Legislature(2003 - 2004)
02/24/2004 01:34 PM House TRA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 438-MOVE OVER LAW FOR DRIVERS CHAIR HOLM announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 438, "An Act relating to motorists moving over or slowing down for emergency vehicles." Number 2209 MATTHEW RUDIG, Staff to Representative Jim Holm, Alaska State Legislature, presented HB 438 on behalf of Representative Holm, sponsor. Mr. Rudig read from written testimony, as follows: Safety; that is what this bill hopes to accomplish. Moving over and slowing down, according to this statute, can save lives. It is very dangerous for ... [law enforcement], fire, and emergency personnel to be working ... along the shoulder of a roadway. According to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, ... from 1997 through 2002, 93 ... police officers [were struck and killed by vehicles]. Many more have been injured and substantially more have had close calls. MR. RUDIG said by mandating that drivers, when passing a vehicle displaying emergency lights, have reduced their speeds to 20 miles below the posted speed limit, and to 5 miles per hour (mph) in a 25 mph or less zone, is an attempt at ensuring safety on the roadways. He said while no measure of "move-over" legislation will guarantee complete safety to [emergency] personnel, this bill along with further public education efforts, may heighten driver awareness of the inherent danger to the men and women who serve in uniform. Mr. Rudig explained that establishing this law in statute encourages the public to recognize the precaution needed while passing emergency personnel and provides for a penalty for those who refuse to obey this law. Thirty other states have enacted similar laws and some of the examples of these are in the bill packets, he said. Mr. Rudig said this legislation is not unprecedented; it is essential. Also included in the bill packets are testimonials given by Fairbanks police officers stating how HB 438 can affect their livelihood. MR. RUDIG said there is also a representative from the Department of Public Safety [DPS] available to answer questions. He remarked, "These people fight for our lives everyday and this legislation is an opportunity for the legislature to fight for theirs." Number 2310 SHELLY OWENS, Health Program Manager, Community Health and Emergency Medical Services, Division of Public Health, Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), testified in support of HB 438 on behalf of DHSS. She said it is estimated that there 12,000 emergency medical vehicle collisions each year, but it is not known how many of those are secondary crashes. She said the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) reports that emergency vehicle crashes are the second leading cause of death for firefighters. Furthermore, she said the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) reported that in 1997, nearly 40 percent of law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty, died in traffic. She explained that the exposure to traditional crashes is greater the longer an accident is in place, and the severity of a secondary crash is greater than the original incident. Ms. Owens said a 1995 analysis of collision statistics in California showed an increased risk by 600 percent to a secondary collision. Furthermore, she explained that a study conducted by the [Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)] noted that in a five-year period, motorists in Florida crashed almost 1,800 times into working law enforcement vehicles that were stopped and parked along roadways, which resulted in five fatalities. In Alaska, she said during a four-year period, from 1998 to 2001 [Tape ends mid-sentence]. TAPE 04-7, SIDE B MS. OWENS continued by saying that there were 386 emergency response vehicles involved in accidents. Moreover, of the 386 crashes, 46 incidents involved a parked emergency response vehicle. She said motor vehicle operators are exposed to multiple sources of distraction including mobile phones, radios, and children [making it difficult to hear and see emergency response vehicle's] sirens and lights. She said DHSS supports efforts to reduce the number and severity of injuries to fire, EMS [emergency medical service], and law enforcement personnel at emergency scenes, including [making] rescuers more visible at the scene, providing training to motorists about the responsibilities regarding emergency vehicles at [accident] scenes, and enacting legislation that is inclusive to the safety of rescuers, patients, and bystanders on (indisc. - coughing). She reiterated that DHSS supports HB 438. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if police officers [issuing traffic citations would be included in this legislation]. MS. OWENS deferred the question to DPS. She said her understanding is the bill will require drivers to pull over or slow down in the presence of emergency response [vehicles] or ambulances on the side of the road with flashing [emergency] lights. Number 2318 REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH directed attention to page 1, line 12, and he said he thought [police] officers would [direct people to move faster] if there was lot of traffic [due to the 5 mile an hour speed restriction imposed by the bill]. CHAIR HOLM clarified that [the 5 mile an hour speed restriction is imposed] in areas in which the speed limit is 25 mph or less, such as a school zone. He remarked, "That's what they suggested that we should do." Number 2287 REPRESENTATIVE OGG, citing Ms. Owens' testimony, asked if those numbers [regarding secondary accidents] could include highway maintenance people. MS. OWENS indicated she would be happy to find out the answer. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked if emergency vehicles are required to put up emergency [signaling devices] such as flares or reflective triangles. Number 2245 KELLY NICOLELLO, Assistant State Fire Marshal, Central Office, Division of Fire Prevention, Department of Public Safety (DPS), testified. Mr. Nicolello replied no. He remarked: When you're performing your duty during an emergency, and once you have, either from a fire perspective up on a crash or from a police perspective maybe pull the vehicle over for speeding, you are concentrating on the people who are there. You place your vehicle in the most safe spot to protect you, but your lights are your protection for identifying that there is an ... emergency action taking place on the side of the road. ... Unfortunately, what happens with those emergency lights, like any type of warning device, sometimes people are attracted to it, like a moth to flame. That's some of the types of accidents that occur on the side of the road that injure fire and/or police people. So, to ask them to put flares out when they're doing a speeding stop or their coming up on an accident, there may be an appropriate time to do that depending on what the situation is, but usually the first person in isn't going to be doing that because they're going to be concentrating on their patients or they're going to be concentrating on the person they're pulling overs actions. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH remarked, "I have trouble with the term 'emergency' especially in the cases of ... speeding tickets and such like that." MR. NICOLELLO said he would find it hard to believe that a person couldn't see the emergency flashing lights, which are different colors and multiple frequencies, but would be able to see a flare or a [reflective] triangle. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he understood that part, but he didn't understand the term "emergency" being used in regard to [issuing] a speeding ticket. MR. NICOLELLO said it [is in reference] to an emergency person doing his or her job, and using lights as warning lights. He said pulling a person over for a speeding ticket may be an infraction and may not be an "emergency," but those emergency lights are what are operating and that is from where the term is being quoted. Number 2132 REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH asked about [the procedures that emergency personnel take to ensure their safety at an accident scene]. MR. NICOLELLO explained that there is a certain way the [emergency response] vehicle is to be parked in relationship to the other vehicles; it will be put outbound into traffic just a little bit, which will protect the officer from being hit by a moving vehicle thus his or her own vehicle acts as a blocking point. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he has seen situations where the proper care isn't taken and an [officer] doesn't make a vehicle being pulled over pull farther [over on the shoulder of the road] or wait for a safe area to pull over the vehicle. MR. NICOLELLO asked if Representative Stepovich was saying officers regularly do this and it is a known problem. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he hopes [officers] don't regularly do it, but he thinks care needs to be taken. He said there are some times when it can't be done, such as in accidents, but at other times [officers] should follow the vehicle until a proper area is found [to make a traffic stop]. Representative Stepovich said he thought that was part of the policy. Number 2065 MR. NICOLELLO said it is, but he pointed out that [traffic stops are often made] on streets that people use for commuting to work. He said from the [firefighting perspective], every incident is critiqued when it is over, including everything from [the areas] where vehicles were parked to how the patient was handled. From a [police perspective] it probably doesn't happen quite as often because usually only a single officer or two officers respond, but still [police officers] realize their life is on the line if things are not done right. He remarked, "It's their inherent responsibility to themselves to make sure they do it right; ... I'm not going to argue that you haven't seen something that wasn't quite the way you think it should've been right, and that is something that is responded to within the department through field training and through recurring training." Mr. Nicolello said for the most part, "an officer who doesn't protect himself is his own liability," and people aren't here to sacrifice their lives for issues that contribute to society, but he understood Representative Stepovich's point. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH noted that Mr. Nicolello had made a good point. He expressed concern about whether the speeds [in the bill] are right or whether the speeds would make traffic more difficult. CHAIR HOLM said he thought it is a good point that it is more important that the emergency be taken care of first, and it is the first priority of the emergency vehicle at that point, while traffic control is secondary, and people should be responsible as drivers in looking out for [other vehicles]. REPRESENTATIVE OGG said he was curious about whether highway maintenance workers should be included, because [highway maintenance workers are often] parked or working on the side of the road. Number 1961 MR. RUDIG said he believed there are currently fines and enforcement with respect to [vehicles] slowing down when in the presence of [highway maintenance workers], often in areas marked by signs and red cones. He said he believed there is a statute in place to address [highway maintenance worker safety], but there is no statute to address [emergency vehicles] parked on the side of the road. REPRESENTATIVE OGG called attention to [page 1], paragraph (2), and he asked [about the relationship between the established speed limit and the reduced speed limit when in the presence of an emergency vehicle]. MR. RUDIG said the purpose of the statue is if a vehicle is traveling at 30 mph, when in the presence of an emergency vehicle, that vehicle would have to slow down to 10 mph, and when traveling at 25 mph or less, the vehicle would have to slow down to 5 mph. Number 1894 REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said he thought it is already required that vehicles slow down when a police officer is in pursuit or an emergency vehicle is pulling over on the side of the road. He asked about reckless endangerment, and about the type of fine that would be issued for not complying with [HB 438]. MR. RUDIG referred to AS 12.55.035 and noted that the fine would not exceed $10,000. He explained that this would be a class A misdemeanor if personal injury were to happen because of recklessness caused by a person not slowing down in the presence of an [emergency vehicle] pulled over to the side of the road. However, he said DPS has indicated that by putting this in statute, a ticket could be written based on the other speeding laws currently in statute and regulation. MR. NICOLELLO said if there was an issue in which a person, on icy conditions, slows down to 5 mph and still hits the officer or hits the officer's car causing it to hit the officer, that person could be cited for going faster than road conditions [permit]. He said it would probably involve some judgment based on the officer's part, although that's a different situation, so he did not have a firm answer regarding that. He said [the fine] is [issued] only if injury results. Under current statute, he said if an officer directs a motorist to do something while passing an accident scene or another action being taken and the [motorist] disobeys it, the motorist could be cited under a federal offense, which he believed falls under "reckless endangerment." Mr. Nicolello brought up the question about including highway [maintenance] workers in this bill, and he explained that the difference is that the public does not have an expectation to react to [maintenance] vehicles, which are usually only identified by a rotating yellow light, as they are to [emergency vehicles]. He remarked, "Something that is also very ... important in it's availability with the highway people on the side of the road whereas if you've got a police, fire, or ambulance, you also have a group of one or more people who can take hostile action if somebody were to get hurt." REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH said it seemed [the speed limits imposed by the bill] might create some "rubbernecking" in the more traffic congested areas, but he's "not saying everybody should do 100 mph by a police officer." He said there are problems with that in the Lower 48. Although he acknowledged that there are different circumstances in Alaska, the [problems occur] when people stop or slow traffic down and create dangers farther off the road. Representative Stepovich said it would be a fairly radical change in the speed [limit]. He indicated he thought the correlation of speeds may be a problem but he agreed that people should slow down when going by. MR. RUDIG said he didn't research that issue, but he wanted to add the point that the bill creates a public education for people to slow down and recognize [emergency vehicles] on the side of the road. He said an officer's life would be in serious danger if hit by a vehicle going 25 or 55 mph, but this bill gives the officer and others the opportunity to get out of the way. CHAIR HOLM explained that the reason for putting forth the bill was to allow [emergency responders] to have the opportunity to [escape from danger]. REPRESENTATIVE STEPOVICH remarked, "If the officer gets hit, we're too late already; ... I know if the bill comes through and it avoids him getting hit, that's a different story, but as far as getting hit, that's where I have trouble with how the bill is going to be." The committee took a brief at-ease. Number 1585 REPRESENTATIVE OGG moved to report HB 438 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 438 was reported out of the House Transportation Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|