Assembly Standing Committee on Emergency Management

Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to Emergency Management. I'm Assemblymember Freddie Rodriguez, chair of Emergency Management. Welcome to today's hearing. At today's hearing, we will take public comments from those in the room. Members of the public may also submit testimony to the committee at aem.assembly.ca.gov. First, establish a quorum. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

And we do have a quorum. First up, we have bills on consent, SB 74, Dodd, regarding the Office of Wildfire Fire Technology Research and Development. The motion is do pass to the Committee on Appropriations. SB 1101, Limon, regarding CAL FIRE and prescribed fire. The motion is do pass the Committee on Appropriations.

SB 1461, Allen, regarding landslides of the state emergencies. The motion is do pass to the Committee on Appropriations. Do I have a motion and a second to approve items on the consent calendar? We have a motion and a second. Secretary, please call the roll.

[Roll Call]

And consent is out. And with that, we do have four items remaining on our agenda. File item one, ACR 151. But I don't think we have our member here yet. Assemblymember Davies, are you going to present file number six, SB 1271? If so, we can go ahead and get that started. Okay, we can just hold on because we don't have anybody here yet. Okay. So at that, members, we'll be moving on to form item number six, SB 1271, Min. We have Assemblymember Davies presenting on the senator's behalf. Assemblymember, when you're ready.

Good afternoon, Chair and committee members. On behalf of Senator Min, I would like to start off by accepting the committee amendments and thank the committee staff for their hard work on this bill. SB 1271 will clarify the definition of each electric bike e-bike class and enhance the safety and regulatory compliance of e-bikes and electronic scooters by requiring them to be manufactured with batteries that meet European Union and Underwriters Laboratory standards.

In recent years, the sale of e-bikes has skyrocketed, which has raised concerns about their potential speed and fire risk. Most e-bikes and e-scooters are powered by lithium batteries, and reports of deadly fires linked to these devices have been on the rise across the country due to poorly manufactured batteries.

SB 1271 will protect consumers and the public by removing low-quality, battery-powered personal mobility devices from the market. In addition, some manufacturers have been selling e-bikes that are able to switch between speed modes, allowing a bike to move from a lower-class two-throttle mode to a faster-class three-pedal assist mode.

These class three devices are not considered e-bikes in the vehicle code and cause confusion with regards to policing these vehicles. As class two e-bikes follow different laws on the road than class three e-bikes. Many parents are unaware that when they purchase a switchable class two e-bike for their child that it is illegal for the child to operate the bike in the class three range since it allows them to reach speeds of up to 28 mph.

This measure will modify the definition of e-bike classes to clarify the appropriate class for a switchable e-bike, if any. Today, I have Kirsten Bladh, advocate for Streets for All, to testify in support of SB 1271. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. You can go ahead.

Good afternoon. My name is Kirsten Bladh. I'm the associate director of state policy for Streets for All, and if you're not familiar with Streets for All, we're a multimodal safe streets advocate group and we're very supportive of the safe use of e-bikes. E-bikes have exploded in popularity in recent years and are actually now outpacing electric cars and electric trucks as the best-selling electric vehicles in America.

E-bikes provide freedom of movement for people who cannot ride a regular bike due to physical limitations and provide Independence for children and relief for parents who increasingly spend so much of their time as child chauffeurs. Overall, we are excited and very supportive of e-bikes, but we recognize that rapid growth brings some growing pains, which is what this bill is aiming to address. SB 1271 is pretty simple and primarily does two things.

Firstly, it clarifies the definition of e-bikes to ensure that problematic moped devices being sold on the market as e-bikes are no longer allowed to be sold and marketed to children and parents as e-bikes. Secondly, it requires high-quality battery standards that ensure the safety of the device in terms of the possibility of fires like we have seen in New York and San Francisco, usually due to very shoddy imports with low-quality batteries.

We've worked very hard to not require a standard that is so high as to both substantially increase the cost of e-bikes and decrease market competition such that only a few companies are able to compete under the new regulations. We think the best market for consumers is a diverse market which balances appropriate safety measures with market competitiveness. Thank you.

With that, is there anyone else in the room for support?

Move the bill.

We have a motion and a second. Anyone in opposition to this bill? With that, we bring back to committee members. I know we have a motion in a second. Any questions? Yes, Assemblymember Bennett.

Just want to make a quick comment. I really appreciate the bill and the author's intent here to deal with one-half of the safety issue from e-bikes, and that's the batteries and the other half is the irresponsible riding of e-bikes that's really endangering a lot of people. And I hope that we'll have some good legislation to deal with that as we move forward. Thank you.

Thank you. With that, so we do have a motion by Assemblymember Boerner and seconded by Arambula. With that, would you like to close, Assemblymember?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

You're welcome. So, Secretary, would you like to call the roll?

[Roll Call]

That motion is out. Thank you.

Thank you.

So now we'll go ahead and move on to file item one, ACR 151, Assemblymember Calderon. And you can proceed when you're ready.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair and members. ACR 151 seeks to raise awareness and prioritize use of seismically vetted non-structural components within our buildings. Non-structural components can include plumbing, electrical wiring, and HVAC systems, all of which are separate from structural building components, such as the foundation of a building or load-bearing walls.

The non-structural components within our buildings play a major yet underestimated role in seismic resiliency. Following an earthquake, buildings are often rendered inhospitable due to severe damage to the non-structural systems, despite minimal damage to the structural components.

Given the constant threat of earthquakes in our state, ACR 151 seeks to raise the importance of seismically vetted non-structural technologies from the point of new construction to the functional recovery of a building post-earthquake. Here with me in support is Richard McCarthy, a former executive director of the Seismic Safety Commission and current president of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Northern California Division, and Bob Torbin, national director of building codes for OmegaFlex.

And with that, you can go ahead and proceed.

Good afternoon, members. So again, Richard McCarthy, president of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Northern California chapter. We support this resolution. It's called to prioritize non-structural components that have been seismically vetted. These products have gone an extra mile to help ensure buildings' functionality after a damaging earthquake.

Let me tell you how much seismic testing has expanded over the last 10 years. We are going in the end of this year, we will be constructing a 10-story building on the University of California's outdoor shake table. It will go through many seismic shake tests. It will also be filled with non-structural components by different companies.

And we're also going to do fire tests on that sample as well. That doesn't happen anywhere else in the United States. Remember, a building's frame, as the member said, may suffer no damage from the shaking. But damaged nonstructural elements can lead to red or yellow tagging, thus rendering the structure unoccupiable. We believe companies should review these options.

As an example, when a building owners are ready to go to construction, they can on the RFP process, they can request fire and shake test results from these non-structural components and see if they can't take that as an option. It's going to reduce the losses down the line so it's cost effective. So and finally, this resolution identifies a cost-effective action that can help reduce the seismic risk to California residents and businesses. Again, EERI is in support of this resolution.

Thank you. Do you have any other questions? You may go.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Bob Torbin, senior director of codes and standards at OmegaFlex. It goes without saying that California is earthquake country and the state has done a fine job in directing regulations to preserve the structural integrity of the buildings and the critical transportation structures.

However, when it comes to these non-structural components, the critical infrastructure that's underground and within the building, there is a lack of coverage and regulations that needs to be addressed. ACR 151 is a good start in that direction, dealing with the critical underground and in-building infrastructure, including the HVAC, water, the fuel, the electrical services, elevators, and such. The good news with current situation is that national consensus standards already exist against which these non-structural components can be tested.

OmegaFlex, for one, has already tested some of our piping products against existing national standards that can be incorporated into any regulations here in California. The bad news is that these special components, non-structural components, these special seismic testing criteria are not required in the building code.

So engineers are forced to engineer and design seismic restraints, bracing systems despite any other seismic qualifications that these non-structural components may have. So going forward, we're using ACR 151 as a catalyst to drive the building community into giving preference if you will, to these tested and certified non-structural components, give it preference in their selection process.

And in fact, ultimately the outcome would result in lower cost to the building because of lower requirements for bracing and structural supports, obviously higher seismic resilience, regardless of what the earthquake may look like. And finally, and most significantly, reducing the functional recovery time, the time it takes for that building after the earthquake to be back into full service. So I seek your support of this resolution. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in support? So we have a motion and a second. Motion by Assemblymember Boerner, seconded by Mr. Arambula. With that, is there any opposition of this measure? Seeing none, bring it back to members. Any questions, comments? And with that, we do have a motion and a second.

And once again, I want to thank Assemblymember Calderon for bringing this very important bill forward. As we talk about, I've always advocated California is a disaster-prone state. Earthquakes are happening and we need to be ready for the next big one. And we talk about building just the four walls, but we don't talk about the infrastructure inside those buildings. So I'd like to be out of the coauthor. I think I could add myself, or if I haven't already, be a co-author and thank you with everything. And with that, the secretary would like to call the roll. Oh, with that, would you like to close?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Secretary, call the roll.

[Roll Call]

And with that, the motion is out. Thank you. And with that, we can move on to file item number three, SB 1088. Senator, when you are ready.

Hello.

You may proceed when you're ready.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, I'm here to present Senate Bill 1088, which would establish the role in small community fire resilience program within the governor's Office of Emergency Services, or Cal OES. This is a program that's going to work in coordination with the Department of Water Resources, the State Water Resources Control Board, and the state fire marshal to develop a system with the distribution for the distribution of state matching funds to communities within the wildland-urban interface, or the WUI.

The WUI is the line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with underdeveloped wildland and vegetative fuels. California's rural communities have been ground zero for large-scale environmental and economic devastation during this past decade due to these wildfires. Aging infrastructures combined with the insufficient resources to prepare for adequate wildfire response has left many of the rural communities in California at risk for further unchecked fire activity.

Communities in the Tahoe Basin, which are in my district, serve as a prime example where most of the water systems were developed between 1930 and 1950 to serve seasonal cabins. Significant portions of the basin are still served by a patchwork of small and geographically isolated water systems, and they lack the capacity to combat fires.

Senate Bill 1088 would provide more state matching funds for these wildfire defense and improve our water infrastructure and protect rural communities. Here to testify in support is Justin Bruglio from the North Tahoe Public Utility District.

Thank you, Justin. You may proceed. We have a motion and a second.

Thank you, Chair Rodriguez and members of the committee, and thank you to the Senator for helping us introduce this on behalf of the Tahoe Water and for fire suppression partnership. Again, Justin Broglio with North Tahoe Public Utility District.

This bill creates a new avenue for California's rural water providers to seek safe support for these critical infrastructure projects. In California, there are numerous programs aimed at helping WUI communities like ours fund forest health projects supporting homeowners with defensible space and home hardening. However, there's no such program facility specifically for improved water infrastructure for fire suppression.

Additionally, the small rate base in our rural communities make it impossible to finance these infrastructure improvements without additional resources. So Senate Bill 1088 changes that and allows our WUI communities located in high and very high severity zones to seek matching funds to accelerate the installation of these projects. So we thank the Senator Alvarado-Gil for supporting this, and we ask for your consideration.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in support? Please come forward. State your name and position.

Real quick, Mr. Chair. Doug Houston, representing CR Business Council and the CR Consortium, both in support. Thanks.

Josh Gauger on behalf of the County of Santa Cruz in support.

Okay, thank you. And with that, I believe we have no one in opposition to this measure. Seeing none. I believe we have a motion already. I believe somebody Assemblymember Davies motion and Arambula second. Any questions? Comments? Assemblymember Bennett.

I very much support the bill, but I do have one comment, and that is that other efforts like this, not necessarily wildfire, but efforts to try to focus on sometimes can be taken advantage of by people who just want to improve their water system. And it's not focused on wildfire. Just want to encourage the authors and all the people that are going to implement this bill to make sure that the funds go for the intended purpose of improving wildfire response. Otherwise, we will erode credibility for these kinds of programs and for bond funding for these kind of programs. If you get news stories about how these funds were manipulated for some ulterior purpose. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. With that, we do have a motion, a second. Secretary. Oh, I'm sorry. With that, would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. Secretary, would you like to call the roll?

[Roll Call]

That measure is out. Thank you very much. Thank you. And now it looks like we have our last item, file item number five, SB 1150. Senator, when you're ready.

Thank you, Chair and members. First, I would like to start by accepting the committee amendments. California is not immune to natural disasters and power outages, and our communication systems are essential in those situations. These systems help provide emergency notifications and communications between first responders.

Because of the importance of these systems, the state requires wireline service providers to have backup power for 72 hours for their facilities and high-fire areas. Currently, broadband providers have been complying with these requirements, primarily using diesel generators. They have not been able to use battery backup power because of existing regulations around fire code and setbacks.

Lithium batteries are an important part of moving towards energy resiliency and away from fossil fuels and, when appropriate, should be considered. Today with me, I have Ingo Hentschel from Cox Communication to speak in support of the bill.

Good afternoon. My name is Ingo.

We do have a motion, a second. Motion by Assemblymember Arambula, second by Calderon. You may proceed.

Good afternoon. My name is Ingo Henschel. I am the vice president of San Diego market for Cox Communications. As the senator described, internet service companies like Cox Communications have been complying with the CPUC's 72-hour battery backup, but we have been seeking a greener means for compliance.

And so far, compliance to date has been to deploy fixed natural gas or mobile diesel generators into tier 2 and 3 high-fire threat areas. Thanks to significant advances in battery technology, lithium-based battery sources solutions have emerged as a feasible and safe alternative.

Battery management systems, or BMS systems for communication networks have significantly improved in terms of the robustness and safety focus. These systems monitor critical conditions like thermal runaway, high temperatures, and other anomalies that can affect lithium batteries. The BMS systems automatically trigger battery system shutdown upon specific conditions.

In addition, the energy density of lithium batteries have advanced and they now meet the 72-hour requirement within the existing power supply footprint in the the public right of way. This is crucial as most cities and residents strongly oppose adding street and community utility equipment to the right of ways.

If we were to deploy the current fire code-approved lead acid batteries, we would need to stack 70 car batteries to obtain the same 72-hour capacity. As you can imagine, our residents would not be pleased. Furthermore, feedback from your constituents and our customers indicate that placing noisy mobile gas, gas, or diesel generators in neighborhoods during PSPS events is disruptive, not to mention the security concerns like vandalism and theft.

This bill will allow for the implementation of the telecommunication-focused solution that ensures safety, minimizes right-of-way encroachment issues in the city, and enhances the overall experience for our residents by reducing noise pollution caused by continuous generator operation during extended outages.

On behalf of Cox Communications, we ask for your help with adhering to CPUC's 72-hour mandate and support for seeking a greener solution to gas generators. We look forward to the discussion with the fire marshal and his team on the code update to ensure all Californians remain connected during PSPS events and natural disasters.

Thank you. Is there anyone else in support?

Juanita Martinez on behalf of Cal Broadband and the California Chamber, in support.

Good afternoon. Alejandro Solis on behalf of the Clean Power Campaign, Comite Civico del Valle, and Los Amigos De La Comunidad, in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else in support? All right, we have a motion a second. Any opposition to this bill? We'll bring back to members. Questions, comments? Seeing none. Want to thank the Senator once again for bringing back. And would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. Secretary, would you call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Looks like that motion is out.

Thank you.

And with that, did we anybody miss any vote? I thought we did the consent, no? Okay. So we'll go ahead and do the consent for Members that were missing. So with that, secretary, call the roll on the consent for the absent Members

On the consent calendar, SB 74, SB 1101, and SB 1461. The motion is the same. Do pass on Committee. Do pass to the Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

And with that, the consent is out. Oh, I also have file item number six, SB 1271. Secretary, call absent Members.

File item number six, SB 1271. The motion is do pass as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

Okay with that. I believe we got them all taken care of. And with that, I believe this was our last meeting of Emergency Management or less, unless something comes up. But with that, thanks everybody, for being a good partner keeping California safe.

And I just want to thank Speaker Emeritus Rendon for creating this new Committee and having me Chair, be the first Chairman of this. But I want to thank everybody for participating in helping making California a safer place. So thank you all, consultants and staff, thank you guys all for your work as well. Thank you.

And this meeting is adjourned. Thanks.