BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2557
Page 1
( Without Reference to File )
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 2557 (Pan)
As Amended August 22, 2014
2/3 vote. Urgency
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 23, 2014) |SENATE: | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant) (vote not available)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|COMMITTEE VOTE: |15-2 |(August 29, 2014) |RECOMMENDATION: |concur |
|(Health) | | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.
SUMMARY : Authorizes the Office of Statewide Health Planning and
Development (OSHPD) to grant certain hospitals, who have already
received an extension of the January 1, 2008, seismic safety
deadline, an additional extension until September 1, 2015.
Contains an urgency clause to ensure that the provisions of this
bill go into immediate effect upon enactment.
The Senate amendments delete the contents of the Assembly approved
version of this bill and instead:
1)Clarify that, after January 1, 2008, a general acute care
hospital determined to be a potential risk of collapse can only
be used for non-acute purposes unless an extension of the
deadline has already been granted and either of the following
occurs before the end of the extension:
a) A replacement building has been constructed and a
certificate of occupancy has been granted by OSHPD for the
replacement building; or,
b) A retrofit has been performed on the building and a
construction final has been obtained by OSHPD.
2)Authorize OSHPD to grant hospitals located in the Counties of
Sacramento, San Mateo, or Santa Barbara or the City of San Jose
AB 2557
Page 2
that have received an extension of the January 1, 2008, deadline,
an additional extension until September 1, 2015, in order to
obtain either a certificate of occupancy from OSHPD for a
replacement building, or a construction final from OSHPD for a
building on which a retrofit has been performed.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the Alfred E. Alquist Hospital Facilities Seismic
Safety Act of 1983 (the 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)Creates a 16-member Hospital Building Safety Board appointed by
the Director of OSHPD to act as a board of appeals in all matters
relating to the administration and enforcement of seismic safety
requirements.
4)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.
5)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.
6)Requires OSHPD to notify the Department of Health Services, now
AB 2557
Page 3
the Department of Public Health (DPH), of the hospital owners
that have received a written notice of violation for failure to
comply with either the 2008 requirements or the 2030
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.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill removed Pasadena City College
from the list of eligible community college campuses that may
participate in the California Community Colleges summer and winter
intersessions pilot program.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee,
pursuant to Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS : According to the author, OSHPD recently identified five
outstanding hospital projects that are working toward the January
1, 2015, deadline, which, due to extenuating circumstances such as
flooding and unforeseeable construction delays, may not be
completed on time. Not meeting the January 1, 2015, deadline could
result in the hospitals' losing their licenses and jeopardizing
their ability to participate in Medicare and Medicaid. This bill
provides an eight-month extension to the January 1, 2015, deadline
for those hospitals, ensuring their communities' uninterrupted
access to health care.
1)BACKGROUND. The Act establishes a seismic safety building
standards program under OSHPD's jurisdiction for hospitals built
on or after March 7, 1973. The 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 Act. Hospitals built in
accordance with the standards of the Act resisted the January
1994 Northridge earthquake with minimal structural damage, while
several facilities built prior to the Act experienced major
structural damage and had to be evacuated.
One of the main provisions of the Act was the development, via
regulation, of earthquake or seismic performance categories,
specifically the Structural Performance Categories (SPC) and
Nonstructural Performance Categories. These include seismic
performance categories for new and existing general acute care
AB 2557
Page 4
hospital facilities at various levels, i.e., from those capable
of providing services to the public after a seismic event to
those at significant risk of collapse and that represent a danger
to the public. The goal of these regulations is to develop
retrofit and repair designs for existing hospital buildings to
yield predictable seismic performance, whether at the essential
life safety level or post-earthquake continued operations level.
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 ("Life Safety Level") 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. In addition,
timeframes for submittal of seismic evaluations, compliance
plans, and other seismic performance levels are cited in the
seismic evaluation procedure regulations.
2)STATUS OF WAIVERS AND COMPLIANCE. Subsequent legislation
affecting the Act has provided for additional seismic compliance
extensions. Statewide, many hospitals are on different timelines
based on the extension they applied for. The five hospitals
subject to the provisions of this bill all have what are commonly
known as SB 1661 (Cox), Chapter 679, Statutes of 2006, waivers.
SB 1661 requires all general acute care hospitals that have
nonconforming SPC-1 buildings to report to OSHPD by June 30,
2009, on the status of their compliance with the seismic safety
deadlines. SPC-1 buildings are buildings posing significant risk
of collapse and danger to the public. Buildings with an approved
extension are permitted to provide acute care service only up to
the length of extension granted, the maximum extension that may
be granted per statute is January 1, 2020, beyond which the
building can no longer provide general acute care services. In
order to grant an extension to the hospital, OSHPD must consider
the structural integrity of the building, the loss of essential
healthcare services to the community should the hospital be
closed, and the financial hardship that the hospital may have
experienced. The extensions granted to the five hospitals that
would be subject to this bill were until January 1, 2015, and all
five have complied with the SB 1661 reporting requirements, which
state:
AB 2557
Page 5
a) The hospital building was under construction at the time of
the request for extension;
b) The hospital building plans were submitted to OSHPD and
were deemed ready for review by OSHPD at least four years
prior to the applicable deadline for the building;
c) The hospital received a building permit at least two years
prior to the applicable deadline for the building;
d) The hospital submitted a construction timeline at least two
years prior to the applicable deadline for the building
demonstrating the hospital's intent to meet the applicable
deadline. Requires the timeline to include all of the
following:
i) The projected construction start date;
ii) The projected construction completion date;
iii) Identification of the contractor; and,
iv) The hospital is making reasonable progress toward
meeting the timeline set forth in d) above, but factors
beyond the hospital's control make it impossible for the
hospital to meet the deadline.
STATUS OF CONSTRUCTION
1)Goleta Valley Cottage Hospital (GVCH). The design build
contractor for the new hospital building was selected in 2007 and
the initial schedule was for the project to commence in January,
2009 and be completed in its entirety by August, 2011.
Construction began in January 2009 on the initial phases, which
included a temporary parking lot, site excavation and shoring,
re-location of utilities and the installation of 2,300 rock
columns. According to GVCH, this work was not completed until
late 2010 due to poor contractor coordination, lack of manpower,
and subcontractor issues. As a result, the new GVCH may not be
completed and certainly, will not be occupied until after the
deadline. Overall, the project is 93.6% complete through June
2014 and GVCH has expended $95.1 million of its anticipated
$124.6 million budget.
2)Regional Medical Center of San Jose (RMC). RMC submitted plans
AB 2557
Page 6
for its seismic retrofit and new addition project on August 8,
2008, with SB 1661 incremental plans for structural,
architectural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing drawings being
submitted in 2010 and 2011. According to RMC they have completed
the construction of a new seismically compliant patient tower and
connecting corridors but will require additional months beyond
the January 1, 2015 deadline to complete renovation work in the
non-compliant portions of their non-compliant facilities because
their design team and contractors have run into hidden and
unknown conditions throughout the demolition and renovation
process which has forced them to redesign and resubmit plans to
OSHPD for approval, a process which has added months to the
project. RMC anticipates completion of the project in March,
2015.
3)Santa Ynez Valley Cottage Hospital (SYVCH). The design build
contractor for the replacement and remodel was selected in 2006
and the initial schedule was for the project to commence in
December 2007 and be completed in its entirety by April 2009.
Construction of the new addition began in January 2008 and was
not completed until December 2010. According to SYVCH the
remodel phase did not begin in earnest until the new addition was
occupied and the project has progressed slowly due to poor
contractor coordination, lack of manpower and subcontractor
issues and as a result, the remodel phase is at risk for not
being completed by the deadline. Overall, the project is
approximately 91% complete through June 2014 and SYVCH has
expended $13.8 million of its anticipated $15.2 million budget.
4)Sequoia Hospital. Sequoia Hospital in Redwood City has completed
the retrofitting of six buildings and the construction of a new
patient pavilion. The pavilion is waiting for a certificate of
occupancy from OSHPD and a license from DPH. Sequoia Hospital
states that the retrofitting of the final two buildings cannot be
completed without disrupting access to health care services for
the community, until patients are moved into the new pavilion.
If construction proceeds as planned, Sequoia Hospital expects the
structural work of the two final buildings to be completed prior
to the deadline, although some remaining cosmetic and remodeling
work may spill into January. OSHPD has indicated they will
approve the structural work separate from the remodeling.
Sequoia Hospital is seeking an extension to allow the
administrative process of OSHPD reviewing and approving the work
and DPH issuing a new license to take place without impacting
access to care for area patients.
AB 2557
Page 7
5)Sutter Memorial Hospital. According to Sutter Memorial Hospital
the replacement project is a very complex project that includes
construction of an eight story Women's and Children's Center and
the remodeling of the existing Sutter General Hospital. Sutter
Memorial notes, like many large construction projects, delays
have pushed the opening date beyond the anticipated completion.
Among the delays, a material defect in a pipe cap led to
significant flooding of the Women's and Children's Center
building earlier this year. A comprehensive remediation and
restoration effort was undertaken to repair damage on several
floors and complicated their ability to complete the project on
the scheduled timeline, resulting in $8 million in damage and a
four-month delay. Sutter Memorial states, to ensure the highest
quality and safety of patients, the new facility will not be
ready to accommodate the patients from Sutter General Hospital
until July 2015.
The California Hospital Association (CHA) is the sponsor of this
bill and states that many designers and structural engineers
consider California hospitals to be the most complex and costly
buildings to construct due to the intricate structural, mechanical,
plumbing and electrical systems needed to remain operational
following an earthquake. CHA notes that these five hospitals have
met the benchmarks required by SB 1661 at the cost of millions of
dollars but, due to the complex nature of the projects and
extenuating circumstances, these five hospital construction
projects have been slightly delayed and if this bill is not passed,
closure of any of these hospitals would create access to care
problems in their communities.
The State Building and Construction Trades Council (SBCTC) supports
this bill stating that their members know firsthand the importance
of ensuring that California hospitals are seismically compliant so
that they will remain operational during the most critical time.
SBCTC also notes that there is an added level of complexity for
hospital construction projects due to the intricate structural,
mechanical, plumbing and electrical systems needed to remain
operational following an earthquake.
The California Nurses Association (CNA) is opposed to this bill
because they maintain it has become routine for the California
Hospital Association to rush into the Legislature at the last
minute asking for special consideration when they could and should
have anticipated the need for extensions earlier in the legislative
AB 2557
Page 8
year. CNA notes that concerned members of the public and
representatives of healthcare workers should be given enough time
to assess the veracity of the excuses made by these hospitals and
this cannot be done when the bill is rushed through the process.
Finally, CNA states that if seismic standards cannot be met after
extensions have already been granted, hospitals should not continue
to admit patients and place them and hospital staff at risk for
injury due to seismic non-compliance.
Analysis Prepared by : Lara Flynn / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097
FN: 0005591