BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: SCR 57
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: Vargas
VERSION: 8/22/11
Analysis by: Mark Stivers FISCAL: Yes
Hearing date: April 17, 2012
SUBJECT:
Seismic shutoff valves
DESCRIPTION:
This resolution urges various state agencies to hold hearings to
determine if the state's building codes should require the
installation of devices that shut off natural gas and electrical
power in the event of an earthquake.
ANALYSIS:
The California Building Standards Law establishes the California
Building Standards Commission (BSC) and the process for adopting
state building standards. Under this process, relevant state
agencies propose amendments to model building codes, which the
BSC must then adopt, modify, or reject. For example, the
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is the
relevant state agency for residential building standards. The
Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development is
responsible for hospitals and clinics, and the Division of the
State Architect (DSA) is the relevant agency for schools and
emergency service buildings.
Current law requires BSC to publish the California Building
Standards Code in its entirety once every three years. BSC is
just about to begin its 2012 triennial code adoption cycle.
State agencies will submit their initial proposals by June 1,
2012, which begins the public review process. BSC is scheduled
to adopt the final building codes on January 7, 2013, and the
codes it adopts will take effect on January 1, 2014.
This resolution urges the DSA, in cooperation with BSC and HCD
and as a part of the 2012 scheduled triennial building code
review, to hold hearings to determine if state building codes
should require the installation of devices that shut off natural
gas and electrical power in the event of an earthquake. The
SCR 57 (VARGAS) Page 2
resolution further urges these agencies to consider all of the
following:
The possible inclusion of a requirement for the devices in
state building codes versus the development of a model
ordinance for local government adoption and the development of
a state pilot program.
Whether a requirement should be adopted statewide, for all
earthquake fault zones, or for specified earthquake fault
zones.
Whether the devices should be required for new school
construction only, for installation at the time of school
facility renovations, or for all new and existing schools;
The technological feasibility of the devices including a
consideration of potential false activations.
The commercial availability of the devices including current
pricing.
Whether the devices should be capable of being reset by the
property owner or the utility.
The magnitude of earthquake that will activate the devices.
The definition of major renovation for the purpose of
requiring a building to be retrofitted with the devices.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose of the resolution . California is known for its
seismic activity, and most geologists predict a major
earthquake in California during our lifetimes. According to
the author, the potential property damage resulting from a
major earthquake in a densely populated urban area could reach
into the hundreds of billions of dollars, severely damaging
the state's ability to sustain its economy. The author cites
data stating that the 1994 Northridge earthquake generated an
estimated 110 fires, 56 percent of which resulted from damaged
electrical systems and 26 percent of which resulted from
natural gas ruptures. The author believes that, in the event
of a major earthquake, seismic shutoff valves for gas and
electricity have the capacity to reduce property damage, limit
the loss of life, and reduce the demands on first responders
to put out fires, freeing them to concentrate their efforts on
search and rescue of people trapped under fallen debris.
2.Been there, done that . In 2002, the Legislature enacted SB
1992 (Perata), Chapter 1051, which required HCD, in
consultation with the DSA and the State Fire Marshal, to
consider whether to propose for inclusion in state building
SCR 57 (VARGAS) Page 3
codes a requirement that seismic gas shutoff devices or excess
flow gas shutoff devices be installed in all or a portion of
dwelling units, motels, hotels, and lodginghouses. HCD
completed this review and issued an information bulletin in
March 2005 which stated:
After careful consideration of all currently available
information, including a study commissioned by a
manufacturer of excess flow valves, the Department
concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support a
statewide requirement for the installation of seismic gas
shutoff devices and/or excess flow gas shutoff devices. The
Department recognizes, however, some jurisdictions,
particularly those in seismically active regions of the
state, may wish to require the usage of such devices?
?The Department recognizes local government's
responsibility to determine if and when unique measures are
needed to mitigate the impact of seismic events, floods,
and/or other natural disasters?The Department is aware that
a number of jurisdictions in California have local
ordinances mandating the installation of seismic gas
shutoff valves or excess flow gas shutoff devices. To
HCD's knowledge, each community that has adopted such an
ordinance is located in "Seismic Zone IV" �the most
seismically active areas].
The bulletin summarized the benefits of seismic shutoff valves
as, "Activate only in cases when building shaking may be
sufficient to cause damage to the gas system. Someone does
not need to be present to ensure shutoff." The bulletin
summarized the drawbacks as, "Can activate even if damage and
hazards do not exist. Aftershocks can cause the device to
activate after service has been restored. May activate from
shaking not related to earthquakes."
The HCD bulletin from 2005 largely covers the same issues as
this resolution. Nonetheless, there are some differences:
Seven years have passed since the publication of the HCD
bulletin. It is unclear to committee staff whether the
technology has changed significantly or not.
This resolution refers to building standards for all
occupancies and specifically mentions schools, whereas the
2005 review was limited to residential occupancies.
SCR 57 (VARGAS) Page 4
This resolution urges the state agencies to review
electricity shutoff devices in addition to gas shutoff
devices.
This resolution urges the state agencies to consider not
just building code requirements but also the publication of
a model local ordinance and the adoption of a pilot
program.
The committee may wish to consider whether or not there is
sufficient evidence of changed conditions to merit the time
and expense of a second review.
1.Technical issues . As mentioned in HCD's 2005 review, false
activations can be a drawback to gas shutoff valves. The
sponsor, a manufacturer, argues that technological
improvements have largely addressed false activations, but
persons in the building code community contacted by staff do
not yet seem convinced. An arguably more important issue is
who is responsible for restoring gas service after an
activation, real or false. Gas utilities have historically
been reluctant to allow consumers to reset the devices for
fear of undetected leaks. They have often felt that restoring
gas service should be left to a professional given the
inherent dangers associated with natural gas. On the other
hand, if shutoff valves were ubiquitous, utilities would be
stretched thin to reset so many valves themselves after an
earthquake, likely resulting in long delays and potential
hardships for consumers.
Seismic electricity shutoff devices seem to be a recent
development, and energy experts contacted by staff were not
aware of much experience with them. Given this lack of
knowledge, it may be premature to consider a mandate to
install such devices.
2.Administrative issues . This resolution also raises a number
of administrative issues. First, the resolution urges the
DSA, in cooperation with BSC and HCD, to hold the hearings.
Given the author's apparent intent in affecting building
standards for a variety of uses, not just schools covered by
DSA, it would make more sense for the BSC to take the lead.
The committee may wish to consider an amendment to make BSC
the lead agency.
Second, the resolution requires the state agencies to hold the
hearings and make their determinations as a part of the 2012
SCR 57 (VARGAS) Page 5
scheduled triennial building code review. It is already too
late for that. The state agencies are required to submit
their code packages to the BSC by June 1, 2012, less than two
months away. The committee may wish to consider an amendment
to move the review to the next triennial cycle following the
2012 cycle.
Third, the resolution requires the state agencies to consider
the development of a pilot program. Given that the building
codes proposed by state agencies are statewide in nature and
that local governments already have the authority, and have
used it, to adopt local requirements for seismic shutoff
valves, a state pilot program seems inappropriate. The
committee may wish to consider an amendment to remove the
reference to a pilot program.
3.Profit motive . Global Seismic Solutions, a manufacturer of
seismic shutoff devices, is the sponsor of this resolution.
While the sponsor highlights the public safety benefits of
these devices, it is also true that a statewide or even
regional requirement to install seismic shutoff devices in new
or existing construction would significantly increase business
for the manufacturers of such devices, including Global
Seismic Solutions.
RELATED LEGISLATION
SB 1271 (Corbett) requires the Department of General Services
(in which the DSA resides) to convene a workgroup to develop and
adopt standards for the seismic safety of schools by January 1,
2114. This bill passed the Senate Education Committee and is in
the Senate Governmental Organization Committee.
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday, April 11,
2012)
SUPPORT: Global Seismic Solutions (sponsor)
OPPOSED: None received.
SCR 57 (VARGAS) Page 6