BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1652|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1652
Author: Jones (D), et al
Amended: 7/15/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE : 6-2, 6/30/10
AYES: Alquist, Cedillo, Leno, Negrete McLeod, Pavley,
Romero
NOES: Strickland, Aanestad
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cox
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 44-30, 6/1/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Public safety: ski resorts
SOURCE : California Ski & Snowboard Safety Organization
DIGEST : This bill requires ski resorts to prepare an
annual safety plan, make the safety plan available to the
public upon request, and make available to the public a
monthly report with specified details about any fatal
incidents at the resort which resulted from a recreational
activity. The bill also requires a standardized signage
policy and a standardized equipment padding policy for the
resort.
NOTE: The current version of this bill is virtually
identical to last year's SB 284 (Cox), which failed
passed in the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations
Committee.
CONTINUED
AB 1652
Page
2
ANALYSIS :
Existing law
1. Specifies numerous procedures for the safe operation of
equipment, workplaces, and certain recreational
facilities.
2. Specifies the requirements for obtaining a license for,
and operating, a passenger aerial tramway, including
those operating as ski lifts. The law also requires the
Division of Occupational Safety and Health within the
Department of Industrial Relations to conduct
inspections of aerial tramways at certain intervals.
This bill:
1. Provides that a ski resort that operates in California
shall prepare an annual safety plan that conforms to the
requirements of federal regulations applicable to ski
resorts operating on federal property.
2. Establishes a standardized signage policy used to
indicate a ski area boundary, hazard, or other safety
information. Signage shall be subject to inspection by
the division.
3. Establishes a policy for standardized safety padding or
other barriers for lift towers and fixed snowmaking
equipment located on or in close proximity to groomed
ski runs.
Background
California ski industry . California hosts an extensive
recreational nordic and alpine skiing and snowboarding
industry, with approximately 30 resorts drawing skiers and
snowboarders from all over the world every year. Nordic
skiing is commonly referred to as cross-country skiing, but
encompasses all types of skiing where the heel of the boot
cannot be affixed to the ski. Conversely, alpine skiing is
commonly referred to as downhill skiing, but encompasses
skiing with fixed-heel bindings.
AB 1652
Page
3
In November 2008, the Assembly Judiciary Committee held an
informational hearing on "Ski and Snowboard Health, Safety
and Liability Standards." The hearing concluded that the
ski industry has no uniform safety policies, procedures, or
signage, and the safety practices that are in place tend to
vary from location to location. Unlike most states with
major ski resorts, California has no ski safety statute, no
proactive oversight and no established ski and snowboard
safety standards.
Most, but not all, of California's ski resorts are located
on federal land, which subjects them to some oversight by
the U.S. Forest Service. Ski resorts located on federal
property are required to file annual operating or safety
plans with the U.S. Forest Service. Although the U.S.
Forest Service has contractual authority to enforce safety
improvements on land leased to ski resorts, with no
established national safety standards, the Forest Service
takes a "hands-off" position on safety regulation.
Individuals testifying at the informational hearing
reported great difficulty in obtaining copies of the plans
from the U.S. Forest Service when they filed the required
Freedom of Information Act requests.
The California ski industry enjoys legal liability
protection through a common law doctrine of "assumed risk"
as well as contractual negligence waivers included on ski
pass purchase agreements. As a result of these
protections, ski resorts have limited exposure to legal
liability. There is no publicly accessible, statewide
repository of information on ski resort-related deaths and
injuries.
Risk of injury from skiing . According to the National Ski
Areas Association, serious injuries (paraplegics, serious
head and other serious injuries) occur at the rate of about
43.6 per year. In the 2007/2008 season, there were 41
serious injuries. Thirty-two of these serious injuries
were skiers and nine were snowboarders. The rate of
serious injury in 2007/2008 was 0.68 per million
skier/snowboarder visits. According to a Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study in the journal,
Wilderness and Environmental Medicine , more people are hurt
AB 1652
Page
4
snowboarding than any other outdoor activity, accounting
for a quarter of emergency room visits. Almost 213,000
people were treated each year in emergency departments for
outdoor recreational injuries from 2004 to 2005. Of those
injured, about 109,000 (51.5 percent) were young people
between the ages of 10 and 24.
Ski helmet usage . The purpose of the helmet is to
partially absorb the force of blunt trauma and dissipate
the energy so that the head alone does not sustain the
total force of the blow. While helmets do not decrease the
risk of injury, they can decrease the severity. Ski
helmets are graded on their ability to withstand frontal
blunt and sharp impact, retention strength, and resistance
to roll off. American standards indicate that those
helmets with a rating of RS 98 from the Snell Memorial
Foundation of the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) have the highest level of protection in all tested
areas of impact.
Helmet utilization in the U.S. is increasing by about five
percent per year for the last several years. In the
2004/05, season the overall usage of helmets among the
general public (skiers and snowboarders) was estimated to
be 33.2 percent. It was higher among children 9 and under
at 66 percent; it was next highest among those over 65, at
46 percent. Only 19 percent of entry level skiers and
snowboarders used a helmet versus advanced/expert at 45
percent. Among males, 35.2 percent used a helmet, and 30.4
percent of females wore a helmet.
In January 1999, the U.S . CPSC released a report on an
investigational study of skiing- and snowboarding-related
head and neck injuries, in an attempt to determine whether
helmets would have prevented or reduced the severity of the
injuries they studied. They note that head injuries
account for 14 percent of skiing and snowboarding
accidents, as well as 56 percent of related deaths. Falls
were the leading cause of head and neck injuries, when
individuals either hit a surface (48 percent) or hit their
ski equipment (21 percent). About two-thirds of the falls
to a surface resulted in injuries to parts of the head
which were identified as addressable by use of a helmet.
Overall, the study indicated that 44 percent of head
AB 1652
Page
5
injuries, an estimated 7,700 injuries annually, could be
addressed by helmet use. The study also showed that for
children under 15 years of age, 53 percent of head injuries
(approximately 2,600 of the 4,950 head injuries annually)
are addressable by use of a helmet.
U.S. CPSC noted that studies have shown safety helmets for
motorcycling and bicycling provide effective protection
against head and brain injuries, including severe brain
injuries. They believe it is reasonable to suggest, from
the bicycling and motorcycling experience, that a skiing
helmet that meets a suitable standard could provide
effective protection against head and brain injuries in
many types of skiing-related incidents involving head
impact. Based on this information as well as their
investigational study, they conclude that the use of
helmets will reduce the risk of head injury associated with
skiing and snowboarding.
Existing federal regulation applicable to ski resorts
operating on federal property . Ski areas located on land
owned by the U.S. Forest Service are authorized under a
special-use permit from the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
to partner with the Forest Service to achieve common goals
of managing and promoting active participation in alpine
recreation. Federal regulations state that it is the
responsibility of the authorized officer to ensure that the
holder of a winter recreation resort permit, in
consultation with the authorized officer, prepare and
annually revise an operating plan that covers all
operations authorized by the permit. The authorized
officer must approve the operating plan and annual
revisions before they are implemented. Once approved by
the authorized officer, the operating plan and annual
revisions must be incorporated as an appendix to the
permit.
The operating plan for a winter recreation resort shall, at
a minimum, address the following operations: a) ski patrol
and first aid; b) communications; c) signs; d) general
safety and sanitation; e) erosion control; f) accident
reporting; g) avalanche control; h) search and rescue; i)
boundary management; j) vegetation management; k)
designation of representatives; l) trail routes for Nordic
AB 1652
Page
6
skiing; and, m) explosive magazine security (where
applicable). The federal requirements are non-specific,
relying on federal forest service personnel to determine
whether a particular plan is suitable or sufficient. The
federal regulations provide little guidance for state
officials considering a safety plan.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/28/10)
California Ski & Snowboard Safety Organization (source)
American Academy of Pediatrics
American College of Emergency Physicians, State Chapter of
California
California Association for Nurse Practitioners
California Chamber of Commerce
California Chiropractic Association
California Emergency Nurses Association
California Medical Association
California Nurses Association
California Psychiatric Association
California School Nurses Organization
Children's Specialty Care Coalition
Civil Justice Association of California
Peace Officers Research Association of California
Several individuals
OPPOSITION : (Verified 7/28/10)
Alpine Meadows Ski Resort
Big Bear Mountain Resorts
California Ski Industry Association
Department of Consumer Affairs
Homewood Mountain Resort
Mammoth Mountain Ski Area
Mountain High Ski Resort
Mt. Shasta Ski Park
National Ski Areas Association
Northstar at Tahoe Resort
Sierra at Tahoe Snowsports Resort
Squaw Valley USA
AB 1652
Page
7
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the sponsor, the
California Ski and Snowboard Safety Organization (CSSSO),
this bill will promote safety at California ski resorts by
requiring children to wear helmets and improve access to
ski resort safety information, which will allow consumers
to make informed decisions. While CSSSO acknowledges the
inherent dangers of skiing and snowboarding, requiring ski
resorts to enforce the use of helmets for children on
slopes, make their safety plans publicly accessible, and
provide information on injuries and fatalities that occur
at the ski resorts, coupled with other requirements in this
bill, will improve safety at ski resorts.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California Ski Industry
Association (CSIA) states that the requirements to include
a description of signage and signage marking ski area
boundaries, and both "natural and manmade hazards," are
undefined and extremely vague, and open ski resorts to
lawsuits. CSIA also opposes the requirement to post
signage at the tops and bottoms of each ski lift, which
would increase visual clutter. Additionally, CSIA believes
the requirement to report the number of deaths and injuries
is cumbersome, potentially violates the privacy of the
injured individual, and the information could be misused or
misconstrued by someone wishing to publish the data in a
misleading way. Lastly, CSIA states that the helmet
requirement in this bill would place the ski resort in an
untenable position of enforcing the new law and open the
resort to potential lawsuits.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez,
Hill, Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Monning,
Nava, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner,
Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Yamada,
John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee,
Caballero, Conway, Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher,
Fuller, Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Huber,
Jeffries, Knight, Logue, Ma, Miller, Nestande, Niello,
Nielsen, Norby, Silva, Smyth, Tran, Villines
AB 1652
Page
8
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Galgiani, Mendoza, V.
Manuel Perez, Audra Strickland, Vacancy
CTW:do 7/29/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****