California Environmental Quality Act: electrical infrastructure projects.
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 status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2025
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 19, 2025
Last action Feb 2, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 2 comparisons
What changed between versions
04/23/25 - Amended Assembly
→
AB941
·
1 edit
MINOR
No substantive policy changes were made to AB 941 between these versions. The differences are entirely formatting and presentation: the bill text was reformatted from a traditional legislative document layout (with line numbers, page headers, and column formatting) into a web page format on the California Legislature's bill tracking site, adding navigation elements and reflowing the text.
TECHNICAL
Bill text was reformatted from a print-style legislative document (with line numbers, page breaks, and centered headers) into a web page layout with navigation menus, search tools, and standard HTML structure. No legal language was changed.
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
12
Key actions
5
Committee
7
Amendments
2
Feb 2, 2026
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
May 23, 2025
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
May 14, 2025
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 24, 2025
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 23, 2025
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 22, 2025
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (April 21).
lower
Apr 3, 2025
Lower · Passed
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.
lower
Mar 10, 2025
Committee
Referred to Coms. on U. & E. and NAT. RES.
lower
Feb 20, 2025
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 22.
lower
1 primary · 2 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Rick Zbur
DDemocratic
Co
Lisa Calderon
DDemocratic
Co
Mike Gipson
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 941
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 941. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline