BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                                                                  SB 1064
                                                                  Page A

          SENATE THIRD READING
          SB 1064 (Hill)
          As Amended  April 8, 2014
          Majority vote 

           SENATE VOTE  :36-0  
           
           UTILITIES & COMMERCE             14-0                
          APPROPRIATIONS      17-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Bradford, Patterson,      |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow,           |
          |     |Bonilla, Buchanan,        |     |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian  |
          |     |Ch�vez, Dahle, Fong, Beth |     |Calderon, Campos,         |
          |     |Gaines, Garcia,           |     |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez,  |
          |     |Roger Hern�ndez, Jones,   |     |Holden, Jones, Linder,    |
          |     |Mullin, Quirk, Rendon     |     |Pan, Quirk,               |
          |     |                          |     |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner,    |
          |     |                          |     |Lowenthal                 |
          |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Enacts provisions concerning National Transportation  
          Safety Board (NTSB) safety recommendations and Federal Transit  
          Administration (FTA) safety advisories relating to California  
          Public Utilities Commission (PUC)-regulated rail facilities.   
          Specifically,  this bill  :   

          1)Requires the PUC, upon receipt of NTSB rail safety  
            recommendations, to provide within 90 days, a written response  
            to NTSB indicating the commission's intended actions for each  
            recommendation, including one of the following:

             a)   The intent to implement recommendations in full, with a  
               proposed timetable.

             b)   The intent to implement part of the recommendations,  
               with a proposed timetable, and detailed reasons for the  
               refusal to implement the remaining recommendations.

             c)   The refusal to implement recommendations, with detailed  
               reasons for the refusal.

          2)Requires the PUC, if NTSB issues a safety recommendation  









                                                                  SB 1064
                                                                  Page B

            letter concerning a PUC-regulated rail facility to the United  
            States (U.S.) Department of Transportation, FTA, a  
            PUC-regulated rail operator, or the PUC itself, or if the FTA  
            issues a safety advisory concerning any PUC-regulated rail  
            facility, to detail in writing whether implementation of the  
            recommendation or advisory is appropriate and approve the  
            decision by majority vote.

          3)Requires the PUC, upon deeming a NTSB recommendation  
            appropriate or an FTA action necessary, to issue orders or  
            adopt rules to implement the recommendation or action as soon  
            as practicable, and further requires the PUC to consider  
            whether a more effective, or equally effective and less  
            costly, alternative exists to address the safety issue.

          4)Requires the PUC annual work plan to report any action taken  
            regarding a rail safety recommendation or advisory, and  
            requires any correspondence from NTSB indicating that a gas or  
            rail safety recommendation has been closed following an action  
            that the NTSB finds unacceptable to be noted.


           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, minor and absorbable costs to the PUC.
           COMMENTS  :   

          1)Purpose of the bill.  According to the author, "The  
            Independent Review Panel into the San Bruno explosion called  
            for the profile of safety to be raised throughout the  
            California Public Utilities Commission's organization.  After  
            finding that the CPUC [California PUC] had largely ignored  
            National Transportation Safety Board gas safety  
            recommendations and safety advisory bulletins from the federal  
            regulator, the Legislature decided to require the CPUC to be  
            more responsive to NTSB and to require a vote of the full  
            Commission in deciding whether to implement relevant  
            recommendations and advisory bulletins.  After the dangerous  
            rescue of passengers of the September [2013] Angel's Flight  
            derailment - a rescue that wouldn't have been dangerous had  
            the CPUC not defied an NTSB recommendation (without even  
            taking a vote) - the Legislature should act again to raise the  
            profile of rail safety.  By requiring the CPUC to report to  
            the Legislature of any actions the NTSB finds unacceptable -  
            as NTSB had found the CPUC's response to the fatal 2001  









                                                                  SB 1064
                                                                  Page C

            Angel's Flight accident - gas and rail safety recommendations  
            from the NTSB will be given the consideration they deserve."

          2)The National Transportation Safety Board.  NTSB is an  
            independent federal agency charged with investigating  
            significant transportation accidents in the U.S., including  
            those related to aviation, railroads, highways, marine, and  
            pipelines.  NTSB determines the probable cause of the  
            accidents and issues safety recommendations intended to  
            prevent future accidents.  These recommendations are directed  
            to the public or private organization best able to correct the  
            issue(s).  Since 1967, the NTSB has issued over 13,000 safety  
            recommendations to more than 2,500 recipients. 

          3)The Federal Transit Administration.  FTA is an agency within  
            the U.S. Department of Transportation that provides financial  
            and technical assistance to local public transit systems. Rail  
            fixed guideway systems, and the Regional Transit Agencies that  
            operate them, are regulated by the FTA and states.  In the  
            past, FTA has issued safety advisories in response to NTSB  
            recommendations.

          4)NTSB rail safety recommendations to the PUC.  NTSB has issued  
            twelve safety recommendations - six concerning pipelines and  
            six concerning rail - to the PUC since 1982.<1>  Regarding the  
            rail recommendations, four were for rail fixed guideways, one  
            was for a freight line, and the remaining was for Amtrak. 

            NTSB has marked all gas pipeline safety recommendations to the  
            PUC as having "Acceptable" actions or responses, but two rail  
            safety recommendations have been classified as "Unacceptable,"  
            with one in particular - Angels Flight - being the impetus for  
            this bill. The troubles for the downtown Los Angeles Angels  
            Flight funicular railway began on February 1, 2001, when the  
            collision of the two cars resulted in one fatality and seven  
            injuries.  In August 2003, NTSB recommended the PUC verify  
            Angels Flight equipment met industry standards, including  
            having an emergency evacuation guideway, before reauthorizing  
            service.  When Angels Flight reopened in 2010, it did so  
            without an emergency evacuation guideway, and the NTSB  
            reclassified the safety recommendation as "Closed -  
            Unacceptable" because the PUC did not require Angels Flight to  
            comply with all elements of the recommendation before resuming  



            --------------------------
          <1>  http://www.ntsb.gov/safetyrecs/private/QueryPage.aspx  








                                                                 SB 1064
                                                                  Page D

            service.  Correspondence on this action indicates the PUC  
            unsuccessfully petitioned the NTSB to change the safety  
            recommendation status to "Closed - Acceptable".

            Another Angels Flight accident occurred on September 5, 2013,  
            when the descending car derailed and required rescue of five  
            stranded passengers in the ascending car.  A month later, NTSB  
            issued five urgent recommendations, and the PUC President  
            responded with actions the PUC is taking to address the  
            recommendations. NTSB's website currently classifies this item  
            as "Open - Initial Response Received," but a May 13, 2014  
            letter from NTSB to the PUC updates the item as "Open -  
            Acceptable Response."

          5)NTSB gas safety recommendations. To ensure NTSB gas safety  
            recommendations were considered by the PUC, AB 578 (Hill),  
            Chapter 462, Statutes of 2012, enacted provisions that  
            required:  a) the PUC to be more responsive to NTSB  
            recommendations; b) a vote of the commission when deciding  
            whether to implement recommendations and/or advisories; and c)  
            inclusion of PUC actions on gas safety recommendations in the  
            PUC's annual report.  This bill seeks to provide consistency  
            in the statute by enacting similar provisions concerning the  
            PUC's response to NTSB rail safety recommendations.


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Brandon Gaytan / U. & C. / (916)  
          319-2083 


                                                                FN: 0004327