The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman William R. O'Donnell, at 1:30 p.m., on Thursday, February 25, 1999, in Room 2149 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman

Senator Mark Amodei, Vice Chairman

Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen

Senator Maurice Washington

Senator Raymond C. Shaffer

Senator Valerie Wiener

Senator Terry Care

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Senator Mike McGinness, Central Nevada Senatorial District

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Joan Moseid, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Chairman O’Donnell opened the meeting with the introduction of bill draft requests (BDRs).

*****

*****

*****

*****

Chairman O’Donnell opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 152.

Stan R. Olsen, Lieutenant, Lobbyist, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (Metro), and Nevada Sheriffs & Chiefs Association (NSCA), said Metro requested this bill to clarify concerns regarding driving under the influence (DUI), chemical testing, and evaluation.

Tracy Birch, Forensic Laboratory Manager, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, communicated that for the past 15 years she has been involved in every aspect of breath-alcohol testing. She said since 1989 when blood- and breath-alcohol levels were defined in the law, the wording has caused frustration and confusion for prosecutors and judges. Ms. Birch stressed S.B. 152 would change the wording in the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) from "blood," which appears 23 times, to "blood or breath." Further, the legislation would remove references to "percent" or "percent by weight" and replace with "concentration of alcohol." She concluded she is submitting the appropriate sections of the Uniform Vehicle Code (Exhibit C), National Safety Council Committee on Alcohol and Other Drugs (Exhibit D), and an unpublished Nevada Supreme Court decision illustrating the court’s misinterpretation of the current statutes (Exhibit E).

Suzanne Harmon, Criminalist, Breath Alcohol Section, Forensic Laboratory, Washoe County, conveyed that Fred F. Messmann, Deputy Chief Game Warden, Bureau of Law Enforcement, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, stated his approval of the inclusion of boating regulations in S.B. 152.

Chairman O’Donnell reiterated the bill is basically a change in the language to conform to the scientific determination of alcohol concentration in the blood or breath. He stated he would put forth the amendments (Exhibit F); and if the bill drafters uncover more statutes needing these changes, they will also be included.

Senator Jacobsen stated he would like a broader scope with some numbers on how many of the different tests are done in a year or a month. Ms. Harmon responded that approximately 10,000 blood and breath tests are done each year in Nevada. She estimated that in the rural counties there were more breath than blood alcohol tests performed.

Lauren R. House, Lobbyist, Executive Vice President, Nevada Independent Insurance Agents (NIIA), said NIIA would support S.B. 152 in its entirety.

There being no further testimony, the hearing was closed on S.B. 152. Chairman O’Donnell opened the work session on S.B. 153. He noted the Nevada Motor Transport Association requested the bill.

*****

Chairman O’Donnell closed the workshop on S.B. 153, and opened the hearing on S.B. 179.

Senator Mike McGinness, Central Nevada Senatorial District, stated S.B. 179 was designed to provide a margin of safety for the sport of skydiving and parachuting. He said this legislation is intended for the first-time jumper who relies on the equipment and training provided, and they should have a reasonable expectation of safety. He observed the sport of scuba diving requires proficiency before a person can dive; the same should be true for sky diving.

Carol Colip, Concerned Citizen, articulated that she lost her husband 2 years ago in a skydiving accident that never should have happened. Reading from prepared text (Exhibit G), she stated there are regulations for the plane and the drop zone, but none for the safety of the person. She emphasized had her husband received proper training and had the appropriate safety devices for his first jump; he would be alive today, and so would her friend Kathleen Auld. She submitted a letter with a newspaper article about her husband’s death (Exhibit H). Ms. Colip urged the legislators to pass S.B. 179 and save lives.

Chairman O’Donnell wanted to know if there was any communication at any time with InStead Sky Sports. Ms. Colip responded there has been no written or verbal contact with InStead Sky Sports, at any time.

Kathleen Barth, Concerned Citizen, said she is Carol Colip’s sister. She stated that when she cleaned out Fred Colip’s truck, she found his checkbook, and the last check was written to InStead Sky Sports for either $225 or $275.

Senator Washington noted section 15, subsection 1, paragraph (a), referenced the safety requirements of the United States Parachute Association (USPA), and asked if they were nationally recognized. Senator McGinness affirmed they were.

Senator Wiener pointed out that the bill specifies minimum training for the student, but it does not specify minimum ability of the instructor. Ms. Colip stated the USPA manual specifies the requirements for instructors, jumpmasters, and tandems.

Senator McGinness conveyed the bill does say instructors as qualified under the USPA regulations.

Senator Washington said he noticed the bill required a two-thirds majority vote, and surmised it was because of the annual licensing fee. Chairman O’Donnell said yes.

Senator McGinness commented a concern in crafting the bill was to avoid a fiscal note, and what government department would enforce it.

Senator Jacobsen inquired of Ms. Colip if her husband signed a release. Ms. Colip responded she has never seen the release.

LouAnn Seve, Concerned Citizen, said she was a first-time jumper at InStead Sky Sports, and has a copy of the limited liability release (Exhibit I). Ms. Seve read from prepared text (Exhibit J), regarding her skydiving experience at InStead Sky Sports.

Ms. Colip said her own research uncovered five skydiving deaths in Nevada. Additionally, her research showed the skydiving operation at InStead Sky Sports did not meet the minimum requirements of the USPA. She stated she checked and could get a business license for a skydiving business without producing any certification.

Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga, Churchill, White Pine, Eureka, and Lander counties Assembly District No. 35, said skydiving is a dangerous sport at best, but it does not need added risks through lack of regulation. She strongly supports S.B. 179.

Senator Michael (Mike) A. Schneider, Clark County Senatorial District No. 8, said he has friends who are members of a professional skydiving group. He said in the friends’ e-mail, they thought the bill is a good idea, but from a professional point of view there are a few details to work out, and made a few proposals (Exhibit K).

Joan McCorkle, Concerned Citizen, said she is the grandmother of Justin Handelsman who is deceased. She articulated her 16-year-old grandson and two friends produced false identification, which said he was 22 years old, to InStead Sky Sports. InStead Sky Sports gave the boys 4 hours of instruction and then let them jump. She stated Justin pulled the wrong cord, and instead of his safety chute deploying, he inadvertently detached his main chute when only 100 feet from the ground. Ms. McCorkle said she is very much in support of S.B. 179, and would like to add to the bill a requirement for honest proof of age.

Evelyn Auld, Concerned Citizen, said she is the sister of Kathleen Auld who went out of the plane backwards, causing her arm to get tangled in her equipment, and was not able to deploy her emergency chute until she was 100 feet from the ground; resulting in her death. Ms. Auld stressed her strong support of the bill.

Michael Hawkes, Project Coordinator, A Skydive Las Vegas, said he has operated the business out of Boulder City Airport for 7 years. He stated he has been skydiving for 20 years with over 4,400 skydives to his credit, without a serious injury. He has either instructed or assisted with instruction of around 40,000 first-time skydivers. Mr. Hawkes submitted a copy of the USPA’s by-laws, rules, and regulations (Exhibit L) (Original is on file in the Research Library.). He said he is a member and strong supporter of USPA, but they have no way of enforcing the regulations they have established. He suggested requiring monthly reports on skydiving incidents to give the guidance needed to regulate the business. He urged the passage of S.B. 179 to include good enforcement of regulations.

Edward M. Scott, Lobbyist, Director of Government Relations and Group Membership, United States Parachute Association, said the USPA is opposed to S.B. 179. He stated the positive aspects of the bill are the recognition of USPA standards; and has caused USPA to review their methods. Mr. Scott gave his testimony from prepared text (Exhibit M). He submitted comments from the USPA (Exhibit N), stating the USPA’s position on S.B. 179, citing, among other things, required regulations and equipment, but with no qualified means of enforcement in place.

Senator Wiener asked for clarification as to whether the organization was endorsed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), or did the FAA turn over responsibility by default. She noted it was implied the bill may cause more problems than help. And finally, after 2 years for the Colip accident, as well as many others, why was the USPA just now addressing and sanctioning rogue operators.

Mr. Scott responded the USPA has been sanctioning various skydiving operations, but it was not until recently, in response to requests by members of USPA, did the organization start publishing the names of the unauthorized facilities. He said in the 1960s the FAA came out with regulation Part 105, but felt the USPA’s guidelines were sufficient for the industry; and both organizations work closely with each other to ensure adherence to operations and procedures. He noted that presently there are 290 skydiving operations, as members. The USPA estimates there may be between 50-70 skydiving operations across the country that are not members of USPA.

Senator Shaffer expressed concern for those people who do not know to ask if the skydiving operation has been sanctioned. He suggested that was a good enough reason for regulating legislation. Mr. Scott agreed that was a good point.

Thomas J. Fronapfel, P.E., Assistant Director, Planning, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), stated NDOT is not opposed to the regulation of skydiving; however, NDOT is opposed to S.B. 179 as written, because they believe they are not the appropriate agency to regulate skydiving. He said NDOT is not a regulating agency; its primary responsibility is the design, construction, and maintenance of highways.

Mr. Hawkes commented that USPA wanted to cancel his membership because his skydiving operation exceeded the USPA requirements. He said anyone who contacts his operation is told in advance of the requirements, including the use of automatic activation devices (AAD). Mr. Hawkes noted that AADs have saved 187 lives around the world in the past 9 years. He concluded the arguments against the bill are similar to the ones used against seat belt regulation.

Chairman O’Donnell appointed himself and Senators Wiener and Amodei to a subcommittee for further study of S.B. 179. He invited Senator McGinness to also participate in the subcommittee. Chairman O’Donnell closed the hearing on S.B. 179.

Acting Chairman Jacobsen opened the hearing on S.B. 208.

Senator O’Donnell testified in favor of S.B. 208. He gave an overview of the provisions in the bill. He observed that New York City has a much stronger regulation, and it has greatly reduced driving under the influence (DUI) incidents since it went into effect this year.

Senator Shaffer wanted to know what happens when the perpetrator is driving someone else’s car. Senator O’Donnell responded the car still gets booted, regardless of the ownership of the car. The exception would be if the owner of the vehicle could prove permission was not given for the perpetrator to use the vehicle. Senator O’Donnell added the vehicle would reside wherever the registered owner of the vehicle designates, including towing it to a specified location at the owner’s expense.

Michael E. Hood, Colonel, Chief, Nevada Highway Patrol Division (NHP), Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, stated the NHP supports any legislation that helps law enforcement take drunk drivers off the highways. He said there is a concern that the 15-day rule could impact staff. He noted that by charging the towing companies with the responsibility of the vehicle, it could release the law officer. Colonel Hood stated he believed these and other concerns were workable.

Senator Wiener expressed concern for families who are dependent on the one vehicle, and the undue hardship booting the vehicle may cause. Senator O’Donnell responded there is a provision in the bill to cover hardships.

Senator Care inquired about the number of vehicles confiscated in Nevada in a year. Colonel Hood quoted that 12,181 DUI arrests we made in 1998. Of those arrests the NHP made 4,190; and over 90 percent of the vehicles were towed. He stated that 1 in 10 vehicles are prereleased, and only to licensed, sober drivers.

Jim D. Holmes, Lobbyist, Vice Chairman, Northern Nevada DUI Task Force, said the task force is responsible for operating the Washoe County Victims Impact Panel, which offenders are required to attend. He stated they see about 250 people per month, which is approximately 3,000 people per year. He emphasized that the statistics indicate the DUI laws already in place are not working that well, and that the task force unanimously supports S.B. 208.

Laurel A. Stadler, Lobbyist, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD), Lyon County Chapter, stated MADD is strongly in support of S.B. 208. She said that MADD hopes this bill will deter and reduce the number of incidents on the highways involving drunk drivers.

Judy M. Jacoboni, Lobbyist, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, Lyon County Chapter, observed that the bill was short, swift, and direct; and that is what punishment should be. She stated that over the years MADD has learned that sympathy and understanding alone do not deter. She said it was the shock of something tangible, like a car, that helps to get the drunk driver’s attention.

L. Keith Carter, Lobbyist, Sergeant, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, and Nevada Sheriffs & Chiefs Association, stated this bill goes a long way to getting drunk drivers off the roads.

James F. Nadeau, Lobbyist, Captain, Washoe County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO), stated the WCSO is in support of S.B. 208. He conveyed that WCSO also has concerns about the costs. He said right now it takes between 2-3 hours per DUI arrest; and if the officer also had to be concerned about booting and towing, it would curtail the amount of time an officer is on patrol.

Robert B. Feldman, Lobbyist, Auto Insurance America, and Nevada General Insurance Company, stated the positive aspect of this bill is it would help get more drunk drivers off the road, and thus reduce the cost of insurance to other drivers. He suggested the bill include that if a driver is listed in whole or in part as one of the registered owners, then there would be a valid reason to hold the vehicle. He stated he was concerned about the 30-days process to apply for a hearing at the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS). He noted the DMV&PS may not have enough hearing officers when considering there are 12,000 DUI arrest in a year in Nevada. He also expressed concern about the person who gives permission for someone to use their vehicle to drive to the grocery store, not knowing that person may stop on the way for drinks. He said it could be difficult for that person to prove lack of knowledge, and the loss of their vehicle impinges on their ability to function.

Senator Washington queried what would prevent a person whose car was booted from renting a vehicle. Senator O’Donnell responded since the perpetrator retains his driver’s license, there is nothing to stop him from renting a car. The rental agency collects their vehicle and the driver has to pay all related expenses; that is still a deterrent.

Mary C. Walker, Lobbyist, Carson City, Douglas County, and Lyon County, stated the counties are in favor of S.B. 208, but have similar concerns as already expressed. She noted it is estimated DUI arrests with booting would take another hour to process. This additional time is a concern, among law enforcement already spread thin, especially in the rural counties, in trying to service their emergency call volume. She noted that it may take 1-2 hours for an available tow truck to arrive on the scene; and in rural areas the closest tow truck may be 60-100 miles away.

David S. Gibson, Lobbyist, Clark County Public Defender, stated from his point of view as a public defender he is concerned that most of his clients have vehicles that are worth less than 5 days of storage. Senator O’Donnell interjected that Clark County already has a policy of immediate impounding. He pointed out the bill allows a person to choose the location the vehicle will stay booted for 30 days, and that could be at that person’s residence.

Mr. Gibson acknowledged that was a good option. He was also concerned about misdemeanors. He urged clarification regarding previous license revocation, wording about "presently immobilized" as regards the status of the vehicle, and to establish something to prohibit a person from removing the boot.

Lucille Lusk, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens (NCC), stated NCC is not necessarily opposed to the bill, but they do have some concerns. She noted that booting would not necessarily stop the drunk driver from obtaining another vehicle. She stated NCC prefers options that immobilize the drunk, such as revoking the license, incarceration, or lots of community service. She noted that a person with financial resources would be more affected by community service, as it cuts into their time. She requested that should the bill be enacted, it be monitored to see if there really is a reduction in DUIs; because of the number of DUIs in spite of the laws already enacted. She suggested a review of the DUI laws to keep those that are working and remove those that are not.

Robert A. Ostrovsky, Lobbyist, The Hertz Corporation, stated The Hertz Corporation has absolutely no sympathy for the drunk driver, and is completely in favor of the bill. He suggested the language in section 4, subsection 7, be carefully crafted; as a person could ask for compensation of time lost at work or for the loss of employment, and also costs associated with the vehicle, such as rental.

Brian R. Hutchins, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Transportation and Public Safety Division, Office of the Attorney General, said on behalf of the DOT there is a pending bill designed to comply with recent federal legislation, which has several requirements for DUI repeat offenders including vehicle immobilization. He stressed there will be costs for DMV&PS in triple-time overtime pay, administrative hearings, attorney time, and cost of litigation. He observed administrative difficulties include the 15-day rule. He noted the actions of the tow companies or local law enforcement could be imputed to the DMV&PS as agents without actual oversight.

Ben Graham, Lobbyist, Nevada District Attorneys’ Association (NDAA), acknowledged the intent of the bill as well as the concerns expressed by others.

Mariah L. Sugden, Assistant Chief Deputy Attorney General, Transportation/Public Safety Division, Department of Motor Vehicles, Office of the Attorney General, stated she is quite familiar with DUI prosecutions, and would work with the bill’s sponsor in addressing the concerns, so S.B. 208 is workable.

Senator Care stated that some people have raised concerns about the vehicle being the criminal. Ms. Hutchins responded that part of the actions taken by transportation is forfeiture of property. He said forfeiture occurs frequently in felony and drug violations. He noted the idea is to use forfeiture of property as a deterrent.

Acting Chairman Jacobsen closed the hearing on S.B. 208.

Chairman O’Donnell noted there was a request for a hold on S.B. 201. He called for a motion on S.B. 203.

Senator Washington noted there was a proposed amendment to include an identification card and driver’s license during the application process, along with one other piece of identification. He said this was to remove the "or" in the bill.

Chairman O’Donnell stated he would prefer an amendment be written and passed by DMV&PS for their information; then brought to the committee. Senator Washington agreed.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Laura Adler

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman

DATE: