BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  1


          (Without Reference to File)

          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
          AB  
          232 (Obernolte)


          As Amended  September 4, 2015


          2/3 vote. Urgency


           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |      |(May 14, 2015) |SENATE: |40-0  |(September 10,   |
          |           |      |               |        |      |2015)            |
          |           |      |               |        |      |                 |
          |           |      |               |        |      |                 |
           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
                 (vote not relevant)


           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |COMMITTEE VOTE: |15-0 |(September 11, |RECOMMENDATION:   |concur    |
          |                |     |2015)          |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
          |                |     |               |                  |          |
           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          (Health)




          Original Committee Reference:  W., P., & W.










                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  2


          SUMMARY:  Authorizes a critical access hospital located in the  
          City of Tehachapi to submit an application to the Office of  
          Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), which, if  
          approved, would extend the hospital's seismic compliance  
          deadline to 2020.  Contains an urgency clause to ensure that the  
          provisions of this bill go into immediate effect upon enactment.


          The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill  
          and instead:


          1)Permit a critical access hospital located in the City of  
            Tehachapi to submit a seismic safety extension application,  
            pursuant to specified provisions of existing law that allow an  
            extension of the deadline until up to January 1, 2020.
          2)Require the application submitted pursuant to 1) above, to  
            include a timetable, as required under existing law, detailing  
            how the hospital intends to meet the requested deadline.


          EXISTING STATE LAW:  


          1)Establishes the Alfred E. Alquist Hospital Facilities Seismic  
            Safety Act of 1983 (Alquist Act), to ensure that hospital  
            buildings be designed and constructed to resist the forces  
            generated by earthquakes and requires OSHPD to propose  
            building standards for earthquake resistance and to provide  
            independent review of the design and construction of hospital  
            buildings.
          2)Requires hospitals to evaluate and rate all their general  
            acute care hospital buildings for seismic resistance.


          3)Provides the ability for hospitals to request and receive a  
            delay in their January 1, 2008, seismic compliance deadline if  
            the hospital can demonstrate that compliance will result in a  
            loss of health care capacity that may not be provided by  
            another hospital within a reasonable distance.  Requires the  
            requesting hospital to state why it cannot comply with the  
            deadline.








                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  3




          4)Requires OSHPD, prior to granting an extension of the 2008  
            deadline, to:


             a)   Provide public notice of a hospital's request for an  
               extension which includes the facility's name,  
               identification number, the status of the request, and the  
               beginning and ending dates of the public comment period, as  
               well as provide copies of extension requests to interested  
               parties within 10 working days; and, 
             b)   Allow the public to submit written comments on the  
               extension proposal for at least 45 days from the date of  
               the public notice.


          5)Allows hospitals that have received extensions to January 1,  
            2013, of the January 1, 2008, seismic deadline, for their  
            SPC-1 buildings, to request an additional extension of up to  
            seven years.  Establishes a deadline of September 30, 2012, to  
            apply for this extension.
          6)Requires OSHPD to notify the Department of Public Health  
            (DPH), of the hospital owners that have received a written  
            notice of violation for failure to comply with seismic safety  
            requirements.  Requires DPH, unless the hospital places its  
            license in voluntary suspense, to suspend or refuse to renew  
            the license of a hospital that has received a notice of  
            violation from OSHPD because of its failure to comply with  
            either of those requirements.


          EXISTING FEDERAL LAW:  Establishes the Medicare Rural Hospital  
          Flexibility Program to permit states to designate certain health  
          facilities to be critical access hospitals.  Requires critical  
          access hospitals to meet certain criteria, including that the  
          facility be a rural public or nonprofit hospital that is located  
          more than a 35-mile drive from any other hospital or is  
          certified by the state as being a necessary provider of health  
          care services to residents in the area.










                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  4


          AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill extended from 20 days to 30  
          days, the time period the Legislature has to review a proposed  
          state park lease agreement before it can be approved by the  
          State Public Works Board.  


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.


          COMMENTS:  According to the author The Tehachapi Valley Health  
          Care District (TVHD) set out to comply with the state's seismic  
          mandate by building a brand new hospital which is currently  
          under construction.  However, in the interim, the hospital must  
          retrofit existing buildings in order to remain operational and  
          to ensure continued access to critical health care services.   
          The author notes that under the current seismic mandate, this  
          hospital will be unable to continue operating in its existing  
          hospital buildings beyond January 1, 2016.  The author contends  
          that if the hospital is not be granted an extension to this  
          deadline, the consequences are severe - including loss of  
          hospital licensure and the exclusion from federal participation  
          in Medicaid and Medicare.  The author concludes passage of this  
          bill will not only prevent closure of this hospital, and will  
          also ensure that residents in this district will continue to  
          have access to critical health care services that are so needed  
          in this small rural community.


          1)Hospital seismic safety requirements.  The Alquist Act  
            establishes a seismic safety building standards program under  
            OSHPD's jurisdiction for hospitals built on or after March 7,  
            1973.  The Alquist Act was initiated because of the loss of  
            life incurred due to the collapse of hospitals during the  
            Sylmar earthquake of 1971.  Approximately 470 general acute  
            care hospital facilities comprised of 2,673 hospital buildings  
            are impacted by the provisions of the Alquist Act.  Hospitals  
            built in accordance with the standards of the Alquist Act  
            resisted the January 1994 Northridge earthquake with minimal  
            structural damage, while several facilities built prior to the  
            Alquist Act experienced major structural damage and had to be  
            evacuated.








                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  5


            One of the main provisions of the Alquist Act was the  
            development, via regulation, of earthquake or seismic  
            performance categories, specifically the Structural  
            Performance Categories (SPCs).  These include seismic  
            performance categories for new and existing general acute care  
            hospital facilities at various levels, i.e., from those  
            capable of providing services to the public after a seismic  
            event (SPC-5) to those at significant risk of collapse (SPC-1)  
            and that represent a danger to the public. 


            Each general acute care hospital facility must be at certain  
            SPC levels by specified timeframes.  For example, in the  
            initial law all general acute care hospital facility buildings  
            must be at the SPC-2 (do not significantly jeopardize life,  
            but may not be repairable or functional following strong  
            ground motion) by January 1, 2008, to be in compliance with  
            the regulations, however, provisions were made to allow this  
            deadline to be extended to January 1, 2013, if compliance with  
            the 2008 deadline would result in a diminished capacity of  
            healthcare services to the community.  The next deadline is  
            the January 1, 2030 deadline for hospitals to remain  
            operational following an earthquake, and at that time SPC-2  
            buildings will no longer be permitted, and all building will  
            have to at least meet SPC-3, and in many cases, SPC-4 or SPC-5  
            (the highest rating).  According to OSPHD, only about 10% of  
            remaining hospital buildings are still classified as SPC-1.


            The following are the Alquist Act deadline extensions that are  
            relevant to Tehachapi Hospital and this bill:


            SB 306 (Ducheny), Chapter 642, Statutes of 2007, permitted a  
            hospital owner to comply with seismic safety deadlines and  
            requirements in current law by replacing all of its buildings  
            subject to seismic retrofit by January 1, 2020, rather than  
            retrofitting to SPC-2 by 2013 and replacing them by 2030, if  
            the hospital meets several conditions and OSHPD certifies that  
            the hospital owner lacks the financial capacity to meet  
            seismic standards, as defined.  Among the conditions a  
            hospital must meet to be eligible for this extension are that  








                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  6


            it maintains a contract to provide Medi-Cal services,  
            maintains a basic emergency room, and is either in an  
            underserved area, serves an underserved community, is an  
            essential provider of Medi-Cal services, or is a heavy  
            provider of services to Medi-Cal and indigent patients.   
            Eighteen hospitals have qualified for extensions to 2020 under  
            this authority.  Tehachapi Hospital applied for an extension  
            under SB 306, but the application was denied by OSHPD due to  
            financial criteria.


            SB 608 (Alquist), Chapter 623, Statutes of 2010, provided for  
            an extension of hospital seismic deadlines, for hospitals that  
            have already received the five-year extension to January 1,  
            2013, of up to three years for hospitals that document that a  
            local planning delay will cause them to miss the January 1,  
            2013, deadline.  Tehachapi Hospital was approved for an  
            extension under SB 608 for the maximum of three years, to  
            January 1, 2016.  This is the deadline currently facing  
            Tehachapi Hospital.


            SB 90 (Steinberg), Chapter 19, Statutes of 2011, allowed a  
            hospital to seek an extension for seismic compliance for its  
            SPC-1 buildings of up to seven years based on the following  
            elements: the structural integrity of the building, the loss  
            of essential hospital services to the community if the  
            hospital closed, and financial hardship.  The deadline for  
            submitting an application under SB 90 was September 30, 2012.   
            A hospital applying under SB 90, as part of its application,  
            was required to specify whether it intended to rebuild,  
            replace, or retrofit the building, and the amount of time  
            necessary to complete the construction.  Additionally, a  
            hospital seeking an SB 90 extension was required to submit to  
            OSHPD, as part of its application, a structural reassessment,  
            known as a HAZUS assessment, for each of its SPC-1 buildings.   
            Tehachapi Hospital initially submitted an application for an  
            extension under SB 90 in 2012, but withdrew the application  
            because it intended to build a new facility rather than  
            retrofit their existing building to SPC-2 standards.










                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  7


          2)Tehachapi Hospital.  Tehachapi Hospital is operated by the  
            TVHD, and is licensed as a 24-bed general acute care hospital,  
            of which 19 beds are classified as "swing" beds, meaning they  
            can also be used for long-term skilled nursing care.   
            Tehachapi Hospital is located in the City of Tehachapi, which  
            is about 35 miles southeast of Bakersfield.  The nearest  
            hospital is Kern Medical Center in Bakersfield, 38 miles away.  
             Tehachapi Hospital is designated by DPH as a critical access  
            hospital, which under federal Medicare law means they are  
            eligible to receive cost-based reimbursement from Medicare,  
            and is intended to reduce hospital closures in rural areas.   
            As discussed above, Tehachapi Hospital was granted extensions  
            from the original January 1, 2008, deadline to bring their  
            SPC-1 buildings into SPC-2 compliance.  Under its SB 608  
            extension, they have until January 1, 2016, to bring their  
            SPC-1 buildings into compliance, or stop providing services as  
            a general acute care hospital.
            According to OSHPD, in March of 2012, Tehachapi Hospital  
            applied for an extension under SB 90, which would have  
            provided for an extension of up to seven years beyond the 2013  
            deadline, or as late as January 1, 2020.  Because this  
            application did not include the required HAZUS assessment,  
            OSHPD issued a letter to Tehachapi informing the hospital that  
            their application was in jeopardy of being denied without the  
            HAZUS assessment.  Rather than complete a HAZUS assessment,  
            Tehachapi Hospital withdrew their request for an SB 90  
            extension in June of 2012.


            According to TVHD, the reason the hospital withdrew its SB 90  
            application was because it was planning on building a new  
            hospital, and because it planned to have this building  
            completed before their current deadline, determined that an SB  
            90 extension was unnecessary.  However the hospital  
            encountered both financial and design challenges as well as  
            construction delays and the project is now approximately 18  
            months behind schedule, beyond the January 1, 2016 deadline.  


            Construction on the new hospital is expected to be finished by  
            the end of May 2016, and after inspections, setting up the new  
            hospital, and achieving licensure, the new Tehachapi Hospital  








                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  8


            is expected to be operational by sometime in November of 2016.


          The Association of California Healthcare Districts (ACHD) is the  
          sponsor of this bill and states without the authority granted in  
          this bill Tehachapi Hospital will be unable to continue  
          operating in its existing hospital as of January 1, 2016.  ACHD  
          notes as a rural critical access hospital serving a remote rural  
          community located west of the Mojave Desert in the Tehachapi  
          Mountains, the hospital faces a greater disadvantage than  
          larger, urban hospitals and has faced both financial and design  
          challenges.  ACHD states the TVHD is in the midst of  
          constructing the new hospital which is approximately 50%  
          complete and until recently believed they were on track to meet  
          the seismic deadlines in statute; however the TVHD now faces an  
          18-month project delay, threatening continued access to critical  
          health care services in this underserved community.


          Adventist Health, the California Hospital Association, and the  
          District Hospital Leadership Forum all note this bill will  
          provide an exception for TVHD to resubmit its seismic safety  
          extension application and acceptable plan to OSHPD in compliance  
          with retrofit deadlines established under current law, and this  
          solution will provide the hospital with adequate time to  
          retrofit the appropriate buildings and allow the hospital to  
          remain operational until the new hospital is complete.


          Analysis Prepared by:                                             
                          Lara Flynn / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097  FN:  
          0002411


















                                                                     AB 232


                                                                    Page  9