MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION Sixty-eighth Session June 8, 1995 The Senate Committee on Transportation was called to order by Chairman William R. O'Donnell, at 1:30 p.m., on Thursday, June 8, 1995, in Room 226 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman Senator Maurice Washington, Vice Chairman Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen Senator Jon C. Porter Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr. Senator Raymond C. Shaffer Senator O. C. Lee STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Don O. Williams, Chief Principal Research Analyst Diane Rea, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Doris Lawson, Representative Ward 4 - Northeast Reno, Washoe County Bishop Divine Turner, Representative Ward 4 - Northeast Reno, Washoe County Louise Matlock, Representative Ward 4 - Northeast Reno, Washoe County Jenny Neill, Special Assistant to Director, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) Thomas Stephens, Director, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) Elizabeth King, Assistant Chief, Drivers' Safety and Improvement, Drivers' License Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS) Donna Wadey-Howell, Acting Chief, Registration Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS) Robert Feldman, Lobbyist, Nevada General Insurance Company, Auto Insurance America Senator O'Donnell opened the hearing on Assembly Concurrent Resolution (A.C.R.) No. 31. ASSEMBLY CONCURRENT Expresses support for programs to mitigate traffic RESOLUTION 31: noise. (BDR R-1959) Doris Lawson, Ward 4 - Northeast Reno, testified that she has lived in northeast Reno for about 28 years. The reason the sound wall is needed is because a person cannot sleep because of the traffic on the highway. Bishop Divine Turner, Ward 4 - Northeast Reno, testified she has been in Nevada for 40 years. She said since the highway was built, anyone can hear the noise all day and all night. Louise Matlock, Ward 4 - Northeast Reno, testified she has lived in her community for 28 years. There has been a tremendous increase in the traffic and the noise during that time. Jenny Neill, Special Assistant to Director, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), stated that the department supports this bill. The department is committed to do an experimental study which will cost approximately $280,000 of selected projects statewide. Senator O'Donnell asked if there are any pilot programs for the noise walls in the Las Vegas area? Thomas Stephens, Director, Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), testified the issue of noise walls was not addressed in the construction of highways until 1976. The standard is 67 decimals or higher. The federal funding which provides over 80 percent of all the new freeway projects is not available for the construction of noise walls on existing highways which do not have them; except if there is a retrofit or something. He said there are a lot of requests for noise walls; at least 100 miles throughout the state. NDOT does not put up a noise wall if there are no residents there when the highway goes in. The noise walls are very expensive to build and without federal funding, there is not enough money for them. Mr. Stephens said in the March board meeting, NDOT appropriated $300,000 for an experimental sound wall program to put up some low-cost sound walls to see how they work. They are developing rough per-mile cost estimates for various locations and propose a financial plan to construct noise barriers on existing highways. He said he would suggest that the NDOT put up one- half the cost of the wall and then take applications from people who are willing to put up some of the money to cover the other half of the cost. Senator O'Donnell asked about putting in the resolution language to encourage the local zoning officials. He said if they are going to zone an apartment complex, they are to evaluate the noise-abatement program to construct or put up the money for the construction of a noise wall. Mr. Stephens stated that a program from California is being analyzed for use in Nevada. The locations tentatively identified for the experimental program include I-515 near Pacos, U.S. 95 near Jones in Henderson by the Foothills overpass, in Reno at the spaghetti bowl, at Oddie Boulevard North and in Sparks near McCarran Boulevard. He said the department has no objections to A.C.R. 31. Senator Porter said the two issues are those who have a problem now and those who will have a problem in the future. He asked if there is anything that can be done for the future housing projects. Mr. Stephens said he cannot see the department doing any "matching funds walls" in any community that does not have a zoning requirement stating any new development has to have noise walls. Senator O'Donnell asked whether the locals should be allowed to adopt an ordinance, or whether the committee should pass a law that any new zoning has to incorporate a sound study and proper noise-abatement? Mr. Stephens said the resolution could include a statement that any residential development that is approved near a major highway or freeway, where the noise level will be 65 decimals or higher, has to have a noise-abatement plan to insure that it is less than 65 decimals. Senator Porter said the noise-abatement plan should be paid for by the developer. Mr. Stephens said the noise wall on a new freeway is either 95 percent or 80 percent federally funded. Anything done on retrofit is 100 percent state funded. Senator Porter stated that it seems backwards that the federal funds are there for the new highways. He said the federal funds should be there to help with the existing housing areas and have the developers be responsible for the new developments. Mr. Stephens agreed, but the federal government says the community has to take some responsibility for their zoning and land use. Senator Washington asked about the cost and height of the experimental walls? Mr. Stephens responded that they are not going to be 14-feet high. They will be about 7-feet high. Senator Jacobsen asked what is a section in highway language? Mr. Stephens replied that it is not a mile, or any specific measurement. Senator O'Donnell closed the hearing on A.C.R. 31. He requested a draft of language to encourage the local zoning boards to include noise abatement when building next to the freeway. Senator O'Donnell opened the hearing on Assembly Bill (A.B.) 91. ASSEMBLY BILL 91: Requires evaluation and treatment relating to abuse of alcohol or other drugs for juvenile offenders under certain circumstances. (BDR 43-247) Senator O'Donnell asked for testimony on behalf of A.B. 91. He asked for opposition on the bill. He asked for Elizabeth King from DMV&PS to see if Assemblyman Bernie Anderson would come to the room and testify because he had chaired the interim committee on this bill. Senator O'Donnell suspended the hearing on A.B. 91. Senator O'Donnell opened the hearing on Senate Bill 64. SENATE BILL 64: Revises provisions relating to reinstatement of certain drivers' licenses which have been revoked or suspended. (BDR 43-572) Don O. Williams, Chief Principal Research Analyst, stated the Drivers' License Division, DMV&PS has submitted this bill. When S.B. 322 was introduced, the division had asked that this bill be held. He said if the committee processed S.B. 322 with the proposed amendments, this bill will not be needed. SENATE BILL 322: Revises requirements for maintaining proof of financial responsibility after reinstatement or restoration of driver's license, permit or registration. (BDR 43- 1468) Senator O'Donnell asked the committee to turn their attention to S.B. 322. Elizabeth King, Assistant Chief, Drivers' Safety and Improvement, Drivers' License Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS), testified S.B. 64 proposed eliminating SR-22 filings for proof of financial responsibility on drivers whose licenses had been revoked. That includes DUI (driving under the influence) and hit and runs; the very serious offenses DMV&PS takes action on. S.B. 322 proposed eliminating SR-22 filings in all instances, even with the Registration Division. Ms. King said the insurance industry imposed the elimination of SR-22 filings on high risk drivers. Their concerns were incorporated in the amendments (Exhibit C and D). She said they are identical with the exception of the inclusion in Amendment No. 439 of the increased liability amounts for improper registration and conviction of a no-insurance violation. Ms. King reviewed the purpose of the amendments by section. Amendment No. 440 does not include the increased liability amounts. Senator O'Donnell and Senator Porter encouraged Amendment No. 440. Senator Washington asked what the current minimum rates for liability are? Ms. King stated $15,000/$30,000/$10,000. Senator Lee stated that an umbrella policy is less expensive and allots for more coverage. Donna Wadey-Howell, Acting Chief, Registration Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety (DMV&PS), testified that the amendment is to clarify the language and exclude the term "proof of financial responsibility" and replace it with "evidence of insurance." The terms have been interchanged and this amendment will clarify the language. She explained the different forms and their uses, as well as the need to clarify the language to reflect the proper form. Mrs. Wadey-Howell pointed out that in section 33 someone has taken out the "department or its designated agent" and left just "designated agent" in. This was not the department's request and will require the department to go to an outside third party vendor to conduct the insurance verification program. She said the brackets need to come out of that section. She said the DMV&PS has the program that is being looked at on a national level. Senator O'Donnell asked the committee about deleting "and designated agent". The department has the option of contracting out, but does not have to do so. The committee said to delete "and designated agent" and leave in "the department." Senator O'Donnell stated that the amendment needs to be re- amended. He asked if the new amendment could be brought back to the committee. SENATOR LEE MOVED TO AMEND AS NOTED AND DO PASS S.B. 322 SENATOR WASHINGTON SECONDED THE MOTION. Robert Feldman, Lobbyist, Nevada General Insurance Company, Auto Insurance America, testified the committee should check with legislative counsel on the question of whether the $250 reinstatement fee is constitutional. Ms. Wadey-Howell stated that the $100 exceeds DMV&PS's cost of administration. The administrative hearings and judicial review are the remedies for the $250. Mr. Feldman stated that if people do not return the VIN (vehicle identification number) verification form, their plates are suspended, causing them to have to pay a $50 reinstatement fee; with a VIN number that is one digit off and it is not their fault. He said he thinks there needs to be a provision saying that if a person really has insurance and there is a typographical error, the fee should be waived. Ms. Wadey-Howell stated that if a person responds and there is an error, DMV&PS does waive that fee. The charge is there when the person ignores the notice. Mr. Feldman argued that the people should not be penalized if they do not respond. Ms. Wadey-Howell stated that DMV&PS does most of the VIN corrections. They have granted a 60-day extension to the insurance companies and have not suspended anyone during that time. They are checking the name, address, year and make of the vehicle for those notices. She said they are then notifying the insurance companies that there is not a match. She stated that DMV&PS has corrected the majority of the VIN numbers. Senator O'Donnell stated that the data base errors on both sides are being corrected. Senator O'Donnell stated that most of the committee members had to be at other meetings; therefore, he adjourned the meeting at 4:35 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Diane C. Rea, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator William R. O'Donnell, Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Transportation June 8, 1995 Page