MINUTES OF THE meeting
of the
ASSEMBLY Committee on Transportation
Seventy-First Session
May 1, 2001
The Committee on Transportationwas called to order at 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 1, 2001. Chairwoman Vonne Chowning presided in Room 3143 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Guest List. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mrs. Vonne Chowning, Chairwoman
Ms. Genie Ohrenschall, Vice Chairman
Mr. John Carpenter
Ms. Barbara Cegavske
Mr. Jerry Claborn
Mr. Don Gustavson
Ms. Kathy McClain
Mr. Dennis Nolan
Mr. John Oceguera
Mrs. Debbie Smith
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:
Mr. Tom Collins, Excused
Mr. John J. Lee, Excused
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Senate District 6
Senator Mark Amodei, Capital Senatorial District
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Paul Mouritsen, Committee Policy Analyst
Ann M. VanNostrand, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Janice Ayres, Chairperson, Tri-County Railway Commission
Carol Falk, Vehicle Program Manager, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS)
Bernie Kaufman, Representing Nevada Car Rental Association
Bob Ostrovsky, Representative for the Hertz Corporation
Walter Johnston, Private Citizen, Advocate for the American’s With Disabilities Act
Wayne Horiucui, Special Representative, Union Pacific Railroad
Ernie Sirotek, Hazardous Materials Program Manager, Union Pacific Railroad
Paul Dannelly, Director of Track Maintenance, Union Pacific Railroad
Chairwoman Chowning opened the work session on S.B. 54.
Senate Bill 54: Provides for issuance of special license plates for appreciation of animals. (BDR 43-693)
Senator Rawson stated S.B. 54 was developed after contact with Joan Burnett, an advocate of the spaying and neutering programs for canines and felines. The license plates were recommended as an animal-friendly reminder to people who adopted these animals. Though there were several calls and faxes regarding amendments to the bill, many of which “muddied the issue,” one (Exhibit C) suggested amendment added only two lines:
The grant language was suggested to assure assistance would be afforded to those nonprofit agencies that voiced serious concerns regarding canine/feline overpopulation.
Chairwoman Chowning asked if without the amendment, the funds would automatically be distributed to nonprofit organizations. Senator Rawson felt that technically nonprofit organizations were covered, but with the amendment they were provided a level of security for receiving the funds. The purpose of the bill was to provide for nonprofit groups and counties to deal with animal overpopulation. Chairwoman Chowning asked if without the amendments, the adoption programs would receive no funding. Senator Rawson answered in the affirmative and wanted the adoption programs to benefit as well since they took the adoption process a step further by spaying and neutering animals before they were adopted.
Chairwoman Chowning closed the work session on S.B. 54 and opened the hearing on S.B. 77.
Senate Bill 77: Provides for issuance of special license plates and souvenir license plates to support construction, maintenance, improvement and promotion of Virginia & Truckee Railroad. (BDR 43-191)
Chairperson for the Tri-County Railway Commission, Janice Ayres, opened talks on development of a special license plate for funding of the Virginia & Truckee (V&T) Railroad project.
Senator Mark Amodei, Capital Senatorial District, stated S.B. 77 was adopted to expand the funding opportunity outside of state government for the reconstruction and restoration of the V&T Railroad through Lyon and Storey Counties into Carson City. Presently it runs from Virginia City to Gold Hill, where the rail terminates. There were other pieces of legislation that included Washoe and Douglas Counties, knowing the V&T was truly a regional asset and all entities were anxious to continue the expansion.
One request, continued Senator Amodei, was the option to have specialized license plates as was done for other nonprofit organizations, worthy causes, and various agencies throughout the state. Ms. Ayres and the project board warmly and enthusiastically supported the idea. Exhibit D depicted an artist’s rendition of the desired special license plate design.
Chairwoman Chowning requested clarification that fees would remain the same for this special plate as set for all others. Senator Amodei responded the fees were the same, but there was language that allowed a strictly souvenir plate to be purchased from the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS).
Assemblyman Gustavson asked if the revenues would be reverted to a nonprofit or private organization. Senator Amodei responded the Tri-County Railway Commission was a nonprofit public organization. Funds would be deposited with the Carson City Treasurer who would process checks for expenditures and provide a checks and balance procedure.
Chairwoman Chowning asked the cost for the souvenir license plates, thinking they would be sold at the Railroad Museum in Carson City. Senator Amodei deferred to Ms. Ayres who stated the DMV&PS charged $15. She believed they could charge above that to be reasonably in line with what the universities charged for their souvenir plates.
Assemblyman Gustavson commented DMV&PS had a set fee for sample plates sold in stores, and he asked if the plates in question would be sold for the same price as through DMV&PS. Senator Amodei replied they might be marked up to a retail level. Ms. Ayres stated the commission was charged $15 and the price in the museum would be marked up from there. Senator Amodei stated DMV&PS would charge the railroad museum the established price for a standard souvenir plate. From there it was the museum’s decision as to what to charge.
Carol Falk, Vehicle Program Manager with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV&PS), stated sample license plate fees were as follows:
Ms. Ayres commented the interest from the community had been outstanding. After a small article in the Nevada Appeal regarding the possibility of developing a plate, they had received 60 calls within an hour requesting such a plate. At present, there was a mailing list of 3,000 state residents who requested information on the plate and when it would be available. There was no doubt this type of fundraiser would afford the continuation of the reconstruction project. Chairwoman Chowning called for a motion.
ASSEMBLYMAN CARPENTER MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 77.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN CEGAVSKE SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Chairwoman Chowning shared the committee’s approval of the proposed license plate because it was a citizen’s choice project and did not involve an increase in taxes. She thanked Senator Amodei for presenting the bill to the committee, closed the hearing on S.B. 77 and opened the hearing on S.B. 118.
Senate Bill 118: Revises certain provisions governing fees charged by short-term lessors of passenger cars. (BDR 43-708)
Bernie Kaufman, representing the Nevada Car Rental Association, said S.B. 118, which permitted car rental agencies to charge up to $15 for a waiver of damages, previously appeared before the committee three times. Under existing statute, the rental companies could charge up to $10, a figure adopted during the 1989 Legislative Session. The $5 increase compensated for inflation, though passage of the bill did not mean the rental agencies would raise the standard rates to the maximum of $15. Chairwoman Chowning asked for what purpose the increase was needed. Mr. Kaufman replied it was to cover the higher costs for vehicles, i.e., a 1989 Chevrolet Cavalier then cost $8,000 and today costs $13,000, and to cover the cost of repairs since drivers were not liable for damages in the event there was an accident or breakdown with the vehicles.
Chairwoman Chowning asked for clarification that the increase was for a waiver for damages. Mr. Kaufman confirmed. She moved to the second part of the bill, a $5 fee for additional drivers included in the rental contract. Mr. Kaufman stated they presently could not charge for additional drivers. Visitors to Nevada normally shared rental car expenses; two or three couples would share the rental fee and more than one of those individuals would be driving the vehicle during the 16 to 24 hours of the rental. Multiple drivers presented increased liability and excessive use when compared to a single driver or a family. The fee would not be charged to spouses or eligible family members.
Chairwoman Chowning asked if the $5 would be the maximum charged for the extra, nonrelated driver. Mr. Kaufman answered in the affirmative.
Assemblyman Claborn inquired if additional charges would be affixed to a car rented more than once in a 24-hour period. Mr. Kaufman explained the minimum rental time was 12 hours but 99 percent of the contracts were for a 24-hour period. Therefore, the car would be rented a maximum of one time per day. Mr. Claborn stated if the automobile was returned before noon and the car was rented again within the 24-hour period, they had just received an additional $5 dollars for that period of time; a total of $10 for the day. Mr. Kaufman stated that was correct. However, the $5 would not be charged unless the lessee stated there would be additional unrelated drivers. Mr. Claborn again stated that within a 24-hour period, one car could be rented more than once. No, Mr. Kaufman contended, the cars were rented once within a 24-hour period. Upon return, they were washed, vacuumed, and serviced, which covered the 24-hour turnaround time. Most cars were rented in the morning, returned by late afternoon, and were not rented again until servicing was completed.
Assemblyman Gustavson asked how the requested fees compared with other states. Mr. Kaufman replied Nevada had one of the lowest fees. California rates were basically identical to Nevada. Other states charged up to a $20 with a $5 to $10 charge for additional drivers; Hawaii and Florida charged $15. Assemblyman Gustavson asked if the rate would be charged for a boyfriend/girlfriend situation. Mr. Kaufman stated there would be no additional fee in that case.
Bob Ostrovsky, representative for the Hertz Corporation, explained there was a statutory requirement in NRS 482.3151 on spouse language, though Hertz did not ask about spouses. By contract, spouses and other family members were covered. If the lessee allowed an unauthorized driver to use the vehicle, the insurance the lessee may have purchased for himself and/or spouse was defaulted upon. Therefore, a possible additional driver had to be included when purchasing the additional insurance. Hertz, in 1998, paid out $29.2 million for additional driver damage claims. The cost in Nevada was approximately $500,000.
Chairwoman Chowning referenced S.B. 118 where it said, “For the additional authorized driver they shall not charge more than $5.” The bill did not make it clear there would be no charge for the spouse. Mr. Ostrovsky replied, because the statute was not changed, he felt spouses and coworkers were automatically covered. S.B. 118 covered those not otherwise defined in that section of the law and requested coverage for two or more independent, unrelated people. Car rental agencies experienced problems when two couples, Mr. & Mrs. Smith and Mr. & Mrs. Jones, shared the rental of one car, but only one of the couples was listed on the contract.
Assemblywoman Cegavske asked how similar S.B. 118 was to another, which Ms. Vilardo had questioned and asked whether locals would be exempt. Chairwoman Chowning stated the other bill dealt with the rental car tax, which Ms. Vilardo did not want applied to residents of Nevada.
Mr. Ostrovsky stated the insurance industry was satisfied with the language of S.B. 118. Most local rentals were provided through insurance companies while the insured’s vehicle was being repaired. He reminded the committee they had heard the bill twice before in prior sessions, though this was the first time it was passed out of the Senate.
Continuing, Mr. Ostrovsky stated Hertz supported the bill. Exhibit E was a brochure, published by Hertz, regarding the insurance policy coverage. He strongly urged support for the increase, the first requested in ten years.
Chairwoman Chowning asked again how Nevada compared to other states concerning rental fees. Mr. Kaufman reported that in the last survey of the top 100 airports across the county, Nevada ranked 89 when it came to cost of car rentals, classing Nevada as one of the least expensive for rental fees.
Chairwoman Chowning asked Mr. Ostrovsky if there were further comments Senator Shaffer, the sponsor of S.B. 118, wanted to add. Mr. Ostrovsky responded the Senator had wanted to introduce the speakers but was unable to attend due to other committee meetings.
ASSEMBLYWOMAN MCCLAIN MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 118.
ASSEMBLYMAN CLABORN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Upon closing the hearing on S.B. 118, Chairwoman Chowning opened the hearing on S.B. 374.
Senate Bill 374: Revises provisions concerning duty to erect and maintain signs to designate parking spaces for use by handicapped persons. (BDR 43-710)
Walter Johnston, Private Citizen and advocate of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), contacted Senator Jacobson to look into the handicap parking problems in Douglas County. As one of the volunteers who routinely inspected handicapped spaces, Mr. Johnston stated he had run into numerous businesspersons who did not bother to obtain the signs. Consequently, people parked where they wanted. One woman would not change a sign and make it proper because it was a good place for her to park. Mr. Johnston felt it was necessary to have some type of authority over compliance. The Douglas County District Attorney looked into the matter, only to discover the law needed to be enforced by the federal government. He did not feel this would occur.
Chairwoman Chowning confirmed he was speaking of a business having only one approved handicap parking sign, or possibly the van accessible handicap parking sign. Mr. Johnson explained he was speaking about the requirement in current statutes that mandated the sign had to be 4 feet above ground with the international symbol and the minimum fine amount of $100 visible. Both that sign and the van accessible sign were those that businesses and the U.S. Post Office found bothersome to maintain or affix correctly to begin with. Chairwoman Chowning pointed out that during the 1999 Legislative Session a van accessible bill passed that mandated on private property with 60 parking spaces or more at least two of the total handicapped parking places must be van accessible. Committee members had been working with the resort and retail associations to voluntarily share that message, in hopes they would provide a sign to make “van accessible” better understood.
Mr. Johnston affirmed people parked in the van accessible space whether they were wheelchair bound or not. A motorcycle owner parked in the striped area because it did not specify “van accessible only.” If there was a way to compel business owners to comply, there would not be a problem. Where there was enforcement of the handicap areas, the violations decreased.
Chairwoman Chowning thanked Mr. Johnston for his input and told the committee that until they could research county ordinances, action on the bill would be held until the scheduled work session.
At this point, Chairwoman Chowning put a hold on S.B. 54 until proper wording was received regarding the license plate.
Chairwoman Chowning closed the hearing on S.B. 374 and opened the presentation and tour of equipment used by Union Pacific Railroad to handle hazardous materials.
Assembly Bill 376: Transfers certain responsibilities for railroad safety from public utilities commission of Nevada to Nevada highway patrol division of department of motor vehicles and public safety. (BDR 43-1268)
Wayne Horiucui, Special Representative of Union Pacific Railroad, stated the Union Pacific testimony and equipment tour was follow-up to A.B. 376, requested by Chairwoman Chowning, to enlighten the committee on Union Pacific Railroad safety.
Ernie Sirotek, Hazardous Materials Program Manager, Union Pacific Railroad, stated a study done by the Association of American Railroads revealed 99.94 percent of the approximately 1.7 million carloads of hazardous materials, or HazMat that moved across North America in 2000 reached its destination without incident (Exhibit F). HazMat incidents were categorized as non-accident released and accident released. A non-accident release meant an incident not related to derailment or railroad accidents, such as shipper failure or the need to re-plug or close a valve. The Western Region Environmental Management team consisted of the Chemical Transportation Safety Group, environmental field managers, environmental site remediation managers and special agent HazMat officers strategically located throughout the western region. Mr. Sirotek said the goal of the Union Pacific Railroad was to be recognized as environmentally responsible and as the transportation leader in the safe movement of hazardous materials. Management activities were tailored around prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery.
Paul Dannelly, Director of Track Maintenance, Union Pacific Railroad, presented information about track welding, rail grinding, broken rail and rail flaw detection, and rail tie programs (Exhibit G). Many miles of rails were solid, without joints, totally welded using the Thermit welding method. Joints were inspected quarterly with ultrasound, which detected rail flaws in the iron. A geometry car rode along the rails testing the quality of the ride, indicating if the rails were flat, level or properly elevated, and generally detecting defects that caused a rail car to produce a “radical” ride. Track maintenance further included track buckling problems, switch defects and yard rehabilitation.
Assemblyman Nolan asked whether this maintenance program was an industry standard or specifically Union Pacific. Mr. Dannelly replied Union Pacific had its own program and within that were the federal standards. Mr. Nolan stated it would be helpful for the committee to know what safety professionals were employed within Nevada, and what their inspection routine was. According to Mr. Sirotek, a special agent hazardous material’s officer, stationed in Sparks, Nevada, was recently hired. He supported the Chemical Transportation Safety Group. Mr. Nolan inquired how the safety people interacted with the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Working with the local entities and the state government was a primary activity, Mr. Sirotek affirmed. He believed the program at Union Pacific was good and the company had maintained a good rapport with the PUC in the past, which they wished to continue.
Assemblyman Claborn asked if the photo of the canister-type vehicle in the presentation in any way related to the nuclear waste canisters used in the 1960s at the Nevada Nuclear Test Site. Mr. Sirotek stated an emphatic no, the “canister” vehicle he referred to was a tank car and not an authorized vehicle to transport nuclear waste. Assemblyman Nolan asked if Union Pacific transported high-level nuclear waste, and whether the federal government had approached them regarding that issue. Mr. Sirotek confirmed the railroad had transported spent nuclear fuel. No one recently had approached anyone within his group regarding future shipments through Nevada or the surrounding area.
Mr. Horiucui interposed that in 1999 Union Pacific transported spent nuclear fuel rods through the Concord Naval Depot in the Bay area, through the Feather River Canyon and through northern Nevada to Salt Lake City and beyond, as part of the Atoms for Peace Program initiated under President Eisenhower to keep the proliferation of nuclear materials from going to countries that should not be using it. The transfer was successfully completed without incident in one day. Assemblyman Nolan asked if special precautions were taken by Union Pacific or the federal government prior to or during the transport. Mr. Horiucui was involved in two years of planning in advance of the move, which used a dedicated train with extra special agents. There were over 100 California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers, including helicopters, accompanying the train. Mr. Horiucui reminded the committee that if Union Pacific, a federal common carrier, was asked by the federal government to accept tariff, they had no alternative than to transport it. It was difficult, he confessed, knowing the controversy that went along with the moves. Assemblyman Nolan asked who picked up the costs for the CHP officers and the hours used during the years of planning. It was the public sector (i.e., the state of California and other local entities) that paid the salaries of the CHP officers, Mr. Horiucui answered. He believed the federal government shared some of the cost.
Chairwoman Chowning expressed extreme concern for the “proliferation of hazardous wastes” that she hoped never would come to Nevada, and for the danger that might occur when trucks containing the casks were removed from the rail cars and traveled on Nevada’s highways. She then instructed the committee members to meet at the back of the Legislature Building for the final demonstration by Union Pacific Railroad. The meeting adjourned at 3:01 p.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Linda Lee Nary
Transcribing Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning, Chairwoman
DATE: