BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 812 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 27, 2016 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION Jim Frazier, Chair SB 812 (Hill) - As Amended June 21, 2016 SENATE VOTE: 39-0 SUBJECT: Charter-party carriers of passengers: passenger stage corporations: private carriers of passengers SUMMARY: Imposes additional, performance-based requirements on the inspection of tour buses. Specifically, this bill: 1)Requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), upon the recommendation of the Department of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and pending an administrative hearing, to suspend the permit or certificate of a passenger state corporation (PSC) or charter party carrier (CPC) for receiving an unsatisfactory compliance rating in three consecutive CHP terminal inspections, as specified. 2)Prohibits the fees collected by CHP to offset the costs of inspections from being used to supplement other sources of funding or to support any other inspection program conducted by CHP. SB 812 Page 2 3)Provides that a maintenance facility or terminal of a tour bus operator that receives two or more consecutive satisfactory CHP inspection ratings shall be inspected at least once every 26 months instead of at least once every 13 months. 4)Provides that a maintenance facility or terminal of a tour bus operator that receives an unsatisfactory CHP inspection rating shall be inspected every 6 months until the operator achieves a satisfactory rating during a regular terminal inspection. 5)Requires a tour bus that is older than two years that is newly acquired by a CPC or PSC that has received an unsatisfactory rating and is being inspected every 6 months to be inspected by CHP prior to being operated. 6)Requires CHP to recommend to CPUC or the United States Department of Transportation that a tour bus or modified limousine carrier's operating authority be suspended, denied, or revoked upon three consecutive unsatisfactory inspection ratings, and requires CHP to retain records of each recommendation by carrier. 7)Requires CHP to order a tour bus out of service upon the determination that the tour bus has multiple safety violations that could constitute an imminent danger to public safety and prohibits the tour bus from being operated until corrections to the violations are verified by a subsequent CHP inspection within 5 business days. 8)Requires CHP to conduct unannounced surprise inspections, prioritizing companies that are non-compliant, have a history of non-compliance with safety laws or regulations, or have received unsatisfactory ratings, and requires that at least 10% of the inspections it conducts each year be surprise SB 812 Page 3 inspections. 9)Requires CHP, by January 1, 2018, to adopt regulations modifying its existing tour bus terminal inspection program to ensure that the performance-based program targets companies that are non-compliant, have a history of non-compliance with safety laws or regulations, or that have received unsatisfactory ratings, and requires CHP to conduct a follow-up inspection to an unsatisfactory rating between 30 to 90 days after the initial inspection. EXISTING LAW: 1)Defines "charter-party carrier of passengers" as a person engaged in the transportation of persons by motor vehicle for compensation over any public highway. 2)Defines "passenger stage corporation" as a corporation or person engaged as a common carrier, for compensation, in the ownership, control, operation, or management of any passenger stage over any public highway in the state between a fixed termini or over a regular route, as specified. 3)Establishes the "Passenger Charter-Party Carriers Act," which directs the CPUC to issue permits or certificates to charter-party carriers, investigate complaints against carriers, and cancel, revoke, or suspend permits and certificates for specific violations. 4)Requires the CPUC, upon the recommendation of CHP and pending an administrative hearing, to suspend the permit or certificate of a PSC or CPC for failure to maintain any vehicle used in transportation for compensation in a safe SB 812 Page 4 operating condition if that failure is either a consistent failure or presents an imminent danger to public safety. 5)Defines a "bus" as a vehicle designed, used, or maintained for carrying more than 10 persons, including the driver, which is used to transport persons for compensation or profit, or is used by any non-profit organization or group. 6)Defines a "tour bus" as a bus operated by or for a CPC or PSC. 7)Requires CHP to regulate the equipment, maintenance, and safe operation of tour buses. 8)Requires CHP to inspect every maintenance facility or terminal of any person who operates any bus, including any vehicle in that terminal, at least once every 13 months, with inspections of terminals housing more than 100 buses occurring without prior notice, and prohibits a person from operating a bus without this inspection having been conducted. 9)Requires each CPC operating tour buses in California to pay an annual fee of $15 per tour bus, or a maximum of $6,500, to offset the cost of the CHP inspections. 10)Additionally requires all tour buses to be inspected every 45 days by the tour bus operator, or more often if necessary to ensure safe operation. FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown COMMENTS: Existing law generally vests CPUC with the SB 812 Page 5 responsibility to regulate CPCs and PSCs. Tour buses operated by CPCs and PSCs are required to be inspected every 13 months by CHP and additionally every 45 days by the tour bus operator. The findings of the inspections carried out by CHP are reported to CPUC, and tour buses may not legally operate unless the bus operator's terminal and maintenance facilities have been inspected. Terminal inspections typically include inspections of a vehicle's registration, the driver's licensure, and the condition of the vehicle itself. As not every vehicle is inspected in a terminal inspection, and an inspection can still result in a satisfactory rating even if some vehicles present exhibit minor safety violations, recent events suggest the current inspection program may not subject certain carriers to sufficient scrutiny. The author cites a tour bus crash in downtown San Francisco in November 2015, as the impetus for this bill. While the crash was found to be the result of driver error, according to the author, the vehicle had never been inspected by CHP and was not properly registered with CPUC. A subsequent surprise inspection of the carrier's fleet resulted in the discovery of numerous safety violations that had not been discovered in previous, scheduled inspections. This bill would restructure CHP's tour bus inspection program as a performance-based program, with additional inspections targeting carriers with repeated violations and less frequent inspections for carriers who consistently demonstrate compliance. Carriers with multiple unsatisfactory inspection results for their tour buses or modified limousines would be subject to enhanced sanctions, including revocation of the carrier's operating authority. CHP would be required to conduct additional surprise inspections in order to better determine if carriers are complying with all applicable requirements. The author believes that restructuring CHP's terminal inspection SB 812 Page 6 program will improve the safety and oversight of tour buses and modified limousines operating in California. Precedent for a shift to a performance-based inspection system exists in the form of the Basic Inspection of Terminals (BIT) program, in which motor carriers of property are inspected based upon their safety record, with non-compliant carriers facing greater scrutiny and more frequent inspections and compliant carriers enjoying longer periods of time between inspections. Proposed author's amendment: While the BIT program is bolstered through more frequent inputs of data from the carriers in the form of roadside inspection facilities (scales) in addition to terminal inspections, tour buses are often only regularly inspected in their respective terminal inspection. A motor carrier who enjoys longer periods between terminal inspections due to multiple satisfactory ratings is still subject to regular verification of compliance with safety standards when they drive through roadside scales, while tour buses have no equivalent system for regular verification. Currently CHP conducts 'destination inspections' where tour buses are inspected at one terminus of their route, but the department cannot inspect those vehicles mid-trip and these inspections have no real regularity. However, a citing officer in a destination inspection or in any other kind of roadside inspection may order a tour bus out of service if found to be non-compliant. In order to ensure that a tour bus's continued safety performance is reasonably linked to the amount of time between terminal inspections, the author intends to amend this bill to require CHP to additionally inspect a carrier's terminal within 90 days if a tour bus belonging to that terminal is ordered out of service in a roadside or destination inspection due to safety violations. This amendment further links the performance of an operator in the field to the scrutiny it receives under the terminal inspection program. SB 812 Page 7 Related legislation: AB 1574 (Chiu) would require CPUC to verify with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) that the buses, limousines, and modified limousines used by a PSC or CPC have been reported and met safety requirements. AB 1574 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Transportation & Housing Committee on June 28, 2016. AB 1677 (Ting) requires the CHP to develop protocols for the inspection of tour buses by local agencies. AB 1677 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Transportation & Housing Committee on June 28, 2016. Previous legislation: SB 611 (Hill), Chapter 860, Statutes of 2014, required all modified limousines, as defined, to be equipped with two fire extinguishers and required CHP to develop and implement an inspection program for modified limousines, as specified. AB 529 (Lowenthal), Chapter 500, Statutes of 2013, revised the BIT program to include additional vehicles and establish a performance-based model for inspections. SB 338 (Hill) of 2013, would have required all limousines, as defined, to be equipped with two fire extinguishers and would have required CHP to administer an inspection program for certain limousines, as specified. SB 338 was vetoed by the Governor. In his veto message, the Governor stated that the fee authorized by SB 338 was not sufficient to cover CHP's costs of conducting the inspections, and requested the Legislature to pass a bill with the same provisions except authorizing the CHP to charge a fee for the actual cost to perform the inspections. SB 812 Page 8 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support California Association of Highway Patrolmen City and County of San Francisco Opposition None on file Analysis Prepared by:Justin Behrens / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093