Lawmakers debate narrow CEQA exemption for exploratory geothermal wells in California

Assemblymember Papan on behalf of the bill’s author told the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee that AB 527 would “spur geothermal energy development in California and secure our clean energy future.” The bill would create a narrow California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption for exploratory geothermal wells that meet specified environmental safeguards, the author said.

Supporters, including Myles Horton of Sonoma Clean Power and labor representatives, said exploratory wells are low‑impact, temporary and necessary to determine whether geothermal resources exist before full project development. Horton said Sonoma Clean Power serves “about 90% clean energy today” but still relies on natural gas “when there’s no sun, no wind, and batteries are empty or depleted.” He argued AB 527 would align California with a federal NEPA exemption and reduce the deterrent effect created when developers must undergo separate environmental reviews for exploration and then for large‑scale development.

Opponents asked the committee to tighten the bill. Kim Delfino of Earth Advocacy, speaking for Defenders of Wildlife, the California Native Plant Society and other groups, said, “We support geothermal as part of our clean energy mix. But, unfortunately, we’re not there yet on this bill,” and urged changes to the proposed acreage limits and safeguards. Delfino and Matthew Baker of the Planning and Conservation League both said the bill’s current footprint allowance—cited in committee amendments as up to 20 acres of disturbance with limits on undisturbed ground—remains too large for a statutory CEQA exemption and would permit temporary roads and electrical lines crossing riparian corridors. They called for a smaller cap (they recommended 5 acres, citing the current average footprint) and stronger guarantees that chemical disclosures and CalGEM regulation would adequately protect water quality and public health.

Assemblymember Papan and witnesses described differences between geothermal enhanced systems and oil‑and‑gas hydraulic fracturing. Papan noted the Biden administration had adopted a similar exemption in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) context after a federal review of exploratory geothermal wells. Myles Horton described the enhanced geothermal process as a closed system in which water or steam is sent down and returned in lined pipes and argued the activities generally occur far below groundwater aquifers. Senator Laird pressed witnesses on that point, asking, “If you have a negative declaration on everything, why do you need a CEQA exemption?” Horton and the author answered that duplicative review (exploration then full project CEQA) and the timeline uncertainty deter developers and add litigation risk even when initial studies return negative declarations.

Committee members said they appreciated the author’s engagement with stakeholders and the amendments the author accepted, including survey requirements and an expectation of updated CalGEM regulations. Senator Grove asked whether project labor agreements limitation in the bill excluded qualified nonunion experts; she said the work is “rather specialized” and noted union witnesses supported a labor requirement.

The committee moved the bill forward. The motion on AB 527 (do pass as amended to Appropriations) was made in committee; the transcript records the measure as passed by roll call and left on call for absent members (6‑0 at the time it was left on call). The committee record shows continued engagement between the author, environmental organizations and industry representatives over outstanding technical and acreage‑limit issues.

Why it matters: Supporters say narrowly tailored exemptions for exploratory geothermal drilling could speed development of firm, 24‑hour renewable energy and help California reduce reliance on natural gas. Opponents say a statutory CEQA exemption is premature for exploratory techniques adapted from oil‑and‑gas practice unless the exemption is tightly circumscribed to protect waterways, cultural resources and public health.

What’s next: The committee passed AB 527 as amended to Appropriations and left the measure on call; the bill will go to the Appropriations Committee for further consideration.