BILL NUMBER: SB 1077	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  AUGUST 21, 2014
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  AUGUST 4, 2014
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 25, 2014
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 16, 2014
	AMENDED IN SENATE  APRIL 21, 2014

INTRODUCED BY   Senator DeSaulnier
   (Coauthor: Assembly Member Lowenthal)

                        FEBRUARY 19, 2014

   An act to add and repeal Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 3090)
of Division 2 of, and to repeal Chapter 7 (commencing with former
Section 3100) of Division 2 of, the Vehicle Code, relating to
vehicles.



	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 1077, as amended, DeSaulnier. Vehicles:  mileage-based
fee   road usage charge  pilot program.
   Existing law establishes the Transportation Agency, which consists
of the Department of the California Highway Patrol, the California
Transportation Commission, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the
Department of Transportation, the High-Speed Rail Authority, and the
Board of Pilot Commissioners for the Bays of San Francisco, San
Pablo, and Suisun.
    This bill would  establish a Mileage-Based Fee (MBF) Task
Force within the California Transportation Commission, as specified
  require the Chair of the California Transportation
Commission to create a Road Usage Charge (RUC) Technical Advisory
Committee in consultation with the Secretary of the Transportation
Agency  . The bill would require the  task force
  technical advisory committee  to study 
MBF   RUC  alternatives to the gas tax and to make
recommendations to the  commission   Secretary
of the Transportation Agency  on the design of a pilot program,
as specified. The bill would also authorize the  task force
  technical advisory committee  to make
recommendations on the criteria to be used to evaluate the pilot
program. The bill would require the  task force 
 technical advisory committee  to consult with specified
entities and to consider certain factors in carrying out its duties.
 The bill would require the commission to approve the design
of a pilot program by January 1, 2016.  The bill would
require the Transportation Agency, based on the  design
approved by the commission   recommendations of the
technical advisory committee  , to implement a pilot program to
identify and evaluate issues related to the potential implementation
of an  MBF   RUC  program in California by
January 1, 2017. The bill would require the agency to prepare and
submit a report of its findings to the  task force 
 technical advisory committee  , the commission, and the
appropriate fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature by no
later than  January 1   June 30  , 2018, as
specified. The bill would also require the commission to include its
recommendations regarding the pilot program in its annual report to
the Legislature, as specified. The bill would repeal these provisions
on January 1, 2019.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
   (a) An efficient transportation system is critical for California'
s economy and quality of life.
   (b) The revenues currently available for highways and local roads
are inadequate to preserve and maintain existing infrastructure and
to provide funds for improvements that would reduce congestion and
improve service.
   (c) The gas tax is an ineffective mechanism for meeting California'
s long-term revenue needs because it will steadily generate less
revenue as cars become more fuel efficient and alternative sources of
fuel are identified. By 2030, as much as half of the revenue that
could have been collected will be lost to fuel efficiency.
Additionally, bundling fees for roads and highways into the gas tax
makes it difficult for users to understand the amount they are paying
for roads and highways.
   (d) Other states have begun to explore the potential for a
 mileage-based fee   road usage charge  to
replace traditional gas taxes, including the State of Oregon, which
established the first permanent road user  fee  
charge  program in the nation. 
   (e) Road usage charging is a policy whereby motorists pay for the
use of the roadway network based on the distance they travel. Drivers
pay the same rate per mile driven, regardless of what part of the
roadway network they use.  
   (e) 
    (f)  A  mileage-based fee   road
  usage charge  program has the potential to distribute
the gas tax burden across all vehicles regardless of fuel source and
to minimize the impact of the current regressive gas tax structure.

   (f) 
    (g)  Experience to date in other states across the
nation demonstrates that mileage-based  user fees 
 charges  can be implemented in a way that ensures data
security and maximum privacy protection for drivers. 
   (g) 
   (h)  It is therefore important that the state begin to
explore alternative revenue sources that may be implemented in lieu
of the antiquated gas tax structure now in place. 
   (h) 
    (i)  Any exploration of alternative revenue sources
shall take privacy implications into account, especially with regard
to location  data, which does not need to be personally
identifiable to raise serious privacy concerns because studies have
shown that this type of data is easy to reidentify.  
data. Travel locations or pa   tterns shall not be reported,
and legal and technical safeguards shall protect personal
information. 
  SEC. 2.  Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 3090) is added to
Division 2 of the Vehicle Code, to read:
      CHAPTER 7.   MILEAGE-BASED FEE   ROAD
USAGE CHARGE  PILOT PROGRAM


   3090.  (a)  The Mileage-Based Fee (MBF) Task Force is
hereby established within the California Transportation Commission.
  The Chair of the California Transportation Commission
shall create, in consultation with the Secretary of the
Transportation Agency, a Road Usage Charge (RUC) Technical Advisory
Committee. 
   (b) The purpose of the  task force  
technical advisory committee  is to guide the development and
evaluation of a pilot program to assess the potential for
mileage-based revenue collection for California's roads and highways
as an alternative to the gas tax system.
   (c) The  task force   technical advisory
committee  shall consist of 15  members, as follows:
 
   (1) Two members of the Assembly, appointed by the Speaker of the
Assembly.  
   (2) Two members of the Senate, appointed by the Senate Committee
on Rules.  
   (3) Two members of the commission, appointed by the chairperson of
the commission. 
    (4)     Nine members
appointed by the Governor. In making these appointments, the Governor
  members. In selecting the members of the technical
advisory committee, the chair  shall consider individuals who
are representative of the telecommunications industry, highway user
groups, the data security and privacy industry, privacy rights
advocacy organizations, regional transportation agencies, 
and  national research and policymaking bodies, including,
but not limited to, the Transportation Research Board and the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
 , members of the Legislature, and other relevant stakeholders as
determined by the chair  . 
   (d) Members of the task force are entitled to compensation of one
hundred dollars ($100) per day, if a majority of the commission
approves the compensation by a recorded vote, plus the necessary
expenses incurred by a member in the performance of his or her
duties. Compensation earned by members of the commission while
serving on the task force shall not be subject to the eight hundred
dollars ($800) limitation described in Section 14509 of the
Government Code.  
   (e) 
    (d)  Pursuant to Section 14512 of the Government Code,
the  task force   technical advisory committee
 may request the Department of Transportation to perform such
work as the  task force   technical advisory
committee  deems necessary to carry out its duties and
responsibilities. 
   (f) 
    (e)  The  task force   technical
advisory   committee  shall study  MBF
  RUC  alternatives to the gas tax. The 
task force   technical advisory committee  shall
gather public comment on issues and concerns related to the pilot
program and shall make recommendations to the  commission
  Secretary of the Transportation Agency  on the
design of a pilot program to test alternative  MBF 
 RUC  approaches. The  task force  
technical advisory committee  may also make recommendations
 to the commission  on the criteria to be used to
evaluate the pilot program.  The commission shall approve the
design of a pilot program by January 1, 2016.  
   (g) 
    (f)  In studying alternatives to the current gas tax
system and developing recommendations on the design of a pilot
program to test alternative  MBF   RUC 
approaches pursuant to subdivision  (f)   (e)
 , the  task force   technical advisory
committee  shall take all of the following into consideration:
   (1) The availability, adaptability, reliability, and security of
methods that might be used in recording and reporting highway use.
   (2) The necessity of protecting all personally identifiable
information used in reporting highway use.
   (3) The ease and cost of recording and reporting highway use.
   (4) The ease and cost of administering the collection of taxes and
fees as an alternative to the current system of taxing highway use
through motor vehicle fuel taxes.
   (5) Effective methods of maintaining compliance.
   (6) The ease of reidentifying location data, even when personally
identifiable information has been removed from the data.
   (7) Increased privacy concerns when location data is used in
conjunction with other  technologies, such as automatic
license plate readers.   technologies. 
   (8) Public and private agency access, including law enforcement,
to data collected and stored for purposes of the  MBF
  RUC  to ensure individual privacy rights are
protected pursuant to Section 1 of Article I of the California
Constitution. 
   (h) 
    (g)  The  task force   technical
advisory committee  shall consult with highway users and
transportation stakeholders, including representatives of vehicle
users, vehicle manufacturers, and fuel distributors as part of its
duties pursuant to subdivision  (g)   (f) 
.
   3091.  (a) Based on the  design approved by the commission
  recommendations of the RUC Technical Advisory
Committee  , the Transportation Agency shall implement a pilot
program to identify and evaluate issues related to the potential
implementation of an  MBF   RUC  program in
California by January 1, 2017.
   (b) At a minimum, the pilot program shall accomplish all of the
following:
   (1) Analyze alternative means of collecting road usage data,
including at least one alternative that does not rely on electronic
vehicle location data.
   (2) Collect a minimum amount of personal information including
location tracking information, necessary to implement the 
MBF   RUC  program.
   (3) Ensure that processes for collecting, managing, storing,
transmitting, and destroying data are in place to protect the
integrity of the data and safeguard the privacy of drivers.
   (c) The agency shall not disclose, distribute, make available,
sell, access, or otherwise provide for another purpose, personal
information or data collected through the  MBF  
RUC  program to any private entity or individual unless
authorized by a court order, as part of a civil case, by a subpoena
issued on behalf of a defendant in a criminal case, by a search
warrant, or in aggregate form with all personal information removed
for the purposes of academic research.
   3092.  (a) The Transportation Agency shall prepare and submit a
report of its findings based on the results of the pilot program to
the  MBF Task Force   RUC Technical Advisory
Committee  , the California Transportation Commission, and the
appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature by no
later than  January 1   June 30  , 2018.
The report shall include, but not be limited to, a discussion of all
of the following issues:
   (1) Cost.
   (2) Privacy, including recommendations regarding public and
private access, including law enforcement, to data collected and
stored for purposes of the  MBF   RUC  to
ensure individual privacy rights are protected pursuant to Section 1
of Article I of the California Constitution.
   (3) Jurisdictional issues.
   (4) Feasibility.
   (5) Complexity.
   (6) Acceptance.
   (7) Use of revenues.
   (8) Security and compliance, including a discussion of processes
and security measures necessary to minimize fraud and tax evasion
rates.
   (9) Data collection technology, including a discussion of the
advantages and disadvantages of various types of data collection
equipment and the privacy implications and considerations of the
equipment.
   (10) Potential for additional driver services.
   (11) Implementation issues.
   (b) The California Transportation Commission shall include its
recommendations regarding the pilot program in its annual report to
the Legislature as specified in Sections 14535 and 14536 of the
Government Code.
   3093.  This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1,
2019, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2019, deletes or extends
that date.
  SEC. 3.  Chapter 7 (commencing with former Section 3100) of
Division 2 of the Vehicle Code is repealed.