaki
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of HB 204.
BOB ANDERSON, Central Region Chief of Maintenance and Operations
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 204.
DAN CARSON, representing self
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 204.
DUSTIN WITTE, Employee
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 204.
DAN LOWDEN, Captain
Alaska State Troopers
Alaska Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Did not provide a position on HB 204.
MATT WALKER, State Traffic and Safety Engineer
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 204.
TRENTON ENGLISH, Business Representative
Public Employees Local 71
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 204.
DON ETHRIDGE, Lobbyist
Alaska AFL-CIO
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 204.
NOAH STAR, Staff
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of HB 82 and answered
questions.
MARLA THOMPSON, Director
Division of Motor Vehicles
Alaska Department of Administration
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 82.
DAVID EPSTEIN, Region Traffic and Safety Engineer
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 82.
GEORGINA DAVIS-GASTELUM, representing self
Kake, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 82.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:31:36 PM
CHAIR BERT STEDMAN called the Senate Transportation Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:31 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators MacKinnon, Bishop, and Chair Stedman.
SB 163-DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES
1:31:59 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN announced the consideration of SB 163.
1:32:33 PM
JOHN BINDER, Deputy Commissioner, Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, Anchorage, Alaska,
provided an introduction of SB 163 as follows:
SB 163 proposes to bring Alaska's definitions of
"commercial motor vehicle" into the 21st century.
Senate Bill 163 proposed changes will benefit farmers
who transport agricultural commodities or supplies in
Alaska because existing restrictions on farm vehicles
limit their movement to within 150 miles of the farm.
SB 163 will allow farmers to operate anywhere in
Alaska. The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century Act (MAP-21), made the federal regulation of
farmers less restrictive than our current existing
language in Alaska statute. SB 163 also proposes the
transportation of hazardous materials should be
amended to only apply to quantities of substances that
require a placard regardless of the size of the
vehicle. Finally, the definition of "school bus" is
updated to provide clarity for when school buses are
exempt from commercial motor vehicle requirements.
1:32:38 PM
SENATOR EGAN joined the committee meeting.
1:33:56 PM
DAN SMITH, Director, Division of Measurement Standards and
Commercial Vehicle Enforcement, Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities, Juneau, Alaska, provided a
sectional overview of SB 163 as follows:
Section 1
AS 19.10.300, the area that we intended to change was
in AS 19.10.399 which is "definitions." AS 19.10.300
is financial responsibility, but since we are using
this wording later on in the bill, this was to mirror
those changes that you will be seeing later.
Page 2, line 4
When we start talking about "covered farm vehicles" is
really the meat of this bill. Presently, a farmer
using a farm vehicle away from their farm after 150
miles from that farm they are then treated as though
they are a motor carrier, meaning they would have to
meet all of the requirements of a carrier, having like
a DOST number markings on their vehicle, that sort of
thing; this change would allow them to operate
anywhere in the state.
Page 2, line 29
When we get to "placard," there are times when a
commercial vehicle may be hauling a substance that is
deemed a hazardous material but it's not in a quantity
that requires a placard. If I owned an air taxi, for
instance, I went and picked up a 55-gallon drum,
that's not an amount of gas that would require a
placard, so sometimes that situation arises, and we
just wanted to be really clear when somebody is
operating a vehicle as a commercial vehicle that then
would be requiring a placard.
"School buses" and "school bus operations"
Presently, in AS 19.10.399 it says, "School buses are
not commercial vehicles," so we wanted to make this
change to clarify that school buses when they are used
for transporting school children from home to school
or school to home, that is school bus operations and
they are exempt from the requirements. So, right now
it is too broad, and it is not a compatible
definition, we say "all school buses." If a school bus
in the summer is picking up down here and taking
passengers from a cruise ship out to the glacier,
that's a motor carrier of passengers at that time and
they would be regulated as such, they already know
that because that's how we've regulating them because
most of them are in interstate commerce already and
therefore are falling under a more restrictive rule.
1:36:41 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON asked what the current commercial requirements
are for school bus drivers or for school buses.
MR. SMITH replied as follows:
For those exempt operations I can't answer that
question because DOT&PF doesn't regulate them, I
believe that's Early Education that sets those
requirements for school buses when they are operating
as a "school bus;" once they are outside of that
definition, absolutely, I can tell you the
requirements for a motor carrier of passengers.
SENATOR MACKINNON explained that her intent was to find out if
there were any unintended consequences from the change in
definition that will affect schools and the safety of the
children that are being transported.
1:37:38 PM
SENATOR WILSON joined the committee meeting.
MR. SMITH replied that he did know of any unintended
consequences. He explained that for the most part, a lot of the
school bus transport is being conducted by government agencies
who are already exempt. He said for those carriers that do
school bus operations and then would have operations as a
commercial carrier, they abide by stringent driver
qualifications and vehicle requirements.
SENATOR BISHOP asked if the exemption for farmers to operate
anywhere in the state without a CDL [commercial drivers
license] was federal law.
MR. SMITH replied that is correct; it is the 49 CFR. [United
State Code of Federal Regulation (CFR)]
SENATOR BISHOP disclosed that he had considered adding minors to
the exemption, but a federal exemption was required. He asked if
the bill gets around that requirement because 49 CFR allows the
exemption for agriculture.
MR. SMITH answered yes.
1:39:17 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON addressed her concerns regarding farm vehicle
safety as follows:
My only question is regarding safety and whether the
roads will be safe with these types of vehicles on
them without the same certification as a "commercial."
I understand the economic disadvantage for the
farmers, agriculture is a tough business to be in and
moving your goods to market is difficult, but the
vehicles and the safety of those vehicles is still of
concern to all of us. Can you speak to the safety of
farm vehicles on a road? I understand it is allowed on
a national level, but Alaska faces some severe winter
conditions and others that require us to look at
everything in a unique way.
MR. SMITH replied that there will be no measurable effect on
safety.
SENATOR BISHOP asked him to address safety regarding 18-wheel
farm vehicles and inquired if the vehicle is exempt from DOT
inspection.
MR. SMITH answered that a farm vehicle would meet the exception
for a covered farm vehicle or existing farm vehicle exception.
He added that an exemption would also apply to [49 CFR Part 391]
for the medical and [49 CFR Part 383] for driver qualifications.
SENATOR BISHOP addressed air brakes and inquired if the
tolerances are the same for farmers as they are for commercial
carriers.
MR. SMITH answered yes.
1:41:38 PM
SENATOR STEDMAN opened public testimony.
1:41:59 PM
AVES THOMPSON, Executive Director, Alaska Trucking Association,
Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of SB 163. He specified
that any effort to clarify the statutes makes it easier for the
trucking industry to comply. He said SB 163 reduces the burden
on farmers and farm vehicles by removing the 150-mile
restriction on farms transporting their own "covered farm
vehicles" in the conduct of their business and allows them to
operate statewide. He noted that if a choice is made to enter
the "for hire world," compliance with the commercial vehicle
rules and regulations will be required. He added that SB 163
provides certainty for motor carriers of passengers by clearly
identifying school bus operations. He specified that school
buses are not considered commercial motor vehicles while
conducting "school bus operations." He added that school bus
operators that choose to engage in "for hire" transport other
than school bus operations would also have to comply with
commercial vehicle rules and regulations. He detailed that SB
163 also provides clarification for carriers transporting
hazardous materials in amounts that require a placard.
1:44:07 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN closed public testimony.
1:44:22 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN held SB 163 in committee.
HB 204-OVERTAKING/PASSING ROAD WORK VEHICLES
1:44:33 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN announced the consideration of HB 204.
1:45:03 PM
WILLIAM JODWALIS, Staff, Representative Kawasaki, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, disclosed that Dan Carson, former
DOT&PF equipment operator in Fairbanks, brought the issue
forward. He said he would speak briefly as to current statute
what the bill does, what changes have been made from its
original version and the penalties that come with any violation
of what this bill puts forward as follows:
Under AS 28.35.185(a), drivers are required to vacate
the nearest lane or slowdown when approaching certain
stationary emergency and service vehicles which are
flashing emergency lights on a highway or roadway.
Such vehicles currently include: emergency, fire, law
enforcement, animal control vehicles, and tow trucks
in the act of picking up a vehicle. This bill adds,
"Vehicle in the act of performing maintenance or road-
service work," to the list of vehicles subject to the
existing move-over law, allowing private contractor,
municipal maintenance vehicles to fall under its
jurisdiction, including the Department of
Transportation.
Under this bill if a driver approaches one of these
vehicles, those preforming maintenance or road service
work which is displaying flashing emergency lights on
a highway, with two or more lanes the driver shall
vacate the lane closest to the vehicle or slow down to
a reasonable speed if they cannot vacate the closest
lane safely. On a road with fewer than two lanes, the
driver shall slow down to a reasonable speed
considering traffic, roadway, and weather conditions.
1:47:33 PM
MR. JODWALIS explained changes made from the original version of
HB 204 during committee proceeding in House Transportation.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked Mr. Jodwalis to address the bill's current
version.
MR. JODWALIS explained the penalties related to the bill as
follows:
Under AS 28.35.185, failure to move over is a class A
misdemeanor if personal injury results from a person's
failure to vacate the lane or slow down. Failure to
move over that does not result in personal injury is
punishable by a $150 fine and 2 points assessed
against the driver's license. This statute has been
effective since September 2005. We confirmed with
municipal police departments that they enforce the
same statute.
He summarized that HB 204 would help reduce the likelihood of
work-zone-related accidents and tragedies and help make Alaska's
roads a safer place to drive and work.
SENATOR WILSON asked how the bill differs from current laws
regarding highway work zones.
MR. JODWALIS specified that the bill would apply to situations
where someone is working on the side of the road.
1:51:32 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked what the requirement and process is from
DOT&PF for an individual to work on potholes or guardrails.
MR. JODWALIS replied that DOT&PF can better answer Senator
Wilson's question.
SENATOR BISHOP commented as follows:
Let me help you explain this. So, you have a
construction project that has an improved traffic plan
in it, let's say it's a bid awarded DOT&PF highway
construction project. So, we have two issues here,
this bill with a DOT&PF approved traffic plan, okay,
that's over here. This bill is, as I interpret it, is
trying to fix what's not a DOT&PF awarded construction
plan to a private contractor. This bill is, like
Senator Wilson said, there could be a maintenance
issue here where DOT&PF is doing pothole repairs or
doing an overlay where they will have two flaggers,
they will have two lighted signs on either end of the
job, but this is getting a little tighter yet where it
might just be a one-truck pothole patch or a recovery
effort of a tow vehicle, etc. This is covering outside
of a controlled traffic plan outside of DOT&PF.
1:53:37 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN opened public testimony.
1:53:53 PM
BOB ANDERSON, Central Region Chief of Maintenance and
Operations, Alaska Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities (DOT&PF), Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of
HB 204 and commented as follows:
DOT&PF supports HB 204 as it has potential to provide
additional safety to crews that are working along the
road and highways every day. Our maintenance operators
are the people you see every day working to provide
safe routes for Alaskans, higher risk situations they
face daily include out of control vehicles, road
debris, and close proximity to traffic. The approval
of this bill could potentially minimize these risks.
He provided national work-zone accident statistics from the US
Department of Transportation as follows:
• Work-zone accidents:
o 2015: 96,000;
o 2014: 89,000;
o 2013: 68,000.
• Work-zone accidents occur every 5.4 minutes with 0.7
percent resulting in a fatality.
MR. ANDERSON disclosed that during the previous month a
maintenance worker in Colorado sustained fatal injuries while
filling potholes. He added that Alaska experienced a loss in
[2016] when [Robert Hammel] was struck [on the Seward Highway]
while assisting Alaska State Troopers. He noted accidents in
work zones that occurred without serious injuries as well.
He summarized that DOT&PF staff take pride in the work they do
and want to make Alaska's road safe for all motorists.
1:56:22 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked Mr. Anderson to explain the safety-zone
procedures for DOT&PF maintenance work.
MR. ANDERSON replied as follows:
I believe this bill is more pointed towards work that
is done by one or two personnel at one time where we
don't have to go through the process of setting up a
complete traffic control plan. We do have policies
that dictate that we use traffic control plans, but
they are quite a bit different than what we typically
see on a construction project for issues like a
guardrail repair. We dictate that our crews park
safely off the side of the road and out of harm's way
and we have emergency flashing lights on, but there
might not be the whole contention of warning signs
leading up to the work zone.
SENATOR WILSON asked him to provide a copy of the procedures to
the committee.
1:58:03 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON addressed her concern for increased liability
as follows:
Could you tell me is there any increased liability as
we expand our definition beyond the public sector? I
see we have tow trucks listed in here so he have made
an exception once now for tow trucks, but the bill as
it was introduced was limited to state, so it seems
like we are expanding it which would be a good thing
in the sense that more people would be protected, but
will the general public be able to recognize those
that are performing maintenance that might be in these
corridors?
MR. ANDERSON answered that he does not see any added liability.
He noted that the requirement for emergency flashing lights
continues which adds additional protection.
SENATOR BISHOP suggested that DOT&PF consider doing public
service announcements to inform the public if the bill became
law.
2:00:16 PM
DAN CARSON, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in
support of HB 204. He disclosed that he used to work for DOT&PF
in Fairbanks as an equipment operator and that was where he came
up with the idea for the bill. He said his experience was that
motorists were not slowing down or moving over in road
maintenance areas. He opined that HB 204 would protect workers
that are out on the road.
2:02:17 PM
DUSTIN WITTE, employee, Alaska Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in support of HB
204. He said there were a lot of distracted drivers on the road
and the bill will keep everybody that works on the road from tow
truck drivers to DOT&PF personnel safe.
CHAIR STEDMAN said Captain Dan Lowden of the Alaska State
Troopers would address the committee. He asked if the Alaska
State Troopers supported the bill.
2:03:31 PM
DAN LOWDEN, Captain, Alaska State Troopers, Alaska Department of
Public Safety (DPS), Anchorage, Alaska, replied that he was not
certain if the department has taken a position on HB 204. He
admitted that the bill was clearly intended to make people safe
that are working along the roadway.
SENATOR MACKINNON asked if the requirement for flashing lights
creates problems.
CAPTAIN LOWDEN answered as follows:
I don't know of a regulation that specifically states
that there is a regulation about towing vehicles
having flashing lights, but I suspect from what I've
seen almost all vehicles that are doing roadwork in
manners that put them alongside the roadway, they
already have lights. I think as it was discussed
earlier, I don't believe that this bill was intended
for construction sites that extend a distance along
the highway, I think this was intended for the single
kind of vehicle that they might be changing a street
light, doing potholes, working on a guardrail,
clearing brush, that sort of thing. I would suspect
that they would all have lights and it certainly would
seem to me that if they didn't it would in fact be
hard for the public to understand what is going on for
compliance to the statute.
2:06:20 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON noted that Anchorage has had casualties and
commented as follows:
In Anchorage we have had casualties beyond performing
maintenance or road service, but when contractors are
out in the right-of-way, they are doing the same thing
and they usually have stationary equipment along side
of the road as well and those Alaskans are in harms
way if you don't slow down or move over. We've had
some near-death experiences with contractors having
people in those right-of-ways and to me it seems like
it would qualify based on the new language coming out
of the Judiciary Committee that a vehicle performing
maintenance, maintenance is reconstruction of a road
or road service work, that's reconstruction that it
would qualify.
So, I guess it's two-fold, I need to know whether this
definition will extend to contractors in a roadway and
then if not, why? Then, I also need to know in the
summer if you don't have flashing lights then that
would exempt those contractors or require additional
expense on state contacts or municipal contracts to
add the flashing lights and is that what we want to
do?
2:08:21 PM
MATT WALKER, State Traffic and Safety Engineer, Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Juneau,
Alaska, testified in support of HB 204 and commented as follows:
To fulfill the department's mission to keep Alaska
moving, our employees are frequently on or adjacent to
roadways and moving traffic. We are inspecting bridges
and roadways to identify repair that extend our
infrastructure's life. We are designing our
infrastructure for safer and more efficient movement
by the public. We are assisting with emergency
response. We are performing maintenance and operation
activities like snow and ice removal, and repairing
signs and pavement markings, and roads and bridges,
and guardrails.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked Mr. Walker to address Senator MacKinnon's
previous questions.
SENATOR MACKINNON restated her questions as follows:
We have construction crews that, I'll use the Muldoon
bridge as an example where there was construction and
barriers and cones, everything set up, and it seems to
me that based on the language that's coming over from
the other body the act of performing maintenance or
road service work that private contractors would now
be included in this new definition, that's the first
question. Is that accurate, because before it was much
narrower. I certainly supported the previous iteration
of the bill where it was DOT&PF, that's who we were
protecting, but I think it's a good conversation that
we have contractors on the roadway that are placing
their lives at risk as well as DOT&PF employees or
other municipal folks.
2:11:14 PM
MR. WALKER replied as follows:
These contractors do work for the department, so I
think the fact that they are on the road performing
maintenance work they would be covered as they have
their flashers up; they are still required to put up
traffic control when they are doing work for the
department according to the Alaska Traffic Manual,
just as our maintenance personnel are required to do.
SENATOR MACKINNON asked him to touch base with the Department of
Law and provide a definitive answer. She continued as follows:
Those contractors who are working in the roadway
should be protected and we should educate, as Senator
Bishop suggested, the general population to know that
if somebody is stationary in the roadway operating on
a road, they should move to the left, they should
vacate the closest lane to provide additional
protection to those working in the roadway.
My secondary concern is requiring the flashing lights.
I'm not sure they are always there in the summer. Now,
maybe I'm just not seeing them because it's light for
some time during an Alaska summer, but if we could
check on whether those lights are required currently
on all projects or whether those lights stop flashing
during daytime hours because that might negate them
from being part of this if the flashers aren't going.
MR. WALKER answered that the DOT&PF Alaska Traffic Manual
requires lights to be on during roadwork.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked if DOT&PF was in support of the HB 204.
MR. WALKER answered yes.
2:13:56 PM
TRENTON ENGLISH, Business Representative, Public Employees Local
71, Juneau, Alaska, testified in support of HB 204. He disclosed
that the labor union represents many men and women throughout
the state that spend a great deal of time working along the
state's roadways. He asserted that the additions HB 204 makes to
the Move Over Law will go along way to keeping workers safe.
2:14:58 PM
DON ETHRIDGE, Lobbyist, Alaska AFL-CIO, Juneau, Alaska,
testified in support of HB 204. He addressed Senator McKinnon's
question and noted that the bill is intended to cover all
construction workers and DOT&PF maintenance personnel on the
highways.
2:15:45 PM
At ease.
2:16:15 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN called the committee back to order.
MR. ETHRIDGE added that traffic supervisors are trained to let
everyone know that "caution lighting" is required with signage.
2:17:18 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN closed public testimony.
2:17:44 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN held HB 204 in committee.
HB 82-OFF HWY DRIVER'S LIC; REGISTRATION; INSURANCE
2:17:57 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN announced the consideration of HB 82.
2:18:15 PM
NOAH STAR, Staff, Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, provided the following overview of
HB 82:
HB 82 seeks to restore off-highway driver's license
eligibility to the communities of Kake, Hoonah,
Angoon, Seldovia, and Hyder. What is an off-highway
driver's license? An off-highway license allows
drivers to become legally licensed without taking a
road test, exempting residents of small communities
from traveling by ferry or plane to a far away DMV
office. To obtain an off-highway driver's license an
individual only has to complete a written test. As of
last year, there were 1,120 off-highway driver's
licenses in Alaska operating in 294 off-highway
communities.
In 2012, constituents from Angoon notified
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins that residents of
Angoon, Kake, and Hoonah had been denied off-highway
driver's licenses. Despite a multi-decade history of
applying for and using off-highway driver's licenses,
these residents were no longer eligible for off-
highway licenses. Suddenly, Angoon, Kake, and Hoonah
residents were faced with uncomfortable decisions.
Residents had to choose either pay hundreds of dollars
to fly to Juneau to take a road test using an
unfamiliar vehicle or stop driving legally. In the
supporting letters that accompany today's presentation
as well as the testimony, you will read how off-
highway driver's license ineligibility affected these
constituents.
Why did Angoon, Kake, and Hoonah find themselves
ineligible for the licenses that they had historically
used? New regulation with inconsistent application. To
be eligible in the status quo a community must not be
"Connected to the land-connected state highway system
with no access to a DMV office." Additionally, a
community must have an average traffic count lower
than 499 cars in order to be eligible for an off-
highway driver's license, but these regulations are
inconsistently applied; for example, Metlakatla and
Sand Point have ferry access but are off-highway
driver's license eligible.
HB 82 realigns off-highway driver's license
eligibility with a common sense and historical
understanding of which communities need off-highway
driver's licenses. HB 82 is simple, the bill asks:
one, is an area off the road system, and two, does the
area not have a DMV? A "yes" to both of those
questions means a community should qualify for an off-
highway driver's license, that's what our bill does.
2:21:17 PM
MR. STAR referenced a sectional analysis for HB 82 as follows:
Section 1
Amends AS.28.10.011, the vehicle registration
exemption statute. It exempts non-commercial vehicles
driven in off-road eligible areas by drivers with
valid driver's licenses, including off-road system
restricted noncommercial driver's license, from
registration. The requirements for off-highway
commercial driver's licenses remain unchanged to
comply with federal law.
Section 2
Amends section AS 28.10.011. Requires the department
to publish a list of areas which don't have land-
connected road access to a driver's test once a year.
Drivers in communities on this list are eligible for
off-highway licenses.
Section 3
Amends AS 28.15.201(d) to use the word "area" instead
of "community" in the statute on drivers required to
use in-vehicle ignition interlock devices and updates
the statutory citation that references off-highway
areas.
Section 4
Amends AS 28.15.201(g) to use the word "area" instead
of "community" in the statute on court limitations of
driver's licenses and updates the statutory citation
that references off-highway areas.
Section 5
Amends AS 28.22.011 to maintain that non-commercial
vehicles driven in off-road areas (as dictated by
updated list published by the department) are exempt
from vehicle insurance.
Section 6
Amends AS 28.35.030(t). Uses the word "areas" instead
of "communities" to include off-road system eligible
places in existing statutes on ignition interlock
devices and updates the statutory citation for off-
highway areas.
Section 7
Amends 28.35.032(t). Uses the word "areas" instead of
"communities" to include off-highway restricted
eligible drivers in existing statutes on ignition
interlock devices and updates the statutory citation
for off-highway areas.
Section 8
Repeals 28.22.011(b), which required the DMV to
annually publish a list of communities exempt from
registration and insurance under the old eligibility
guidelines, since the new list is required to be
published under AS 28.10.011(b).
2:23:27 PM
SENATOR WILSON commented as follows:
We are constantly reminded by our Juneau senator upon
how a lot of the folks don't pay their fair share of
the roadways. DOT&PF does maintain some of the roads
or builds some of the new highway miles within some of
these communities and so the fee is not being paid is
a bit of a concern, but more of a concern is why not
have motor vehicle insurance be required for some of
the drivers of off-road access; that just seems that
other motor vehicle lists for if they do get into an
accident because they may not go through the same
training or have a driver's road test so some may
theorize that those folks may not be as safe as
someone who would go through the DMV process, take the
written test and the road test to be commercially
licensed to not to have those individuals who drive
motor vehicles which can be considered a deadly weapon
for some to not be insured. I just don't understand
the reason of why.
MR. STAR replied that the current insurance exemption is
untouched by the bill and detailed as follows:
The policy question of whether off-highway communities
should be exempt from registration or insurance is
untouched by HB 82, that exemption is already on the
books and was on the books for the period of time that
I mentioned where the communities of Angoon, Kake, and
Hoonah had off-highway eligibility. So, HB 82 only
seeks to conform existing statute which affords an
exemption to these communities to the new method that
we suggest being used to determine if a community is
off-highway.
2:25:19 PM
SENATOR WILSON asked if the Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS)
was included. He inquired if the off-road communities commute
through AMHS to another off-road community can continue to be
exempt.
MR. STAR answered as follows:
My understanding is that if someone with an off-
highway driver's license were to drive onto a ferry,
take the ferry to another off-highway community, they
would be able to drive with their off-highway driver's
license. If they were to take the ferry from an off-
highway community to Juneau, they would need someone
with a normal license to accompany in a vehicle
similar to how a provisional license might work if you
were driving in Anchorage or Juneau.
SENATOR MACKINNON commented as follows:
What's great about surveying the people of Alaska is
understanding individual needs in other communities. I
appreciate that these are existing policies, but the
interlock seems to be a new policy. Can you speak to
me about the new policy on interlock, first?
MR. STAR answered as follows:
The interlock conforming changes in the bill is not a
new policy, in fact, it is actually just a conforming
change so the same list that was used to determine
off-highway communities was used to exclude
communities from being required from purchasing an
interlock ignition device, the reason for that being
based on our conversations with folks is that it can
be prohibitively difficult to acquire an interlock
ignition device in these same communities which is why
the same list is used.
2:27:09 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON inquired as follows:
Is that because transmitting electronically
information or do you know historically why that
hasn't been done? Again, it's an opportunity to learn
about a community. Why has Alaska chosen that in the
past?
MR. STAR stated that he will get back to the committee with
historical data. He reiterated that off-highway constituents
have said interlock ignition devices are prohibitively difficult
to install.
SENATOR MACKINNON asked if there is a distinction between a
regular driver's license and an off-highway driver's license.
MR. STAR answered that the two licenses look different.
SENATOR MACKINNON shared her concerns as follows:
It concerns me that we are creating a different group
of folks that don't have to have insurance and that
could be unsafe in their community based on not having
equitable distribution of regulations or laws, but I
will withhold judgement until I hear more because I do
know that individual communities struggle with
different things. I lived on Dutch Harbor before there
was a bridge so it's isolated, it's very small, about
two miles wide, and so it would have been difficult
without a boat to get over to Unalaska to find
groceries. So, I know that depending on where you live
the challenges are different, so I will refrain
judgement until I hear a little bit more.
2:30:02 PM
SENATOR BISHOP remarked that the change occurred when somebody
interpreted AMHS as counting as access.
MR. STAR answered correct. He detailed that in 2014 a traffic-
count component was also added. He opined that traffic count was
problematic because the count was not always kept up in rural
communities.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked Mr. Star to get back to the committee on the
AMHS reference because the AMHS is considered a highway and why
should it be excluded.
SENATOR MACKINNON concurred as follows:
I appreciate you acknowledging the Marine Highway is a
highway because we have those arguments where I've
been known to challenge the fee structure of the
Marine Highway and so now the Marine Highway isn't a
highway and that's inconsistent also. I appreciate you
raising that issue because depending on where you live
in Alaska these are different issues. If you live in
Juneau or any other community and you benefit from the
Marine Highway System, you fight for that and the
subsequent dollars that the state invests on those
communities on behalf to run that system and if you
are on the highway system you are burdened from some
perspective with insurance and interlock systems and
other state regulation that now is being treated
different because of the Marine Highway. So, I'm not
going to get controversial about it, but I would
concur that we are asking for a different treatment
when you are connected to the Marine Highway System
under this particular scenario.
CHAIR STEDMAN remarked that AMHS is a highway, a scenic byway.
2:32:51 PM
MARLA THOMPSON, Director, Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV),
Alaska Department of Administration, Anchorage, Alaska,
explained that off-highway licenses are marked as a restriction.
She added that the off-highway license has been redesigned to
clearly show that the license is off-highway.
CHAIR STEDMAN noted that there was an earlier concern on an
interpretation change dealing with some of the remote
communities that are attached to AMHS. He asked if Ms. Thompson
had any comments on the AMHS issue.
MS. THOMPSON replied as follows:
The only thing that I would comment on is that because
the DOT&PF only does the traffic counts on a schedule
that they've got, it's not always accurate and things
can change. From the DMV's point of view, if it
changes it becomes more confusing for the people who
live there because one day, they might have an off-
highway license and then the next day because now it's
498, the traffic, then we have to take that away from
them and frankly that's an expense and it is very
confusing for folks.
SENATOR WILSON asked Ms. Thompson to address his previous
comment on "fees not paid" as well as where the normal DMV
registration fees go for communities that are not off-road.
MR. THOMPSON replied that DMV is strictly responsible for
collecting fees. She added that there would not be a
registration fee from those communities any longer.
CHAIR STEDMAN asked David Epstein from DOT&PF if AMHS is
considered a highway.
2:35:56 PM
DAVID EPSTEIN, South Coast Region Traffic and Safety Engineer,
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities,
Juneau, Alaska, replied that he has not done much with AMHS and
noted that the department does not do traffic counts on the
ships. He said the closest association he has with AMHS is
signing and striping in the parking lots.
SENATOR MACKINNON commented as follows:
I believe we are provided AMHS counts on a regular
basis, so I just wanted to make sure the record
reflects that we might have a different analysis of
that.
CHAIR STEDMAN said the Legislature receives an accurate count of
the car-deck and ridership on AMHS from point-to-point.
2:37:51 PM
GEORGINA DAVIS-GASTELUM, representing self, Kake, Alaska,
testified in support of HB 82. She said the bill addresses the
financial and geographical difficulties that rural residents
face when having to travel to take road tests at DMV offices.
She requested including Kake, Angoon, and Hoonah as locations
authorized for off-highway driver's licenses.
SENATOR EGAN emphasized that AMHS is on the federal aid to
highway systems.
CHAIR STEDMAN concurred that AMHS is a highway. He emphasized
that there was no confusion with the chairman of the Senate
Transportation Committee that AHMS is a highway.
2:41:07 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN closed public testimony.
SENATOR WILSON commented as follows:
I guess that clarification if AMHS is a federal
highway it thus would be illegal to drive on to that
federal highway with the off-road license, so you
would be stuck on your current location if you have an
off-road vehicle. I just wanted to get that legal
clarification.
CHAIR STEDMAN noted that the committee has asked the bill
sponsor to comeback with a clarification on the issue that
Senator Wilson addressed.
2:42:07 PM
CHAIR STEDMAN held HB 82 in committee.
2:42:46 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Stedman adjourned the Senate Transportation Standing
Committee meeting at 2:42 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 204 Version J 4.19.17.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 Senate Transportation Committee Memo.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 Minor Offences Table.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 Explanation of Changes.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 DOT Work Zone Safety Week PR.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 CS (JUD) Sponsor Statement.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 Citation Statistics.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 AAA Support Letter.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 NWZAW Poster.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 - FN DPS.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 204 - FN DOA.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 204 |
| HB 82 ver J.A 2.26.18.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 Supporting Documents - Powerpoint 4.11.2017.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 Summary of Changes.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 Sponsor Statement 4.11.2017.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 Letters of Support 2.15.18.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| HB 82 - FN DOA.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 82 |
| SB163 Fiscal Note DOT-MSCVE 1.29.18.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
SB 163 |
| SB163 Hearing Request 1.29.18.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
SB 163 |
| SB163 ver A 1.29.18.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
SB 163 |
| SB163 Sponsor Statement 1.29.18.pdf |
STRA 3/1/2018 1:30:00 PM |
SB 163 |