MINUTES OF THE
SENATE Committee on Transportation
Seventy-second Session
February 11, 2003
The Senate Committee on Transportationwas called to order by Chairman Raymond C. Shaffer, at 1:37 p.m., on Tuesday, February 11, 2003, 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 Raymond C. Shaffer, Chairman
Senator Dennis Nolan, Vice Chairman
Senator Mark E. Amodei
Senator Warren B. Hardy II
Senator Michael Schneider
Senator Terry Care
Senator Maggie Carlton
GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:
Senator Mike McGinness, Central Nevada Senatorial District
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Clark County Senatorial District No. 4
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Marsheilah Lyons, Committee Policy Analyst
Sandy Arraiz, Committee Manager
Lee Ann Keever, Committee Secretary
Sherry Rodriguez, Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Tom Lammel, Member, Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee
Ted Wehking, Member, Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee
Daryl Capurro, Concerned Citizen
Terry R. Crawforth, Administrator, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
Martha Barnes, Administrator, Central Services and Records Division, Department of Motor Vehicles
Russ Benzler, Administrator, Compliance Enforcement Division, Department of Motor Vehicles
Peter D. Krueger, Lobbyist, Nevada Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Associates
Stephanie Licht, Lobbyist, Elko County Commission
Chairman Shaffer:
I would like to welcome everyone here today. I am privileged to have as my Vice Chairman, Senator Dennis Nolan. He is new to the committee, but he is not new to transportation or the Senate.
I would like to introduce the staff assigned to work for this committee. Marsheilah Lyons is the Committee Policy Analyst and also a Senior Research Analyst in the Research Division of the Legislative Counsel Bureau. She is quite up-to-speed on what is happening. I would like to welcome other members of my committee and have them introduce themselves.
Senator Carlton:
I am Senator Maggie Carlton representing Senate District No. 2, Clark County. I am glad to be able to serve on this committee. Transportation is an important issue in southern Nevada and in my district.
Senator Care:
My name is Terry Care representing Senate District No. 7, Clark County. This is my third session and my third serving on transportation. I am glad to be back.
Senator Hardy:
I am Warren B. Hardy representing Senate District No. 12, Clark County, which is largely rural Clark County. I have portions of Mesquite, Moapa Valley, Boulder City and Laughlin. It is a very large district. This is my first term in the Senate. I served in the Assembly several years ago. After a 10-year break I am trying the other side of the aisle. It is a pleasure to be serving on this committee.
Senator Amodei:
Good afternoon, I am Mark Amodei former Vice Chairman of this committee. I am happy to be back once again.
Chairman Shaffer:
Senator Schneider is not here at this time. He is in the building and will be in shortly.
Senator Nolan:
I am Dennis Nolan serving my first term on the Senate Committee on Transportation, having served four terms on the Assembly Committee on Transportation. I represent Senate District No. 9, Clark County. I look forward to serving as your Vice Chairman.
Chairman Shaffer:
Most of you are aware I serve on the committee for high-level nuclear waste. Senator Nolan and I feel it would be beneficial for the committee to visit Yucca Mountain and see what is happening there.
Senator Nolan:
With the year 2010 fast approaching, this is the drop-dead date the nuclear industry and Yucca Mountain have given the Department of Energy to begin shipping high-level nuclear waste to the State. We thought the 2003 Legislative Session would be a good time to start looking at the types of things that we as a State should be doing to protect ourselves. We want to look at other issues regarding regulation of nuclear waste transportation within the State.
We do not mean to undermine the efforts currently being taken by our congressional delegation, the Attorney General, the Governor, or even this Legislature to thwart efforts to ship nuclear waste to Nevada. We felt waiting until the 2005 Legislative Session might preempt our ability to take some action. It would probably be incumbent upon us, during this session, to take a trip to Yucca Mountain and the storage facility for high-level nuclear waste. We would also look at hazardous material shipments currently coming into Nevada test sites as well as the training facility.
We hope, with some funding coming through the U.S. Department Of Homeland Security and going toward training, a lot of that money will be directed toward this facility. We have tentatively scheduled a tour for this committee for Thursday, February 27, 2003. The committee will meet Friday, February 28, 2003 in Las Vegas. The tour will be conducted at three facilities, Yucca Mountain medium and low-level hazardous waste sites, and the emergency preparation and training facility. They will be conducting a full-scale exercise on that day, which this committee will have an opportunity to view. The tour will be open to the public and lobbying community who would like to attend.
There is a security clearance document (Exhibit C) we need to presubmit to the Department of Energy. Please fill it out and get it back to Senator Shaffer’s office so we can complete trip plans.
Senator Shaffer:
I would ask for a committee issue brief from Ms. Lyons.
Marsheilah Lyons, Committee Policy Analyst:
I am going to briefly go through the Committee Issue Brief (Exhibit D). I am going to talk about the Titles and Chapters of the Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) that fall under jurisdiction of this committee, major transportation-related legislation enacted during the 2001 Legislative Session, reports submitted to this committee or the Legislature during the 2003 Legislative Session, a summary of possible transportation issues, and key dates associated with the 120-day session. As a final attachment, there is a list of State transportation agency officials and interest groups.
The Senate Committee on Transportation has jurisdiction over legislation affecting highways, roads, bridges, parks, vehicles, aeronautics, railroads, monorails, motor carriers, and the following Titles of NRS.
Title 35 of NRS is highways, roads, bridges and parks and chapters listed. Title 43 of NRS is public safety vehicles, watercraft and the chapters that follow. Title 44 of NRS is aeronautics. Title 58 of NRS is energy, public utilities and similar entities. Chapter 705 of NRS is railroads and monorails, and Chapter 706 of NRS is motor carriers.
The Senate Committee on Transportation reviewed a total of 67 measures during the 2001 Legislative Session. Following is a selection of measures considered by the committee. These bills were chosen to illustrate the kinds of measures typically referred to this committee. For additional information on the issues and specific measures from the 2001 Legislative Session, a summary is available.
During the 2001 Legislative Session, the Legislature changed the structure of the Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety. This change was based on a determination by the Governor’s Steering Committee to Conduct a Fundamental Review of State Government. The mission and functions of the public safety branch were entirely different than the functions of the motor vehicles branch. Senate Bill No. 481 of the 71st Session divided the department into two agencies, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and the Department of Public Safety.
Numerous bills regarding licensing of drivers and registration of motor vehicles were heard. Senate Bill No. 523 of the 71st Session allows DMV to release photographs from drivers’ license records to authorized federal, State, and local governmental entities, law enforcement agencies, and representatives of the Welfare Division or Office of the State Public Defender. This measure also provides that DMV may not release personal information from license and registration files for use in bulk surveys and marketing unless the person authorizes such release.
The committee approved several bills relating to registering motor vehicles including extending the revision date from June 30, 2001, to June 30, 2003, of an appropriation made during the 1999 Legislative Session for the DMV to redesign existing standard license plates and issue new replacement license plates, S.B. No. 525 of the 71st Session.
Assembly Bill (A.B.) No. 476 of the 71st Session revised provisions concerning reinstatement of car registrations that have been suspended for lack of insurance by allowing DMV to charge a fee of $50 or waive the fee entirely in cases where extenuating circumstances prevented the owner from complying with the law.
Assembly Bill No. 646 of the 71st Session authorized DMV to allow inspection stations to renew vehicle registrations.
The committee considered several bills concerning young drivers. One of the most visible and talked about transportation issues addressed during the 2001 Legislative Session pertained to driver education. Senate Bill No. 260 of the 71st Session provides that a high school student who is at least 15 years of age may take a course in driver education.
Ms. Lyons:
Assembly Bill No. 271 of the 71st Session authorizes 15-year-olds to take driver education courses in public schools. This measure makes various changes regarding the age at which a driver’s license may be obtained and the length of time learner’s permit must be held. The measure also sets forth a tiered passenger restriction based on the age at which the driver’s license is obtained.
A number of bills were enacted to provide for special license plates. The plates include the following: supporting rodeos and the protection and restoration of the Lower Truckee River and Pyramid Lake, A.B. No. 113 of the 71st Session; commemorating the history of atomic testing in Nevada and supporting the preservation of federal lands outside Las Vegas, A.B. No. 643 of the 71st Session; appreciating animals, S.B. No. 54 of the 71st Session; supporting reconstruction, maintenance, improvement, and promotion of the Virginia and Truckee Railroad, S.B. No. 77 of the 71st Session; recognizing current or former service as volunteer fire fighters, S.B. No. 257 of the 71st Session; commemorating the 100th anniversary of the founding of the City of Las Vegas, S.B. No. 414 of the 71st Session.
For all special license plates, the Legislature prohibits DMV from designing, preparing, or issuing a special license plate until it receives at least 250 applications for that type of plate. The 250 applications must be received by DMV within 4 years. In addition to usual registration and the additional fee to support projects related to the plates, these measures require an additional $35 special plate fee to be paid by the applicant for the initial issuance of the plates and $10 for annual renewal.
Assembly Bill No. 229 of the 71st Session was passed to address the concern regarding the increasing number of different types of special license plates. This measure provides, beginning January 1, 2003, when the Legislature enacts a statute for the creation of a special license plate, DMV must not issue the plates unless it receives at least 1000 applications. Further, applications must be filed within 2 years from the time the bill creating the special plate becomes effective.
Several bills were passed during the 2001 Legislative Session to strengthen traffic laws. Assembly Bill No. 7 of the 71st Session requires signs for school crossing zones be uniform in size and color and designate the hours during which the reduced speed limit applies.
Ms. Lyons:
Assembly Bill No. 383 of the 71st Session provides that a driver, when operating a vehicle on a multilane highway within a county with a population of 100,000 or more, may not allow a passenger under 18 years of age to ride in the cargo space of the vehicle. This space includes the bed of a pickup or flatbed truck, but this prohibition does not apply if a camper shell or a slide-in camper covers the bed of the truck.
Senate Bill No. 396 of the 71st Session requires the driver of a slow-moving vehicle on a two-lane highway to turn off the roadway in certain circumstances. When a driver has five or more vehicles following in a line behind him and passing is unsafe, the driver must turn off at the nearest designated turnout or wherever there is enough space for a safe turnout.
Three bills were passed by the Legislature regarding aviation: A.B. No. 210 of the 71st Session increased the maximum term a county may lease property for airport facilities or services from 50 years to 99 years; A.B. No. 490 of the 71st Session required a board of county commissioners in a county with a population of 400,000 or more to establish, by ordinance, an advisory committee on aircraft noise; and S.B. No. 26 of the 71st Session created the fund for aviation as a trust fund in the Office of the State Treasurer administered by the director of the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT).
Several bills were passed relating to public mass transit projects. Assembly Bill No. 83 of the 71st Session increases maximum axle weight from 20,000 to 29,000 pounds for vehicles used in mass transit if the vehicle has tires not less than 20 inches wide.
Assembly Bill No. 465 of the 71st Session, or the Needles Highway Bill, authorized the use of proceeds of certain taxes from rental of transient housing, an inter‑local agreement, a tax for improvement of transportation, and a supplemental vehicle privilege tax to pay costs of highway improvement projects located within 30 miles of the State that connects Nevada to an interstate highway.
Ms. Lyons:
Senate Bill No. 323 of the 71st Session authorized the California-Nevada Super Speed Ground Transportation Commission to issue bonds, notes, obligations, or other evidences of borrowing to finance construction of a super speed ground transportation system.
Regarding motor vehicle repair and sales, two bills of importance to Nevada consumers considered by the committee were passed during the 2001 Legislative Session. Assembly Bill No. 171 of the 71st Session changes laws relating to garages for repair of motor vehicles. The bill extends protections of the law to owners of recreational vehicles, motor homes, and similar vehicles. Second, the measure exempts the registration requirement to operate a garage.
Assembly Bill No. 320 of the 71st Session requires DMV to retain, for at least 1 year, originals of certificates of ownership and powers of attorney that are submitted to the DMV.
The 2001 Legislature passed two measures relating to rental car charges or fees. Assembly Bill No. 460 of the 71st Session changes the law governing fees collected by rental car agencies to increase State General Fund revenues by approximately $11.6 million in fiscal year 2001/2002 and $14.9 million in fiscal year 2002/2003.
Senate Bill No. 118 of the 71st Session increases from $10 to $15 the maximum fee a rental car agency may charge for a waiver of damages for a full or partial 24‑hour rental period. It allows an agency to charge an additional fee of not more than $5 per full or partial 24-hour rental period for any extra driver besides the person renting the car and one other driver.
There are several reports presented to this committee and to the Legislature that pertain to transportation. Nevada Revised Statutes 408.203 requires the director of NDOT to submit reports regarding the following: a comprehensive report outlining requirements for construction and maintenance of highways for the next 10 years; a complete report of requirements for construction and maintenance of highways for the next 3 years, including anticipated revenues and expenditures; and a report to the Legislature, submitted by February 1 of odd‑numbered years on the progress being made in the department’s 12-year plan for resurfacing State highways.
I have several issues listed that may arise during the 2003 Legislative Session. Among them are young drivers, driver’s license issues, and transportation of nuclear waste.
I want to cover the key dates for the 2003 Legislative Session. On February 10, final bill draft requests (BDRs) for legislators were due, final committee BDRs are due by February 24. On March 17, introduction of all bills requested by an individual legislator, and on March 24, introduction of all bills requested by a standing committee are due. On April 11, all bills are to be passed out of committee of reference in the house of origin, and by April 22, all bills are to be passed out of the house of origin. On May 16, all bills are to be passed out of committee of reference in the second house and on May 23, all bills are to be passed out of the second house.
Chairman Shaffer:
At this time we are going to take a look at the Senate Committee on Transportation, 72nd Session Standing Rules (Exhibit E). If you need time to review them that is fine, otherwise, I will take a motion to adopt them.
SENATOR AMODEI MOVED TO ADOPT THE STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION, SEVENTY-SECOND SESSION.
SENATOR NOLAN SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR SCHNEIDER WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
*****
Chairman Shaffer:
Our next order of business will be Senate Bill 15.
SENATE BILL 15: Provides for issuance of special license plates for support of wildlife in Nevada. (BDR 43-332)
Senator Mike McGinness, Central Nevada Senatorial District:
I was asked by the Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee to introduce this bill. Tom Lammel is one of my constituents and has been involved with this for a long time. They offer some amendments to S.B. 15 and I support those. At this time I will turn the rest of the presentation over to the Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee.
Tom Lammel, Member, Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee:
The Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee is an organization, which started in 1980 by a group of sportsmen who decided they wanted to recognize the trophy qualities of wildlife in Nevada. We have published four books and they have become collector items. Our first-edition books are now selling for $200, if they are available. It is tough to find one.
We would like to venture into a new proposed Wildlife Interactive Interpretive Center. The center would be for the State of Nevada, locals, and nonresidents, school children, and whoever would want to go through our Interactive Interpretive Center. With this center being interactive, there will be a lot of educational opportunities for those who go there to learn about wildlife in Nevada, and what we need to preserve, and why. In order to accomplish this, we want to issue a license plate.
There are some changes we would like to make to S.B. 15. Those changes are last in your folder (Exhibit F). We would like this account to be for support of the Nevada Wildlife Record Book and be held in the General Fund. Our committee shall have the opportunity to administer that account. The State treasurer, on a quarterly basis, distributes funds to the Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee. We will use those funds exclusively for the Interactive Interpretive Center. One thing we want is education. We give a couple of scholarships each year to people who are interested in pursuing careers in wildlife. We also donate for habitat improvement and other things that benefit wildlife in the State of Nevada, specifically for the Interactive Interpretive Center. We ask that you change the provisions in section 4. In section 1 of the bill as outlined in Exhibit F, we requested applications be changed from 1000 to 250. However, after hearing Ms. Lyons’ information earlier, it should remain at 1000.
Ted Wehking, Member, Nevada Wildlife Record Book Committee:
A copy of our book is in the gift shop downstairs, our fourth edition. We have printed 10,000 limited copies. They have all been sold. We held back a few 1995 and 2000 books we donate as fund-raisers for different sport organizations. An interpretive center is interactive because this book and center would celebrate the big game animals in Nevada. It would be somewhat of a museum. There would be other animals or birds that you would find in a particular location of the State. It would be interactive with other animals and for visitors as well, whether children or adults, giving pertinent information of a bull elk, for example. By pushing a button visitors could hear a bull elk in his full rutting song. There are 12 big game animals in the State.
We plan to market these plates through existing sports clubs, and wildlife clubs’ publications, newspapers, and magazines that are printed in the State.
Senator Nolan:
The Interactive Interpretive Center sounds like a great idea. I think it would be something that would benefit children and promote sportsmanship in this State. I know we have some precedence with some of these license plates on distributing revenue to an agency other than a State agency. I recall some caveats in some bills we have passed that if money were used for its intended purpose, it would be reverted somewhere else. I understand your intention is to build a very nice center. What would happen if that center went bankrupt or the organization had financial problems; where would the revenues generated go?
Mr. Lammel:
In our proposed changes to the bill, section 4, subsection 2, paragraph (a) (Exhibit F), we have put in “without limitation, education, habitat improvement and establish a maintenance of support of an Interactive Interpretive Center,” there is an escape route. We could use these monies for education or habitat. Section 3 of S.B. 15 states the committee may provide grants from the account to other organizations or public agencies to carry out provisions of this section. That was our intent in the escape route. Does that answer your question?
Senator Nolan:
Yes, thank you.
Mr. Lammel:
We have a good track record over the last 24 years. We do have integrity; however, we would not object to reporting back to this committee or whoever would be appropriate in a period of 2 years or so.
Senator Nolan:
Would the committee itself be responsible for overseeing expenditures of these funds?
Mr. Lammel:
That is correct.
Senator Nolan:
Who is on that committee?
Mr. Lammel:
Ted Wehking, John Capurro, Tom Cavin, Doctor Gerald Lent, Victor Clark, Tim Humes, and Sam Stiver an employee of the Division of Wildlife, and myself are on the committee.
Chairman Shaffer:
Are there any other questions from the committee? Is there anyone else here supporting this bill?
Daryl Capurro, Concerned Citizen:
The book that has been produced is probably one of the finest literary gems on wildlife in Nevada. Some of the stories range from hilarious to poignant to strange at times in how hunts were conducted and things that happened during hunts. In the 1995 edition, one of the stories is about my ex-wife’s hunt for a California Big Horn Sheep and all the things that went wrong and a few that went right on that hunt. It is a very fascinating publication.
These people spend a lot of time on these books and receive nothing for it. The book is certainly a prideful thing for the State. They always include a member of the Division of Wildlife on their book committee. You can be assured there will be a presence both with respect to the State and accountability.
Chairman Shaffer:
Are there any questions for these gentlemen?
Terry R. Crawforth, Administrator, Division of Wildlife, State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources:
I appreciate this opportunity to support the record books. I commend them for their foresight and past work on behalf of the wildlife in Nevada. The division has a long-standing relationship with the record book committee, and we have had members of our organization on that committee. They have provided us with funds to develop a wildlife scholarship for students. It is a working scholarship for people interested in working in wildlife management in the future. Their publication is outstanding. As a user-funded agency we cannot develop the number of facilities, projects, or programs we would like. We welcome all the help we can get. We appreciate your assistance.
Senator Nolan:
With programs your organization currently provides, do you have any direct formal input to them or is it an informal process on behalf of the division to make recommendations? My question goes back to accountability, I do not know if we really want your organization to come back every legislative session and give a report on how much they have realized. I am more concerned about the accountability portion. Is the money being generated through the State acting as a medium for them to have some formal attachment to the State? Do we have some input into what is going on and how the money is being spent?
Mr. Crawforth:
I think there are two answers to that question. They have been in business for a long time and have been able to maintain their program and provide not only scholarship money, but also project money to things outside the immediate record book. I would think accountability could certainly come through that. As far as our input, it is both formal and informal. We have been involved with them for a number of years. The accountability would more than be upheld by this group of people.
Martha Barnes, Administrator, Central Services and Records Division, Department of Motor Vehicles:
The department has submitted a fiscal note in the amount of $15,707. An appropriation is not requested due to the revolving account previously established to cover expenses associated with production of a new plate.
Chairman Shaffer:
Are there any more questions on S.B. 15? We will close the hearing on S.B. 15 and open the hearing on S.B. 25.
SENATE BILL 25: Requires certain trailers sold in Nevada to be equipped with brakes that comply with traffic laws of this state. (BDR 43-93)
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Clark County Senatorial District No. 4:
Senate Bill 25 came to me from a gentleman who is a constituent of mine. He explained a problem he thought needed to be corrected. The bill would make it unlawful for anyone who sells, or offers to sell, or displays for sale, a trailer, semi-trailer, house trailer, or pull trailer that is subject to NRS 484.593 through NRS 484.605 that intend to be operated upon the highways of this State unless such trailers are equipped with brakes to conform to requirements in statute.
The bill suggests these particular trailers offered for sale, do not have brakes as required by law; therefore, they would be unlawful for operation. When we look at section 1, subsection 2, the prohibition is set forth to apply only to brokers, dealers, distributors, lessors, manufactures, or salesmen who are licensed pursuant to the chapter. These are individuals who should have safety brakes on these trailers. It should not be left to the purchaser of the trailer to supply these brakes. This bill raises a safety question. If safety brakes are not on these vehicles, it could cause some type of accident. This is a violation of law at the present time. As the law is stated in NRS, it would be unlawful to operate these vehicles.
The proposal for review is to see if requirements presented here make it a misdemeanor for a person who violates the provision of this section.
Mr. Chairman, this is not a bill I am willing to go to the mat on unless the gentleman who asked me to carry this bill is present here and ready to stand by me to defend it.
Chairman Shaffer:
If I understand you correctly, you are saying these individuals should not sell any kind of trailer that does not have the braking system designated here.
Senator Neal:
Right. What the bill is presently saying, is if these trailers do not currently have brakes required by statute, the dealer, distributor, lessor, manufacturer, or salesman selling these trailers would have to make sure they meet the brake requirements before they are sold and permitted on the roadway. I have not researched the statute to see if this is present law. The way the bill is written, it suggests it is the present law. The requirement set forth is it should be a misdemeanor if someone violates this particular statute.
Chairman Shaffer:
Is there somebody from the DMV who can give some information on this? Are there similar laws in other states of which you are aware?
Russ Benzler, Administrator, Compliance Enforcement Division, Department of Motor Vehicles:
I am not familiar with other states and their requirements. What is written here is not currently in law. The prohibition we have now is you cannot operate or tow a vehicle or trailer down the road without safety brakes, if they are not equipped as specified here. This just says in addition to not operating them, you cannot sell them.
Chairman Shaffer:
Do you have any problem with that?
Mr. Benzler:
No, we do not. The question I have is would it be better to apply this universally where no one can sell a trailer without safety equipment?
Senator Hardy:
I think Senator Neal has hit on something that is a good idea. It seems NRS 484.593 requires any trailer over 3000 pounds to have trailer brakes. I think your purpose here is no dealer, or anyone, can sell a trailer without the required trailer brakes. You are attaching a penalty to selling a trailer without the required brakes, is that correct?
Senator Neal:
The proposal is to prohibit the dealer, distributor, lessor, manufacturer, or salesman from selling a trailer without the required brakes. The penalty would be a misdemeanor.
Senator Hardy:
What we have currently in law is a prohibition or something illegal that does not have a penalty attached?
Mr. Benzler:
Now the prohibition is pulling a trailer down the road or operating it on the highway without its safety brakes; therefore, the owner is responsible. There is nothing that says you cannot sell.
Senator Hardy:
If we pass S.B. 25, will there be something saying that?
Mr. Benzler:
Correct, if you pass S.B. 25, then it would be a misdemeanor.
Senator Hardy:
Thank you, that clarifies it.
Chairman Shaffer:
Thank you very much, anyone else in the audience who would like to testify on S.B. 25?
Peter D. Krueger, Lobbyist, Nevada Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Associates:
I am not here to testify for or against the bill. One obvious party or selling agent left out is private parties. If we were to process this bill, I would think a private party should be subject to these provisions as well as people in the commerce stream. The term “lessor” in section 1, subsection 2 would apply to my membership, but it is not referred to in section 1. I do not have specific guidance of a lessor. A rental center is a short-term lessor of these trailers, should they be hauling bobcats, backhoes and things of that nature? I would like to have included in the bill “private party sales” as well.
While it is illegal to operate, who is going to do the enforcement? The enforcement needs to be explored. If a private party sells a trailer without safety brakes and you want to make a case that a misdemeanor was committed, to whom would you tell your story, the sheriff? I think that part needs to be addressed as well. I am here to work on behalf of my clients, the sponsor, and this committee if you choose to process this bill.
Senator Nolan:
Mr. Krueger, I think you bring up a very good point. The average person would not know if they had a trailer with faulty brakes unless they failed or something catastrophic occurred. On the enforcement side, getting the word to private parties who own trailers, then sell them in the classified section of the newspapers is necessary. They do not know anything about the law, and if there is a failure, it becomes an important issue. This is an issue that would be beneficial to have some information or disclaimer provided to the buyer of a vehicle from the seller. This would state the brakes have been inspected and are in working order or have not been inspected and cannot certify they are in working order. Private parties or commercial organizations would be required to repair brakes on every type of trailer before they sell it.
Mr. Krueger:
If someone owns a trailer built in 1984 and uses it to haul a boat around that has surge brakes, there is a technical question of whether surge brakes are satisfactory. It has to do with weight. When the trailer is without its boat, it does not weigh very much. But, when you put a boat on the trailer, it weighs more, so it becomes a technical issue. My understanding is it comes to the attention of the DMV at the initial time of registration when an inspection is done. There are some technicalities that we could work together on to make this a better bill.
Senator Hardy:
I wonder if we could get some information or statistics from the DMV regarding how may citations have been issued for violations of NRS 484.593 through NRS 484.864. How often is this a problem? I know all of the trailers now, and I think even back to the late 1960s, that are over 3000 pounds are equipped with the required trailer brakes. I am wondering if we have a solution in search of a problem.
Mr. Benzler:
The DMV does not keep those statistics. I can make an inquiry with the highway patrol to see if they have a database that can provide the information. As for the DMV, this is not an issue of which were we are made aware.
Chairman Shaffer:
Is there anyone else wanting to testify on this bill?
Stephanie Licht, Lobbyist, Elko County Commission:
In reading this bill it says 3000-pound trailer. My commissioners were concerned because there are many of us in the hinterlands that use the old bed of a pickup hooked onto the back of another vehicle Saturday mornings we load up with garbage to haul to the dump. Unladen it might not weigh 3000 pounds. But, if I have a neighbor with a few old couches and a couple of old beds I am hauling to the dump for them, it will weigh more. We are wondering about the technicality of that. My commissioners were concerned about their constituents in that vain. I know the sheep ranchers, on the other hand, have sheep trailers for the tenders. I am sure most of them have safety brakes. I would be happy to help work on this. The concern on this from my commissioners was for those weekend people that had something they threw together to make it convenient to haul items to the dump.
Chairman Shaffer:
We will see if we can clean up the language with the volunteers we have at this time. There being no further business, the meeting is adjourned at 2:41 p.m.
Sherry Rodriguez,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator Raymond C. Shaffer, Chairman
DATE: