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