BILL NUMBER: SB 110	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 11, 2013

INTRODUCED BY   Senator  Steinberg   DeSaulnier

    (   Coauthors:   Assembly Members 
 Ammiano   and Gordon   ) 

                        JANUARY 14, 2013

   An act to add  Section 14521.5 to the Government Code
   and repeal Chapter 4.4 (commencing with Section
30964.10) of Division 17 of the Streets and Highways Code  ,
relating to transportation  , and making an appropriation
therefor  .


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 110, as amended,  Steinberg   DeSaulnier
 .  California Transportation Commission: guidelines.
  East Span, San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Safety
Review Task Force.  
   Existing law identifies the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge as a
"toll bridge" and provides that the bridge and the approaches to it
are a primary state highway. Existing law requires the Department of
Transportation to permanently maintain and operate the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge as a primary state highway in such a
manner that the physical condition and operating efficiency thereof
are of the highest character. Existing law establishes the Bay Area
Toll Authority and assigns to it responsibility for the
administration of all toll revenues from state-owned toll bridges.
Existing law provides that the power or duty of the authority to fix
the rates of toll for the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge or the
power and duty of the department to collect the tolls so fixed by the
authority for the use of the bridge are not affected by any law
providing that state highways are to be free highways.  
   This bill would establish the East Span, San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge Safety Review Task Force in state government and require the
Legislative Analyst to provide administrative support for the task
force as necessary for the completion of its duties. The task force
would consist of 7 members appointed by the Legislative Analyst. Each
member of the task force would serve a term of one year and receive
compensation, as specified, and reimbursement for actual and
necessary expenses. The bill would appropriate $100,000 from the
State Highway Account in the State Transportation Fund to the
Legislative Analyst for purposes of paying for the compensation and
expense reimbursement of the task force members. The task force would
be required to assess the anticipated seismic structural performance
of the East Span, as defined, of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge by conducting a series of specified reviews. The task force
would be required to submit a final written report to the Legislature
and the Governor that includes the results of its reviews, as
specified.  
   This bill would provide that the task force is exempt from the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act and open meeting requirements that
apply to the Legislature. The bill would provide that the records and
documents of the task force are exempt from disclosure under the
California Public Records Act and the Legislative Open Records Act
until the final written report is submitted to the Legislature and
the Governor. Upon submission of the final written report, the task
force would be required to provide copies of all of its records and
documents to the Legislative Analyst, and the records and documents
of the task force in the possession of the Legislative Analyst would
be subject to disclosure under the Legislative Open Records Act.
 
   Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that
limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the
writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings
demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need
for protecting that interest.  
   This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. 

   This bill would make these provisions, except for the provision
regarding liability described below, inoperative on July 1, 2014, and
would repeal it as of January 1, 2015.  
   This bill would provide that the task force, each of its
individual members, the Legislative Analyst, and any other public
officer or entity are not and may not be held liable for any injury
arising out of an act or omission made in connection with these
provisions.  
   Existing law generally provides for programming and allocation of
state and federal funds available for transportation capital
improvement projects by the California Transportation Commission,
pursuant to various requirements. Existing law authorizes the
commission, in certain cases, to adopt guidelines relative to its
programming and allocation policies and procedures. 

   Existing law, the Administrative Procedure Act, generally governs
the procedure for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations
by state agencies and for the review of those regulatory actions by
the Office of Administrative Law. Existing law, in certain instances,
exempts state agencies from these requirements.  
   This bill would establish specified procedures that the commission
would be required to utilize when it adopts guidelines, except as
specified, and would exempt the adoption of those guidelines from the
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. 
   Vote:  majority   2/3  . Appropriation:
 no   yes  . Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


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

   SECTION 1.    Chapter 4.4 (commencing with Section
30964.10) is added to Division 17 of the   Streets and
Highways Code   , to read:  
      CHAPTER 4.4.  EAST SPAN, SAN FRANCISCO-OAKLAND BAY BRIDGE
SAFETY REVIEW TASK FORCE


   30964.10.  (a) The East Span, San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
Safety Review Task Force is hereby established in state government.
The Legislative Analyst shall provide administrative support for the
task force as necessary for the completion of its duties.
   (b) The task force shall consist of seven members appointed by the
Legislative Analyst. Each member shall serve a term of one year. The
members shall be selected based upon the following qualifications:
   (1) Expertise: Members shall be well-credentialed, recognized
experts in the field of bridge design and construction. The
membership shall reflect extensive experience and knowledge related
to the design and construction of structures that resemble the East
Span in terms of complexity and magnitude, and that raise similar
design and construction obstacles and technical challenges.
   (2) Independence: Members shall have minimal or no prior
involvement in the design, construction, or review of the East Span
as determined by the Legislative Analyst. If necessary, members may
be appointed from outside of California.
   (c) The task force shall select a chairperson from its members.
   (d) The chairperson shall receive compensation of twelve thousand
dollars ($12,000). Each of the other members shall receive
compensation of eight thousand dollars ($8,000). Each member shall be
reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses. The sum of one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000) is hereby appropriated from the State
Highway Account in the State Transportation Fund to the Legislative
Analyst, without regard to fiscal year, for the purpose of paying for
the compensation and expense reimbursement of the members of the
task force.
   30964.15.  As used in this chapter, the following terms have the
following meanings:
   (a) "Task force" means the East Span, San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge Safety Review Task Force established in subdivision (a) of
Section 30964.10.
   (b) "East Span" means the self-anchored suspension bridge, and its
associated 13 foundation piles, that was constructed as a component
of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.
   30964.20.  (a) All task force meetings shall be held in
California, except that members may participate via conference call
with the prior consent of the Legislative Analyst.
   (b) Notwithstanding Section 11033 of the Government Code, members
of the task force may be absent from the state on business of the
state.
   (c) Notwithstanding Section 11032 of the Government Code, the
Legislative Analyst may approve actual and necessary travel expenses
of members for travel outside the state.
   (d) The task force is exempt from the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting
Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1
of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code) and from Article
2.2 (commencing with Section 9027) of Chapter 1.5 of Part 1 of
Division 2 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
   (e) The records and documents of the task force, or in the
possession of the task force, are exempt from disclosure under the
California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section
6250) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code) and the
Legislative Open Records Act (Article 3.5 (commencing with Section
9070) of Chapter 1.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 2 of the
Government Code) until the final written report pursuant to Section
30964.35 is submitted to the Legislature and the Governor. The task
force shall provide copies of all of its records and documents to the
Legislative Analyst, and, when the task force submits the final
written report to the Legislature and the Governor pursuant to
Section 30964.35, the task force records and documents in the
possession of the Legislative Analyst, including the final written
report, shall then be subject to disclosure under the Legislative
Open Records Act.
   30964.25.  The task force shall assess the anticipated seismic
structural performance of the East Span as follows:
   (a) Review the seismic design criteria of the East Span. Evaluate
the appropriateness of the approach, methodologies, and modeling
assumptions of the Department of Transportation as they pertain to
the ability of the structure as designed to withstand earthquakes of
an assumed magnitude that could come from the Hayward, San Andreas,
or other faults in the Bay Area.
   (b) Review construction techniques, testing documents, and other
pertinent information on the construction of the East Span. In
performing this task, the task force shall address specifically
questions that have been raised about construction quality due to
possible problems with the oversight by the Department of
Transportation of the construction contractor and subcontractors.
   (c) Review and evaluate analyses performed by the Department of
Transportation to assess the impact of construction defects
identified pursuant to subdivision (b). The task force may request
that the Department of Transportation run models of the East Span
foundation or bridge, or both, using a different set of assumptions
regarding the construction of the East Span foundation or bridge, or
both, or using different assumptions about the type of anticipated
earthquake.
   (d) Perform a high-level assessment of the risk analysis conducted
by the Department of Transportation as part of the East Span design
to determine whether the department's evaluations of the East Span's
seismic performance as a lifeline structure in the event of a
design-level, large earthquake are appropriate.
   30964.30.  (a) The Department of Transportation shall cooperate
fully with the task force in the performance of its duties pursuant
to this chapter.
   (b) Notwithstanding any other law, the Department of
Transportation shall provide the task force with all relevant
information and records that the task force requests.
   (c) If so requested by the task force, the Department of
Transportation shall run models of the East Span foundation or
bridge, or both, using the assumptions requested by the task force
pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 30964.25, and shall provide
all resulting information to the task force.
   30964.35.  (a) The task force shall submit a final written report
to the Legislature and the Governor that sets forth the results of
its reviews, including all of the following:
   (1) Whether the Department of Transportation made proper
assumptions and followed proper procedures to ensure that the East
Span will perform as expected under the assumed design earthquake.
   (2) Whether the evaluations of the Department of Transportation
concerning the East Span's seismic performance as a lifeline
structure in the event of a design-level, large earthquake are
appropriate.
   (b) Notwithstanding Section 9795 of the Government Code, the
report to the Legislature shall be delivered to the Senate Committee
on Transportation and Housing and the Assembly Committee on
Transportation.
   30964.40.  This chapter shall become inoperative on July 1, 2014,
and, as of January 1, 2015, is repealed, unless a later enacted
statute, that becomes operative on or before January 1, 2015, deletes
or extends the dates on which it becomes inoperative and is
repealed. 
   SEC. 2.   Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
including Division 3.6 (commencing with Section 810) of Title 1 of
the Government Code, neither the East Span, San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge Safety Review Task Force, as established in Chapter 4.4
(commencing with Section 30964.10) of Division 17 of the Streets and
Highways Code pursuant to this act, any member of the task force, the
Legislative Analyst, nor any other public officer or entity is or
may be held liable for any injury arising out of an act or omission
in connection with that chapter. 
   SEC. 3.    Pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision
(b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, the
Legislature finds and declares all of the following:  
   (a) California has a strong public interest in making every effort
to ensure that the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
is constructed in a manner that ensures that it is a safe and
reliable lifeline structure that will survive a foreseeable
earthquake.  
   (b) It is critical for the state to obtain a reliable, independent
review of the structure as soon as possible, and the substantial
public interest to have early access to documents and proceedings
related to this review is outweighed by the public interest of
ensuring that the structure is safe and can survive a foreseeable
earthquake. All of the records and documents of the East Span, San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Safety Review Task Force, including its
final written report, will become subject to the disclosure
requirements of the Legislative Open Records Act once the report is
submitted to the Legislature and the Governor. 
   SEC. 4.    It is the intent of the Legislature that
the work of the East Span, San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Safety
Review Task Force established in Chapter 4.4 (commencing with Section
30964.10) of Division 17 of the Streets and Highways Code not delay
the opening of the new East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge if the Department of Transportation determines at any time
that the bridge is safe and ready to open.  
  SECTION 1.    The Legislature finds and declares
all of the following:
   (a) From time to time, the Legislature has authorized the
California Transportation Commission to adopt guidelines for the
development and administration of statutorily created transportation
programs.
   (b) Examples of the legislative authorization described in
subdivision (a) include, but are not limited to, the authority for
guidelines for the administration of transportation programs funded
by the Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port
Security Bond Act of 2006 (Chapter 12.49 (commencing with Section
8879.20) of Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code), including
the Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA) and the
Highway-Railroad Crossing Safety Account.
   (c) In 2009, the commission also adopted program guidelines for
the implementation of the public-private partnership authority the
Legislature granted to the Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
and to regional transportation planning agencies pursuant to Section
143 of the Streets and Highways Code.
   (d) The Legislature has exempted program guidelines adopted by the
commission from the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5
(commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of
the Government Code) so that the commission may adopt guidelines
quickly and may amend adopted guidelines in response to quickly
changing circumstances.
   (e) On some occasions, the commission's process for adopting
program guidelines has lacked transparency and has not provided the
public with ample opportunity to fully review and comment on proposed
guidelines.
   (f) To ensure the commission's process for the adoption of program
guidelines is understandable, predictable, and transparent, and to
ensure the commission's process provides ample opportunity for public
review and comment on proposed guidelines, it is necessary to place
into statute a process for the adoption of program guidelines by the
commission.  
  SEC. 2.    Section 14521.5 is added to the
Government Code, to read:
   14521.5.  (a) Notwithstanding any other law, the adoption of
guidelines by the commission shall be exempt from the rulemaking
provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5
(commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1). Except for the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) guidelines adopted pursuant
to Sections 14526, 14527, and 14529, on or after January 1, 2014,
the commission shall adopt guidelines using the procedures
established pursuant to this section.
   (b) The commission's legal counsel shall review the proposed
guidelines for matters such as necessity, authority, clarity,
consistency, reference, and nonduplication, and recommend any
proposed action to the commissioners. For purposes of this section,
"necessity," "authority," "clarity," "consistency," "reference," and
"nonduplication" shall each have the same meaning as defined in
Section 11349. The commission's legal counsel's recommendations and
communications to the commission concerning the results of the review
shall be subject to the attorney-client privilege, unless otherwise
waived. The commission's executive director shall cause the
recommendations and communications to be distributed to all
commissioners.
   (c) Program or policy guidelines shall first be presented at a
commission meeting for purposes of receiving public comment. At least
45 days prior to the meeting, the proposed or draft guideline shall
be sent to any person who has requested notices of the meetings of
the commission and shall be available to the public in electronic
format. The proposed or draft guideline shall include notice of the
right of the public to comment orally on the proposed or draft
guideline during the public meeting or to comment in writing at any
time prior to the meeting or within seven business days following the
meeting, at which time the written comment period shall be closed.
   (d) Following the close of the written comment period, the
commission staff shall review all written and oral comments and shall
prepare a summary of the objections and recommendations made in
those comments and an explanation of how the proposed guideline is
proposed to be changed to accommodate the objections or
recommendations, or the reason or reasons for proposing no change.
   (e) The staff recommendations and summary described in subdivision
(d) shall be made publicly available at least 15 days prior to a
subsequent regular meeting of the commission. At that subsequent
public meeting, the commission shall consider the staff
recommendations and any additional public comment made at the meeting
prior to voting on the adoption of the proposed guideline. A program
or policy guideline adopted by the commission shall be adopted by an
affirmative vote of a majority of the commission membership.
   (f) The commission shall maintain a guideline adoption file
containing the public notice, public comments, and minutes of the
public meeting, including the action taken by the commission, and a
letter from the commission's legal counsel confirming that he or she
reviewed the proposed guidelines for compliance with the standards
set forth in subdivision (b).
   (g) The guideline adoption file shall contain a summary of each
objection or recommendation made and an explanation of how the
proposed guideline was changed to accommodate each objection or
recommendation, or the reason or reasons for making no change.
   (h) The commission shall include in its annual report to the
Legislature, required pursuant to Section 14535, a summary of its
activities related to the adoption of program or policy guidelines
during the previous calendar year, including, but not limited to, a
summary of the proposed guidelines considered by the commission, a
description of the actions taken by the commission, and the votes of
the commission on matters it considered.