California 20252026 Regular Session Status: In Committee 3 D cosponsors

AB 941 — California Environmental Quality Act: electrical infrastructure projects.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill is in committee in the Assembly. Introduced February 19, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.

Next likely step: a committee vote, then a floor vote in the Assembly.

Prognosis

Advancing 40% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Low

How often bills like it became law.

  • In Committee

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 3 sponsors

    1 primary, 2 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (3 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 2 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA exempts certain projects from its requirements, including actions necessary to prevent or mitigate an emergency. Existing law prohibits an electrical corporation from beginning the construction of a line, plant, or system, or extensions of those facilities without first obtaining from the Public Utilities Commission a certificate that the present or future convenience and necessity require or will require the construction. Existing law specifies that the certificate is not required for the extension, expansion, upgrade, or other modification of existing electrical transmission facilities. This bill would require the commission to determine whether to certify the environmental impact report for an electrical infrastructure project that is a priority project, as defined, no later than 270 days after the commission determines that an application for an electrical infrastructure project is complete, except as specified. The bill would require a project applicant to identify an electrical infrastructure project that is a priority project and the basis for the designation in the application to the commission. The bill would require commission staff to review an application for a priority project no later than 30 days after it is filed and notify the applicant in writing of any deficiencies in the information and data submitted in the application. The bill would require the applicant to correct any deficiencies or notify the commission in writing why it is unable to correct those deficiencies, as specified, within 60 days of that notification. The bill would require the commission to deem an application for a priority project complete with a preliminary ruling setting the scope and schedule, as provided. Under existing law, a violation of any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because a violation of a commission action implementing this bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. In committee: Held under submission.

  4. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  5. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. Read second time and amended.

  7. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (April 21).

  8. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (April 2). Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.

  9. Coauthors revised.

  10. Referred to Coms. on U. & E. and NAT. RES.

  11. From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.

  12. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 2 co-sponsors · 119 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (2)

Not signed on (119)

119 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 119 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 14 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 4000
Democratic 10000
Total 14000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (14)
Member Party Vote
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Ellis, Stan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Natural Resources]

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 5000
Democratic 12001
Total 17001
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rogers, Chris Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment technology energy
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 941 do?
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA exempts certain projects from its requirements, including actions necessary to prevent or mitigate an emergency. Existing law prohibits an electrical corporation from beginning the construction of a line, plant, or system, or extensions of those facilities without first obtaining from the Public Utilities Commission a certificate that the present or future convenience and necessity require or will require the construction. Existing law specifies that the certificate is not required for the extension, expansion, upgrade, or other modification of existing electrical transmission facilities. This bill would require the commission to determine whether to certify the environmental impact report for an electrical infrastructure project that is a priority project, as defined, no later than 270 days after the commission determines that an application for an electrical infrastructure project is complete, except as specified. The bill would require a project applicant to identify an electrical infrastructure project that is a priority project and the basis for the designation in the application to the commission. The bill would require commission staff to review an application for a priority project no later than 30 days after it is filed and notify the applicant in writing of any deficiencies in the information and data submitted in the application. The bill would require the applicant to correct any deficiencies or notify the commission in writing why it is unable to correct those deficiencies, as specified, within 60 days of that notification. The bill would require the commission to deem an application for a priority project complete with a preliminary ruling setting the scope and schedule, as provided. Under existing law, a violation of any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the commission is a crime. Because a violation of a commission action implementing this bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 941?
AB 941 is sponsored by Gipson, Mike A. (Democratic), Calderon, Lisa (Democratic), and Zbur, Rick Chavez (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 941?
This bill is in committee in the Assembly. Introduced February 19, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Where can I track AB 941?
Track AB 941 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 941

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 941

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →