CA AB 527
vetoedCalifornia Environmental Quality Act: geothermal exploratory projects: geothermal field development projects: enhanced geothermal system wells.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Quick answers
Did CA AB 527 pass?
No. CA AB 527 passed the legislature but was vetoed on 2026-01-22. Latest recorded action (2026-01-22): Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
What is CA AB 527 about?
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 the lead agency 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. Existing law establishes the Geologic Energy Management Division in the Department of Conservation, under the direction of the State Oil and Gas Supervisor, who is required to supervise the drilling, operation, maintenance, and abandonment of wells so as to permit the owners or operators of those wells to use all methods and practices known to the industry for the purpose of increasing the ultimate recovery of geothermal resources, as provided. Existing law requires the division to be the lead agency for all geothermal exploratory projects for purposes of CEQA, as specified, and authorizes the division to delegate its lead agency responsibility for geothermal exploratory projects to a county that has adopted a geothermal element for its general plan. Existing law also requires the county in which a geothermal project is located to assume the responsibilities of a lead agency for a geothermal exploratory project upon the request of an applicant, as specified. Existing law defines "geothermal exploratory project" in part as a project composed of not more than 6 wells and associated drilling and testing equipment whose chief and original purpose is to evaluate the presence and characteristics of geothermal resources. Existing law requires wells included within a geothermal exploratory project to be located at least one-half mile from geothermal development wells that are capable of producing geothermal resources in commercial quantities. Existing law requires the owner or operator of a well to keep, or to cause to be kept, a careful and accurate log, core record, and history of drilling the well and requires the log to show, among other things, the character and depth of the formation passed through or encountered in the drilling of the well. Upon completion or abandonment of a well, or upon the suspension of operations of a well, existing law requires true copies of the log, core record, and history to be filed with the district deputy of an oil and gas district, as specified. This bill would expressly include as part of a geothermal exploratory project, among other things, equipment and activities necessary to establish interconnectivity between wells and reservoirs. The bill would exclude certain wells connecting to geothermal reservoirs from the one-half mile limit described above. The bill would require the log for a well that is part of a geothermal exploratory project that is exempt from CEQA, as described below, to include the chemical and physical characteristics of well stimulation fluids. Upon completion or abandonment of a well, or upon the suspension of operations of a well, that is part of a geothermal exploratory project that is exempt from CEQA, as described below, the bill would require a project developer to disclose the composition of fluids used in all relevant hydraulic fracturing operations with the log for a well and would require the project developer to file a copy of the disclosure with the lead agency. This bill would, until January 1, 2031, exempt from CEQA geothermal exploratory projects that meet specified conditions and for which the county or the Geologic Energy Management Division is the lead agency. The bill would require a project developer to conduct a reconnaissance survey, that includes certain information, and to supply the lead agency with the reconnaissance survey when applying for an exemption from CEQA. The bill would require the lead agency to engage in a scoping consultation with any California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, as provided. The bill would authorize the lead agency to require the project applicant to file an indemnity bond, as specified, before the lead agency determines that a geothermal exploratory project is exempt from CEQA. The bill would require a geothermal exploratory project that is exempt from CEQA to include full reclamation of the project site, as provided. The bill would require the lead agency, at least 30 days before making a determination to approve a geothermal exploratory project as exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption, to post a written notice of the intent to apply the exemption at the project site and to post a written notice of the intent to apply the exemption and the entire project application on its internet website. If the lead agency determines that the project is exempt from CEQA, the bill would require the lead agency to file a notice with the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and with the county clerk of the county in which the project is located, as provided, and to provide a copy of the notice to specified entities. Because the exemption would apply to projects where the county is the lead agency and the county would be required to engage in a scoping consultation and determine if a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require a geothermal field development project located on a site where a geothermal exploratory project was deployed pursuant to the above-described CEQA exemption to use a baseline for CEQA review that reflects the site before the geothermal exploratory project occurred. Existing law requires the owner or operator of a well to file a written notice of intention to commence drilling with, and prohibits any drilling until approval is given by, the supervisor or district deputy. This bill would require, on or before January 1, 2029, the Geologic Energy Management Division to promulgate regulations for enhanced geothermal system wells, as provided. Before the promulgation and implementation of those regulations, the bill would require an operator to provide specified information to the supervisor when the operator files the notice of intent to commence drilling for a well in a CEQA-exempt geothermal exploratory project that employs enhanced geothermal system technology. 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 CA AB 527?
Papan is the primary sponsor of CA AB 527, joined by 1 cosponsor.
Description
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 the lead agency 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. Existing law establishes the Geologic Energy Management Division in the Department of Conservation, under the direction of the State Oil and Gas Supervisor, who is required to supervise the drilling, operation, maintenance, and abandonment of wells so as to permit the owners or operators of those wells to use all methods and practices known to the industry for the purpose of increasing the ultimate recovery of geothermal resources, as provided. Existing law requires the division to be the lead agency for all geothermal exploratory projects for purposes of CEQA, as specified, and authorizes the division to delegate its lead agency responsibility for geothermal exploratory projects to a county that has adopted a geothermal element for its general plan. Existing law also requires the county in which a geothermal project is located to assume the responsibilities of a lead agency for a geothermal exploratory project upon the request of an applicant, as specified. Existing law defines "geothermal exploratory project" in part as a project composed of not more than 6 wells and associated drilling and testing equipment whose chief and original purpose is to evaluate the presence and characteristics of geothermal resources. Existing law requires wells included within a geothermal exploratory project to be located at least one-half mile from geothermal development wells that are capable of producing geothermal resources in commercial quantities. Existing law requires the owner or operator of a well to keep, or to cause to be kept, a careful and accurate log, core record, and history of drilling the well and requires the log to show, among other things, the character and depth of the formation passed through or encountered in the drilling of the well. Upon completion or abandonment of a well, or upon the suspension of operations of a well, existing law requires true copies of the log, core record, and history to be filed with the district deputy of an oil and gas district, as specified. This bill would expressly include as part of a geothermal exploratory project, among other things, equipment and activities necessary to establish interconnectivity between wells and reservoirs. The bill would exclude certain wells connecting to geothermal reservoirs from the one-half mile limit described above. The bill would require the log for a well that is part of a geothermal exploratory project that is exempt from CEQA, as described below, to include the chemical and physical characteristics of well stimulation fluids. Upon completion or abandonment of a well, or upon the suspension of operations of a well, that is part of a geothermal exploratory project that is exempt from CEQA, as described below, the bill would require a project developer to disclose the composition of fluids used in all relevant hydraulic fracturing operations with the log for a well and would require the project developer to file a copy of the disclosure with the lead agency. This bill would, until January 1, 2031, exempt from CEQA geothermal exploratory projects that meet specified conditions and for which the county or the Geologic Energy Management Division is the lead agency. The bill would require a project developer to conduct a reconnaissance survey, that includes certain information, and to supply the lead agency with the reconnaissance survey when applying for an exemption from CEQA. The bill would require the lead agency to engage in a scoping consultation with any California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project, as provided. The bill would authorize the lead agency to require the project applicant to file an indemnity bond, as specified, before the lead agency determines that a geothermal exploratory project is exempt from CEQA. The bill would require a geothermal exploratory project that is exempt from CEQA to include full reclamation of the project site, as provided. The bill would require the lead agency, at least 30 days before making a determination to approve a geothermal exploratory project as exempt from CEQA pursuant to this exemption, to post a written notice of the intent to apply the exemption at the project site and to post a written notice of the intent to apply the exemption and the entire project application on its internet website. If the lead agency determines that the project is exempt from CEQA, the bill would require the lead agency to file a notice with the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation and with the county clerk of the county in which the project is located, as provided, and to provide a copy of the notice to specified entities. Because the exemption would apply to projects where the county is the lead agency and the county would be required to engage in a scoping consultation and determine if a project qualifies for this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require a geothermal field development project located on a site where a geothermal exploratory project was deployed pursuant to the above-described CEQA exemption to use a baseline for CEQA review that reflects the site before the geothermal exploratory project occurred. Existing law requires the owner or operator of a well to file a written notice of intention to commence drilling with, and prohibits any drilling until approval is given by, the supervisor or district deputy. This bill would require, on or before January 1, 2029, the Geologic Energy Management Division to promulgate regulations for enhanced geothermal system wells, as provided. Before the promulgation and implementation of those regulations, the bill would require an operator to provide specified information to the supervisor when the operator files the notice of intent to commence drilling for a well in a CEQA-exempt geothermal exploratory project that employs enhanced geothermal system technology. 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.
- Introduced
- 2025-04-10
- Latest action
- 2026-01-22 — Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Papanauthor
- Rogerscoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-10
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
2025-02-11
From printer. May be heard in committee March 13.
2025-03-03
Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
referral-committee
2025-04-10
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-04-21
Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
referral-committee
2025-04-21
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-04-21
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
2025-04-22
Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
referral-committee
2025-05-01
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (April 28).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2025-05-05
Read second time and amended.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-05-06
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
referral-committee
2025-05-14
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 14).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-05-15
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-05-27
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 1729.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-05-28
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2025-06-04
Referred to Coms. on E.Q. and N.R. & W.
referral-committee
2025-06-24
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E.Q.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-07-03
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on N.R. & W. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (July 2).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2025-07-07
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-07-23
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 16).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2025-07-23
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-08-18
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-08-29
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-08-29
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 29).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-05
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-08
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-09
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 2739.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-09
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2025-09-10
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3196.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-22
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-10-06
Vetoed by Governor.
executive-veto
2025-10-06
Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
2026-01-22
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
veto-override-failure
Versions
- 02/10/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-10Compare
- 04/10/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-04-10Compare
- 04/21/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-04-21Compare
- 05/05/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-05-05Compare
- 06/24/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-06-24Compare
- 07/07/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-07-07Compare
- 07/23/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-07-23Compare
- 09/05/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-09-05Compare
- 09/12/25 - Enrolled — 2025-09-12Compare
- AB527Compare
- (document, no version)Compare
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-28 · pass · 14-0
Member-level votes (14)
- Haney: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Flora: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Connolly: yes
Do pass.
2025-05-14 · pass · 15-0
Member-level votes (15)
- Fong: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Hart: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Ta: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Solache: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Arambula: yes
AB 527 Papan Assembly Third Reading
2025-05-27 · pass · 76-0
Member-level votes (79)
- Alanis: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Berman: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Lackey: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Solache: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Fong: yes
- Krell: yes
- Davies: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Macedo: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Lee: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Chen: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Gallagher: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Haney: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- DeMaio: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Flora: yes
- Patel: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Papan: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Tangipa: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Ta: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Hart: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Ward: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Castillo: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Garcia: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Soria: yes
- Bains: yes
- Addis: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Nguyen: other
- Jeff Gonzalez: other
- Aguiar-Curry: other
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Natural Resources and Water]
2025-07-02 · pass · 6-1
Member-level votes (8)
- Hurtado: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Valladares: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Pérez: no
- Menjivar: other
Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-07-16 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Hurtado: yes
- Laird: yes
- Limón: yes
- Grove: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Stern: yes
- Allen: yes
Placed on suspense file
2025-08-18 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Grayson: yes
Do pass
2025-08-29 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
3rd Reading AB527 Papan et al. By Limón
2025-09-09 · pass · 36-0
Member-level votes (40)
- Richardson: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Jones: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Stern: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Becker: yes
- Alvarado-Gil: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Grove: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Rubio: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Laird: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Limón: yes
- Strickland: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Niello: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Allen: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Choi: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Reyes: other
- Menjivar: other
- Wahab: other
- Valladares: other
AB 527 Papan Concurrence in Senate Amendments
2025-09-11 · pass · 79-0
Member-level votes (80)
- Addis: yes
- Haney: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Berman: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Zbur: yes
- DeMaio: yes
- Hadwick: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Patel: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Sanchez: yes
- Johnson: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Hart: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Soria: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Papan: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Jeff Gonzalez: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Patterson: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Davies: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Krell: yes
- Chen: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Bains: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Lee: yes
- Castillo: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Ta: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Gallagher: yes
- Ellis: yes
- Macedo: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Dixon: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Ward: yes
- Fong: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Lackey: yes
- Flora: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Tangipa: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 527. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.