2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

AgendaBUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

Thursday, September 12, 1991 - 9:30 a.m.LACTC Mariposa Room, 5th Floor

818 West Seventh StreetLos Angeles, CA 90017

Call to Order

Approval of August 8, 1991 Minutes

(Item #2, Page 2)

City of Los Angeles Included Operator Status

City of Santa Clarita Included Operator Status

Antelope Valley Transit Included Operator Status

Private Sector Forum Update

FIVE MINUTE BREAK

FY 1992 Triennial Performance Audits(Item #7, Page 6)

court Ruling on Half-Fare Benefits

(Item #8, Page 19)

Congestion Management Program Update

Revenue Vehicle Replaoement Study

ii. FY 1990-91 Inflation Rate for Los Angeles

(Item #ii, Page 21)

12. Assembly Bill 347 - Relating to Drug Testing

(Item #12, Page 22)

13. FY 1989-90 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE MEASURES

(Item #13, Page 36)

13. New Business

14. Adjournment

DISPOSITION

ACTION

ACTION

ACTION/DISCUSSIO~(Patashnick)

ACTION/DISCUSSIO~(DeRock)

ACTION/DISCUSSION(DeRock)

INFORMATION(Parker)

,

INFORMATION(Austin)

INFORMATION(Hazen)

INFORMATION(McAllester)

INFORMATION(Booz-Allen

Hamilton)

INFORMATION(Tyner)

INFORMATION

INFORMATION(Tyner)

Commi~ion"

Los Anoeles County 8~8 west Seventh StreetTransportation Suite 1100

Leading the Way to Greater MobilityLos Angeles. CA 90017Tel 213 623-1194

MinutesAUGUST 8, 1991

BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

Name

Stephanie GriffinJim SealBirgit BrazillTom WhittleMike UyenoGreg Kelly

John DimarioMark MaloneLarry TorresMike LenschCara RiceSteven BrownBob Hildebrand

MEMBERS PRESENT

Aqency

Santa MonicaCalifornia Bus Assn.Culver CityGardenaLADOTL.A. Co. Dept. of

Public WorksLa MiradaLong BeachMontebelloNorwalkRedondo BeachSCRTDTorrance

OTHERS PRESE~PP

Mary Sue O’MeliaLori DigginsEric SconrefelerDolores Buddell-TeubnerPatti PostMary LauPeter BeaudryGary RosenfeldSubhash MundleJohn MedinaMike PriorBob HuddyBarry SamstenDavid SteinLeo BevonHaim GeffenLinda HaskinsTom RubinDana Woodbury

Booz-Allen & HamiltonComsis Corp.ComsisPalmdalePatti Post & AssociatesL.A. Co. D.P.W.LancasterLaidlaw TransitMundle & AssociatesSanta ClaritaSanta ClaritaSCAGSCAGSCAGSCRTDSCRTDSCRTDSCRTDSCRTD

Commission

Los Angeles County 818 West Seventh StreetTransportation Suite 1100

~-eading the Way ro Greater Mobility

Los Angeles, CA 90017Tel 213 623-1194

BOS MinutesMeeting of August 8, 1991Page Two

Nalini AhujaJulie AustinRenee BerlinBrent CardwellRichard DeRockJody FeerstEric Johnson

LACTC STAFF PRESENT

Bryce LittleJim ParkerAlan PatashnickDesiree PortilloSusan PerryDale RoyalLupe Valdez

CALL TO ORDER

The Meeting was called to order at 9:42 a.m.

APPROVAL OF JULY ii, 1991 MINUTES

The following corrections were noted: (I) Birgit - Brazill, CulverCity, and Larry Tortes, Montebello, were mistakenly marked absent;2) Bob Hildebrand, Torrance, was mistakenly marked present; and3) the discussion of Santa Clarita Transit was Wrong in includingTDA Article 8 dollars as part of the proposal. The minutes weremoved, seconded, and approved as corrected.

RTD LINE 130/TORRANCE LINE 6 FUNDING

Bryce Little, LACTC, summarized SCRTD’s and Torrance Transit’splans to coordinate bus service between California State Universityat Dominguez Hills and the Artesia Blue Line Station. To augmentthe Transit Service Expansion Grant, awarded to Torrance Transitfor this service, an additional $222,600 is being requested fromProposition A Discretionary Interest. BOS members moved, secondedand approved the funding request.

INCLUDED MUNICIPAL OPERATOR STATUS

Regarding the proposal to allocate formula funds to Antelope Valleyand Santa Clarita Transit, Richard DeRock, LACTC, outlined the mostrecent revisions to the draft committee report.

The formula allocation shares will be calculated using theregular base fare for local service - no distinction of ex-press distance-based fares.

For approval, this proposal does not require 8 votes, but thatwill be recommended as a policy for this vote.

O0000L~

BOS MinutesMeeting of August 8,Page Three

1991

LACTC will continue to use the boundaries governing statefunds as the guidelines for allocating federal dollars. There-fore, the official designation as an "Included Municipal Oper-ator" does not apply to operators, like Antelope Valley andSanta Clarita, who are outside of the SCRTD reserved servicearea. DeRock recommends a new official title, such as "Elig-ible Municipal Operator."

B0S members agreed that Antelope Valley and Santa Clarita are elig-ible to receive formula funds, but recommend that the new operatorsreceive their full share of revenue out of the Proposition A Dis-cretionary Fund. BOS members see allocating federal and state dol-lars to operators outside of the SCRTD service area as inconsistentwith the established state guidelines.

In addition, BOS members requested copies of:

Antelope Valley and Santa Clarita operating budgets;FY 1989-90 Transit Performance Measures;FY 1991-92 State Transit Assistance Efficiency Measures;North County express and local farebox recovery rates; andEstimated North County capital future needs

BOS requested a special workshop to continue discussion of thisproposal.

Regarding the proposal to allocate formula funds to the City of LosAngeles, Alan Patashnick outlined how LADOT’s service satisfies theIncluded Municipal Operator criteria. BOS members asked how theDASH service qualifies being "fully integrated" without acceptingtransfers. BOS requested to continue discussion of LADOT at thespecial workshop.

PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT POLICY

Jim Parker, LACTC summarized discussion from BOS Workshop. TomRubin, SCRTD, distributed copies of Marginal Cost Model Method.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Item tabled until September BOS Meeting.

30--YEAR PLAN FUTURE BUS ESTIMATES

Subhash Mundle, Mundle & Associates, summarized changes to the 30-Year Plan since the latest BOS workshop. Mundle noted that over-crowding relief was dropped as a separate item, and that the HOVimplementation schedule was shifted and reduces the number of busesneeded. Total changes require 85 fewer buses.

000004

BOS MinutesMeeting of August 8,Page Four

1991

UMTA/COMSIS STUDY - MIX OF L.A. COUNTY BUS SERVICE

Representatives from the consulting firm COMSIS informed the mem-bers that they are conducting a study of the change in the amountof express bus service in L.A. County from 1986 to 1990. Operatorsshould expect phone calls.

REPORT ON ADA IMPLEMENTATION

Item tabled until October BOS Meeting.

UPDATE ON PROPOSITION C DISCRETIONAP¥

Item tabled until October BOS Meeting.

FY 1991 STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE FUND

Item tabled until September BOS Meeting.

NEW BUSINESS

i. Next Included Operator Workshop - August 14, 1:30 p.m.

2. Next Private Sector Workshop - August 21, 9:30 p.m.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 12:30 p.m.

BOS:MINUTES.BOSDR:db

00000~

~TEM #7

AUgust 26, 1991

MEMO TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTRR -- 9/12/91 MEETING

JULIE AUSTIN, POLICY PROJECT MANAGER ~i

FY 1992 TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDITSOF TRANSIT OPerATORS - WORK SCOPE AND SCHEDULE

ISSUE

State law requires LACTC to conduct a performance audit of transitoperators every three years in accordance with PUC Section 99246.

RECOMMENDATION

Approve the proposed scope of work for the FY 92 TriennialPerformance Audit of Transit Operators.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

Section 99246 of the Public Utilities Code requires certificationthat performance audits of the operators under LACTC’s jurisdictionare completed every three years. The next performance audit of LosAngeles County transit operators is due this fiscal year (FY 92),for the period FY 89 t~rough FY 91; and estimated performance forFY 92. The performance audit provides an evaluation of theefficiency, ~ffectiveness, and economy of the operation and shouldinclude, at a minimum, verification of the operator’s:

- Operating Cost per Passenger- Operating Cost per Vehicle Service Hour- Passengers per Vehicle Service Hour- Passengers per Vehicle Service Mile- Vehicle Service Hours per Employee

The indicators listed above will be evaluated using TransitPerformance Measurement (TPM) data. As in the past, the evaluationwill be conducted in two phases. Phase I will focus on theperformance indicators, TPM data collection and reporting, andother specific areas of analysis. Phase II may include analysis ofspecific functional areas, as recommended in Phase I. Functionalareas include operations, maintenance, service planning, managementreporting, etc.

Commission

Los Angeles County 818 West Seventh StreetTransportation Suite 1100

Los Angeles, CA 90017Tel 213 623-1194

Leading the Way to Greater Mobility.

00000~5

FY 92 TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDITSOF TRANSIT OPERATORS - WORK SCOPEANDSC~E~U7~BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE - 9/12/91MEETINGPage 2.

LACTC has historically conducted an in-depth performance evaluationprogram which examines TPM performance and analyzes policies ortrends which may affect the operator’s efficiency, effectivenessand economy. Additional analysis proposed for inclusion in the FY92 audit are listed in IV.2.D of the Scope of Work (Attachment A),and relate to the following:

- Alternatively-fueled buses vs. UMTA spare ratiorequirements

- Metro Blue Line performance

- Duplication of effort/customer services

- Compliance with Revised Prop. A Guidelines

- Graffiti/vandalism costs vs. security needs

- Goals and objectives

- Systemwide opportunities for more cost-effectiveoperations

LACTC encourages operator involvement in the performance evaluationprocess, and staff will work with operators to prioritize tasks andensure that exit interviews are conducted prior to auditcompletion. The performance audit can provide a useful managementtool, and provide guidance on reporting requirements under LACTC’srecently adopted funding guidelines.

Proposed Schedule

Assuming the work scope is approved at the September LACTC meeting,the schedule for proposal submissions is as follows:

Issue Request for ProposalsPre-proposal ConferenceProposals DueConsultant InterviewsSelection of ConsultantIssue Notice to ProceedContract Execution

October 3, 1991October ii, 1991October 25, 1991November ii, 1991November 27, 1991November 28, 1991December 2, 1991

00000’~

F¥ 1992 TRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDITSOF TRANSIT OPERATORS - WORK SCOPE AND SC~R~ULEBUS OPERATIONS SUDCOMMITTEE - 9~12/91 M~ETINGPage 3.

The proposed schedule for completion of each major product is asfollows:

Draft Phase I Audit ReportFinal Phase I Audit Report

and Executive SummaryRevised Scope of Work for

Phase II Audits, by TaskDraft Phase II Audit ReportFinal Phase II Audit Report

and Executive Summary

March 27, 1992

April 29, 1992

May 27, 1992June 26, 1992

July 24, 1992

Attachment

ATTACHMENT "A"

TRANSIT OPERATORTRIENNIAL PERFORMANCE AUDITS

LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRANSIT OPERATORSFISCAL YEAR 1992

IV. SCOPE OF SERVICE

i. BACKGROUND

(DRAFT - 8/26/91)

i.I. Triennial Performance Audits

State law requires an independent performance audit to be conductedevery three years by LACTC for all operators receiving state funds.Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99246(d) requires five specificperformance indicators to be included in the performance audit.The following indicators must be verified for each operator:

i) Operating cost per passenger;2) Operating cost per vehicle service hour;3) Passengers per vehicle service hour;4) Passengers per vehicle service mile; and5) Vehicle service hours per employee.

The performance measure definitions are listed in PUC Section99247. All but one of the above statistics (VSH per employee)parallel the reporting requirements of the LACTC TransitPerformance Measurement Program, as described in Section IV.I.4.PUC Section 99246(b) requires the performance audits to "evaluatethe efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of the operation of theentity being audited" and requires the audit to be conducted "inaccordance with the efficiency, economy and program resultsportions of the Comptroller General’s "Standards for Audit ofGovernmental Organizations, Programs, Activities, and Functions.’,TDA law requires LACTC to set financial standards and to bring theoperators into compliance with these standards.

The Caltrans "Transit Performance Audit Guidebook", published inJanuary 1991, suggests several functional areas which may requiremore detailed analysis. Functional areas to be examined foroperators who require a Phase II audit may include any or all ofthe following as determined by the results of Phase I:

¯

¯

¯

¯

¯

¯

¯

¯

Transportation OperationsMaintenanceService PlanningBudget and Financial PlanningManagement ReportingPurchasingMarketing and Public RelationsPersonnel ManagementRisk Analysis, Claims and Insurance

1

000003

Those areas that are analyzed should be tied to specific goals andobjectives pertaining to each respective area.

It is anticipated that only selected functional areas will requirefurther analysis in Phase II. The Commission anticipates areaswhichwill require further analysis will include insurance costs,absenteeism, administrative costs, security/vandalism costs, andaccident prevention measures.

1.2 Objectives

The goal of LACTC is to "focus LACTC planning and funding actionsto produce maximum mobility for each dollar expended." Theperformance audit provides a useful tool in meeting this goal byidentifying areas where cost savings may be achieved, and bymonitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of transit services.With this goal in mind, the objectives of the FY 92 performanceaudit are as follows:

o

The performance audit report should provide a usefulinternal management tool for the operator.

The recommendations made in the performance audit shouldprovide specific implementation procedures for use by theoperator.

The Board of Directors of each property should be able touse the performance audit in evaluating the transitoperation.

LACTC should be able to use the performance audit resultsto:

ao Satisfy state requirements;

Provide clear direction that enables the Commissionto verify annually that the operators are makingsatisfactory progress in implementing therecommendations; and

c. Verify that operator productivity is improving.

In meeting Objective #2 above, the consultant should recommendspecific low-cost methodology operators may use to quantify costsavings anticipated to result from implementing therecommendations.

0000~0

1.3 Characteristics of Los Anqeles County Transit Operator~

In order to comply with the requirements of the Transportation ZoneGuidelines, Foothill Transit will be added to the list of operatorsto receive a performance audit in FY 92. SCRTD’s Blue Line railoperations during FY 91 and FY 92 (estimated) will also evaluated separate from bus operations. Los Angeles County transitoperators to be audited are:

¯ Arcadia Dial-A-Ride¯ Claremont Dial-A-Ride¯ Commerce Municipal Bus Lines¯ Culver City Municipal Bus Lines¯ Gardena Municipal Bus Lines¯ La Mirada Transit¯ Long Beach Public Transit¯ Montebello Bus Lines

¯ Norwalk Transit System¯ Redondo Beach Dial-A-Ride¯ Santa Monica Municipal Bus

Lines¯ Torrance Transit System¯ Southern California Rapid

Transit District (SCRTD)¯ Foothill Transit

At the present time, LACTC allocates funds to fourteen (14)transit operators: 12 municipal operators; SCRTD; and the FoothillTransit Zone. Four of these properties operate strictly fixed-route, fixed schedule bus services; six operate both fixed routeand demand-response services; and four operate only general publicdemand-response services. As noted in Appendix A, the size ofthese operations ranges from two to 2086 peak fleet buses.

Funding allocations to all operators are determined by means of aformula originally adopted by the Commission in 1979 and mostrecently re-adopted in 1991. In addition s all operators arere~lired to report selected performance statistics as part of theLACTC’s Transit Performance Measurement (TPM) program, as describedin XV.I.4 below. While the dial-a-ride operators are required toreport all TPM statistics, they only report in one serviceclassification.

1.4 Transit Performance Measurement ~TPM) Proqr~m

In accordance with state law (AB 103), which requires LACTC to setfinancial standards and to bring the transit operators intocompliance the LACTC adopted a Transit Performance Measurement(TPM) Program (Appendix B). The program requires the transitoperators receiving state funds from the Commission to collect andreport certain operating statistics on an annual basis. Thesestatistics include:

I. Total vehicle miles2. In-service vehicle miles

3. Total vehicle hours4. In-service vehicle hours5. Peak vehicles6. Unlinked passengers

7. Passenger revenue8. Auxiliary revenue and local subsidies

0000~i$

As detailed in Appendix B, these statistics are collected andreported for up to five service classifications, as applicable toeach operator’s services.

Certain statistics are to be used in determining formula subsidyallocations for Transportation Development Act (TDA), State TransitAssistance (STA), and UMTA Section 9 funds, as follows:

In-service vehicle milesPassenger revenue

The statistics used in assessing operator performance under the TPMprogram are as follows:

o

In-service vehicle hoursUnlinked passengersPassenger revenueAuxiliary revenue and local subsidiesOperating Costs

WORK ELEMENTS

It is expected that the consultant,s effort on each of the twophases will include but not be limited to the following tasks:

2.1 Phase I Tasks

Category A - Introduction

Introductory meeting to review scope and approach withLACTC and bus operators.

Category B - Prior Audit Review

Review operator’s progress in complying with therecommendations made in the FY 89 performance audit (asummary table of recommendations and Commission findingsis attached as Appendix C).

Identify cost savings resulting from FY 89 perfoz~anceaudits.

Cateqory C - Data Collection and Review

o

o

Review non-financial data collection practices used byeach operator for TPM reporting purposes.

Verify that the operator uses. generally accepted datacollection techniques in accordance with UMTA Section 15and TDA reporting requirements.

Make recommendations for improvement of data collectiontechniques, if appropriate.

7. Review each operator’s data compilation and reportingunder the TPM program.

8o Recommend improvements in data compilation and reporting,if necessary.

Collect non-financial statistics for FY 89 through. FY 91(actual) and FY 92 (available to date).

i0. Calculate TDA-required performance indicators. Performtrend analysis for six years, including statisticscompiled in the FY 89 performance audits (FY 86 - FY 91).Also indicate if FY 92 data compiled to date shows anychanges in trends.

Cateqory D - Analysis

ii. Determine potential costs and ramifications ofalternatively-fueled buses on UMTA’s spare ratiorequirements. In addition, identify the capacity andneed for, and cost of, additional bus space atfacilities.

12. For the Metro Blue Line: Verify compliance with, andreporting of, the TDA and TPM performance indicators.Examine SCRTD’s methodology for allocating ridership,passenger revenues and administrative costs between busand rail since implementation. (Line item data bydepartment/function is available from SCRTD’s accountingdepartment)

13. In order to maximize the effective allocation ofresources, identify any duplication of effort betweenSCRTD, municipal operators, Commuter TransportationServices, and employer transportation coordinators(including transportation management associations) in thefollowing areas:

Transportation demand management marketing(e.g., computerized customer information services ccis);

"Employer-focused" customer service or "CongestedCorridor-focused,, customer services (e.g.,corporate pass programs)

c. Conduct cost-benefit analysis of:

Sharing CCIS data with other transit agencies, anddeveloping public-domain software that can overcomeany proprietary obstacles to sharing data withother agencies.

14. LACTC recently modified the Proposition A 40%Discretionary Guidelines and method for allocating funds.Review operators’ compliance with these guidelines andrecommend any necessary modifications in data reportingin conjunction with TDA/TPM requirements.

15. Identify how operators’ define, report, and allocatecosts of graffiti and vandalism. Based upon thesefindings, and upon operator interviews, determine ifsecurity should be augmented. The analysis of securityneeds should review the past 3 years and future-throughFY 95 with specific recommendations, where appropriate.

16. Review the goals and objectives of each operator (basedon budgets or SRTPs) and verify that:

clear standards have been defined based on the TPMdata for the various functional areas. (See SectionIV. 1.1);

performance monitoring of TPM-related indicators isregularly reported to executive management of thetransit operation;

efforts are documented and integrated with budgetsand SRTPs; and

progress has occurred during the data collectionperiod (FY 89 - FY 91).

17.

18.

Identify systemwide opportunities for more cost-effectiveoperations (e.g., redeployment, elimination of duplicateservices). Reference: PUC Section 99669.

Based upon the findings for Tasks #1-17, prepare clearrecommendations with specific implementation proceduresfor each recommendation (including schedule). Includespecific low-cost methodology the operators may use toquantify cost savings resulting from recommendations.

000014 6

~ategory

19.

E - Phase I Report

Conduct exit interviews with operators to reviewpreliminary recommendations.

20. Prepare Phase I audit draft report (including ExecutiveSummary).

21. Review draft report with LACTC and operator.

22. Present Phase I results to the LACTC Advisory Committeesas required, and to the LACTC.

23. Issue final Phase I Audit Report and Executive Summary.

Phase II Tasks2.2

Only selected functional areas will require further analysisin Phase II based on recommendations of Task #18. LACTC willwork with the consultant to identify areas which throughfurther analysis offer opportunities for operators to attainsignificant cost savings.

Category A - Introduction

Meet with LACTC and bus operators to review schedule anddata collection needs.

Meet with operators’ management staff in functional areasto determine appropriate documents and indicators.

Category B - Data Collection and Review

3. Collect and review a~plicable documents.

Collect data for FY 89 - FY 91 (audited) and FY (available to date).

5o Calculate indicators and perform six-year trend analysis,including functional data compiled in the FY 89performance audits (FY 86 - FY 91). Also indicate if 92 data compiled to date shows any changes in trends.

Category C - Analysis

Review departmental standards utilized to meetestablished goals and objectives for each functionalarea, based on the results of the indicator and documentanalysis. Verify that:

the established standards are reliable indicatorsof progress toward meeting goals and objectives;and

00005~

progress has occurred in meeting the standardsusing the data period (FY 89 - FY 91).

o Analyze and synthesize results of interviews andindicator/document reviews, formulate findings andrecommendations. Prepare clear recommendations andspecific implementation procedures for each

recommendation. The consultant, based on a review ofcurrent and historical data, shall identify those budgetline items which have experienced cost increasessignificantly able increases in the CPI.

8o Recommend specific low-cost methodology the operators mayuse to quantify cost savings resulting from therecommendations.

Cateqory D - Phase II Report

So Conduct exist interview with operators to reviewpreliminary recommendations.

i0. Prepare Phase II audit draft report (including ExecutiveSummary).

ii. Review draft report with LACTC and operator.

12. Discuss cost estimate with LACTC concerning returning insix months to review all operator’s progress inimplementing Phase I and II recommendations and to answeroperator’s questions.

13. Present Phase II results to the Planning and MobilityImprovement Committee and LACTC.

14. Issue final Phase II Audit Report and Executive Summary.

00005~8

APPENDIX A

000017

CHARACTERISTICS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTYTRANSIT OPERATORS

FY 1992

PEAK UNLINKED OPERATINGFLEET PASS.\YEAR BASE BUDGETSIZE(c) (000’S) FARE (000’S)

Arcadia(a) 16 152.2 .75 881.9

Claremont(a) 4 40.0 .50 350.0

Commerce 8 949.0 FREE 1,412.0

Culver City 24 4,000.0 .60 5,253.9

Gardena 37 5,117.0 .50 5,994.0

La Mirada(a) 8 104.9 .50 689.0

Long Beach 177(d) 21,175.0 .75 33,428.0

Montebello 41 7,073.6 .60 8,588.0

Norwalk(b) 19 1,245.9 .50 N/A

Redondo Beach(a) 57.5 1.00 204.3

Santa Monica 106 18,416.5 .50 18,057.0

Torrance 40 3,385.6 .50 8,351.6

SCRTD 2,086 425,000.0 1.15 621,627.0

Foothill 73 3,443.4 .85 9,851..5

(a) Arcadia, Claremont, La Mirada, and Redondo do not operateFixed-Route service.

(b) Estimate, pending submittal of FY 92-94 SRTP.

(c) Includes Fixed Route and Dial-A-Ride/Dial-A-Lift

(d) Includes runabout and Transit Service Expansion RedondoAvenue line.

00001~

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

MInterofficeMemo

AUGUST 26, 1991

BUS OPERATORS SUBCOMMITTEE

CHIP HAZEN, PROGRAM MANAGER, CTSA

COURT RULING ON HALF-FARE BENEFITS

This memo is to inform you of a U.S. Circuit Court of Appealsruling on a denial of a half-fare discount benefit to unqualifieddisabled persons.

New York City had denied a mentally disabled individual fromreceiving a half-fare discount for use of transit services. Theindividual sued on the basis of discrimination against a disabledperson under the UMT Act and Section 504 of the RehabilitationAct.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the UMT Act de-finition of handicap is "plain and unambiguous" and applies topeople who have disabilities that impair their use of trans-portation facilities. Therefore, an individual who is disabledand does not require special planning or design to utilize publictransportation facilities and services effectively are not en-titled to receive the one-half fare benefit. The importance ofthis ruling is that individuals with disabilities, or other silentdisabilities, are not qualified for the one-half fare benefit.

Enclosed is the discussion from the Handicapped RequirementsHandbook, January 1991 issue.

Los Angeles County818 West Seventh StreetTransportation Suite i100Commi~ion Los Angeles, CA 90017

Tel 213 623-1194

Leading the Way to Greater Mobility

, In the Courts

City’s denial of half-fare benefits doesnot violate section 504, court rules

New York City did not discriminate againsta disabled person when it denied him half-fareprivileges under a program that provides dis-count transit to disabled and elderly people, the2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.

Jonathan Marsh was denied reduced-ticketbenefits provided to handicapped people underthe city’s Half-Fare Progam. Under the UrbanMass Transportation (UMT) Act, local transitagencies that receive federal funding must of-fer a fare discount to disabled and elderlypeople. Marsh has a mental disability, but the

January 1991

city said he did not meet the UMT Act’s defi-nition of "handicapped person" to be eligiblefor the pro~am.

Marsh sued, charging that the denial dis-criminated against him under the UMT Actand Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

Generally, the half-fare program applies topeople who, due to age, illness or disablingconditions, are unable to use public transporta-tion without special services. Marsh concededthat he does not require special facilities orspecial planning to use public transit. But, hesaid, he qualifies as handicapped under theRehabilitation Act and thus should be entitledto the discount.

Handicapped Requirements Handbook

The appeals court disagreed, ruling that"importation of the Rehabilitation Act’s defi-nition of ’individuals with handicaps’ into the[half-fare] program would violate fundamentalprinciples of statutory construction." The UMTAct definition of handicap is "plain and unam-bt~,uous, the court said, noting that it essentiallyapplies to people who have disabilities that im-pair the use of transportation facilities.

The court acknowledged that Marsh washandicapped as defined by section 504. Buteven if that definition applied to the transitprogram, it held, the denial of benefits wouldnot be discriminatory because Marsh is nototherwise qualified for the discount.

The court also dismissed two constitutionalclaims Marsh had filed. This case is MarshSkinner, Appendix IV:490.

/

490 Marsh v. Skinner. No. 90-61t3. Dec. 26.1990(2nd Cir. 1990)

Denial of hal.~fare discount benefits to unqualified disabledperson not discrimination under section 504

Denying discount benefits to a disabled person who is notqualified for participation in the program does not constitute dis-crimination under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the 2ndU.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled.

Jonathan Marsh, who has a mental disability, was denied a dis-count transit fare provided to disabled people under New YorkCity’s Half-Fare Program. The city said Marsh did not meet thestatutory definition of "handicapped person" to be eligible for theprogram. Marsh sued. charging that the denial discriminatedagainst him under section 504 and the Urban Mass Transportation(UMT) Act, which authorizes the program.

Under the UMT Act. transit agencies that receive federal fund-ing are required to offer a fare discount to elderly and handi-capped people¯ The act defines handicapped as:

"any individual who by reason of illness, injury, age.congenital malfunction, or other permanent or temporaryincapacity or disability.., is unable without special facili-

ties or special planning or design to utilize public transpor-tation facilities and services effectively."

Marsh conceded that he is not a handicapped person forpurposes of the UMT Act because he does not require specialfacilities or special planning to u~e public transit¯ However. hesaid. he is handicapped as defined by the Rehabilitation Act andthus should be entitled to the discount¯ He also argued thatCongress intended UNIT Act benefits to be co-extensive with thesection 504 definition of handicap.

The appeals court disagreed, ruling that "importation of theRehabilitation Act’s definition of]individuals with handicaps"into the [half-tare] program would violate fundamental principlesof statutory construction.’" The UMT Act definition of handicap is"’plain and unambiguous." the court said. noting that it essentiallyapplies to people who have transportation disabilities¯ Marsh ad-mitted that he does not meet this criterion.

The court found no evidence that Congress linked the UMTAct and section 504 definitions. Marsh had relied on a generalstatement made by one lawmaker to support his contention: thecourt said this one statement was. insufficient to "’override theclear language of the UMT Act.~"

0000~.~ Handicapped Requirements Handbook

ITEM #II

InterofficeMemo

August 7, 1991

MEMO TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

BUDGET ANALYST, FISCAL ANALYSIS

FY 1991 INFLATION RATE FOR THE LOS ANGELES AREA

The rate of inflation for the Los Angeles urbanized area averaged5.4% during FY 1991. This rate is based on the Consumer~PriceIndex for all urban consumers (CPI-U, 1967 base) in the LosAngeles-Anaheim-Riverside area.

FY 1991

Jul 1990 over Jul 1989 = 5.12%Aug 1990 over Aug 1989 = 5.70%Sep 1990 over Sep 1989 = 5.83%Oct 1990 over Oct 1989 = 6.64%Nov 1990 over Nov 1989 = 6.82%Dec 1990 over Dec 1989 = 6.64%Jan 1991 over Jan 1990 = 5.97%Feb 1991 over Feb 1990 = 4.66%Mar 1991 over Mar 1990 = 3.90%Apr 1991 over Apr 1990 = 4.87%May 1991 over May 1990 = 5.13%Jun 1991 over Jun 1990 = 4.21%

FY 1991 AVERAGE 5.41% (5°4%)

If yOU have any questions, please call me at (213) 244-6526.

LORENZO TYNERBudget AnalystFiscal Analysis

~ Los Angeles County 818 West Seventh StreetTransportation Suite 1100Commission Los Angeles. CA 90017

L~.~’~ Tel 213 623-1194

Leading the Way to Greater Mobility

ITEM

InterofficeMemo

AUgUst 28, 1991

W~MOTO:

FROM:

BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

DEIDRERE.ITMAN, STATE AFFAIRS ~R~RESENTATIVE~

ASSEMBLY BIT.T. 347 -- ~R;~TING TO DRUG TESTING

Attached is a copy of the recently amended AB 347 relating to drugtesting. The BOS has reviewed this legfslation on previousoccasions. The amendments to AB 347 clarify federal regulationsthat had previously been referenced in the bill. AB 347 is a two-year bill and will not be considered again until next January.

As most of you know, the Legislature adjourns on September 13,although there is talk of a one-week special session relating toreapportionment. The Legislature will reconvene in January, 1992for the second year of the two-year session.

D#3/bos.mmo

Los Angeles County818 West Seventh Stree[Transportation Suite 1100Commission Los Angeles. CA 90017

Tel 213 623-1194

Leading the Way to Greater Mobility

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 1

1 AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 19, 199123456789i0ii12131415161718192O2122232425262728293O3132333435363738394O4142434445464748495O

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 17, 1991

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 8, 1991

Introduced by Assembly Members Eaves, Bentley, Costa, Hansen,Quackenbush, and Woodruff(Coauthor: Senators Presley and Russell)January 28, 1991

An act to AMEND THE HEADING OF ARTICLE 3 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 4010)OF CHAPTER 2.5 OF DIVISION 2 OF, AND TO add Sections 588, 1033.2, 3559,3560, 4011, 5141, and 5384.7 to the Public Utilities Code, and to AMENDSECTIONS 34505.1 AND 34505.6 OF, AND TO add Chapter 8 (commencing withSection 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) Division 6 of, the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles, and making anappropriation therefor.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 347, as amended, Eaves. Commercial vehicles: drivers: drug testing.(i) Federal regulations require regulated motor carriers to implement

a controlled substance testing program, in compliance with specifiedstandards, for drivers of commercial vehicles in interstate commerce.

This bill would require [ the Department of the California Highway[Patrol to adopt regulations requiring all employers of drivers of[commercial motor vehicles to test their drivers and driver applicants[for the presence of those controlled substances consistent with the[federal regulations. The bill would require the Department of the[California Highway Patrol to submit the regulations prior to adoption to][the State Department of Health Services for review and comment, and any ][suggested revisions, which would be required to be included in the ][regulations. The] EVERY MOTOR CARRIER, AS DEFINED, TO IMPLEMENT APROGRAM FOR TESTING OF DRIVERS OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES FORMARIJUANA, COCAINE, OPIATES, PHENCYCLIDINE (PCP), AND AMPHETAMINES, BOTHBIENNIALLY AND, UPON REASONABLE CAUSE, AT OTHER TIMES, PURSUANT TOREGULATIONS WHICH THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIAHIGHWAY PATROL TO ADOPT. THE BILL WOULD SPECIFY THE TESTING PROCEDURESPURSUANT TO REGULATIONS WHICH THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE THESTATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES TO ADOPT, RECORDKEEPING, AND RELATEDMATTERS. THE BILL WOULD DECLARE A DRIVER WHO TESTS POSITIVE FORCONTROLLED SUBSTANCES TO BE MEDICALLY UNQUALIFIED TO OPERATE A COMMERCIALMOTOR VEHICLE, EXCEPT AS SPECIFIED.

THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE EVERY MOTOR CARRIER TO ESTABLISH AN EMPLOYEEDRUG EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM FOR BOTH SUPERVISORS AND DRIVERS, ASPRESCRIBED. THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIAHIGHWAY PATROL, THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, AND THE PUBLICUTILITIES COMMISSION EACH TO MAINTAIN A LIST OF DRUG TESTING LABORATORIESMEETING SPECIFIED FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS.

THE BILL WOULD MAKE CERTAIN VIOLATIONS OF THESE REQUIREMENTS

DELETED MATERIAL IS IN BRACKETS []. ADDED MATERIAL IS CAPITALIZED.

oooo~~J

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *********************************************************************************

AB 347 PAGE 2

123456789i0ii121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394O4142434445464748495O

MISDEMF~NORS AND, UNDER OTHER PROVISIONS, OTHER VIOLATIONS WOULD BEINFRACTIONS. THUS, THE BILL WOULD IMPOSE A STATE-MANDATED LOCAL PROGRAMBY CREATING NEW CRIMES.

THE BILL WOULD CONTINUOUSLY APPROPRIATE AN UNSPECIFIED AMOUNT ANNUALLYFROM THE TRANSPORTATION RATE FUND TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HF~iLTHSERVICES FOR PURPOSES OF ITS RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE BILL. THE billwould require every highway common carrier passenger stage corporation,highway permit carrier, PRIVATE CARRIER, household goods carrier, [ ][passenger stage corporation,] and [ ][charter party] CHARTER-PARTY carrier of passengers subject to thejurisdiction and control [ Public Utilities Commission] OF THE COMMISSIONto submit, by January i, 1993, and annually thereafter, a certificationthat a controlled substance testing program meeting these requirementshas been established and is maintained in effect. THE BILL WOULD ALSOREQUIRE EVERY OWNER-OPERATOR, BY JANUARY i, 1993, AND ANNUALLYTHEREAFTER, TO SUBMIT TO THE COMMISSION A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF ATEST FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. Since, under other provisions, aviolation of these requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose astate-mandated local program.

The bill would also require the commission to suspend the operatingauthority of those entities if the [ certification] CERTIFICATE OFCOMPLETION is not filed when due, and continue the suspension until [ the][certification] THAT CERTIFICATE is [ made] FILED.

Because the bill would impose new duties on the commission which arepayable from the Transportation Rate Fund, a continuously appropriatedfund, the bill would make an appropriation.

(2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse localagencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.

Statutory provisions establish proceduresfor making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this actfor a specified reason.

vote: majority. Appropriation: yes. Fiscal committee: yes.State-mandated local program: yes.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION i. Section 588 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:588. Every highway common carrier and cement carrier shall, on or

before January i, 1993, and annually thereafter, file with thecommission, on a fo~m prescribed by the commission, a certification thatthe carrier has established and maintained in effect a controlledsubstance testing program in compliance with [ Section 15330] CHAPTER 8(COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION15400) OF DIVISION 6 of the Vehicle Code. The commission shall suspendthe operating authority of any carrier which does not file the requiredcertification on or before the date that the certification is required tobe filed. The suspension shall continue until the proper certificationis filed with the commission.

SEC. 2. Section 1033.2 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 3

1 1033.2. Every passenger stage corporation shall, on or before January2 i, 1993, and annually thereafter, file with the commission, on a form3 prescribed by the commission, a certification that the corporation has4 established and maintained in effect a controlled substance testing5 program in compliance with [ Section 15330] CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH6 SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) 7 DIVISION 6 of the Vehicle Code. The commission shall suspend the8 operating authority of any passenger stage corporation which does not9 file the required certification on or before the date that thei0 certification is required to be filed. The suspension shall continueii until the proper certification is filed with the commission.12 SECo 3. Section 3559 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to read:13 3559. Every highway permit carrier shall, on or before January i,14 1993, and annually thereafter, file with the commission, on a form15 prescribed by the commission, a certification that the carrier has16 established and maintains in effect a controlled substance testing17 program in compliance with [ Section 15330 ] CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH18 SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) OF DIVISION19 6 of the Vehicle Code. The commission shall suspend the operating20 authority of any carrier which does not file the req~.ired certification21 on or before the date that the certification is requlred to be filed.22 The suspension shall continue until the proper certification is filed23 with the commission.24 SEC. 4. SECTION 3560 IS ADDED TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE, TO READ:25 3560. (A) ON AND AFTER JANUARY I, 1993, NO PERSON SHALL BE ISSUED26 OPERATING27 AUTHORITY AS AN OWNER-OPERATOR, AND NO OWNER-OPERATOR OPERATING AUTHORITY28 SHALL BE TRANSFERRED, UNTIL THE PERSON OR TRANSFEREE HAS SUBMITTED TO THE29 COMMISSION A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION OF A TEST FOR CONTROLLED30 SUBSTANCES, SIGNED UNDER OATH, BY A MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER, AS DEFINED IN31 SECTION 15330 OF THE VEHICLE CODE. THAT TEST SHALL HAVE BEEN COMPLETED32 NO EARLIER THAN 60 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE THE APPLICATION FOR ISSUANCE OR33 TRANSFER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION.34 (B) EVERY OWNER-OPERATOR SHALL, ON OR BEFORE JANUARY i, 1993, AND35 ANNUALLY THEREAFTER, OBTAIN FROM A MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER A CERTIFICATE36 OF COMPLETION OF A TEST FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. THE CERTIFICATE OF37 COMPLETION SHALL BE FILED WITH THE COMMISSION NO LATER THAN THE DATE OF38 EXPIRATION OF THE OWNER-OPERATOR’S MEDICAL CERTIFICATE. THE COMMISSION39 SHALL SUSPEND THE OPERATING AUTHORITY OF ANY OWNER-OPERATOR WHO DOES NOT40 HAVE A CURRENT CERTIFICATE ON FILE.41 (C) THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION SHALL CONTAIN ALL OF THE FOLLOWING42 INFORMATION:43 (i) THE NAME, ADDRESS, AND LICENSE NUMBER OF THE MEDICAL REVIEW44 OFFICER.45 (2) A STATEMENT SIGNED BY THE MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER UNDER OATH THAT46 THE OWNER-OPERATOR HAS COMPLETED A TEST FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES47 IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER48 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) OF DIVISION 6 OF THE VEHICLE CODE AND49 THAT THE TEST RESULT WAS NEGATIVE FOR THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES TESTED.50 (3) THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE LABORATORY, CERTIFIED UNDER THE

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *********************************************************************************

AB 347 PAGE 4

1 ~MANDATORY GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL WORKPLACE DRUG TESTING PROGRAMS’’ OF2 THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 53 FEDERAL3 REGISTER 11970 ET SEQ., APRIL ii, 1988, AS AMENDED, THAT PERFORMED THE4 TEST.5 (4) THE DATE THE OWNER-OPERATOR WAS TESTED FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.6 (D) UPON VERIFYING THAT THE CONTENTS OF THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION7 ARE TRUE AND CORRECT, THE COMMISSION SHALL ISSUE THE OWNER-OPERATOR A8 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION THAT SHALL BE CARRIED BY9 THE OWNER-OPERATOR AT ALL TIMES WHEN OPERATING A COMMERCIAL MOTORi0 VEHICLE.ii (E) THE OWNER-OPERATOR SHALL FURNISH A COPY OF THE CERTIFIED COPY 12 THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION TO A MOTOR CARRIER PURSUANT TO EVERY13 SUBHAUL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OWNER-OPERATORAND THE MOTOR CARRIER. THE14 MOTOR CARRIER SHALL MAINTAIN A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION ON15 FILE AS PART OF THE SUBHAUL AGREEMENT. THE MOTOR CARRIER IS NOT REQUIRED16 TO PAY THE FEE FOR THE17 OWNER-OPERATOR’S TEST FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION.18 SEC. 5. THE HEADING OF ARTICLE 3 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 4010) 19 CHAPTER 2.5 OF DIVISION 2 OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE IS AMENDED TO20 READ: Article 3. [ Insurance] REGULATION21 SEC. 6. SECTION 4011 IS ADDED TO THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE, TO READ:22 4011. EVERY PRIVATE CARRIER SHALL, ON OR BEFORE J/d~UARY i, 1993, AND23 ANNUALLY THEREAFTER, FILE WITH THE COMMISSION, ON A FORM PRESCRIBED BY24 THE COMMISSION, A CERTIFICATION THAT THE CARRIER HAS ESTABLISHED AND25 MAINTAINS IN EFFECT A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTING PROGRAM IN COMPLIANCE26 WITH CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING27 WITH SECTION 15400) OF DIVISION 6 OF THE VEHICLE CODE. THE COMMISSION28 SHALL SUSPEND THE REGISTRATION OF ANY CARRIER WHICH DOES NOT FILE THE29 REQUIRED CERTIFICATION. THAT SUSPENSION SHALL CONTINUE UNTIL THE30 CERTIFICATION IS FILED WITH THE COMMISSION.31 SEC. 7. Section 5141 is added to the Public Utilities Code~ to read:32 5141.. Every household goods carrier shall, on or before January i,33 1993, and annually thereafter, file with the commission, on a form34 prescribed by the commission, a certification that the carrier has35 established and maintained in effect a controlled substance36 testing program in compliance with [ Section 15330 ] CHAPTER 837 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION38 15400) OF DIVISION 6 of the Vehicle Code. The commission shall suspend39 the operating authority of any [ passenger stage corporation] HOUSEHOLD40 GOODS CARRIER which does not file the required certification on or before41 the date that the certification is required to be filed. The suspension42 shall continue until the proper certification is filed with the43 commission. [

]44 [ SEC. 5.]45 SEC. 8. Section 5384.7 is added to the Public Utilities Code, to46 read:47 5384.7. Every [ charter party] CHARTER-PARTY carrier of passengers48 shall, on or before January i, 1993, and annually thereafter, file with49 the commission, on a form prescribed by the commission, a certification50 that the carrier has established and maintained in effect a controlled

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347PAGE 5

1 substance testing program in compliance with [ Section 15330] CHAPTER 82 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330) AND CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION3 15400) OF DIVISION 6 of the Vehicle Code. The commission shall suspend4 the operating authority of any [ passenger stage corporation]5 CHARTER-PARTY CARRIER which does not file the required certification on6 or before the date that the certification is7 required to be filed. The suspension shall continue until8 the proper certification is filed with the commission. [ ]9 [ SEC. 6.]I0 SEC. 9. Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 15330) is added ii Division 6 of the Vehicle Code, to read: C 8. C S T [ ]12 [ 15330. (a) The Department of the California Highway Patrol shall

]13 [adopt regulations to require every employer to test every driver and ]14 [driver applicant for the use of marijuana, cocaine, opiates, ]15 [phencyclidine (PCP), and amphetamines which regulations are consistent ]16 [with the requirements of the Federal Highway Administration, as set ]17 [forth in Part 40 (commencing with Section 40.1) of, and in Subpart

]18 [(commencing with Section 391.81) of Part 391 of, Title 49 of ’the Code

of]19 [Federal Regulations.

]20 [ (b) Prior to the adoption of regulations pursuant to subdivision(a),]21 [the Department of the California Highway Patrol shall submit "the

]22 [proposed regulations to the State Department of Health Services for ]23 [review and comment and suggested revisions. The Department of the

]24 [California Highway Patrol shall amend the proposed regulations to ]25 [include any suggested revisions made

]26 [ by the State Department of Health Services.]27 [ 15331. For purposes of this chapter, ~’employer’’ has the same meaning]

28 [as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 15210.]29 [ 15332. Nothing in this chapter either requires an employer to test, or]

30 [prohibits an employer from testing, drivers on a random basis for any ]31 [controlled substance.

]32 [ SEC. 7. ]33 15330. THE FOLLOWING DEFINITIONS GOVERN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS34 CHAPTER:35 (A) ~~COLLECTION SITE’’ MEANS A PLACE WHERE INDIVIDUALS PRESENT36 THEMSEI~ES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING BODY FLUID OR TISSUE SAMPLES TO37 BE ANALYZED FOR SPECIFIED CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. THE SITE SHALL HAVE38 PRESENT ALL NECESSARY PERSONNEL, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FACILITIES, AND39 SUPERVISION TO PROVIDE FOR THE COLLECTION, SECURITY, TEMPORARY STORAGE,40 AND TRANSPORTATION OR SHIPMENT OF THE SAMPLES TO A LABORATORY.41 (B) ~COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE’’ MEANS A MOTOR VEHICLE OR 42 COMBINATION OF VEHICLES USED IN INTRASTATE COMMERCE TO TRANSPORT43 PASSENGERS OR PROPERTY IF THE VEHICLE IS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:44 (i) HAS A GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT RATING OR GROSS COMBINATION WEIGHT45 RATING OF 26,001 OR MORE POUNDS.46 (2) IS DESIGNED TO TRANSPORT MORE THAN 15 PASSENGERS, INCLINING THE47 DRIVER.48 (3) IS USED IN THE TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN A49 QUANTITY REQUIRING PLACARDING UNDER REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE UNITED50 STATES SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION UNDER THE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 6

1 TRANSPORTATION ACT (49 U.S.C. APP. 1801 ET SEQ.).2 (C) ’~CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE’’ HAS THE MEANING GIVEN BY SECTION 802 3 TITLE 21 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE, AS AMENDED, AND INCLUDES ALL4 SUBSTanCES LISTED IN SECTIONS 1308.11 TO 1308.15, INCLUSIVE, OF TITLE 215 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, AS AMENDED.6 (D) ~~DRIVER’’ MEANS ANY PERSON WHO OPERATES A COMMERCIAL MOTOR7 VEHICLE AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION (B), WHETHER AS AN EMPLOYEE 8 INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.9 (E) ~DRUG’’ MEANS ANY SUBSTANCE OTHER THAN ALCOHOL THAT IS I0 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION (C) AND IN PART 40 ii TITLE 49 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS.12 (F) ~MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER’’ MEANS A LICENSED PHYSICIAN AND SURGEON13 RESPONSIBLE FOR RECEIVING LABORATORY RESULTS GENERATED BY A MOTOR14 CARRIER’S DRUG TESTING PROGRAM WHO HAS KNOWLEDGE OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE15 DISORDERS AND HAS APPROPRIATE MEDICAL TRAINING TO INTERPRET AND EVALUATE16 AN INDIVIDUAL’S CONFIRMED POSITIVE TEST FOR ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.17 (G) ~MOTOR CARRIER’’ MEANS EVERY INTRASTATE MOTOR CARRIER OF PERSONS18 OR PROPERTY, WHETHER A FOR-HIRE OR PRIVATE CARRIER, INCLUDING SCHOOL BUS19 OPERATORS AND PUBLIC TRANSIT OPERATORS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE20 JURISDICTIONAND CONTROL OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION WHICH USE IN21 THEIR OPERATIONS A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE.22 (H) ~OWNER-OPERATOR’’ HAS THE MEANING GIVEN BY SECTION 3557 OF THE23 PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE. AN OWNER-OPERATOR IS A DRIVER WITHIN THE MEANING24 OF SUBDIVISION (D) AND MOTOR CARRIER WITHIN THE MEANING OF SUBDIVISION25 (G) IF HE OR SHE USES OR EMPLOYS DRIVERS OTHER THAN HIMSELF OR HERSELF.26 (I) ~ON DUTY’’ MEANS DRIVING HOURS AND ON-DUTY STATUS, AS DEFINED IN27 SECTION 1212 OF TITLE 13 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS.28 (J) ~~REASONABLE CAUSE’’ MEANS THAT A MOTOR CARRIER REASONABLY29 BELIEVES THE ACTIONS, APPEARANCE, OR CONDUCT OF A DRIVER WHO IS ON DUTY30 ARE INDICATIVE OF THE USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.31 15331. (A) EVERY MOTOR CARRIER SHALL, ON AND AFTER JANUARY i, 1993,32 IMPLEMENT A PROGRAM TO TEST DRIVERS OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES FOR THE33 USE OF MARIJUANA, COCAINE, OPIATES, PHENCYCLIDINE (PCP), AND34 AMPHETAMINES, AS DEFINED IN PART 40 OF TITLE 49 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL35 REGULATIONS.36 (B) THE DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL SHALL ADOPT37 REGULATIONS TO ENFORCE THIS CHAPTER.38 15332. TESTING FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES PRESCRIBED IN THIS CHAPTER39 -SHALL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION40 WORKPLACE DRUG TESTING PROGRAMS CONTAINED IN CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH41 SECTION 15400). ALL URINE SPECIMENS SHALL BE TESTED BY A LABORATORY42 CERTIFIED UNDER THE ~MANDATORY GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL WORKPLACE DRUG43 TESTING PROGRAMS’’ OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN44 SERVICES, 53 FEDERAL REGISTER 11970 ET SEQ., APRIL ii, 1988, AS AMENDED.45 15333. (A) EVERY MOTOR CARRIER SHALL REQUIRE A DRIVER-APPLICANT WHOM46 THE MOTOR CARRIER INTENDS TO HIRE OR CONTRACT FOR THE SERVICES OF TO BE47 TESTED FOR THE USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AS A PREQUALIFICATION48 CONDITION.49 (B) A DRIVER-APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT TO CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTING50 AS A PREQUALIFICATION

0000~

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 7

1 CONDITION.2 (C) PRIOR TO COLLECTION OF A URINE SAMPLE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER3 9 .(COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400), A DRIVER-APPLICANT SHALL BE NOTIFIED4 THAT THE SAMPLE WILL BE TESTED FOR THE PRESENCE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.5 (D) MOTOR CA RRIER MA Y US E A DRIVER WH O IS AN OWNER-OPERATOR, AS6 DEFINED IN SECTION 3557 OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE, WITHOUT COMPLYING7 WITH SUBDIVISION (A) IF THE DRIVER HAS ON FILE A CURRENT CERTIFICATE 8 COMPLETION OF A TEST FOR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITIES9 COMMISSION AND THAT CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION IS PART OF THE SUBHAULi0 AGREEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3560 OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE.ii 15334. (A) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL REQUIRE A DRIVER TO BE TESTED UNDER12 THIS CHAPTER FOR THE USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AS PART OF THE BIENNIAL13 MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF THE DRIVER.14 (B) NO OWNER-OPERATOR SHALL BE ON DUTY UNLESS HE OR SHE HAS A VALID15 CERTIFIED COPY OF COMPLETION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST ISSUED BY THE16 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 3560 OF THE PUBLIC17 UTILITIES CODE.18 15335. (A) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL REQUIRE A DRIVER TO BE TESTED, UPON19 REASONABLE CAUSE, FOR THE USE OF20 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.21 (B) A DRIVER SHALL SUBMIT TO TESTING, UPON REASONABLE CAUSE, FOR THE22 USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES WHEN REQUESTED TO DO SO BY THE EMPLOYING23 MOTOR CARRIER.24 (C) IN ESTABLISHING REASONABLE CAUSE, THE DRIVER’S CONDUCT INDICATING25 THE PROBABLE USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE SHALL BE WITNESSED BY TWO26 SUPERVISORS. IF ONLY ONE SUPERVISOR IS AVAILABLE, THAT SUPERVISOR IS A27 SUFFICIENT WITNESS OF THE CONDUCT. EACH WITNESS SHALL HAVE RECEIVED28 TRAINING IN THE DETECTION OF PROBABLE DRUG USE BY OBSERVING A ]PERSON’S29 BEHAVIOR.30 (D) THE DOCUMENTATION OF THE DRIVER’S CONDUCT SHALL BE PREPARED AND31 SIGNED BY EACH WITNESS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THE OBSERVED BEHAVIOR OR32 BEFORE THE RESULTS OF THE TESTS ARE RELEASED, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER.33 15336. (A) NO DRIVER SHALL BE ON DUTY IF THE DRIVER TESTS POSITIVE34 FOR USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBDIVISION (D).35 (B) A DRIVER WHO TESTS POSITIVE FOR THE USE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE36 IS MEDICALLY UNQUALIFIED TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE~ EXCEPT AS37 PROVIDED IN SUBDIVISION (D).38 (C) A DRIVER WHO REFUSES TO BE TESTED PURSUANT TO THIS CHAPTER SHALL39 NOT BE PERMITTED TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR40 VEHICLE. THAT REFUSAL SHALL BE TREATED AS A POSITIVE TEST AND SHALL41 SUBJECT THE DRIVER TO THE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN SUBDIVISION (B).42 (D) ANY DRIVER WHO IS UNQUALIFIED TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR43 VEHICLE UNDER SUBDIVISION (A) OR (B) SHALL HAVE AS AN AFFIRMATIVE44 DEFENSE, TO BE PROVEN BY THE DRIVER, THAT HIS OR HER USE OF A CONTROLLED45 SUBSTANCE (EXCEPT FOR METHADONE) WAS PRESCRIBED BY A LICENSED PHYSICIAN46 AND SURGEON WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH THE DRIVER’S MEDICAL HISTORY AND47 ASSIGNED DUTIES. THE MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY48 FOR A DRIVER TO DISCUSS A POSITIVE TEST RESULT AND CLARIFY WHETHER A49 PRESCRIBED MEDICATION WAS USED PRIOR TO ANY ACTION BEING TAKEN BY THE50 MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER.

O000~Z9

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 8

1 (E) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION PROHIBITS A MOTOR CARRIER FROM REQUIRING2 A DRIVER TO NOTIFY THE MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER OF ANY THERAPEUTIC DRUG3 USE.4 15337. (A) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL ENSURE THAT THE DRIVER TO BE TESTED5 IS TRANSPORTED IMMEDIATELY TO A COLLECTION SITE FOR THE COLLECTION OF A6 URINE SAMPLE.7 (B) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL ENSURE THAT THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE8 TESTING PERFORMED CONFORMS WITH CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION9 15400).i0 15338. (A) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL NOTIFY ITS DRIVER ii DRIVER-APPLICANT OF THE RESULTS OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST CONDUCTED12 UNDER THIS CHAPTER.13 (B) MOTOR CA RRIER SH ALL NO TIFY A DRIVER-APPLICANT OF THERESULTS OF14 A PREEMPLOYMENT CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST CONDUCTED UNDER THIS CHAPTER IF15 THE DRIVER-APPLICANT REQUESTS THOSE RESULTS WITHIN 60 DAYS OF BEING16 NOTIFIED OF THE DISPOSITION OF THE EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION.17 (C) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL NOTIFY A DRIVER OF THE RESULTS OF 18 PERIODIC OR REASONABLE CAUSE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST CONDUCTED UNDER19 THIS CHAPTER IF THE RESULTS WERE POSITIVE.20 (D) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL ENSURE THAT ALL RECORDS RELATED TO THE21 ADMINISTRATION AND RESULTS OF THE DRUG TESTING PROGRAM FOR ITS DRIVERS22 SUBJECT TO THE TESTING REQUIREMENTS ARE MAINTAINED FOR A MINIMUM OF FIVE23 YEARS, EXCEPT THAT INDIVIDUAL NEGATIVE TEST RESULTS SHALL BE MAINTAINED24 FOR A MINIMUM OF 12 MONTHS.25 (E) A MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER SHALL BE THE SOLE CUSTODIAN 26 INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS. THE MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER SHALL RETAIN THE27 REPORTS OF INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS FOR A MINIMUM OF FIVE YEARS.28 (F) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL RETAIN IN THE EMPLOYEE’S QUALIFICATION FILE29 INFORMATION THAT INDICATES ONLY THE FOLLOWING:30 (I) THE EMPLOYEE SUBMITTED TO THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST.31 (2) THE DATE OF THE TEST.32 (3) THE LOCATION OF THE TEST.33 (4) THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON OR ENTITY PERFORMING THE TEST.34 (5) WHETHER THE TEST FINDING WAS POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE.35 15339. (A) A MOTOR CARRIER SHALL MAINTAIN A SUMMARY FOR EACH CALENDAR36 YEAR OF THE RECORDS RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND RESULTS OF THE37 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTING PROGRAM PERFORMED UNDER THIS CHAPTER. THIS38 SUMMARY SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:39 (i) THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTS ADMINISTERED.40 (2) THE NUMBER OF PREQUALIFICATION, PERIODIC, AND REASONABLE CAUSE41 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTS ADMINISTERED, SPECIFYING THAT NUMBER IN EACH42 TESTING CATEGORY.43 (3) THE TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHOSE TEST RESULTS WERE POSITIVE44 FOR A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.45 (4) THE TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHOSE TEST RESULTS WERE POSITIVE46 FOR A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, SPECIFYING THE NUMBER OF EACH47 TESTING CATEGORY.48 (5) THE DISPOSITION OF EACH INDIVIDUAL WHOSE TEST RESULTS WERE49 POSITIVE FOR A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.50 (6) THE NUMBER OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTS PERFORMED BY

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 9

1 LABORATORY THAT INDICATED EVIDENCE OF A PROHIBITED CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE2 OR METABOLITE IN THE SCREENING TEST IN A SUFFICIENT QUANTITY TO WARRANT A3 CONFIRmaTORY TEST.4 (7) THE NUMBER OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTS PERFORMED BY 5 LABORATORY THAT INDICATED EVIDENCE OF A PROHIBITED CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE6 OR METABOLITE IN THE CONFIRMATORY TEST IN A SUFFICIENT QUANTITY TO BE7 REPORTED AS A POSITIVE FINDING TO THE MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER.8 (8) THE NUMBER OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTS PERFORMED BY 9 LABORATORY THAT INDICATED EVIDENCE OF A PROHIBITED CONTROLLED SUBSTANCEi0 OR METABOLITE IN THE CONFIRMATORY TESTS IN A SUFFICIENT QUANTITY TO BEii REPORTED AS A POSITIVE FINDING, SPECIFYING THAT PARTICULAR CONTROLLED12 SUBSTANCE FOUND.13 (B) THE DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL SHALL INSPECT14 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTING SUMMARIES MAINTAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION15 (A), AS PART OF THE REQUIRED INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED PURSUANT 16 SUBDIVISION (C) OF SECTION 34501 AND SUBDIVISION (C) OF SECTION 34501.1217 TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITH THIS CHAPTER. HOWEVER,18 NO CARRIER SHALL RELEASE THE NAME, DRIVERS’ LICENSE NUMBER, OR SOCIAL19 SECURITY NUMBER OF ANY DRIVER OR ANY OTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING THE20 IDENTITY OF ANY DRIVER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA HIG}FWAY21 PATROL. NO CARRIER SHALL BE GIVEN A SATISFACTORY RATING FOR AN22 INSPECTION UNLESS THE EMPLOYER HAS COMPLIED WITH THIS CHAPTER.23 15340. (A) NO PERSON MAY OBTAIN THE INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS RETAINED24 BY A MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER, AND NO MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER SHALL RELEASE25 THE INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS OF ANY EMPLOYEE TO ANY PERSON, WITHOUT FIRST26 OBTAINING WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE TESTED DRIVER. THIS SUBDIVISION27 DOES NOT PROHIBIT A MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER FROM RELEASING, TO THE28 EMPLOYING MOTOR CARRIER, THE INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH29 SECTION 15338.30 (B) NO PERSON MAY OBTAIN THE INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SECTION 15338 31 BE RETAINED BY A MOTOR CARRIER, AND NO MOTOR CARRIER SHALL RELF~SE THAT32 INFORMATION RELATING TO ANY DRIVER OR FORMER DRIVER, WITHOUT FIRST33 OBTAINING WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE TESTED DRIVER.34 15341. (A) EVERY MOTOR CARRIER SHALL ESTABLISH AN EMPLOYEE DRUG35 EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM. THE PROGRAM SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE36 LIMITED TO, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING:37 (I) AN EDUCATIONAL AND TRAINING COMPONENT FOR DRIVERS WHICH ADDRESSES38 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.39 (2) AN EDUCATIONAL AND TRAINING COMPONENT FOR SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL40 WHICH ADDRESSES CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES.41 (3) A WRITTEN STATEMENT, ON FILE AND AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION, AT THE42 MOTOR CARRIER’S PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS, OUTLINING THE MOTOR43 CARRIER’S PROGRAM.44 (B) EACH PROGRAM SHALL CONSIST OF AN EFFECTIVE TRAINING PROGRAM FOR45 THE MOTOR CARRIER’S SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL AND ALL DRIVERS.46 (C) THE TRAINING PROGRAM SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, THE47 FOLLOWING ELEMENTS:48 (i) THE EFFECTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE USE 49 PERSONAL HEALTH, SAFETY, AND THE WORK ENVIRONMENT.50 (2) THE MANIFESTATIONS AND BEHAVIORAL CAUSES THAT MAY INDICATE

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE i0

1 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE USE ABUSE.2 (3) DOCUMENTATION OF TRAINING GIVEN TO DRIVERS AND MOTOR CARRIER3 SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL.4 (D) THE TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR DRIVERS AND SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL SHALL5 CONSIST OF AT LEAST 60 MINUTES OF TRAINING.6 (E) AFTER RETURNING TO WORK, DRIVERS WHO TEST POSITIVE SHALL BE7 REQUIRED TO CONTINUE IN AN AFTERCARE PROGRAM AND BE SUBJECT TO FOLLOWUP8 TESTING FOR NOT LONGER THAN 12 MONTHS FOLLOWING RETURN TO WORK.9 15342. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, THE STATEi0 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, AND THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION SHALLii EACH MAINTAIN A CURRENT LIST OF LABORATORIES CERTIFIED BY THE NATIONAL12 INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND13 HUMAN SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED IN THE ~MANDATORY14 GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL WORKPLACE DRUG TESTING PROGRAMS’’ OF THE UNITED15 STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, 53 FEDERAL REGISTER 1197016 ET SEQ., APRIL Ii, 1988, AS AMENDED.17 15343. A MOTOR CARRIER WILLFULLY FAILING TO TEST EMPLOYEES IN18 ACCORDANCE WITH THIS CHAPTER OR CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400)19 OR RELEASING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION IN VIOLATION OF THIS CHAPTER IS20 GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR.21 15344. NO DRIVER SHALL BE DISCHARGED OR OTHERWISE DISCRIMINATED22 AGAINST IN EMPLOYMENT AS A RESULT OF A FALSE POSITIVE OR OTHER ERRONEOUS23 TEST RESULT OR PURSUANT TO TESTING PERFORMED IN A24 MANNER INCONSISTENT WITH THIS CHAPTER OR CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH25 SECTION 15400). IN ANY LEGAL ACTION TO ENFORCE THIS SECTION, 26 PREVAILING PLAINTIFF SHALL BE AWARDED REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND27 COSTS. A PREVAILING PLAINTIFF MAY ALSO BE AWARDED PUNITIVE DAMAGES, IN28 THE DISCRETION OF THE COURT.29 15345. NO DRIVER MAY BE CHARGED ANY FEE FORANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE30 TESTING PERFORMED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.31 15346. A LABOR ORGANIZATION IS NOT AN EMPLOYER OF A DRIVER FOR32 PURPOSES OF THIS CHAPTER.33 15347. THIS CHA~PTER DOES NOT PROHIBIT A LABOR ORGANIZATION FROM34 ENTERING INTO A COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT WITH AN EMPLOYER WHICH35 PROVIDES MORE STRINGENT SAFEGUARDS OF A DRIVER’S RIGHTS REGARDING CHAIN36 OF CUSTODY, LABORATORY PROCEDURES, AND THE PROCEDURES OR CONDUCT OF A37 MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER, EXCEPT THAT THE AGREEMENT MAY NOT WAIVE THE38 OBLIGATION OF AN EMPLOYER TO CONDUCT A DRUG TESTING PROGRAM AS REQUIRED39 BY THIS CHAPTER.40 15348. A DRIVER WHO IS SUBJECT TO AND PARTICIPATES IN TESTING FOR41 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES PURSUANT TO REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED BY THE UNITED42 STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AS SET FORTH IN PART 40 OR PART 39143 OF TITLE 4944 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS IS DEEMED TO HAVE COMPLIED WITH45 THIS C~IAPTER, EXCEPT THAT AN OWNER-OPERATOR SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION46 15334 AND SECTION 3560 OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE.47 15349. NOTHING IN THIS CHAPTER AFFECTS THE OBLIGATION OFAN EMPLOYER48 UNDER SECTION 222.5 OR 231 OF THE LABOR CODE.49 15350. NOTHING IN THIS CHAPTER EITHER REQUIRES A MOTOR CARRIER TO50 TEST, OR PROHIBITS A MOTOR CARRIER FROM TESTING, DRIVERS ON A RANDOM

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT08/26/91 *

********************************************************************************

AB 347 PAGE ii

1 BASIS, EXCEPT THAT A MOTOR CARRIER WHO TESTS DRIVERS ON A RANDOM BASIS2 SHALL FOLLOW THE PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED IN THIS CHAPTER AND CHAPTER 93 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400).4 15351. NO INFORMATION CONCERNING THE RESULT OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE5 TEST PERFORMED ON ANY DRIVER MAY BE USED IN ANY SUBSEQUENT CRIMINAL6 PROCEEDING AGAINST THAT PERSON. NO INFORMATION, EVIDENCE, OR DOCUMENT7 OBTAINED FROM ANY RECORD MAINTAINED PURSUANT TO THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE8 USED IN ANY SUBSEQUENT CRIMINAL PROCEEDING AGAINST A DRIVER.9 SEC. i0. CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) IS ADDED i0 DIVISION 6 OF THE VEHICLE CODE, TO READ: C 9. P Tii WD T P12 15400. THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES SHALL ADOPT REGULATIONS13 SETTING FORTH PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG TESTING14 PROGRAMS WHICH ARE AT LEAST AS EFFECTIVE AS THE REGULATIONS OF THE15 SECRETARY OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONTAINED IN16 PART 40 OF TITLE 49 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, AS AMENDED.17 15401. THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES SHALL ADOPT REGULATIONS18 ESTABLISHING AN AUDIT PROGRAM TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE BY MOTOR CARRIERS WITH19 CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330). THE AUDIT PROGRAM SHALL20 INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO, INSPECTION OF RECORDS TO DETERMINE THAT21 THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A MEDICAL REVIEW OFFICER WERE FOLLOWED, AND THAT22 PROPER SAMPLE TAKING, CHAIN OF CUSTODY, AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES WERE23 FOLLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THIS24 CHAPTER.25 15402. THE REGULATIONS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THIS CHAPTER SHALL CREATE26 SUBSTANTIVE LEGAL RIGHTS OF DRIVERS SUBJECT TO CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE27 TESTING.28 15403. THE REGULATIONS ADOPTED UNDER THIS CHAPTER SHALL BECOME29 EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY i, 1993.30 15404. (A) NO MOTOR CARRIER MAY TEST ANY DRIVER FOR CONTROLLED31 SUBSTANCES IN VIOLATION OF ANY32 REGULATION ADOPTED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.33 (B) THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES MAY ACCESS AND COLLECT 34 CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($I,000) FOR ANY35 VIOLATION OF A REGULATION ADOPTED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.36 15405. NOTWITHSTANDING SECTION 5005 OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE, THE37 SUM OF __ DOLLARS ($.__) IS HEREBY APPROPRIATED ANNUALLY FROM THE38 TRANSPORTATION RATE FUND TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES FOR39 PURPOSES OF THIS CHAPTER AND CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15330).40 SEC. ii. SECTION 34505.1 OF THE VEHICLE CODE IS AMENDED TO ]READ:41 34505.1. (a) Upon determining that a tour bus operator has [ either]42 (I) failed to maintain any vehicle used in transportation for43 compensation in a safe operating condition or to comply with [ the

]44 [Vehicle Code] THIS CODE or with regulations contained in Title 13 of the45 California Code of Regulations relative to motor carrier safety, and, in46 the department’s opinion, that failure presents an imminent danger to47 public safety or constitutes such a consistent failure as to justify a48 recommendation to the Public Utilities Commission or the Interstate49 Commerce Commission [ or] , (2) failed to comply with the pull notice50 system or periodic report requirements required by Section

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT08/26/91 *

********************************************************************************

AB 347 PAGE 12

1 1808.1, OR (3) FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE2 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING WITH3 SECTION 15330) OR CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) OF DIVISION4 6, the department shall recommend to the Public Utilities Commission or5 the Interstate Commerce Commission that the carrier’s operating authority6 be suspended, denied, or revoked, whichever is appropriate. However,7 when recommending denial of an application for new or renewal authority,8 the department need not conclude that the carrier’s failure presents an9 imminent danger to public safety or that it constitutes a consistenti0 failure. The department need only conclude that the carrier’s complianceii with the safety-related matters described in paragraph (i) of subdivision12 (a) is sufficiently unsatisfactory to justify a recommendation for13 denial° The department shall retain a record, by operator, of every14 recommendation made pursuant to this section.15 (b) Before transmitting a recommendation pursuant to subdivision (a),16 the department shall notify the carrier in writing of all of the17 following:18 (i) That the department has determined that the carrier’s safety19 record is unsatisfactory, furnishing a copy of any documentation or20 summary of any other evidence supporting the determination.21 (2) That the determination may result in a suspension, revocation, 22 denial of the carrier’s operating authority by the [ California] Public23 Utilities Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission.24 (3) That the carrier may request a review of the determination by the25 department within five days of its receipt of the notice required under26 this subdivision. If a review is requested by the carrier, the27 department shall conduct and evaluate that review prior to transmitting28 any notification pursuant to subdivision (a).29 SEC. 12. SECTION 34505.6 OF THE VEHICLE CODE IS AMENDED TO READ:30 34505.6. (a) Upon determining that a motor carrier operating any31 vehicle described in subdivision (a), (b), (d), (e), (f), 32 Section 34500 has [ either] (i) failed to maintain any vehicle used 33 transportation for compensation in a safe operating condition or to34 comply with [ the] [ Vehicle Code ] THIS CODE or with regulations35 contained in Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations relative to36 motor carrier safety, and, in the department’s opinion, that failure37 presents an ~mminent danger to public safety or constitutes such a38 consistent failure as to justify a recommendation to the Public Utilities39 Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission, [ or] (2)40 failed to comply with the pull notice system or periodic report41 requirements required by Section 1808.1, OR (3) FAILED TO COMPLY WITH42 THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 8 (COMMENCING43 WITH SECTION 15330) OR CHAPTER 9 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 15400) 44 DIVISION 6, the department shall recommend to the Public Utilities45 Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission that the carrier’s46 operating authority be suspended, denied, or revoked, whichever is47 appropriate. The department shall retain a record, by operator, of every48 recommendation made pursuant to this section.49 (b) Before transmitting a recommendation pursuant to subdivision (a),50 the department shall notify the carrier in writing of all of the

* LEGI-TECH BILL TEXT REPORT 08/26/91 *

AB 347 PAGE 13

1 following:2 (i) That the department has determined that the carrier’s safety3 record is unsatisfactory, furnishing a copy of any documentation or4 summary of any other evidence supporting the determination.5 (2) That the determination may result in a suspension, revocation, 6 denial of the carrier’s operating authority by the [ California] Public7 Utilities Commission or the Interstate Commerce Commission.8 (3) That the carrier may request a review of the determination by the9 department within five days of its receipt Of the notice required underi0 this subdivision. If a review pursuant to thisii paragraph is requested by the carrier, the department shall conduct and12 evaluate that review prior to transmitting any notification pursuant to13 subdivision (a).14 SEC. 13. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section15 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs16 which may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be17 incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, changes the18 definition of a crime or infraction, changes the penalty for a crime or19 infraction, or eliminates a crime or infraction. Notwithstanding Section20 17580 of the Government Code, unless otherwise specified in this act, the21 provisions of this act shall become operative on the same date that the22 act takes effect pursuant to the California Constitution.

0000~35

ITEM #13

September 5, 1991

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

LORENZO TYNER

FY 1989-90 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE MEASURES

As requested, LACTC staff has compiled a summary of transit per-formance measures from Fiscal Year 1989-90 for the Los AngelesCounty Included Municipal Operators. The summary includes the fourperformance measures previously used to allocate the Proposition ADiscretionary Bonus dollars:

2.3.4.

Operating Cost per HourFarebox Recovery RatioSubsidy per PassengerUnlinked Passengers Per Hour

Please reviewand comment no later than September 16, 199].. Atthat time, LACTC staff will include the performance statistics inthe LACTC Performance Audit documentation.

Please call me or Dale Royal with your comments at (213) 244-6526and (213) 244-6456, respectively.

Thank you.

LT:dr

Attachments

Los Angeles County 818 West Seventh StreetTransportation Suite 1100Commission ’ Los Angeles, CA 90017

Tel 213 623-1194

Leading the Way to Greater Mobility

00o0a5

LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRANSIT PERFORMANCE MEASURES

OPERATING COST PER HOUR

All All AllLocal , Express pAR

Arcadia $0.00 $0.00 $27.62

Claremont $0.00 $0.00 $27.58

Commerce $80.48 $0o00 $34.94Culver City $52.57 $0.00 $0.00

Gardena $61.19 $0.00 $0.00La Mirada $0.00 $0.00 $46.27Long Beach $50.15 $0.00 $31.14Montebello $55.60 $0.00 $27.52

Norwalk $49.93 $0.00 $41.53

Redondo Beach $0.00 $0.00 $22.97

Santa Monica $46.64 $63.46 $0,00Torrance $64.14 $69.11 $35.65SCRTD $71.63 $84.79 $0.00

FAREBOX RECOVERY RATIO

All All AllLocal Express DAR

Arcadia 0.00% 0.00% 36.70%Claremont 0.00% 0.00% 47.25%Commerce 74.94% 0.00% 100.00%Culver City 38.47% 0.00% 0.00%

Gardena 35.71% 0.00% 0.00%La Mirada 0.00% 0.00% 60.95%Long Beach 42.33 % 0.00% 34.18 %1Montebello 40.77% 0.00% 10.59%

Norwalk 53.04% 0.00% 36.36%

Redondo Beach 0.00% 0.00% 14.98%

Santa Monica 62.53% 86.16% 0.00%Torrance 34.13 % 38.83 % 67.85 %SCRTD 52.82% 36.60% 0.00%

September 12, 1991 Page

LOS ANGELES COUNTY TRANSIT PERFORMANCE MEASURES

SUBSIDY PER PASSENGER

All All AI.Local Express DAR

Arcadia $0.00 $0.00 $3.35

Claremont $0.00 $0.00 $4.50

Commerce $0.33 $0.00 $0.00Culver City $0.68 $0.00 $0.00

Gardena $0.63 $0.00 $0.00

La Mirada $0.00 $0.00 $2.38

Long Beach $0.72 $0.00 $9.78

Montebello $0.55 $0.00 $12.85

Norwalk $1.21 $0.00 $9.14

Redondo Beach $0.00 $0.00 $3.71

Santa Monica $0.25 $0.24 $0.00

Torrance $1.27 $1.45 $4.50

SCRTD $0.49 $1.55 $0.00

UNLINKED PASSENGERS TOTAL VEHICLE SERVICE HOURS

All All AllLocal Express DAR

Arcadia 0 0 5Claremont 0 0 3

Commerce 60 0 1

Culver City 48 0 0

Gardena 63 0 0

La Mirada 0 0 8Long Beach 40 0 2

Ivlontebello 60 0 2

Norwalk 19 0 3

Redondo Beach 0 0 5

Santa Monica 70 37 0

Torrance 33 29 3

SCRTD 69 35 0

September 12, 1991 Page 2

BUS OPERATIONS SUBCOMMITTEESEPTEMBER 12, 1991

AGENCY

24.

:gh/Sign-ln.RFP.Hard Disk