STAND. COM. REP. NO. 63-00

                                 Honolulu, Hawaii
                                                   , 2000

                                 RE: H.B. No. 1777
                                     H.D. 1




Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say
Speaker, House of Representatives
Twentieth State Legislature
Regular Session of 2000
State of Hawaii

Sir:

     Your Committee on Transportation, to which was referred H.B.
No. 1777 entitled: 

     "A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO MOTOR CARRIERS,"

begs leave to report as follows:

     The purpose of this bill is to clarify the responsibility of
the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) in considering applications
for certificates of public convenience for carriers and permits
for contract carriers.

     Your Committee finds that the PUC has granted applicants
authority beyond the conditions in their applications for permits
and certificates of public convenience.  Such actions circumvent
the public notice given to the consumer advocate and the general
public.

     This bill would require carrier applicants to adhere
strictly to the services, routes, and vehicle types proposed in
their applications for certificates and permits.  Further, if a
carrier engages in a motor carrier operation without prior
written authority granted by the PUC, this would constitute prima
facie evidence of attempting to evade the PUC regulations and
constitute grounds for the PUC to deny any application for a
permit for two years.

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                 STAND. COM. REP. NO. 63-00
                                 Page 2

 
     Testimony in support of this measure was received on behalf
of a carrier, testifying that the PUC should not permit the
exceeding of the scope of service proposed in an application.
The PUC testified in opposition to this bill on the grounds that
it creates an unreasonable burden on carriers and the PUC.  A
carrier also opposed this bill on the basis that the carrier
industry should be deregulated.  The Hawaii Transportation
Association testified against including specific types of
vehicles to be employed in the carrier application.

     Your Committee has amended this bill by:

          (1) Limiting the specificity required of an applicant
              to only passenger carrying applicants;

          (2) Deleting reference to the differentiation between
              standard and speciality vehicles, but adding motor
              coaches as an example of a vehicle type; and

          (3) Making other technical, nonsubstantive amendments
              for consistency and clarity.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your
Committee on Transportation that is attached to this report, your
Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No.
1777, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second
Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 1777, H.D. 1, and
be referred to the Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce.

                                   Respectfully submitted on
                                   behalf of the members of the
                                   Committee on Transportation,



                                   ______________________________
                                   KENNETH T. HIRAKI, Chair