BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2456
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2456 (Torrico)
As Amended May 28, 2010
Majority vote
HEALTH 17-2 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Monning, Fletcher, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Ammiano, |
| |Ammiano, Carter, Conway, | |Bradford, |
| |Brownley, De Leon, Eng, | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| |Hayashi, Hernandez, | |Davis, Monning, Ruskin, |
| |Jones, | |Skinner, Solorio, |
| |Bonnie Lowenthal, Nava, | |Torlakson, Torrico |
| |V. Manuel Perez, Salas, | | |
| |Smyth, Audra Strickland | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Adams, Gaines |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Addresses oversight of emergency medical professionals
under the jurisdiction of the California Emergency Medical
Services Authority (EMSA). Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires EMSA to develop regulations establishing standards
for policies and procedures applicable to the functions,
certification, and licensure of emergency medical technician
(EMT) personnel to address local accreditation, competency
examinations, demonstration of skills competency, field
competency, preceptor evaluation, and approval and evaluation
of service providers.
2)Requires the regulations to address optional skills including
medical oversight, service provider approval, and additional
training and maintenance of accreditation.
3)Requires mandatory adherence by counties that have opted to
run the local Emergency Medical Services (EMS) program to
comply with the regulations established pursuant to this bill.
4)Specifies if policies and procedures deviate from regulations
established pursuant to this bill, those policies and
AB 2456
Page 2
procedures must be approved by EMSA and the EMS Commission.
5)Authorizes EMSA to develop and adopt a fee schedule to support
the additional costs of promulgating the regulations, to be
apportioned among certifying entities and EMT licensure fees.
6)States legislative intent and declarations.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, annual fee-supported special fund costs of $800,000
for EMSA to establish regulations and statewide oversight of
emergency medical professionals. Recent amendments provide EMSA
to the authority to levy fees to support the workload created by
this bill.
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill is intended to
clarify existing law established by AB 2917 (Torrico), Chapter
274, Statutes of 2008, with respect to EMSA's current ability to
establish guidelines that direct local EMS programs and other
essential EMS stakeholders in their operations for the
coordinated delivery of EMS in this state. The author explains
that EMS personnel, such as in Kern and San Bernardino counties
provide multi-county services but are subject to differing
requirements. The author argues that this bill is necessary to
streamline this incongruent process and that policies need to be
driven by research and consensus rather than the personality of
the local administrator and doctor. The author also asserts
that policies should ensure the safety and competency of EMS
personnel through standardized training and accreditation, as
well as consistency in training programs which ensures safe and
effective delivery of EMS to the public. This means one state
standard for all EMS certified and licensed personnel,
regardless of where the service is delivered.
California operates on a two-tiered EMS system. EMSA is the
state lead agency and centralized resource to oversee emergency
and disaster medical services. EMSA is charged with providing
leadership in developing and implementing EMS systems throughout
California and setting standards for the training and scope of
practice of various levels of EMS personnel. EMSA also has
responsibility for promoting disaster medical preparedness
throughout the state, and, when required, managing the state's
medical response to major disasters. According to EMSA it
operates through standard setting, consensus building, and
AB 2456
Page 3
leadership. Responsibilities for EMS systems planning and
development include assessment of EMS systems in order to
coordinate EMS activity based on community needs; technical
assistance to local agencies; developing, implementing, or
evaluating components of an EMS system; development of statewide
standards and guidelines for EMS systems as well as guidelines
for the assessment of critical care capabilities of hospitals;
and, review and approval of local EMS plans to ensure compliance
with the minimum standards set by EMSA
In California, day-to-day EMS system management is the
responsibility of the local and regional EMS agencies.
California has 32 local EMS systems that are providing EMS for
California's 58 counties. Seven regional EMS systems comprised
of 33 counties and 25 single county agencies provide the
services. Regional systems are usually comprised of small, more
rural, less-populated counties and single-county systems
generally exist in the larger and more urban counties.
Analysis Prepared by : Marjorie Swartz / HEALTH / (916)
319-2097
FN: 0004658