BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1271
AUTHOR: Corbett
INTRODUCED: February 23, 2012
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: March 28, 2012
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Kathleen Chavira
NOTE : This bill has been referred to the Committees on
Education and Governmental Organization. A "do pass"
motion should include referral to the Committee on
Governmental Organization.
SUBJECT : Field Act and Seismic Safety Standards.
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Department of General Services (DGS)
to convene a work group, as specified, to develop and adopt
standards with respect to the seismic safety of schools to
make recommendations to the Legislature on ways to amend
the Field Act to make it more effective, and sunsets these
provisions on January 1, 2016.
BACKGROUND
Current law requires that K-12 school facilities be built
in compliance with specified earthquake safety standards,
commonly known as the "Field Act." The Field Act was
enacted following a severe earthquake in Long Beach in
1933. The Field Act requires a comprehensive design
specification and construction inspection process for
"public school" educational facilities (community college
facilities may be constructed according to either the Field
Act or the California Building Standards Code).
Among other things, the Field Act requires the Division of
the State Architect (DSA) within the Department of General
Services (DGS) to review the construction plans for school
buildings and requires school districts to hire onsite
construction inspectors to ensure compliance with the
structural safety standards. (Education Code § 17280-§
SB 1271
Page 2
17317, § 17365-§ 17374)
ANALYSIS
This bill :
1) Requires the Department of General Services to:
a) Convene a workgroup to develop and adopt
standards, subject to the approval of other
members of the workgroup, with respect to the
seismic safety of schools.
b) Make recommendations to the Legislature on
ways to amend the Field Act to make it more
effective.
2) Requires the workgroup to adopt the standards and
submit the recommendations to the Legislature by
January 1, 2014.
3) Restricts participants of the workgroup to six members
and requires that it includes representatives from,
but not limited to:
a) Office of the State Auditor.
b) The Superintendent of Public Instruction.
c) Office of Emergency Services.
d) The State Architect.
4) Requires the workgroup to hold a public hearing to
solicit public comments before adopting these
standards.
5) Requires that the workgroup consider all the
following:
a) The Division of the State Architect's
(DSA's) use of order to comply and stock orders.
b) The Division of the State Architect's use of
penalties for school districts.
SB 1271
Page 3
c) Policies regarding classifying types of
uncertified projects.
d) Improved communication with school districts on
uncertified
projects.
e) Specific expectations for conducting site visits
and monitoring
efforts to its planned actions.
f) Increasing training on current code requirements.
g) Directions for the field engineers to increase
their presence on project sites.
h) Increasing training on current code requirements.
i) Evaluating inspectors, including providing
consistent documentation
of performance.
j) Increased oversight by qualified individuals of
accessibility-related
and fire and life safety-related issues.
aa) Increased transparence to the public of the
Division of the State
Architect's actions.
1) Sunset these provisions on January 1, 2016.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . In December, 2011 the Bureau of
State Audits (BSA) issued a report, completed at the
request of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (in
response to a series of disturbing news articles),
which highlighted a number of concerns with the
Division of the State Architect oversight of, and
implementation of the Field Act in, school facility
construction projects. It is the intent of the author
to ensure that the recommendations made in the BSA
audit are implemented so that schools are seismically
SB 1271
Page 4
safe and parents can be assured that the buildings in
which their children are being educated are certified
as safe to occupy. The author notes the intent to
further inform the content of the bill as the result
of an informational hearing scheduled for April 20,
2012, by the Senate Select Committee on Earthquake and
Disaster Preparedness, Response and Recovery.
2) BSA audit . Among other things, the BSA report,
Department of General Services: The Division of the
State Architect Lacks Enforcement Authority and Has
Weak Oversight Procedures, Increasing the Risk That
School Construction Projects May Be Unsafe found that:
While the division must certify school
construction projects when they comply with the
act, as of December 2010 approximately 16,400
projects statewide remained uncertified.
Statewide, 23 percent of projects closed in
the last three fiscal years remain uncertified.
The division inconsistently used its
authority to order districts to stop work on
projects after identifying a potential threat to
public safety.
The division did not effectively document
its determinations about the risk level of
uncertified projects or to use these
determinations to guide its approach to following
up on those projects.
The division's level of oversight of school
construction processes is not comprehensive-of 24
projects reviewed, three did not have evidence of
any site visits by its field engineers and eight
had evidence of only one site visit.
Although districts must submit inspectors
for approval prior to construction, for 22 of 34
projects reviewed, the division did not approve
the inspectors until after construction began.
The division does not provide the same level
SB 1271
Page 5
of construction oversight for fire and life
safety and accessibility as it does for
structural safety even though it reviews plans
for all three disciplines.
In addition, the report notes that the Field Act
hampers the DSA's ability to ensure that projects
comply with certification requirements by expressly
allowing school district's to occupy projects
regardless of whether the division has certified them
or not. According to the BSA audit, the Field Act
grants the DSA limited tools for encouraging districts
to pursue certification, and the DSA uses these tools
infrequently and inconsistently.
1) Need for clarification, and narrowing of workgroup's
activities . As currently drafted, the bill could be
interpreted to presuppose that changes to the Field
Act will be made and that the entire Act is proposed
for review and revision by the work group. It appears
to be the intent of the author to respond to
recommendations in the BSA audit that the DSA pursue
legislative changes to the Field Act that would 1)
prohibit occupancy in cases where the division has
identified significant safety concerns, and 2)
implement penalties for school districts that do not
provide all required documents.
Staff recommends the bill be amended to more clearly
articulate that it is these provisions of the Field
Act which are to be reviewed by the work group, and
that the work group is asked to recommend what, if
any, changes should be made to the Act in these
specific areas.
2) Recommendations . The BSA made several recommendations
for changes to the DSA's current oversight of school
facility construction, including that the DSA:
Use the enforcement tools at its disposal
such as orders to comply and stop work orders to
enforce compliance with the Field Act.
Modify current policies regarding
classifying uncertified projects with safety
concerns and use the information to prioritize
SB 1271
Page 6
its efforts to follow up on projects based on
risk.
Develop an overall strategy that establishes
specific expectations for conducting field
engineers' site visits.
Streamline its inspector approval process to
ensure they are approved prior to starting
construction.
Re-establish a formal process for evaluating
inspectors.
According to the Division of the State Architect
(DSA), the division has already begun implementation
of various changes and activities in response to the
audit. The DSA reports that the 16,400 projects that
were closed without certification have been reviewed
and that there are now 73 remaining projects with
"potential" life/safety issues. DSA expects that any
life/safety issues that need to be addressed with
regard to these 73 projects will be identified within
six weeks, and that all districts with uncertified
projects will be notified of the current status of
their projects by the end of June. In addition, DSA is
reviewing, modifying and streamlining a number of its
existing processes and evaluative work tools for
inspectors and field staff with the goal of increasing
their ability to conduct and complete site visits.
Finally, the DSA reports that it has implemented
processes to better evaluate uncertified projects, and
to facilitate communication with school districts and
other stakeholders.
1) Duplicative of current DGS/BSA activity . As noted in
staff comment #4, the (DSA) has already initiated the
review required of the workgroup and outlined in this
bill. Additionally, current law requires the State
Auditor to ensure that recommendations are being
implemented and that the Auditor report what
recommendations were not implemented to the
Legislature. Any audited entity is required to report
back to the Auditor at 60 days, 6 months and one year
after an audit is released, further ensuring that the
DSA responds to the specific recommendations made by
SB 1271
Page 7
the State Auditor.
In order to ensure that the work group does not
unnecessarily duplicate, but instead builds upon the
activities already undertaken by the DSA and the BSA,
staff recommends the bill be amended to delete lines
30-40 on page 3 and lines 1-7 on Page 4.
Staff further recommends that the responsibilities of
the task force convened by the DSA additionally
require that they review the procedural changes that
have been made internal to the DSA as a result of the
BSA audit and make any recommendations the workgroup
determines are appropriate to further improve the
oversight and inspection activities under the control
of the DSA relative to school facility construction.
2) Is this the right group ? It is unclear what role the
State Auditor and the Office of Emergency Services
would play on the work group, as neither brings any
experience or expertise in school facility
construction and the Field Act. On the other hand,
school districts that would be directly affected by
changes to occupancy statutes and penalties, and the
Seismic Safety Commission, which advises the Governor,
Legislature, and state and local governments on ways
to reduce earthquake risk would seem to bring
perspective and expertise which should be included. In
addition, the State Fire Marshall, responsible for
developing fire and life safety regulations and
building standards, would also bring appropriate
expertise for evaluating fire and life safety issues
relative to building occupancy.
Staff recommends the bill be amended to delete the
Office of the State Auditor and the Office of
Emergency Services, and to add the State Fire Marshal,
the Seismic Safety Commission, and school district
representatives that reflect the diverse size and
geography of California's school districts.
Finally, while issues have not been raised around
community college facilities, any changes to the Field
Act could potentially have a direct effect on
construction of community college facilities. Staff
therefore recommends that the bill be amended to
SB 1271
Page 8
include a representative from the Community College
Chancellor's office and a representative from a
community college district on the work group.
3) Public review . Currently, the bill requires that the
workgroup hold a public hearing to solicit public
comments and that all members of the work group
approve any standards adopted. If amended as
recommended in staff comments 3, 5, and 6, the outcome
of the workgroup would be recommendations for
potential legislative action and procedural changes
within the DSA. Since the workgroup would no longer
be adopting seismic safety "standards," the obsolete
language on lines 24-25 on page 3 should be deleted.
Staff recommends that the bill be amended to instead
require that the work group's recommendations be
presented to the Legislature at a hearing of the
Senate Select Committee on Earthquake and Disaster
Preparedness, Response and Recovery, and that public
comment be solicited at this hearing before proposing
any statutory changes which may emerge from the
workgroup's recommendations.
SUPPORT
None received.
OPPOSITION
None received.