BILL ANALYSIS Ó ----------------------------------------------------------------- |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 135| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- UNFINISHED BUSINESS Bill No: SB 135 Author: Padilla (D), et al. Amended: 9/11/13 Vote: 21 SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE : 11-0, 4/9/13 AYES: Wright, Nielsen, Berryhill, Calderon, Cannella, Correa, De León, Galgiani, Hernandez, Lieu, Padilla SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER COMMITTEE : 9-0, 4/23/13 AYES: Pavley, Cannella, Evans, Fuller, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Monning, Wolk SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-0, 5/23/13 AYES: De León, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg SENATE FLOOR : 39-0, 5/28/13 AYES: Anderson, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Calderon, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Emmerson, Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Hancock, Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Knight, Lara, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Monning, Nielsen, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Roth, Steinberg, Torres, Walters, Wolk, Wright, Wyland, Yee NO VOTE RECORDED: Vacancy ASSEMBLY FLOOR : Not available SUBJECT : Earthquake early warning system SOURCE : Author CONTINUED SB 135 Page 2 DIGEST : This bill makes various findings and declarations relative to the nature of earthquakes and early warning technology and requires the Office of Emergency Services (OES), in collaboration with the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), the California Geological Survey (CGS), the University of California, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Alfred E. Alquist Seismic Safety Commission (SSC), and others, to develop a comprehensive statewide earthquake early warning (EEW) system in California and requires the system to include certain features, including the installation of field sensors; and makes these provisions contingent upon OES identifying funding sources for the system, as provided. If no funding sources are identified by January 1, 2016, these provisions are repealed. Assembly Amendments add the SSC to the list of entities required to collaborate with the OES in the development of the EEW system; requires OES to develop an approval mechanism; prohibit OES from identifying the General Fund as a funding source; state legislative intent; and make technical and clarifying changes. ANALYSIS : Existing law: 1. Provides for the California Emergency Services Act requiring the Director of OES to coordinate the emergency activities of all state agencies during an emergency. 2. Provides for the establishment of a Standardized Emergency Management System for use by all emergency response agencies. 3. Provides that OES shall coordinate the activities of all state agencies relating to preparation and implementation of the State Emergency Plan, the response efforts of state and local agencies and the integration of federal resources into state and local response and recovery operations. 4. Establishes the CGS which provides scientific products and services about the state's geology, seismology and mineral resources including their related hazards, which affect the health, safety, and business interests of the people of California. The CGS creates and maintains the California CONTINUED SB 135 Page 3 Integrated Seismic Network (CISN) "ShakeMaps." 5. Requires that safety elements of local general plans protect communities from any unreasonable risks associated with the effects of, amongst others, earthquakes and tsunamis, and include mapping of known seismic and other geological hazards. 6. Provides for the 20-member SSC which was established with the passage of the Seismic Safety Commission Act of 1975, in response to the devastation following the Sylmar Earthquake of 1971, after an ad hoc committee recognized the need for a continuing effort to build the state's infrastructure to resist future earthquakes. The SSC is charged with investigating earthquakes, advising the Governor, Legislature and state and local government on ways to reduce earthquake risk and ensuring a coordinated framework for establishing earthquake safety policies and programs in California. This bill: 1. Makes legislative findings and declarations relating to California seismic activity/forecast, the Pacific Ring of Fire, and EEW systems. 2. Requires OES, in collaboration with Caltech, UC, USGS, CGS, SSC, and other stakeholders, to develop a comprehensive statewide EEW system through a public-private, partnership in California that includes, but is not limited to, (a) installation of field sensors, (b) improvement of field telemetry, (c) construction and testing of central processing and notification centers, (d) establishment of warning notification distribution paths to the public, and (e) integration of EEW education with general earthquake preparedness efforts. 3. Requires OES to identify funding for the system through single or multiple sources of revenue, including, but not limited to, federal funds, funds from revenue bonds, local funds, and private grants. 4. Provides that #2 above shall not become operative until OES identifies funding pursuant to #3 above. CONTINUED SB 135 Page 4 5. Requires OES, in consultation with stakeholders, to develop an approval mechanism to review compliance with EEW standards as they are developed. Requires the development of an approval mechanism to include input from a broad representation of EEW stakeholders. Requires that the approval mechanism (a) ensure appropriate standards, (b) determine the degree to which the standards apply to providers and components of the system, (c) determine methods to ensure compliance with the standards, and (d) determine requirements for participation in the system. 6. Prohibits OES from identifying the General Fund as a funding source for the purpose of establishing the EEW system. 7. Provides that if funding is not identified, as specified, by January 1, 2016, the provisions of the bill are repealed unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2016, deletes or extends that date. 8. Requires OES to file with the Secretary of State its determination that funding was not identified, as specified. Background EEW system . When an earthquake occurs, seismic waves radiate from the epicenter like waves on a pond - it is these waves we feel as earthquake shaking which causes damage to structures. The technology exists to detect moderate to large earthquakes so quickly that a warning can be sent to locations outside the area where the earthquake begins before these destructive waves arrive. The amount of warning time at a particular location depends on the distance from the earthquake epicenter. Locations very close to the earthquake epicenter will receive relatively little or no warning whereas locations far removed from the earthquake epicenter would receive more warning time but may not experience damaging shaking. For those locations in between, the warning time could range from seconds to minutes. Currently, there are two approaches to EEW - the "single station" (or on-site) approach and the "network" approach. In the single-station approach, a single sensor detects the arrival of the faster but weaker seismic wave (P-wave) and warns before the arrival of the slower, more destructive seismic wave (S-wave). This approach is relatively simple, but some would CONTINUED SB 135 Page 5 argue it is less accurate and more prone to false alerts compared to the network approach. The network approach utilizes many seismic sensors that are distributed across a wide area where earthquakes are likely to occur. This network of sensors sends data to a central site where ground motion signals are analyzed, earthquakes are detected and warnings are issued. The network approach is considered to be slower, but more reliable than the on-site approach. This is because it uses information from many stations to confirm that the ground motion detected is actually from an earthquake and not from some other source of vibration. CISN . The CISN, a collaborative effort between Caltech, UC Berkeley, USGS, California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA) and CGS, currently operates a network of hundreds of seismic sensors in California to monitor and notify earthquake activity in this State. The CISN is primarily funded by USGS, CalEMA, and CGS. The CISN generates and distributes ShakeMaps and other products for emergency response, post-earthquake recovery, earthquake engineering, and seismological research. Ring of Fire . California is in the heart of the Pacific Ring of Fire which includes the very active San Andreas Fault zone which is more than 800 miles long and extends to depths of at least 10 miles within the Earth. Geological studies show that over the past 1,400 to 1,500 years large earthquakes have occurred at about 150-year intervals on the southern San Andreas Fault - the last such large quake in 1857. According to a 2008 analysis from the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, California has a 99.7% chance of having a 6.7 magnitude earthquake and a 94% likelihood of a 7.0 magnitude earthquake during the next 30 years. In addition, the USGS released a report that showed a 7.8 magnitude earthquake on the southern Andreas Fault would cause 2,000 deaths and $200 billion in damage, with severe and long lasting disruption. Early warning systems are in place, or in the works, in a number of earthquake prone nations including Japan, Taiwan, Mexico, Turkey, Italy, China, and Romania. Japan turned on the first publicly available nationwide EEW system in 2007, and on March 11, 2011, it had its first true test during the 9.0 magnitude Tohoku earthquake off the coast of Sendai. Earthquake warnings CONTINUED SB 135 Page 6 were automatically broadcast on television and radio and 52 million people received their warning via smartphones - millions more downloaded the early warning app after the quake to receive warnings in advance of large aftershocks. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: Initial estimated costs of approximately $80 million over five years (likely $20-$25 million in the first year, and $12-$15 million for the remaining four years) to establish a statewide EEW system (federal/local/private). This assumes an expansion of the current CISN, rather than building a warning system from the ground up. Initial OES staffing costs of $399,000 annually (two Research Specialist II positions) to support the development of the system. SUPPORT : (Verified 9/11/13) AFSCME AtHoc, Inc. California Institute of Technology Cities of Baldwin Park, Bell Gardens, Beverly Hills, Coalinga, Encinitas, Grover Beach, Irvine, Los Angeles, Rancho Cordova, San Luis Obispo, South El Monte, Watsonville, and Winters City and County of San Francisco City of Chula Vista, Councilman Rudy Ramirez City of Culver City, Mayor Jeffrey Cooper City of Martinez, Mayor Rob Schroder City of Pasadena, Mayor Bill Bogaard City of Walnut Creek, Mayor Cindy Silva City of West Hollywood, Mayor Abbe Land Counties of San Luis Obispo and San Mateo ISTI (Sarasota Springs, NY) Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Town of Los Altos Hills University of California University of California, Berkeley CONTINUED SB 135 Page 7 OPPOSITION : (Verified 9/11/13) Department of Finance ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, "while earthquakes cannot be predicated or prevented, using advanced science and technology we can detect seismic activity to provide an advanced warning, save lives and help mitigate damage. California currently has the California Integrated Seismic Network (CISN), which is a demonstration EEW system. A fully developed system would process data from an array of sensors throughout the state. The system would effectively detect the strength and the progression of earthquakes, alert the public within seconds and provide up to 60 seconds advanced warning before potentially damaging ground shaking is felt. Earthquake early warning systems not only alert the public, they also speed the response of police, fire and other safety personnel by quickly identifying areas hardest hit by the quake." ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The Department of Finance states that this bill will result in additional General Fund costs that are not included in the Administration's current fiscal plan. MW:d 9/12/13 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED