Gentlemen:

We have some specific concerns with the “Proposed General Regulations”, 24VAC27-et seq.  These concerns follow, along with our recommendations to cure the problem.

Our first issue is with the Board itself.  It has become obvious in our view, from discussions with individual Board members, and our observations of the Board in practice, that the members of the Board have not received the training needed to faithfully discharge their obligations to the towing industry, and to the citizens of the Commonwealth at large.  We recommend that the Board examine the very helpful “New Board Members Manual” issued by DPOR, adapt it for the towing and recovery industry, and distribute it to the members of the Board.  A copy is publicly available here:  http://www.dpor.virginia.gov/dporweb/NBM%20Manual.pdf

·        24VAC27-30-20 Fees:  We do not believe that it is necessary to have permits that must be renewed annually, whether this be an Operator’s permit or a Driver’s permit.  An informal survey of other regulated professions such as contractors (2 years); real estate agents (2 years); and opticians (2 years) shows that very few other professions require an annual renewal.  This regulation has the potential to be exceptionally onerous to the small businesses involved in this industry, and we recommend that the Board amend the licencing period to biennial (every 2 years). 

·        24VAC27-30-70 Exemptions: 5) The Board cannot interfere with interstate commerce.  Federal case law (and the Constitution, for that matter) is, to our layman’s understanding, quite clear that what the Board proposes here will not pass muster.  The Board can regulate towing that takes place intrastate, but may NOT regulate interstate commerce, no matter which end of the trip is within Virginia. We recommend you strike this section, to avoid the burden to the Commonwealth of attempting to defend a legal challenge and losing. 

·        24VAC27-30-110. Standards of practice: 4) We recommend the Board amend this section by adding “minimum”, since many operators carry higher limits of insurance.  As currently written, an Operator can be in technical violation of this section if he carries a higher limit of insurance.

·        Ibid 13) Exactly what is meant by “impersonating”?  We are familiar with companies, in different areas of the state, who have the same name but are not related.  This section requires more information, so that an Operator is not in technical violation.

·        24VAC27-30-130. Expedited process to consider consumer complaints. B) The Board cannot reference “policy and guidance documents” without having those documents already prepared.  Since the “policy and guidance documents” are incorporated into the Proposed General Regulations by reference, it is a violation of Code of Virginia to not have those “documents” available for public reference and comment at this time.  We recommend you either strike this section to amend it at a later time; or immediately  provide the referenced documents.

·        24VAC27-30-140. Prerequisites for application for tow truck driver’s authorization document.  Our first issue here is the annual nature of the Driver’s authorization document.  DMV seems to have no problem allowing a Class A CDL holder to go 5 years before renewal. Why must we renew annually?  This is excessively onerous to small businesses, and the Commonwealth is not served by this requirement. We recommend that the Board go to a multi-year licencing scheme for drivers. 

Our second issue herein is what appears to be an annual requirement for fingerprinting and background checks.  The Va State Police is on record, testifying before the General Assembly, that fingerprints are NOT required for a background check to enable a citizen to receive a Concealed Handgun Permit.  We have brought this to the attention of the Board in October 2007, and this requirement has not been stricken.  We recommend that the Board strike the fingerprinting requirement, as it is not required for a full and accurate background check.  It also effectively doubles the cost to an Operator for his drivers.  We also recommend that the Board state whether the background check for drivers is a recurring requirement or a “one time” requirement for initial licensure.

·       24VAC27-30-160. Requirements for drivers: Why must the Driver’s Authorization Document be tied to what company he or she is employed by? Suppose a driver works for multiple different Operators, must their Authorization Document reflect all of those? Further, suppose a Driver for Company A is asked to temporarily assist Company B by driving for them, and their Document does not reflect Company B as an employer, are they in violation? We recommend that the Board amend the regulations such that the employer of a duly authorized driver has no bearing on their Driver’s documentation. In other words, the Board should not be involved in worrying about what company or companies a given Driver is employed by.

We thank the Board for its efforts on behalf of the Towing and Recovery industry within the Commonwealth.  We also thank the Board for its attention to these concerns, and expect that the Board will act upon our recommendations forthwith, so as to benefit the industry and the Commonwealth at large.