Researcher: SM Page 1 5/3/24
OLR Bill Analysis
sHB 5330 (as amended by House "A")*
AN ACT IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
SUMMARY
§ 1 — VIOLATIONS OF TRAFFIC CONTROL AND ROAD SAFETY
ORDERS
Increases, from $5,000 to $10,000, the maximum fine for a person or entity that does not
comply with certain orders related to traffic control and road safety
§§ 2-5 — MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATING DEVELOPMENTS
Requires OSTA to order local building officials to revoke building or foundation permits
for major traffic generating developments that do not have an OSTA certificate
§ 6 — BICYCLE-CONTROL SIGNALS
Allows the use of bicycle-control signals at intersections and requires cyclists to comply
with them
§§ 7 & 8 — LOCAL TRAFFIC AUTHORITIES
Allows a municipality, by vote of its legislative body, to establish a new LTA replacing the
entity currently designated as such
§ 9 — VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS
Allows DOT to set variable speed limits on limited-access highways to address traffic,
construction, or other safety conditions
§ 10 — BUS FACILITY ADVERTISEMENTS
Generally allows advertising signs, displays, or devices to be erected within 660 feet of the
interstate and other limited-access highways in connection with bus facilities, subject to
DOT approval and related regulations
§ 11 — MODERNIZING AND MAINTAINING BUS STOPS AND
SHELTERS
Specifies that existing law’s requirement that, beginning on July 1, 2024, bus stops and
shelters constructed by DOT or transit districts comply with the ADA and certain plans
developed by these entities applies only to those that are newly built on and after this date
§§ 12 & 13 — FARE ENFORCEMENT ON PUBLIC BUSES
Allows employees of DOT and certain third-party contractors with fare inspection duties
to issue citations to people who deliberately ride public buses without paying the required
fare, rather than specifically requiring these citations be issued by employees that are “fare
inspectors,” as under current law 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 2 5/3/24
§ 14 — METRO NORTH INDEMNIFICATION
Specifies that the DOT commissioner can only indemnify Metro North Railroad against
certain claims when it is acting in its capacity as the state’s contracted maintainer of the
M-8 rail car fleet
§§ 15-17 & 42-50 — AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT
Restarts and makes permanent DOT’s work zone speed camera program (which was
initially established as a pilot program and ended on December 31, 2023); expands the
permissible locations and makes other changes from the pilot program; modifies speed and
red light camera provisions related to data retention and leased vehicles
§ 18 — DOT CAPITAL PROJECTS INFORMATION
Requires DOT to develop and maintain an interactive map on its website that displays the
location of and certain information on its active construction capital projects
§ 19 — PROPOSED FARE AND SERVICE CHANGES
Requires DOT to provide notice of public hearings on proposed major service changes to
commuter rail service to the Transportation and Finance, Revenue and Bonding
committees and the Connecticut Public Transportation Council; requires DOT to provide
notice of public hearings related to fare changes for mass land transportation to the
council, in addition to these legislative committees as current law requires
§§ 20-40 — VERTIPORTS AND UNMANNED AIRCR AFT
Defines “unmanned aircraft” and “vertiports” and incorporates these concepts into
various existing aeronautics statutes; expands CAA’s authority to generally cover
unmanned aircraft regulation; prohibits the operation of unmanned aircraft in close
proximity above a private premises without the owner’s approval
§ 41 — ALCOHOL SALES AT BRADLEY AIRPORT
Modifies the hours during which alcohol sales are allowed at Bradley Airport to every day
after 4:00 a.m. and until 11:00 p.m.
§ 51 — DOT ROAD SAFETY AUDITS
Requires DOT to develop a process allowing a municipality’s chief executive officer, local
traffic authority, or regional council of governments to ask it to do a road safety audit of a
state highway and sets specified requirements for this process
§ 52 — PARKING AUTHORITIES AND MUNICIPAL PARKING
REGULATIONS
Allows any municipality to adopt an ordinance authorizing its parking authority to
enforce municipal parking regulations, rather than only Hartford as under current law
§ 53 — SHORE LINE EAST SERVICE RESTORATION
Requires DOT, by January 1, 2025, to report to the Transportation Committee on five
alternatives for restoring Shore Line East service and their cost
§ 54 — INCIDENT REPORTS AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE
PROCESS
Extends, from within three business days to within six business days after an incident, the
timeframe during which a police officer must prepare and send DUI incident reports and
related chemical test results to DMV under the administrative per se license suspension
process 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 3 5/3/24
SUMMARY
This bill, among other things, makes various changes in
transportation-related laws, including modifying provisions on
automated enforcement. It also extends the timeframe during which a
police officer must transmit DUI incident reports to the Department of
Motor Vehicles (DMV) under the administrative per se license
suspension process. Additionally, the bill defines “unmanned aircraft”
(i.e., drones) and “vertiports” and incorporates these concepts into
various existing aeronautics statutes. Lastly, the bill makes various
minor, technical, and conforming changes. A section-by-section analysis
follows.
*House Amendment “A” principally eliminates the underlying bill’s
provisions on motorcycle helmet requirements and reckless driving
violations for distracted driving on limited-access highways and
incorporates the provisions on (1) automated enforcement, (2)
Department of Transportation (DOT) capital projects information, (3)
proposed fare and service changes, (4) vertiports and unmanned
aircraft, (5) alcohol sales at Bradley Airport, (6) DOT road safety audits,
(7) parking authorities, (8) Shore Line East service restoration, and (9)
incident reports and the administrative per se process.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Various; see below.
§ 1 — VIOLATIONS OF TRAFFIC CONTROL AND ROAD SAFETY
ORDERS
Increases, from $5,000 to $10,000, the maximum fine for a person or entity that does not
comply with certain orders related to traffic control and road safety
The bill increases, from $5,000 to $10,000, the maximum fine for any
person, firm, or corporation that does not comply with certain orders
related to traffic control and road safety (e.g., Office of the State Traffic
Administration (OSTA) orders related to major traffic generating
developments (see § 2) or local traffic authorities’ orders related to traffic
control devices). As under existing law, a violator is also subject to
imprisonment of up to 30 days and can have his or her driver’s license
or vehicle registration suspended or revoked.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2024 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 4 5/3/24
§§ 2-5 — MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATING DEVELO PMENTS
Requires OSTA to order local building officials to revoke building or foundation permits
for major traffic generating developments that do not have an OSTA certificate
By law, entities building, expanding, or establishing a major traffic-
generating development (i.e., one with at least 100,000 square feet of
floor area or at least 200 parking spaces; see Conn. Agencies Regs., § 14-
312-1) generally must get an OSTA certificate. Local building officials
may not issue a (1) building or foundation permit to these entities until
they show their certificate and (2) certificate of occupancy for these
developments until the OSTA certificate’s conditions have been met.
Under the bill, if OSTA determines that a local building official issued a
building or foundation permit to an entity that does not have a
certificate, it must order the building official to revoke the permit.
The bill also makes a conforming change applying the same
requirement to major traffic-generating developments that consist of
separately owned parcels.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§ 6 — BICYCLE-CONTROL SIGNALS
Allows the use of bicycle-control signals at intersections and requires cyclists to comply
with them
The bill permits the use of bicycle-control signals at intersections and
requires cyclists to comply with them. Under existing law, cyclists
riding on the traveled portion of roads are generally subject to the same
statutory duties applicable to motor vehicle drivers (CGS § 14-286a). In
other words, current law generally requires these cyclists to comply
with traffic control signals in the same way as vehicular traffic. Under
the bill, when both traffic control signals and bicycle-control signals are
present at an intersection, cyclists must comply with the bicycle signals.
The bill also specifies that (1) this is the case for pedestrians directed by
pedestrian-control signals and (2) pedestrians must comply with these
signals.
Under the bill, bicycle-control signals are three lens signal heads with
green, yellow, or red bicycle-stenciled lenses. A green, red, or yellow
bicycle indicates bicycle traffic facing the signal may proceed, must stop, 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 5 5/3/24
or is warned in the same way as currently for the following traffic
control signals: a green alone, red alone, or steady yellow. A flashing
red or yellow bicycle indicates bicycle traffic must stop or may proceed
in the same way as for a flashing red or yellow traffic control signal.
States must comply with the Federal Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD), which contains specific requirements
related to bicycle signals.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§§ 7 & 8 — LOCAL TRAFFIC AUTHORITIES
Allows a municipality, by vote of its legislative body, to establish a new LTA replacing the
entity currently designated as such
The bill allows municipalities to create a separate entity to serve as
their local traffic authority (LTA) instead of the board of police
commissioners or another entity current law prescribes. The bill applies
despite any contrary provisions in a municipality’s charter, special act,
or home rule ordinance.
Under the bill, any municipality, by vote of its legislative body, may
establish an LTA and appoint members to serve on it. The municipality’s
legislative body also sets the qualifications, terms, and compensation, if
any, of these members. An LTA created through this process replaces
the entity currently filling this role in the municipality and has all the
powers and duties the law assigns to LTAs (see Background — Authority
of Local Traffic Authorities).
As shown in the table below, current law designates different local
bodies or officials to serve as a municipality’s LTA, depending mainly
on whether the municipality has a board of police commissioners.
Under existing law, unchanged by the bill, OSTA is the traffic authority
for state roads and bridges and has authority over certain elements
specified in law (e.g., traffic control signals).
Table: Entities Current Law Designates as Local Traffic Authorities 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 6 5/3/24
Jurisdiction Designated Entity
City, town, or borough with police
commissioners
Board of police commissioners
City, town, or borough without
commissioners, but with a regularly
appointed police force
City or town manager, police chief, police
superintendent, or any elected or
appointed official or board with similar
powers and duties
Town without a city or borough that has a
regularly appointed police force
Board of selectmen
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
Background — Authority of Local Traffic Authorities
With respect to streets under their jurisdiction, the law generally
gives LTAs authority (in some cases only with OSTA approval) to,
among other things, (1) place and maintain traffic control signals, signs,
markings, and other safety devices following OSTA regulations (CGS §
14-298); (2) set speed limits on roads and bridges, under certain
conditions (CGS § 14-218a); (3) designate school zones (in which fines
for certain violations may be doubled) and pedestrian safety zones (CGS
§§ 14-212b & -307a); (4) designate one-way streets (CGS § 14-303); (5)
allow golf carts to be driven on streets during daylight hours (CGS § 14-
300g); and (6) adopt regulations necessary to exercise their authority
(CGS § 14-312).
§ 9 — VARIABLE SPEED LIMITS
Allows DOT to set variable speed limits on limited-access highways to address traffic,
construction, or other safety conditions
The bill allows DOT to set variable speed limits (i.e., temporarily
lower the posted speed limit) on limited-access highways or portions of
these highways. It may do so to address traffic congestion, road
construction, or other conditions affecting safe and orderly traffic
movement. Under the bill, a variable speed limit must be (1) based on
an engineering investigation; (2) no less than 10 mph below the posted
speed limit; and (3) effective when it is posted and accompanied by a
sign, between 500 and 1,000 feet before the point at which it takes effect,
notifying drivers of the speed limit change. The bill requires DOT to use
stationary or portable, changeable message signs to give this notice. 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 7 5/3/24
(The federal MUTCD contains various standards related to variable
speed limits and related signs; federal law and regulation require DOT
to comply with MUTCD standards.)
The bill’s variable speed limit provisions replace a provision of
current law allowing DOT to modify limited-access highway speed
limits during weather events or emergencies, so long as there are
electronic signs indicating the speed limits.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2024
§ 10 — BUS FACILITY ADVERTISEMENTS
Generally allows advertising signs, displays, or devices to be erected within 660 feet of the
interstate and other limited-access highways in connection with bus facilities, subject to
DOT approval and related regulations
The law generally prohibits the erection of billboards and advertising
signs within 660 feet of the edge of the interstate and other limited-
access highways. However, the DOT commissioner may allow certain
types of signs subject to its regulations, such as directional and other
official signs.
The law also makes an exception for advertising signs, displays, or
devices located on, built on, or abutting property in areas owned,
managed, or leased by a public authority for (1) railway or rail
infrastructure facilities and certain associated structures; (2) bus rapid
transit corridors and associated shelters, structures, or facilities; (3)
airport development zones; or (4) any other transit or freight purpose.
The bill adds bus facilities to these exceptions.
As under existing law, these advertisements cannot be built where
state law, local ordinance, or zoning regulations prohibit them.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§ 11 — MODERNIZING AND MAINTAINING BUS S TOPS AND
SHELTERS
Specifies that existing law’s requirement that, beginning on July 1, 2024, bus stops and
shelters constructed by DOT or transit districts comply with the ADA and certain plans
developed by these entities applies only to those that are newly built on and after this date 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 8 5/3/24
By law, beginning July 1, 2024, each bus stop or shelter constructed
by DOT or a transit district must be (1) built according to certain
modernization and maintenance plans the department must jointly
develop with transit districts and (2) compliant with the federal
Americans with Disabilities Act’s (ADA) physical accessibility
guidelines. The bill specifies that these requirements apply only to new
bus stops or shelters built on and after this date.
Existing law already requires that the state building code, which
generally regulates the design, construction, use, and alteration of
buildings and structures including bus stops and shelters, be in
substantial compliance with the ADA (CGS §§ 29-252 & 29-269).
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§§ 12 & 13 — FARE ENFORCEMENT ON PUBLIC BUSES
Allows employees of DOT and certain third-party contractors with fare inspection duties
to issue citations to people who deliberately ride public buses without paying the required
fare, rather than specifically requiring these citations be issued by employees that are “fare
inspectors,” as under current law
Under current law, “fare inspectors” are DOT employees the
commissioner designates or third-party contractors the department
employs. They are responsible for inspecting passengers’ tickets, passes,
or other documentation on state-owned or -controlled public buses
proving the passenger paid the required fare (i.e., “fare inspection
duties”), when all or part of the fare must be paid before boarding. Fare
inspectors are authorized to issue citations to people who deliberately
ride these buses without paying the required fare.
The bill instead allows employees of DOT or third-party contractors
with fare inspection duties to issue these citations, eliminating reference
to the specific “fare inspector” job title.
Under existing law, unchanged by the bill, it is an infraction (see
Background — Infractions) for a person to ride a state-owned or -
controlled public bus while intentionally not paying the required fare.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 9 5/3/24
Background — Infractions
Infractions are punishable by fines, usually set by Superior Court
judges, of between $35 and $90, plus a $20 or $35 surcharge and an
additional fee based on the fine’s amount. There may also be other
applicable charges depending on the type of infraction. For example,
certain motor vehicle infractions trigger a Special Transportation Fund
surcharge of 50% of the fine. An infraction is not a crime and violators
can generally pay the fine by mail without making a court appearance.
§ 14 — METRO NORTH INDEMNIFICATION
Specifies that the DOT commissioner can only indemnify Metro North Railroad against
certain claims when it is acting in its capacity as the state’s contracted maintainer of the
M-8 rail car fleet
Current law allows the DOT commissioner, if he finds it is in the
state’s best interest, to indemnify and hold harmless Metro North
Railroad against claims brought by the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation (Amtrak) or other third parties against Metro North related
to M-8 rail car operation on Amtrak property, as long as the
indemnification does not relieve Metro North of liability for its willful
or negligent acts or omissions.
The bill specifies that the commissioner can do so only when Metro
North is acting in its capacity as the state’s contracted maintainer of the
M-8 rail car fleet.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§§ 15-17 & 42-50 — AUTOMATED EN FORCEMENT
Restarts and makes permanent DOT’s work zone speed camera program (which was
initially established as a pilot program and ended on December 31, 2023); expands the
permissible locations and makes other changes from the pilot program; modifies speed and
red light camera provisions related to data retention and leased vehicles
The bill restarts and makes permanent DOT’s work zone speed
camera program. The speed camera program was initially established
as a pilot program in PA 21-2, June Special Session (§§ 296-305) and
ended on December 31, 2023. The bill generally retains the pilot
program’s provisions on vendors, speed camera placement and
operation, ticket issuance and processing, and data retention and 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 10 5/3/24
privacy, but it makes the following changes, among others:
1. expands the permissible locations for work zone speed cameras;
2. lowers, from at least 15 mph to at least 10 mph, the amount by
which a vehicle must exceed the posted speed limit in a work
zone in order to be issued a warning or ticket;
3. modifies the fine structure and requires that a fine be issued for
a first violation if the vehicle’s detected speed is 85 mph or more;
4. requires notice to a municipality’s chief elected official before
operating speed cameras in the municipality; and
5. requires DOT to annually report certain information on the
program.
The bill also modifies the penalty and data retention provisions
applicable to municipal speed and red light camera programs enacted
under PA 23-116 (§§ 10-14 & 16-18). Generally, it specifies when a
violation is considered a second or subsequent violation, which may be
subject to higher penalties, and allows municipalities or their vendors
to retain data necessary to impose the penalties.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
Work Zone Speed Cameras
Permissible Locations. The bill expands the types of roads where
DOT may operate speed cameras and increases the limit on the number
of places where they may be operated at any one time. Under the pilot
program, cameras could be placed on limited access highways in up to
three locations at any one time. Under the bill, cameras may be used in
up to 15 highway work zones on any highway (i.e., public road). But the
bill retains the provision limiting the use of speed cameras to roads with
speed limits of at least 45 mph.
Notice Requirements. The bill requires DOT or a work zone speed
camera operator give written notice of the date work zone cameras will
start operating in a given work zone to the Division of State Police and 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 11 5/3/24
the chief executive officer of a municipality where the cameras will be
located. DOT or the operator must give this notice at least two days
before the cameras begin operating. Under the pilot program, DOT or
the operator had to certify to the State Police when work zone speed
cameras were operating at least seven days in advance.
The bill retains public notice requirements from the pilot program.
Specifically, in order to use speed cameras in a work zone, there must
be at least two conspicuous signs placed at a reasonable distance ahead
of the zone, and one of these signs must indicate whether the cameras
are currently in use. DOT must also post on its website the locations
where work zone speed cameras are operating.
Violations. Under the pilot program and the bill, speed cameras in
work zones detect vehicles exceeding the speed limit by a specified
amount, and the State Police review camera images and issue warnings
and tickets as appropriate.
Vehicle owners could be ticketed or issued a warning under the pilot
program if they exceeded the posted speed limit in a work zone by 15
mph or more. The bill lowers this amount to 10 mph or more for the
permanent program. As under the pilot program, speed cameras in
work zones record only vehicles exceeding the speed limit by this
amount.
Penalties. Under the pilot program, vehicle owners were issued a
written warning for their first violation detected by a work zone speed
camera. The bill generally retains this requirement from the pilot
program except that it imposes a $75 fine for a first violation if the
vehicle’s detected speed is 85 mph or more. (By law, driving more than
85 mph is considered reckless driving (CGS § 14-222).)
The bill also creates a single fine tier for second and subsequent
violations detected by work zone speed cameras. Under the pilot
program, a second violation was subject to a $75 fine and a subsequent
violation was subject to a $150 fine. The bill makes the fine amount $75
for all second and subsequent violations. It also specifies that second
and subsequent violations are those that occur within one year after the 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 12 5/3/24
owner’s most recent violation, and subsequent violations occurring after
that period are considered first violations. As under the pilot program,
fine revenue goes to the Special Transportation Fund.
Under the pilot program and the bill, vehicle owners are generally
responsible for violations committed in the vehicle and liable for any
fine imposed under the program unless the driver received a citation
from a police officer at the time of the violation. The bill retains these
provisions but specifies that a lessee is considered the vehicle owner if
the vehicle is leased for more than 30 days.
Under the pilot program, if a vehicle owner failed to pay a fine, the
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) could suspend the registration of
the vehicle used to commit the violation or refuse to register it. The bill
additionally allows DMV to do so if the vehicle owner fails to (1) pay
any additional fee associated with the violation, (2) submit a plea of not
guilty by the answer date, or (3) appear for a scheduled court
appearance.
Annual Report. The bill requires DOT to annually report to the
Transportation Committee on the work zone speed camera program
starting by February 1, 2026. The report must include the following
information from the preceding calendar year:
1. the number of warnings and violations issued by each
operational speed camera;
2. the number of warnings and violations where the vehicle
exceeded the speed limit by (a) 11-20 mph, (b) 21-30 mph, (c) 31-
40 mph, and (d) 41 mph or more;
3. the number of crashes that happened in each work zone where a
speed camera was operating;
4. the amount of fine revenue received and DOT’s costs for using
the cameras;
5. the number of motor vehicles that committed one violation, two
violations, three violations, or four or more violations; 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 13 5/3/24
6. a list of engineering and education measures that DOT
implemented to improve safety in work zones that have
operating speed cameras;
7. descriptions of situations where work zone speed camera images
could not be or were not used; and
8. the number of leased or rented motor vehicles, out-of-state
vehicles, or other vehicles (including trucks) where enforcement
efforts were unsuccessful.
Municipal Speed and Red Light Camera Changes
Fines for Subsequent Violations. By law, municipalities
implementing speed or red light cameras may set fines for violations the
cameras detect, but the fines cannot be more than $50 for a first violation
or $75 for a second or subsequent violation. The bill specifies that (1)
second and subsequent violations are those that occur within one year
after the most recent violation and (2) subsequent violations occurring
after that period are considered first violations. Current law does not
specify a timeframe for second and subsequent violations.
Under existing law, municipalities and vendors generally must
destroy the personally identifiable information they collect in
connection with enforcing speed or red light camera violations and
penalties within 30 days after a fine is collected or a hearing on the
alleged violation is resolved. The bill creates an exception allowing a
municipality or vendor to retain a portion of personally identifiable
information for the limited purpose of determining whether a person
committed a second or subsequent offense. The municipality or vendor
must destroy any information it keeps under this exception within one
year after the date of a person’s most recent violation.
Leased or Rented Vehicles. By law, a vehicle’s owner is generally
responsible for violations committed in the vehicle. The bill specifies a
lessee is considered the owner if the vehicle is leased for more than 30
days.
Background — Related Bill 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 14 5/3/24
sHB 5328 (File 273), reported favorably by the Transportation and
Appropriations committees, contains similar provisions on work zone
cameras and municipal speed and red light cameras.
§ 18 — DOT CAPITAL PROJECTS INFORMATION
Requires DOT to develop and maintain an interactive map on its website that displays the
location of and certain information on its active construction capital projects
The bill requires the DOT commissioner to develop and maintain an
interactive map on the department’s website that displays the location
and information of its active construction capital projects across the
state. The map must (1) identify the funding source for each project, (2)
aggregate the total costs of the projects by funding type and construction
phase, and (3) provide information and scheduled phases for the
projects.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon passage
Background — Related Bill
sSB 278 (File 294), reported favorably by the Transportation
Committee, requires the DOT commissioner to (1) annually submit a
report to certain legislative committees that includes specified
information about its capital projects and (2) create and update a website
page for certain information about the projects in its five-year capital
plan.
§ 19 — PROPOSED FARE AND SERVICE CHANGES
Requires DOT to provide notice of public hearings on proposed major service changes to
commuter rail service to the Transportation and Finance, Revenue and Bonding
committees and the Connecticut Public Transportation Council; requires DOT to provide
notice of public hearings related to fare changes for mass land transportation to the
council, in addition to these legislative committees as current law requires
The bill requires DOT, whenever it must hold a public hearing on a
proposed major service change to commuter rail service according to
federal requirements (see Background), to provide notice of the hearing
to the (1) chairpersons and ranking members of the Transportation and
Finance, Revenue and Bonding committees and (2) Connecticut Public
Transportation Council (see Background). The department must do so at
least 15 days before the hearing. 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 15 5/3/24
Existing law requires DOT to provide notice of public hearings
related to fare changes for mass transportation by land to these
legislative committee leaders. The bill additionally requires it to provide
this notice (1) at least 15 days before a hearing and (2) to the Connecticut
Public Transportation Council.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
Background
Connecticut Public Transportation Council. By law, the 15-
member Connecticut Public Transportation Council is charged with
studying and investigating all aspects of the daily operation of
commuter railroad systems and state-funded public transit services
(e.g., bus transit), monitoring their performance, and recommending
changes to improve their efficiency, equity, and quality. The council
serves as an advocate for customers of all commuter railroad systems
and state-funded public transit services (CGS §§ 13b-212b & -212c).
Major Service Changes to Commuter Rail Service. Pursuant to
federal requirements, DOT generally conducts a Service and Fare Equity
analysis any time fare changes or major service changes are proposed to
ensure that the changes do not unfairly impact minority and low-
income populations (Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Federal
Transit Administration Circular 4702.1B). According to DOT’s Public
Involvement Procedures, it conducts comprehensive community
outreach to give the public opportunities to provide input and
alternatives or request clarification; this may include a combination of
public hearings and community-based organization meetings.
Related Bill. sSB 281 (File 212), reported favorably by the
Transportation Committee, has identical provisions.
§§ 20-40 — VERTIPORTS AND UNMANNED AIRCRAFT
Defines “unmanned aircraft” and “vertiports” and incorporates these concepts into
various existing aeronautics statutes; expands CAA’s authority to generally cover
unmanned aircraft regulation; prohibits the operation of unmanned aircraft in close
proximity above a private premises without the owner’s approval
The bill defines “unmanned aircraft” (i.e., drones) and “vertiports” 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 16 5/3/24
and incorporates these concepts into various existing aeronautics
statutes. In doing so, the bill generally subjects vertiports to the same
regulatory framework as other air navigation facilities (e.g., airports,
heliports, and restricted landing areas), including requirements for
facility licensure and aircraft registration, among other things. The bill
also generally expands the authority of the Connecticut Airport
Authority (CAA) executive director to cover unmanned aircraft and
allows him to adopt procedures specifying where unmanned aircraft
may take off and land and governing their operation, unless already
prohibited or regulated by federal law (see Background).
The bill applies certain existing statutes on investigations and
reporting requirements for aircraft accidents and reckless operation to
unmanned aircraft. It also prohibits any person from operating an
unmanned aircraft in close proximity above a private premises.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024, except that the provisions on
operating unmanned aircraft under the influence, CAA procedures for
unmanned aircraft, and operating unmanned aircraft over private
premises are effective October 1, 2024.
Vertiport Regulation
Under the bill, vertiports are areas with defined dimensions, at
ground level or elevated on a structure, that are designated for vertical
takeoff and landing (VTOL) of aircraft and may be restricted only for
this purpose (i.e., similar to existing law’s definition of heliports, which
are designed for helicopters rather than VTOL aircraft). (In practice, no
vertiports currently exist in the state.)
Under existing law, an “air navigation facility” generally includes
airports, heliports, and restricted landing areas. The bill makes a
vertiport an air navigation facility (§ 20) and makes various changes to
incorporate them into the existing statutory framework for these and
similar facilities. It allows the CAA executive director to issue
certificates of approval for proposed vertiports and license these
facilities in the same way as under existing law for other air navigation
facilities (§§ 23-25). 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 17 5/3/24
The bill applies numerous other statutory provisions generally
applicable to air navigation facilities to vertiports, such as those related
to complaints about landings or takeoffs by aircraft from unlicensed
property (§ 28), CAA orders (§ 32), and airspace protection and runway
clear zones (§§ 36 & 37). The bill also extends other provisions on air
navigation facilities to vertiports by doing the following:
1. imposing existing law’s aircraft registration requirements on
aircraft based or primarily used at a vertiport in the state (§§ 21
& 22);
2. subjecting vertiport owners or operators to requirements to
annually report certain information about aircraft based or
primarily used at their facility (§ 26);
3. authorizing the CAA executive director to cooperate with the
federal government and municipalities in undertaking certain
vertiport-related projects that receive federal aid (§ 27); and
4. making it a class D felony to interfere or tamper with a vertiport
or related equipment (punishable by up to five years in prison, a
fine of up to $5,000, or both) (§ 33).
Unmanned Aircraft Regulation
Under the bill, an unmanned aircraft (i.e., a drone) is a powered
aircraft that (1) uses aerodynamic forces to provide vertical lift, (2) is
operated remotely by a pilot in command or is capable of autonomous
flight, (3) does not carry a human operator, and (4) can be expendable
or recoverable. The bill specifies that unmanned aircraft are not
considered aircraft under the aeronautics statutes.
CAA Authority to Regulate (§§ 29 & 39). Existing law generally
gives CAA’s executive director broad authority to develop and promote
aeronautics. This includes the authority to, consistent with aeronautics
laws, perform acts, issue and amend orders, make and amend
regulations and procedures, and establish minimum standards that he
determines are needed for protecting the (1) general public interest and
safety and (2) safety of (a) people operating, using, or traveling in 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 18 5/3/24
aircraft (including those receiving instruction) and (b) people and
property on land or water. The bill expands this authority to include
protecting people operating or using unmanned aircraft.
The bill authorizes CAA to adopt procedures (1) specifying where
unmanned aircraft may take off and land, considering the public health,
safety, aesthetics, and general welfare of the state, and (2) governing the
operation of unmanned aircraft, unless already prohibited or regulated
by federal law. It must do so in consultation with DOT, representatives
from the unmanned aircraft industry, and organizations representing
municipalities and first responders.
Accident Investigations (§§ 30 & 31). Current law allows the CAA
executive director to hold investigations, inquiries, and hearings about
matters covered by aeronautics laws, aircraft accidents, or his orders
and regulations. The bill expands this authority to include “unmanned
aircraft accidents.”
Under the bill, an “unmanned aircraft accident” is an occurrence
associated with unmanned aircraft operation that takes place between
when it takes off and lands, in which (1) someone dies or is seriously
injured due to direct contact with the unmanned aircraft (or anything
attached to it) or its operation or (2) the unmanned aircraft incurs or
causes substantial damage. Existing law similarly defines an aircraft
accident (i.e., one in which someone dies or is seriously injured due to
being in or on the aircraft or in direct contact with it, or the aircraft
receives substantial damage).
Under current law, “substantial damage” is damage or structural
failure that affects the aircraft’s structural strength, performance, or
flight characteristics and would normally require major repair or
replacement of the affected component. The bill expands this to also
include (1) damage or structural failure of this type to an unmanned
aircraft and (2) any damage of more than $1,000 to any person’s
property (this aligns with the threshold in the Uniform Aircraft
Financial Responsibility Act).
Accident Reporting (§§ 30 & 34). Current law generally requires the 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 19 5/3/24
pilot of a civil aircraft involved in an accident described above (or the
operator if the pilot is incapacitated) to immediately notify the CAA
executive director or police. The bill applies this requirement to
operators of unmanned aircraft involved in an accident (or anyone else
that caused or authorized its operation if the operator is incapacitated).
Under current law, when an accident occurs that is subject to these
provisions, a written report must be filed with the executive director
within 14 days. The bill specifies that this is the pilot’s or operator’s
responsibility. The bill also eliminates the definition of “operator” that
is applicable to these provisions. (Under existing law, “operator” is also
defined under the Uniform Aircraft Financial Responsibility Act and
means any person who is exercising actual physical control of an
aircraft.)
Additionally, the bill expands to certain unmanned aircraft accidents
(i.e., accidents not subject to the mandatory reporting requirement
discussed above) current law’s written report requirement for aircraft
accidents when the damage is not substantial. As under existing law, (1)
these reports are required at the executive director’s request and (2) he
may investigate the accidents if he deems it advisable, or instead accept
a copy of the final report by a federal investigation agency.
Reckless Operation and Operating Under the Influence (§§ 35 &
38). The bill extends current law’s prohibitions on doing the following
to include unmanned aircraft:
1. operating any aircraft carelessly, recklessly, or in a way that
endangers people or property, having regard to the proximity of
weather and field conditions, territory flown over, and other
aircraft (or unmanned aircraft under the bill); and
2. operating, or attempting to operate, any aircraft on the ground or
in the air while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Violators are (1) subject to a fine of up to $250 for a first offense and
(2) guilty of a class D misdemeanor for a subsequent offense (punishable
by a fine of up to $250, up to 30 days in prison, or both) (CGS § 15-97). 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 20 5/3/24
Restriction on Operating Unmanned Aircraft Over a Private
Premises (§ 40)
The bill prohibits any person from operating, or programming to
operate, an unmanned aircraft at a height of less than 250 feet over the
boundaries of a private premises without the owner’s prior approval. It
makes violations an infraction (see §§ 12 & 13 Background — Infractions).
It exempts the following individuals while performing their official
duties: (1) employees of the federal government, the state, or its political
subdivisions; (2) public service company employees (e.g., electric
distribution, gas, and telephone companies); (3) members of the U.S. or
state armed forces; and (4) firefighters and police officers. This
exemption also covers operating unmanned aircraft on behalf of these
entities. The bill also exempts people operating unmanned aircraft for
commercial purposes in compliance with Federal Aviation
Administration authorization (if doing so is necessary for these
purposes).
Background
Federal Guidance on State Regulation of Unmanned Aircraft. In
2023, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) released an updated
fact sheet to provide further guidance to states on the scope of federal
authority over unmanned aircraft and more clearly delineate the aspects
of their use that states may regulate and those which may be preempted
(Updated Fact Sheet on State and Local Regulation of Unmanned
Aircraft Systems, dated July 14, 2023).
According to the fact sheet, states may not regulate in the fields of
aviation safety or airspace efficiency and laws attempting to do so are
preempted. However, states generally may regulate unmanned aircraft
outside those fields, with certain exceptions (e.g., laws that conflict with
FAA regulations or impair reasonable use of the airspace).
The fact sheet identifies several categories of state laws that would
likely not be subject to preemption, including laws (1) on land use and
zoning, privacy, harassment, trespassing, exercise of police powers,
search and rescue, and taking photographs or videos of certain facilities; 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 21 5/3/24
(2) regulating the location of takeoff and landing areas; and (3)
restricting unmanned aircraft operation near property, to the extent
their operation substantially interferes with the property owner’s actual
use and enjoyment of the property.
Related Bills. sSB 3 (File 182), § 4, reported favorably by the General
Law Committee, generally prohibits a public entity from (1) purchasing
a drone assembled or manufactured by a covered entity (e.g., China or
Russia) beginning October 1, 2024, and (2) operating these drones
beginning October 1, 2025.
sHB 5202 (File 322), §§ 1-24, reported favorably by the Transportation
Committee, has similar provisions.
§ 41 — ALCOHOL SALES AT BRADLEY AIRPORT
Modifies the hours during which alcohol sales are allowed at Bradley Airport to every day
after 4:00 a.m. and until 11:00 p.m.
The bill modifies the hours during which alcohol sales are allowed at
Bradley Airport in premises operating under a cafe permit to every day
after 4:00 a.m. and until 11:00 p.m. Current law generally allows sales
beginning after 6:00 a.m. and until (1) 1:00 a.m. on Monday through
Friday and (2) 2:00 a.m. on the weekend (with certain holiday
exceptions).
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2024
Background — Related Bill
sHB 5202 (File 322), § 26, reported favorably by the Transportation
Committee, has identical provisions.
§ 51 — DOT ROAD SAFETY AUDITS
Requires DOT to develop a process allowing a municipality’s chief executive officer, local
traffic authority, or regional council of governments to ask it to do a road safety audit of a
state highway and sets specified requirements for this process
The bill requires DOT, by October 1, 2024, to develop (and later revise
as needed) a process allowing a municipality’s chief executive officer,
local traffic authority, or regional council of governments to request the
department to do a road safety audit (RSA; see Background) of a specific 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 22 5/3/24
state highway (i.e., generally, state or local roads that are open to the
public). The purpose of these audits is to identify transportation safety
solutions and improve motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic on
the highway.
Under the bill, the RSA process must require the DOT commissioner
to notify the requesting entity in writing, within 60 days after receiving
the request, as to his decision whether to perform the RSA. If DOT will
do one, it must coordinate with the applicable traffic authority to
schedule the audit date; if not, the notice must include the reasons why.
Additionally, the process must require DOT to submit RSA results to (1)
the requesting entity and (2) legislators representing the municipality or
municipalities where the audited state highway is located. The bill
requires DOT to post this RSA process on its website.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
Background
DOT RSAs. Under current practice, DOT accepts RSA applications
from local traffic authorities. When the department approves an
application, it notifies the municipality and schedules the field audit.
Before doing the audit, DOT meets with RSA stakeholders to discuss
audit objectives and review relevant information. Following a post-
audit meeting with these stakeholders, DOT drafts a final report with
existing conditions and recommendations and allows the municipality
to review the report and make additional comments. After reviewing
and incorporating these comments, DOT addresses each
recommendation with steps the municipality should take for
implementation. According to DOT, RSAs are currently done using
protocols the Federal Highway Administration publishes.
Related Bill. HB 5329 (File 233), reported favorably by the
Transportation Committee, has similar provisions.
§ 52 — PARKING AUTHO RITIES AND MUNICIPAL PARKING
REGULATIONS
Allows any municipality to adopt an ordinance authorizing its parking authority to
enforce municipal parking regulations, rather than only Hartford as under current law 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 23 5/3/24
Under current law, only Hartford is allowed to authorize its parking
authority to enforce municipal parking regulations. By law, parking
authorities are generally permitted to operate and maintain off-street
parking facilities and collect and receive all the revenue from on-street
parking meters.
The bill allows any municipality to adopt an ordinance authorizing
its parking authority to enforce municipal parking regulations. Existing
law correspondingly authorizes parking authorities in a municipality
that has adopted such an ordinance to enforce parking regulations
according to the ordinance’s terms (CGS § 7-204). Under the bill, as
under existing law for Hartford, the ordinance may allow the
municipality to remit the funds it receives for parking violations to the
authority.
Existing law requires enforcement officers of any parking authority
authorized to enforce municipal parking regulations to also enforce
certain state laws on abandoned or unregistered motor vehicles and
those menacing traffic or public health and safety (CGS § 14-150). By
law, DMV inspectors and police officers also enforce these laws.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§ 53 — SHORE LINE EAST SERVICE RESTORA TION
Requires DOT, by January 1, 2025, to report to the Transportation Committee on five
alternatives for restoring Shore Line East service and their cost
The bill requires the DOT commissioner, by January 1, 2025, to
submit a report to the Transportation Committee (1) identifying at least
five alternative methods for restoring Shore Line East rail line service
and (2) recommending the needed funding level to implement each
alternative.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon passage
§ 54 — INCIDENT REPORTS AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE
PROCESS
Extends, from within three business days to within six business days after an incident, the
timeframe during which a police officer must prepare and send DUI incident reports and 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 24 5/3/24
related chemical test results to DMV under the administrative per se license suspension
process
By law, someone arrested for DUI is subject to administrative
licensing sanctions through DMV in addition to criminal prosecution.
This process is referred to as “administrative per se,” and the sanctions
may occur when (1) a driver refuses to submit to a blood, breath, or
urine test; (2) a test indicates an elevated blood alcohol content (BAC);
or (3) the officer concludes through investigation (e.g., a drug influence
evaluation) that the driver was under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or
both.
When any of the above circumstances occurs, the arresting officer
must prepare a report and send it to DMV. The report must be sworn by
the officer under penalty of false statement and state, among other
things, the grounds for his or her belief that there was probable cause to
arrest the person for DUI and include the evidence (e.g., chemical test
results) supporting the officer’s conclusion.
Current law requires that the report be prepared and sent to DMV
within three business days after the incident. The bill extends this
timeframe to within six business days after the incident. Generally,
reports prepared and sent under this law are an exception to the hearsay
rule and admissible at an administrative per se license suspension
hearing without the officer’s testimony (see Background — Related Case).
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
Background — Related Case
On April 9, 2024, the Connecticut Supreme Court held that failure to
comply with the three-business-day preparation and mailing timeframe
renders a DUI incident report inadmissible in an administrative license
suspension hearing in the absence of testimony from the arresting
officer. The court found that (1) the purpose of the timeframe and the
other report requirements (e.g., a sworn statement) was to provide
sufficient indicia of reliability so that the report may be admissible
under a hearsay exemption and (2) adherence to the timeframe was
mandatory for the report to be admissible (Anthony J. Marshall III v. 2024HB-05330-R01-BA.DOCX
Researcher: SM Page 25 5/3/24
Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, 348 Conn. 778).
COMMITTEE ACTION
Transportation Committee
Joint Favorable Substitute
Yea 22 Nay 14 (03/18/2024)