BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 51
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
51 (Quirk and Lackey)
As Amended June 1, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |May 28, 2015 |SENATE: | 38-0 |(August 1, 2016) |
| |58-14 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: TRANS.
SUMMARY: Authorizes the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to
develop guidelines relating safe lane splitting practices.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of the bill,
and instead:
1)Require CHP, in the development of the guidelines, to consult
with agencies and organizations with an interest in road
safety and motorcyclist behavior including, but not
necessarily limited to, the Department of Motor Vehicles,
Department of Transportation, Office of Traffic Safety, and a
motorcycle organization focused on motorcyclist safety.
2)Define a variety of terms.
AB 51
Page 2
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill:
1)Unequivocally authorized motorcycles to drive between stopped
or slow moving vehicles in the same lane on divided and
undivided streets, roads, or highways if the following
conditions are met:
a) The motorcycle is not driven at a speed greater than 50
miles per hour (mph);
b) The motorcycle is not driven more than 15 mph faster
than the speed of traffic going in the same direction.
2)Provided that motorcycles must continue to obey existing laws
relating to the safe operation of a vehicle.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS: Lane splitting (also referred to as lane sharing or
filtering) refers to the practice of riding a motorcycle in the
same lane as a vehicle traveling in the same direction between
clearly marked lanes of traffic. Typically, this maneuver is
undertaken so that motorcycles can overtake slow moving or
stopped vehicles but the maneuver is also frequently performed
when traffic is moving at higher rates of speed. Lane splitting
is illegal in all states, with the exception of California,
where the practice is neither expressly authorized nor
prohibited. Lane splitting, however, is a legal practice in
many European and Asian countries where it is frequently
utilized in highly urbanized areas.
Recognizing the need to develop guidelines as an educational
tool for all roadway users, CHP convened a committee of traffic
safety stakeholders and motorcycle safety experts representing
governmental, private, academic communities. Together, the
committee drafted guidelines on safe lane splitting practices
and the guidelines were posted on CHP's Internet Web site in
early 2013 and, later, on the Office of Traffic Safety's (OTS's)
Internet Web site. The guidelines were also printed in the
AB 51
Page 3
DMV's motorcycle handbook. The guidelines clarified that lane
splitting, when conducted in a safe and prudent and manner is
not illegal in California and outlined five general safety
recommendations for motorcyclists engaging in lane splitting
including that: 1) lane splitting should occur only when a
motorcyclist is travelling at a speed no more than 10 mph faster
than surrounding traffic; 2) motorcyclists should refrain from
lane splitting when the traffic is flowing at a speed of 30 mph
or faster; 3) lane splitting should occur between the #1 and #2
lanes over other lanes; 4) the total environment should be
considered by the motorcyclist when lane splitting occurs,
including the lane width, size of surrounding vehicles, weather,
and lighting; and 5) motorcyclists should be alert and
anticipate possible movements of other road users.
After CHP and OTS posted the guidelines on their respective Web
sites, a complaint was registered with the Office of
Administrative Law that the guidelines were developed in the
absence of a formal rulemaking process and, therefore, could be
considered "underground regulations." CHP and OTS removed the
guidelines from their respective Internet Web sites, informed
the public that they would not issue or enforce the guidelines,
and noted that the guidelines were developed only to provide
common-sense safety information for motorcyclists given that
California law does not allow or prohibit lane splitting.
According to the author, removing the guidelines from CHP and
OTS Web sites left a void in informing the public about safe
lane splitting practices, particularly since CHP curtailed all
education and outreach efforts on the subject. To address this
concern, the author introduced this bill which generally
codifies CHP's lane splitting guidelines, except that the
allowable conditions have been modified slightly to reflect new
research that has just been released.
Writing in support of this bill, the Personal Insurance
Federation of California which represents seven of the nation's
largest insurance companies, indicates that codifying the CHP's
lane splitting guidelines would serve to reduce injuries and
AB 51
Page 4
enhance public road safety. Specifically, Personal Insurance
Federation of California contends that this bill would also
serve to educate motorcycle riders and motorists about lane
splitting and help to reduce accidents currently associated with
this practice.
Several motorcycle groups have writing in opposition to this
bill noting that it is overly restrictive and, therefore, lacks
support in the motorcycle community. More specifically, the
American Motorcyclist Association, also writing in opposition to
this bill, states that there is a widespread acceptance of lane
splitting in California and that they specifically oppose
efforts to restrict this popular practice. It is unclear if
these groups remain in opposition following recent amendments to
the bill to reflect updated research.
Please see the policy committee analysis for a full discussion
of this bill.
Analysis Prepared by:
Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093 FN:
0003547