BILL NUMBER: AB 1717	CHAPTERED
	BILL TEXT

	CHAPTER  525
	FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE  SEPTEMBER 25, 2003
	APPROVED BY GOVERNOR  SEPTEMBER 24, 2003
	PASSED THE ASSEMBLY  AUGUST 28, 2003
	PASSED THE SENATE  AUGUST 25, 2003
	AMENDED IN SENATE  JUNE 30, 2003
	AMENDED IN SENATE  JUNE 23, 2003
	AMENDED IN SENATE  JUNE 9, 2003
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  APRIL 9, 2003

INTRODUCED BY   Committee on Transportation (Dutra (Chair), Chan,
Chu, Liu, Longville, Nakano, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley, Salinas, and
Simitian)

                        FEBRUARY 27, 2003

   An act to amend Sections 8879.1, 14070.4, 14076.4, 14524.2, and
65082 of, and to repeal Sections 8879.17 and 14524.15 of, the
Government Code, to amend Sections 21602, 21702, 21704, 21707, and
102015 of, and to repeal Section 21604 of, and Chapter 3.5
(commencing with Section 21501) of Division 9 of, the Public
Utilities Code, and to amend Sections 72.1, 164.6, 188.5, 339, 354,
373, 390, 391, 407, 410, 411, 426, 460, and 820 of, and to repeal
Sections 180.10, 391.1, 391.3, 401.1, 407.1, 411.5, and 509 of, the
Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   AB 1717, Committee on Transportation.  Transportation.
   (1) Existing law creates a transportation planning and programming
process for the expenditure of transportation capital funds and
describes the powers and duties of the Department of Transportation
and the California Transportation Commission in that regard.
Existing law requires the department to submit various reports to the
Legislature regarding transportation project delivery, seismic
retrofit projects, and certain other matters.
   This bill would eliminate certain reporting requirements.
   (2) Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation, by
interagency agreement, to transfer responsibility for administering
an intercity rail passenger corridor funded by the department to a
joint powers board, and prescribes certain requirements applicable to
the Capitol Corridor in the event an interagency agreement is
concluded for that corridor, including the selection of a public rail
transit agency to provide all necessary administrative support staff
to the joint powers board.
   This bill would delete provisions governing the length of terms of
the interagency agreement and would provide for 5-year renewal terms
applicable to the selection of an agency by the Capitol Corridor
board to provide administrative support staff.
   (3) Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation
shall have full possession and control of all state highways.
Existing law describes the authorized routes in the state highway
system and establishes a process for adoption of a traversable
highway on an authorized route by the California Transportation
Commission.  Existing law authorizes the commission to relinquish
certain state highway segments to local agencies.
   This bill would revise the route descriptions for certain state
highway segments that have been relinquished to local agencies.
   (4) Existing law creates the Division of Aeronautics in the
Department of Transportation with certain powers and duties relative
to aviation.  Existing law requires the division to collaborate in
the development and implementation of a computerized cockpit
instrument display for general aviation aircraft, and establishes a
process for selecting general aviation capital improvement projects
funded with state and federal funds.  Existing law requires certain
airport planning functions to be funded solely with federal funds.
   This bill would repeal the provisions relating to implementation
of the computerized cockpit instrument display and would authorize
certain airport planning functions to be funded from nonfederal
sources.  The bill would also make revisions to the process for
selecting capital projects.
   (5) Existing law describes the authorized boundaries of the
Sacramento Regional Transit District and cities that may be annexed
to the district.
   This bill would identify Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, and Rancho
Cordova as additional cities that may be annexed to the district.
   (6) The bill would make other conforming changes.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:


  SECTION 1.  Section 8879.1 of the Government Code is amended to
read:
   8879.1.  (a) The Legislature finds and declares that the
completion of seismic safety retrofit work is essential to the
welfare and economy of the state.
   (b) It is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that the work be
completed as quickly as possible.
   (c) In order to avoid delays in the completion of the work, it is
necessary that certain statutes that would otherwise be applicable be
temporarily suspended.
  SEC. 2.  Section 8879.17 of the Government Code is repealed.
  SEC. 3.  Section 14070.4 of the Government Code is amended to read:

   14070.4.  (a) An interagency transfer agreement between the
department and a joint powers board, when approved by the secretary,
shall do all of the following:
   (1) Specify the date and conditions for the transfer of
responsibilities and identify the annual level of funding and ensure
that the level of funding is consistent with and sufficient for the
planned service improvements within the corridor.
   (2) Identify, for the initial year and subsequent years, the funds
to be transferred to the board including state operating subsidies
made available for intercity rail services in the corridor, and funds
currently used by the department for administration and marketing of
the corridor, with the amounts adjusted annually for inflation and
in accordance with the business plan.
   (3) Specify the level of service to be provided, the respective
responsibilities of the board and the department, the methods that
the department will use to assure the coordination of services with
other rail passenger services in the state, and the methods that the
department will use for the annual review of the business plan and
annual proposals on funding and appropriations.
   (4) Describe the terms for transferring to the joint exercise of
powers agency car and locomotive train sets, and other equipment and
property owned by the department and required for the intercity
service in the corridor including, but not limited to, the number of
units to be provided, liability coverage, maintenance and warranty
responsibilities, and indemnification issues.
   (5) Describe auditing responsibilities and process requirements,
reimbursement and billing procedures, the responsibility for funding
shortfalls, if any, during the course of each fiscal year, an
operating contract oversight review process, performance standards
and reporting procedures, the level of rail infrastructure
maintenance, and other relevant monitoring procedures.  The
description shall contain an evaluation of the impact of any transfer
of equipment on other intercity corridors.  The agreement shall
endeavor to minimize the impact and maximize the efficient use of the
equipment, including continued joint use of equipment that is
currently shared by one or more corridors.
   (b) Use of the annual state funding allocation, as set forth in
the interagency transfer agreement, shall be described in an annual
business plan submitted by the board to the secretary for review and
recommendation by April 1 of each year.  The business plan, when
approved by the secretary, shall be deemed accepted by the state.
The budget proposal developed by the department for the subsequent
year shall be based upon the business plan approved by the secretary.
  The business plan shall be consistent with the interagency
agreement and shall include a report on the recent as well as
historical performance of the corridor service, an overall operating
plan including proposed service enhancement to increase ridership and
provide for increased traveler demands in the corridor for the
upcoming year, short-term and long-term capitol improvement programs,
funding requirements for the upcoming fiscal year, and an action
plan with specific performance goals and objectives.  The business
plan shall document service improvements to provide the planned level
of service, inclusion of operating plans to serve peak period work
trips, and consideration of other service expansions and
enhancements.  The plan shall clearly delineate how funding and
accounting for state-sponsored rail passenger services shall be
separate from locally sponsored services in the corridor.  Proposals
to expand or modify passenger services shall be accompanied by the
identification of all associated costs and ridership projections.
The business plan shall establish, among other things:  fares,
operating strategies, capital improvements needed, and marketing and
operational strategies designed to meet performance standards
established in the interagency agreement.
   (c) Based on the annual business plan and the subsequent
appropriation by the Legislature, the secretary shall allocate state
funds on an annual basis to the board.  As provided in the
interagency agreement, any additional funds that are required to
operate the passenger rail service during the fiscal year shall be
provided by the board from jurisdictions that receive service.  In
addition, the board may use any cost savings or farebox revenues to
provide service improvements related to intercity service.  In any
event, the board shall report the fiscal results of the previous year'
s operations as part of the annual business plan.
   (d) The level of service funded by the state shall in no case be
less than the current number of intercity round trips operated in a
corridor and serving the end points currently served by the intercity
rail corridor.  Subject to Section 14035.2, the level of service
funded by the state shall also include feeder bus service with
substantially the same number of route miles as the current feeder
system, to be operated in conjunction with the trains.  However, the
interagency agreement shall not prohibit the joint powers board from
reducing the number of feeder bus route miles if the joint powers
board determines that a feeder bus route is not cost effective as
provided in Section 14035.2.
   (e) Nothing in this article shall be construed to preclude
expansion of state-approved intercity rail service.
  SEC. 4.  Section 14076.4 of the Government Code is amended to read:

   14076.4.  If the board and the department enter into an
interagency transfer agreement pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with
Section 14070), for an initial period, that begins with the transfer
of responsibilities from the department to the board and continues
for a three-year period subsequent to the completion of the track and
signal improvements between Sacramento and Emeryville, the San
Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District General Manager and the
district's administrative staff shall, if that district has appointed
members to the board in accordance with Section 14076.2, provide all
necessary administrative support to the board to perform its duties
and responsibilities, and may perform for the board any and all
activities that they are authorized to perform for the district.  At
the conclusion of the initial period, the board may, through
procedures that it determines, select the San Francisco Bay Area
Rapid Transit District or another existing public rail transit agency
for one three-year term immediately following the initial period,
and thereafter for five-year terms, to provide all necessary
administrative support staff to the board to perform its duties and
responsibilities.
  SEC. 5.  Section 14524.15 of the Government Code is repealed.
  SEC. 6.  Section 14524.2 of the Government Code is amended to read:

   14524.2.  (a) If the department's total project delivery plan for
any year requires a permanent and temporary capital outlay support
staffing level which equals the 1986-87 budgeted permanent and
temporary capital outlay support staffing level, the department's
budget request for that year shall contain a permanent and temporary
capital outlay support staffing level equal to its 1986-87 authorized
permanent and temporary capital outlay support staffing level.
   (b) If the department's total project delivery plan for any year
requires a permanent and temporary capital outlay support staffing
level and personnel year equivalents for cash overtime and contract
services which exceed the 1986-87 authorized permanent and temporary
capital outlay support staffing level and personnel year equivalents
for cash overtime and contract services, the department's budget
request for that year shall contain a permanent and temporary capital
outlay support staffing level and personnel year equivalents for
cash overtime equal to the 1986-87 authorized permanent and temporary
capital outlay support staffing level and personnel year equivalents
for cash overtime plus one-half of the excess over the 1986-87
authorized permanent and temporary capital outlay support staffing
level and personnel year equivalents for cash overtime and contract
services.  The department may contract out, pursuant to Section
14131, an equal number of personnel year equivalents for each
authorized permanent and temporary capital outlay support staffing
level and personnel year equivalents for cash overtime which exceed
the 1986-87 authorized permanent and temporary capital outlay support
staffing level and personnel year equivalents for cash overtime.
   (c) For purposes of this section, "permanent and temporary capital
outlay support staffing level" means the department's permanent and
temporary capital outlay support staffing level funded by state and
federal funds through the State Highway Account.
  SEC. 7.  Section 65082 of the Government Code is amended to read:
   65082.  (a) (1) A five-year regional transportation improvement
program shall be prepared, adopted, and submitted to the California
Transportation Commission on or before December 15 of each
odd-numbered year thereafter, updated every two years, pursuant to
Sections 65080 and 65080.5 and the guidelines adopted pursuant to
Section 14530.1, to include regional transportation improvement
projects and programs proposed to be funded, in whole or in part, in
the state transportation improvement program.
   (2) Major projects shall include current costs updated as of
November 1 of the year of submittal and escalated to the appropriate
year, and be listed by relative priority, taking into account need,
delivery milestone dates, and the availability of funding.
   (b) Except for those counties that do not prepare a congestion
management program pursuant to Section 65088.3, congestion management
programs adopted pursuant to Section 65089 shall be incorporated
into the regional transportation improvement program submitted to the
commission by December 15 of each odd-numbered year.
   (c) Local projects not included in a congestion management program
shall not be included in the regional transportation improvement
program.  Projects and programs adopted pursuant to subdivision (a)
shall be consistent with the capital improvement program adopted
pursuant to paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089, and
the guidelines adopted pursuant to Section 14530.1.
   (d) Other projects may be included in the regional transportation
improvement program if listed separately.
   (e) Unless a county not containing urbanized areas of over 50,000
population notifies the Department of Transportation by July 1 that
it intends to prepare a regional transportation improvement program
for that county, the department shall, in consultation with the
affected local agencies, prepare the program for all counties for
which it prepares a regional transportation plan.
   (f) The requirements for incorporating a congestion management
program into a regional transportation improvement program specified
in this section do not apply in those counties that do not prepare a
congestion management program in accordance with Section 65088.3.
   (g) The regional transportation improvement program may include a
reserve of county shares for providing funds in order to match
federal funds.
  SEC. 8.  Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 21501) of Division 9
of the Public Utilities Code is repealed.
  SEC. 9.  Section 21602 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
   21602.  (a) Subject to the terms and within the limits of special
appropriations made by the Legislature, the department may render
financial assistance by grant or loan, or both, to political
subdivisions jointly, in the planning, acquisition, construction,
improvement, maintenance, or operation of an airport owned or
controlled, or to be owned or controlled, by a political subdivision
or subdivisions, if the financial assistance has been shown by public
hearing to be appropriate to the proper development or maintenance
of a statewide system of airports.  Financial assistance may be
furnished in connection with federal or other financial aid for the
same purpose.
   (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of Section 21681, a city or
county designated by the Airport Land Use Commission is eligible to
compete for funds held in the Aeronautics Account in the State
Transportation Fund on behalf of any privately owned, public use
airport that is included in an airport land use compatibility plan.
However, the city or county shall be eligible to compete for the
funds only when zoning on the parcel is tantamount to a taking of all
reasonable uses that might otherwise be permitted on the parcel.
The eligible airport and aviation purposes are limited to those
specified in paragraphs (4), (5), (6), (9), and (14) of subdivision
(f) of Section 21681, and, further, any capital improvements or
acquisitions shall become the property of the designated city or
county.  Matching funds pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 21684
may include the in-kind contribution of real property, with the
approval of the department.
   (c) Any grant of funds held in the Aeronautics Account in the
State Transportation Fund on behalf of any privately owned airports
shall contain a covenant that the airport remain open for public use
for 20 years.  Any grant made to a city or county on behalf of a
privately owned airport shall contain a payback provision based upon
existing market value at the time the private airport ceases to be
open for public use.
   (d) Upon request, California Aid to Airports Program (CAAP)
projects included within the adopted Aeronautics Program, may be
funded in advance of the year programmed, with the concurrence of the
department, in order to better utilize funds in the account.
   (e) There is, in the Aeronautics Account in the State
Transportation Fund, a subaccount for the management of funds for
loans to local entities pursuant to this chapter.  All funds for
airport loans in the Special Deposit Fund are hereby transferred to
the subaccount.  With the approval of the Department of Finance, the
department shall deposit in the subaccount all money received by the
department from repayments of and interest on existing and future
airport loans, including, but not limited to, the sums of five
hundred forty thousand dollars ($540,000) in repayments from the
General Fund due in July 1987, and July 1988, and may, upon
appropriation, transfer additional funds from the Aeronautics Account
in the State Transportation Fund to the subaccount as the department
deems appropriate.  Interest on money in the subaccount shall be
credited to the subaccount as it accrues.
   (f) Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, the
money in the subaccount created by subdivision (e) is hereby
continuously appropriated to the department without regard to fiscal
years for purposes of loans to political subdivisions for airport
purposes.
  SEC. 10.  Section 21604 of the Public Utilities Code is repealed.

  SEC. 11.  Section 21702 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
   21702.  The California Aviation System Plan shall include, but not
be limited to, all of the following elements:
   (a) A background and introduction element, which summarizes
aviation activity in California and establishes goals and objectives
for aviation improvement.
   (b) An air transportation issues element, which addresses issues
such as aviation safety, airport noise, airport ground access,
transportation systems management, airport financing, airport land
use compatibility planning, and institutional relationships.
   (c) A regional plan alternative element, which consists of the
aviation elements of the regional transportation plans prepared by
each transportation planning agency.  This element shall include
consideration of regional air transportation matters relating to
growth, capacity needs, county activity, airport activity, and
systemwide activity in order to evaluate adequately the overall
impacts of regional activity in relation to the statewide air
transportation system.  This element shall propose general aviation
and air carrier public use airports for consideration by the
commission for funding eligibility under this chapter.
   (d) A state plan alternative element, which includes consideration
of statewide air transportation matters relating to growth,
including, but not limited to, county activity, airport activity, and
systemwide activity in order to evaluate adequately the state
aviation system and to designate an adequate number of general
aviation and air carrier public use airports for state funding in
order to provide a level of air service and safety acceptable to the
public.
   (e) A comparative element, which compares and contrasts the
regional plan alternative with the state plan alternative, including,
but not limited to, airport noise, air quality, toxic waste cleanup,
energy, economics, and passengers served.
   (f) A 10-year capital improvement plan for each airport, based on
each airport's adopted master plan if the airport has a master plan,
approved by the applicable transportation planning agency, and
submitted to the division for inclusion in the California Aviation
System Plan.
   (g) Any other element deemed appropriate by the division and the
transportation planning agencies.
   (h) A summary and conclusion element, which presents the findings
and recommended course of action.
  SEC. 12.  Section 21704 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
   21704.  The division, in consultation with the transportation
planning agencies, shall biennially revise the capital improvement
plan developed pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 21702, and the
division shall submit the revised capital improvement plan to the
commission.  The division, in consultation with the transportation
planning agencies, shall revise all other elements of the California
Aviation System Plan every five years, and shall submit the revised
system plan to the commission.
  SEC. 13.  Section 21707 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
   21707.  Any funds necessary to carry out Sections 21701, 21702,
and 21704 shall be obtained from federal grants, except for updates
of the capital improvement plan and policy elements of the California
Aviation System Plan, which may be funded from nonfederal sources.

  SEC. 14.  Section 102015 of the Public Utilities Code is amended to
read:
   102015.  "City" means, individually, the Cities of Citrus Heights,
Davis, Elk Grove, Folsom, Rancho Cordova, Roseville, Sacramento, and
Woodland, and any other city which is annexed to the district as
provided in this part.
  SEC. 15.  Section 72.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   72.1.  (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms have
the following meanings:
   (1) "Central Freeway Replacement Project" is the department and
city designated alternative transportation system to the damaged
Central Freeway.
   (2) "City" is the City and County of San Francisco.
   (3) "Freeway Project" includes demolition of the existing commonly
known Central Freeway, construction of a new freeway between Mission
Street and Market Street, and construction of ramps to, and from,
the new freeway.
   (4) "Octavia Street Project" is the improvement of Octavia Street
from Market Street north as a ground level boulevard.
   (b) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
   (1) That portion of Route 101 located in the city and commonly
known as the Central Freeway was severely damaged in the 1989 Loma
Prieta earthquake.  This damage to the Central Freeway caused and
continues to cause significant traffic congestion.
   (2) Following the Loma Prieta earthquake, the department and the
city, with substantial public involvement, selected the Central
Freeway Replacement Project as an alternative transportation system
to the damaged Central Freeway.  The Central Freeway Replacement
Project includes the Freeway Project consisting of the demolition of
the existing Central Freeway, construction of a new freeway between
Mission Street and Market Street, and the construction of ramps to,
and from, the new freeway, and the Octavia Street Project, consisting
of improvement of Octavia Street from Market Street north as a
ground level boulevard.  The Central Freeway Replacement Project will
remediate traffic congestion problems and allow the city to reclaim
unnecessary rights-of-way for beneficial public uses.
   (3) The implementation of an alternative transportation system is
in the best interests of the people of the State of California.
   (4) No portions of Route 101 north of Fell Street and south of
Turk Street are needed for the Central Freeway Replacement Project or
for the proposed alternative project to be placed before the voters
as Proposition J in the general municipal election of November 1999.

   (c) (1) The Legislature recognizes that the Central Freeway
Replacement Project adopted by the city's voters, as local measure
Proposition E in November 1998 qualifies for the statutory exemption
under Section 180.2.
   (2) The Legislature further recognizes that the proposed
alternative project included in Proposition J also qualifies for the
statutory exemption under Section 180.2.
   (3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), any development of property
transferred to the city pursuant to this section may, to the extent
required by applicable law, require subsequent environmental analysis
by the city at the time at which the specific proposals for the use
of that property are developed.
   (d) That portion of Route 101 between Market Street and Turk
Street is not a state highway, except that if the proposed
alternative to the Octavia Street Project is approved by the voters
in the general municipal election of November 1999, only that portion
of Route 101 between Fell Street and Turk Street is not a state
highway.
   (e) The department shall retain jurisdiction over the portion of
Route 101 that is between Mission Street and either Market Street or
Fell Street, depending on which project is approved by the voters in
the general municipal election of November 1999, and shall promptly
transfer to the city any portion of Route 101 that is not a state
highway under subdivision (d).
   (f) The following shall apply if the voters do not approve the
alternative project in the general municipal election of November
1999:
   (1) The city shall utilize any proceeds from the disposition or
use of excess rights-of-way for the purpose of designing,
constructing, developing, and maintaining the Octavia Street Project
until the city's share of the costs of that project are paid in full
or funded from other sources.  Upon the full funding of the city's
share of the Octavia Street Project, the city shall utilize any
remaining proceeds from the sale of excess rights-of-way solely for
the transportation and related purposes authorized under Article XIX
of the California Constitution.
   (2) Upon notification to the department by the San Francisco
County Transportation Authority that the city is prepared to
implement an interim traffic management plan, the department shall
proceed expeditiously with demolition of the portion of Route 101
between Fell and Mission Streets.  The department shall design and
construct the Freeway Project, and the city shall design and
construct the Octavia Street Project, and each project shall be
consistent with the Central Freeway Replacement Project.
  SEC. 16.  Section 164.6 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   164.6.  (a) The department shall prepare a 10-year state
rehabilitation plan for the rehabilitation and reconstruction, or the
combination thereof, by the State Highway Operation and Protection
Program, of all state highways and bridges owned by the state.  The
plan shall identify all rehabilitation needs for the 10-year period
beginning on July 1, 1998, and ending on June 30, 2008, and shall
include a schedule of improvements to complete all needed
rehabilitation during the life of the plan not later than June 30,
2008.  The plan shall be updated every two years beginning in 2000.
The plan shall include specific milestones and quantifiable
accomplishments, such as miles of highways to be repaved and number
of bridges to be retrofitted.  The plan shall contain strategies to
control cost and improve the efficiency of the program, and include a
cost estimate for at least the first five years of the program.
   (b) The plan shall be submitted to the commission for review and
comments not later than January 31 of each odd-numbered year, and
shall be transmitted to the Governor and the Legislature not later
than May 1 of each odd-numbered year.
   (c) The plan shall be the basis for the department's budget
request and for the adoption of fund estimates pursuant to Section
163.
  SEC. 17.  Section 180.10 of the Streets and Highways Code is
repealed.
  SEC. 18.  Section 188.5 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   188.5.  (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
   (1) The department has determined that in order to provide maximum
safety for the traveling public and to ensure continuous and
unimpeded operation of the state's transportation network, six
state-owned toll bridges are in need of a seismic safety retrofit,
and one state-owned toll bridge is in need of a partial retrofit and
a partial replacement.
   (2) The bridges identified by the department as needing seismic
retrofit are the Benicia-Martinez Bridge, the Carquinez Bridge, the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, the San Mateo-Hayward Bridge, the San
Pedro-Terminal Island Bridge (also known as the Vincent Thomas
Bridge), the San Diego-Coronado Bridge, and the west span of the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.  The department has also identified the
east span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge as needing to be
replaced.  That replacement span will be safer, stronger, longer
lasting, and more cost efficient to maintain than completing a
seismic retrofit for the
    current east span.
   (3) The south span of the Carquinez Bridge is to be replaced
pursuant to Regional Measure 1, as described in subdivision (b) of
Section 30917.
   (4) The cost estimate to retrofit the state-owned toll bridges and
to replace the east span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge is
four billion six hundred thirty-seven million dollars
($4,637,000,000), as follows:
   (A) The Benicia-Martinez Bridge retrofit is one hundred ninety
million dollars ($190,000,000).
   (B) The north span of the Carquinez Bridge retrofit is one hundred
twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000).
   (C) The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge retrofit is six hundred
sixty-five million dollars ($665,000,000).
   (D) The San Mateo-Hayward Bridge retrofit is one hundred ninety
million dollars ($190,000,000).
   (E) The San Pedro-Terminal Island Bridge retrofit is sixty-two
million dollars ($62,000,000).
   (F) The San Diego-Coronado Bridge retrofit is one hundred five
million dollars ($105,000,000).
   (G) The west span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
retrofit, as a lifeline bridge, is seven hundred million dollars
($700,000,000).
   (H) Replacement of the east span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge is two billion six hundred million dollars ($2,600,000,000).
   (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the following amounts
from the following funds shall be allocated until expended, for the
seismic retrofit or replacement of state-owned toll bridges:
   (1) Six hundred fifty million dollars ($650,000,000) from the 1996
Seismic Retrofit Account in the Seismic Retrofit Bond Fund of 1996
for the seven state-owned toll bridges identified by the department
as requiring seismic safety retrofit or replacement.
   (2) One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000) in surplus
revenues generated under the Seismic Retrofit Bond Act of 1996 that
are in excess of the amount actually necessary to complete Phase Two
of the state's seismic retrofit program.  These excess funds shall be
reallocated to assist in financing seismic retrofit of the
state-owned toll bridges.
   (3) Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) from the Vincent Thomas
Toll Bridge Revenue Account.
   (4) The funds necessary to meet both of the following:
   (A) A principal obligation of two billion two hundred eighty-two
million dollars ($2,282,000,000) from the seismic retrofit surcharge,
including any interest therefrom, imposed pursuant to Section 31010,
subject to the limitation set forth in subdivision (c) and
subdivision (b) of Section 31010.
   (B) All costs of financing, including capitalized interest,
reserves, costs of issuance, costs of credit enhancements and any
other financial products necessary or desirable in connection
therewith, and any other costs related to financing.
   (5) Thirty-three million dollars ($33,000,000) from the San
Diego-Coronado Toll Bridge Revenue Fund.
   (6) Not less than seven hundred forty-five million dollars
($745,000,000) from the State Highway Account to be used toward the
eight hundred seventy-five million dollars ($875,000,000) state
contribution, to be achieved as follows:
   (A) (i) Two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) to be
appropriated for the state-local transportation partnership program
described in paragraph (7) of subdivision (d) of Section 164 for the
1998-99 fiscal year.
   (ii) The remaining funds intended for that program and any program
savings to be made available for toll bridge seismic retrofit.
   (B) A reduction of not more than seventy-five million dollars
($75,000,000) in the funding level specified in paragraph (4) of
subdivision (d) of Section 164 for traffic system management.
   (C) Three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000) in accumulated
savings by the department achieved from better efficiency and lower
costs.
   (7) Not more than one hundred thirty million dollars
($130,000,000) from the Transit Capital Improvement Program funded by
the Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund
to be used toward the eight hundred seventy-five million dollars
($875,000,000) state contribution.  If the contribution in
subparagraph (A) of paragraph (6) exceeds three hundred seventy
million dollars ($370,000,000), it is the intent that the amount from
the Transit Capital Improvement Program shall be reduced by an
amount that is equal to that excess.
   (8) (A) The funds necessary to meet principal obligations of not
less than six hundred forty-two million dollars ($642,000,000) from
the state's share of the federal Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation (HBRR) Program.
   (B) If the project costs exceed four billion six hundred
thirty-seven million dollars ($4,637,000,000), the department may
program not more than four hundred forty-eight million dollars
($448,000,000) in project savings or other available resources from
the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program, the State
Highway Operation and Protection Program, or federal bridge funds for
that purpose.
   (C) None of the funds identified in subparagraph (B) may be
expended for any purpose other than the conditions and design
features described in paragraph (9).
   (9) The estimated cost of replacing the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge listed in subparagraph (H) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (a)
is based on the following conditions:
   (A) The new bridge shall be located north adjacent to the existing
bridge and shall be the Replacement Alternative N-6 (preferred)
Suspension Structure Variation, as specified in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement, dated May 1, 2001, submitted by the
department to the Federal Highway Administration.
   (B) The main span of the bridge shall be in the form of a single
tower cable suspension design and shall be the Replacement
Alternative N-6 (preferred) Suspension Structure Variation, as
specified in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, dated May 1,
2001, submitted by the department to the Federal Highway
Administration.
   (C) The roadway in each direction shall consist of five lanes,
each lane will be 12 feet wide, and there shall be 10-foot shoulders
as an emergency lane for public safety purposes on each side of the
main-traveled way.
   (c) If the actual cost of retrofit or replacement, or both
retrofit and replacement, of toll bridges is less than the cost
estimate of four billion six hundred thirty-seven million dollars
($4,637,000,000), there shall be a reduction in the amount provided
in paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) equal to the proportion of total
funds committed to complete the projects funded from funds generated
from paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) as compared to the total funds
from paragraphs (6), (7), and (8) of subdivision (b), and there shall
be a proportional reduction in the amount specified in paragraph (8)
of subdivision (b).
   (d) If the department determines that the actual costs exceed the
amounts identified in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (8) of
subdivision (b), the department shall report to the Legislature
within 90 days from the date of that determination as to the
difference and the reason for the increase in costs.
   (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the commission
shall adopt fund estimates consistent with subdivision (b) and
provide flexibility so that state funds can be made available to
match federal funds made available to regional transportation
planning agencies.
   (f) For the purposes of this section, "principal obligations" are
the amount of funds generated, either in cash, obligation authority,
or the proceeds of a bond or other indebtedness.
   (g) (1) Commencing January 1, 2004, and quarterly thereafter until
completion of all applicable projects, the department shall provide
quarterly seismic reports to the transportation committees of both
houses of the Legislature and to the commission for each of the toll
bridge seismic retrofit projects in subdivision (a).
   (2) The report shall include details of each toll bridge seismic
retrofit project and all information necessary to clearly describe
the status of the project, including, but not limited to, all of the
following:
   (A) A progress report.
   (B) The baseline budget for support and capital outlay
construction costs that the department assumed at the time that
Chapter 907 of the Statutes of 2001 was enacted.
   (C) The current or projected budget for support and capital outlay
construction costs.
   (D) Expenditures to date for support and capital outlay
construction costs.
   (E) A comparison of the current or projected schedule and the
baseline schedule that was assumed at the time that Chapter 907 of
the Statutes of 2001 was enacted.
   (F) A summary of milestones achieved during the quarterly period
and any issues identified and actions taken to address those issues.

   (h) (1) Commencing on January 1, 2004, and quarterly thereafter
until completion of all applicable projects, the department shall
provide quarterly seismic reports to the transportation committees of
both houses of the Legislature and to the commission for other
seismic retrofit programs.
   (2) The reports shall include all of the following:
   (A) A progress report for each program.
   (B) The program baseline budget for support and capital outlay
construction costs.
   (C) The current or projected program budget for support and
capital outlay construction costs.
   (D) Expenditures to date for support and capital outlay
construction costs.
   (E) A comparison of the current or projected schedule and the
baseline schedule.
   (F) A summary of milestones achieved during the quarterly period
and any issues identified and actions taken to address those issues.

  SEC. 19.  Section 339 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   339.  Route 39 is from:
   (a) Route 1 near Huntington Beach to Route 72 in La Habra via
Beach Boulevard.
   (b) Beach Boulevard to Harbor Boulevard in La Habra via Whittier
Boulevard.
   (c) Whittier Boulevard in La Habra to Route 2 via Harbor Boulevard
to the vicinity of Fullerton Road, then to Azusa Avenue, Azusa
Avenue to San Gabriel Canyon Road, San Gabriel Avenue southbound
between Azusa Avenue and San Gabriel Canyon Road, and San Gabriel
Canyon Road, other than the portion of the segment described by this
subdivision that is within the city limits of Azusa and Covina.
   The relinquished former portions of Route 39 within the city
limits of Azusa and Covina are not a state highway and are not
eligible for adoption under Section 81.
  SEC. 20.  Section 354 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   354.  (a) Route 54 is from Route 5 near the Sweetwater River to
the southern city limits of El Cajon.
   (b) The relinquished former portion of Route 54 within the City of
El Cajon is not a state highway and is not eligible for adoption
under Section 81.
   (c) The City of El Cajon may not impose any special restriction on
the operation of buses or commercial motor vehicles, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 34601 of the Vehicle
Code, on the relinquished former portion of Route 54 if that
restriction is in addition to restrictions authorized under other
provisions of law.
  SEC. 21.  Section 373 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   373.  Route 73 is from Route 5 near San Juan Capistrano to Route
405 via the San Joaquin Hills.
  SEC. 22.  Section 390 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   390.  (a) Route 90 is from Route 1 northwest of the Los Angeles
International Airport to Route 91 in Santa Ana Canyon passing near La
Habra, except for the portion within the city limits of Yorba Linda.

   (b) The relinquished former portion of Route 90 within the City of
Yorba Linda is not a state highway and is not eligible for adoption
under Section 81.
   (c) The City of Yorba Linda shall ensure the continuity of traffic
flow on the relinquished former portion of Route 90, including any
traffic signal progression.
   (d) For the relinquished former portion of Route 90, the City of
Yorba Linda shall maintain signs directing motorists to the
continuation of Route 90.
  SEC. 23.  Section 391 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   391.  Route 91 is from:
   (a) Vermont Avenue at the eastern city limits of Gardena to Route
215 in Riverside via Santa Ana Canyon.
   (b) The relinquished former portions of Route 91 in the Cities of
Gardena, Torrance, Lawndale, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, and
Hermosa Beach are not a state highway and are not eligible for
adoption under Section 81.
  SEC. 24.  Section 391.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is
repealed.
  SEC. 25.  Section 391.3 of the Streets and Highways Code, as added
by Section 22 of Chapter 724 of the Statutes of 1999, is repealed.
  SEC. 26.  Section 391.3 of the Streets and Highways Code, as added
by Section 12.5 of Chapter 1007 of the Statutes of 1999, is repealed.

  SEC. 27.  Section 401.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is
repealed.
  SEC. 28.  Section 407 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   407.  (a) Route 107 is from Route 1 in Torrance to the southern
city limits of Lawndale.
   (b) The relinquished former portion of Route 107 in the City of
Lawndale is not a state highway and is not eligible for adoption
under Section 81.
  SEC. 29.  Section 407.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is
repealed.
  SEC. 30.  Section 410 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   410.  (a) Route 110 is from Route 47 in San Pedro to Glenarm
Street in Pasadena.
   (b) The relinquished former portion of Route 110 that is located
between Glenarm Street and Colorado Boulevard in Pasadena is not a
state highway and is not eligible for adoption under Section 81.
  SEC. 31.  Section 411 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   411.  Route 111 is from:
   (a) The international border south of Calexico to Route 78 near
Brawley, passing east of Heber.
   (b) Route 78 near Brawley to Route 86 via the north shore of the
Salton Sea.
   (c) Route 10 near Indio to the southeastern city limits of Rancho
Mirage.
   (d) The western city limits of Cathedral City to Route 10 near
Whitewater.
   The relinquished former portions of Route 111 within the Cities of
Cathedral City and Rancho Mirage are not a state highway and are not
eligible for adoption under Section 81.
  SEC. 32.  Section 411.5 of the Streets and Highways Code is
repealed.
  SEC. 33.  Section 426 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   426.  (a) Route 126 is from Route 101 near Ventura to Route 5.
   (b) Route 126 shall be known and designated as the "Santa Paula
Freeway."
   (c) The relinquished former portion of Route 126 within the City
of Santa Clarita is not a state highway and is not eligible for
adoption under Section 81.
  SEC. 34.  Section 460 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   460.  (a) Route 160 is from Route 4 near Antioch to the southern
city limits of Sacramento.
   (b) The relinquished former portion of Route 160 within the City
of Sacramento is not a state highway and is not eligible for adoption
under Section 81.
  SEC. 35.  Section 509 of the Streets and Highways Code is repealed.

  SEC. 36.  Section 820 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   820.  The State of California assents to the provisions of Title
23 of the United States Code, as amended and supplemented, other acts
of Congress relative to federal aid, or other cooperative highway
work, or to emergency construction of public highways with funds
apportioned by the government of the United States.  All work done
under the provisions of Title 23 or other acts of Congress relative
to highways shall be performed as required under acts of Congress and
the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.  Laws, or rules
and regulations, of this state inconsistent with the laws, or rules
and regulations, of the United States, shall not apply to that work,
to the extent of the inconsistency.