Rules and Regulations Governing Disputes Involving the Nonpayment of Tolls, Administrative Fees, and Fines (855-RICR-10-00-2)

Regulation Authority:

R.I. Gen. Laws § 24-12-37

Purpose and Reason:

1.The purpose of the adoption of this amendment is to harmonize the Rhode Island Turnpike and Bridge Authority's ("RITBA") existing Rules and Regulations Governing the Nonpayment of Tolls with the recent amendments to R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 24-12-37, 31-3-5, and 24-12-37.1. The proposed amendment to the Rules and Regulations Governing the Nonpayment of Tolls would describe the legal enforcement process, including the imposition of administrative fees, upon toll violators and toll evaders. The Rules and Regulations Governing the Nonpayment of Tolls, as amended, would also set forth the processes by which the Authority would notify toll violators and toll evaders of their violations and seek collection of unpaid tolls and administrative fees. It will also set forth the process by which RITBA will hear and resolve disputes arising from the imposition of tolls and administrative fees. Finally, the amended Rules and Regulations will describe RITBA’s process for reporting certain toll violators and toll evaders to the Division of Motor Vehicles in accordance with R.I. Gen. Laws § 24-12-37 for the purposes of placing holds on license and registration renewals. 2.This amendment amends the existing Rules and Regulations Governing the Nonpayment of Tolls as follows:  The amendment restyles the existing regulation so as to bring the regulation into compliance with the styling requirements of the new Rhode Island Code of Regulations.  The amendment incorporates procedures relating to the dispute of administrative fees and fines pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 24-12-37.  The amendment adds definitions for "administrative fees" and "fines" and alters the definitions of "bridge", "Nonpayment of Tolls" (to incorporate administrative fees and fines), "toll", "toll violator" and "notice of violation". A new defined term "Toll Evader" has also been added.  The amendment adds a section pertaining to a new dispute resolution process in conformance with R.I. Gen. Laws § 24-12-37. 3.The following sets forth the Regulatory Analysis of RITBA required by R.I. Gen. Laws §42-35-2.9 with respect to the Rules and Regulations Governing Disputes Involving the Nonpayment of Tolls, Administrative Fees, and Fines, as amended by RITBA pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws §24-12-37 (“Regulations”). The goal of the Regulations is to set forth the procedures that RITBA will follow to address any disputes that arise relating to RITBA’s imposition of the toll amounts, administrative fees, and fines set forth in R.I. Gen. Laws §24-12-37. They also describe RITBA’s desire to resolve any disputes in a fair and efficient manner, which would yield net benefits to RITBA and the members of the public who dispute RITBA’s imposition of tolls, administrative fees, and fines. To that end, the Regulations establish a specific and efficient procedure that RITBA and disputants will follow in an effort to resolve disputes and which will achieve the objectives of the Regulations’ authorizing statute in a cost-effective manner. RITBA does not anticipate incurring any additional hard costs under the Regulations other than the costs of the paper, envelopes, and postage associated with mailing notices as part of its dispute resolution procedure. These costs will be de minimis, and are easily outweighed in comparison to the benefits to RITBA and the disputants. RITBA’s staff will handle all disputes within its existing personnel structure. It will not require the hiring of any additional staff or any other capital expenses. RITBA believes that the Regulations set forth the most efficient and cost-effective manner for it and the disputants to attempt to resolve any disputes relating to toll amounts, administrative fees, and fines. RITBA believes that resolving disputes via mail and telephonically is the least burdensome method available to it and the public. RITBA considered, but rejected, requiring disputes to be resolved in-person. Such a procedure would be unjustifiably costly and unduly burdensome on RITBA, its staff, and the disputants. 4. No substantive differences exist from the the Regulation, as proposed, and the final Regulation following the close of the public comment period.