AB 1995 requires the Office of the State Fire Marshal to convene a lithium battery working group to identify safety issues for lithium batteries and charging infrastructure located near or inside residential and commercial occupancies that the 2025 California Building Standards Code did not already address. The group must recommend solutions ranging from informational bulletins and training materials to voluntary or mandatory building standards, and deliver initial findings by January 1, 2028.
The bill also authorizes an appropriation from the Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund for operating costs, research, guidance development, education, and formulation of potential building standards related to lithium battery safety. Membership is defined to include fire service organizations, building officials, property and parking facility owners, academic expertise in battery chemistry (with a preference for a University of California professor), electrical trades, and consultants.
At a Glance
What It Does
Mandates the State Fire Marshal to assemble a working group to identify lithium battery and charging infrastructure safety gaps not covered by the 2025 code, produce recommendations, and submit initial research and recommendations by January 1, 2028. Authorizes an appropriation from the Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund to support the work.
Who It Affects
State and local fire agencies, building departments, building standards regulators, owners/operators of parking facilities, commercial and multifamily property owners, electrical contractors, and entities involved in energy storage and microgrids.
Why It Matters
California is facing rapid deployment of lithium batteries in buildings and vehicles; this bill creates a formal, cross‑sector process to identify remaining safety gaps and scope potential regulatory or guidance responses that could change building compliance and retrofit obligations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill asks the State Fire Marshal to run a targeted gap analysis: find important safety issues tied to lithium batteries and charging setups that the 2025 California Building Standards Code does not already cover, and propose realistic remedies. The law does not itself change the building code; instead, it produces recommendations that may include nonbinding materials like informational bulletins and training, as well as proposals for voluntary or mandatory code changes for other agencies and the Building Standards Commission to consider.
Membership is pre‑specified and weighted toward fire service, building regulators, property and parking owners, and electrical expertise. The State Fire Marshal has discretion to pick additional participants but must include representatives from named organizations and sectors.
The bill instructs the Marshal to try to appoint a University of California professor for the battery‑chemistry seat, but allows appointment from another institution if no eligible UC candidate is available.Operationally, the working group must set a timeline and deliver the initial research and recommendations by January 1, 2028, which creates a firm project milestone for policymakers and regulated parties. To pay for the group's work, the bill directs a yet‑to‑be‑specified appropriation from the Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund to the State Fire Marshal and lists permissible uses: running the group, commissioning research, drafting guidance and training, and developing potential building standards.
That appropriation amount is left blank in the text and would need to be filled before the funds are actionable.Because the group can propose both voluntary and mandatory standards, its output could lead to nonbinding best practices or to formal code change proposals that would follow the Building Standards Commission process. The bill centralizes the initial technical review within the State Fire Marshal's office while linking its work to the existing code framework and funding mechanism used for building standards activities.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The working group must deliver its initial research, findings, and recommendations on or before January 1, 2028.
Membership is prescriptive: the group must include named representatives (e.g.
Fire Districts Association, California Fire Chiefs, two from California Professional Firefighters), building officials, parking facility owners, commercial and apartment owners, one licensed electrical contractor, and one electrician with Energy Storage and Microgrid Training and Certification.
The bill requires a battery‑chemistry academic on the panel and directs the State Fire Marshal to attempt to select a University of California professor first; if unavailable, the Marshal may choose a professor from another institution.
Funding is authorized from the Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund for operational costs, research, guidance, training materials, formulation of potential standards, and identifying cost‑effective risk mitigations — but the appropriation amount is left blank in the bill.
Recommendations may range from informational bulletins and guidance to educational/training materials and proposals for voluntary or mandatory building standards, giving the group both technical and regulatory pathways to influence safety outcomes.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Scope and deliverables of the working group
This subsection defines the group's mission: identify lithium battery and charging‑infrastructure safety issues not already addressed in the 2025 California Building Standards Code and recommend solutions. Practically, that limits the group's work to gaps remaining after the 2025 code and frames outputs as a menu (informational bulletins, guidance, training, voluntary or mandatory standards). The provision stops short of giving the State Fire Marshal authority to enact code changes directly; instead, it positions the group as a technical advisory body whose proposals may be advanced through the normal standards process.
Required membership and appointment preference
This subsection lists required participants and grants the State Fire Marshal selection authority for representatives. Membership intentionally includes frontline fire organizations, the California Building Standards Commission, building departments, property and parking owners, and electrical trades, ensuring technical, operational, and owner perspectives. The academic seat includes a procedural preference: the Marshal should first seek a University of California professor with expertise in lithium battery chemistry, but may appoint a non‑UC professor if necessary. That preference can shape the scientific viewpoint brought to the group while retaining flexibility to fill the seat.
Project timeline and milestone
The working group must establish a timeline for its initial work and deliver its initial research, findings, and recommendations by January 1, 2028. Requiring an internal timeline and an external delivery date creates a project management imperative and produces a fixed point for agencies and stakeholders to evaluate preliminary outcomes. The statute does not prescribe interim reporting requirements, frequency of meetings, or final reporting beyond the initial deliverable, leaving operational cadence to the Marshal and the group's members.
Funding source and permitted uses (appropriation blank)
This subsection appropriates an unspecified sum from the Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund to the State Fire Marshal to support the working group and enumerates allowable uses — operational costs, research, guidance development, training, and standards formulation. The use list is broad, covering technical studies and stakeholder outreach. However, because the dollar amount is blank in the bill text, the appropriation is conditional: the list signals legislative intent for fundable activities, but budgetary action or an amended bill would be required to make money available.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Infrastructure across all five countries.
Explore Infrastructure in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Local fire departments and first responders — they gain consolidated, technically vetted recommendations and training materials tailored to lithium battery incidents, which can improve response protocols and safety outcomes.
- Building officials and inspectors — the group's guidance and potential code proposals can clarify inspection expectations and reduce regulatory uncertainty around new battery installations and integrated charging infrastructure.
- Residents and building occupants in multifamily and commercial properties — if recommendations lead to stronger protections or clearer operational guidance, occupants could face lower risks from battery fires and more consistent emergency procedures.
- Owners/operators of parking facilities and commercial landlords — they receive guidance and potential standards that reduce liability uncertainty and offer practical mitigation strategies to manage battery risks in garages and shared spaces.
Who Bears the Cost
- Property owners and facility operators — if the group's recommendations become mandatory code changes, owners may face retrofit, installation, or operational expenses to meet new safety requirements.
- Contractors and electricians — new training, certification, or installation standards could impose compliance costs and require upskilling, especially for small electrical firms.
- The Office of the State Fire Marshal — even with an appropriation, convening and managing the group, contracting research, and shepherding outputs will consume staff time and administrative resources.
- State Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund — the appropriation draws down a dedicated fund used for standards development; use of these monies reduces available resources for other building standards activities unless replenished.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances the urgent public‑safety need to address lithium battery risks against cost, feasibility, and regulatory due process: it centralizes technical review and can propose enforceable standards, but doing so risks imposing retrofit and compliance costs on property owners and contractors without a clear funding or decision pathway to manage that trade‑off.
Several implementation questions will determine how consequential the working group becomes. First, the bill leaves the appropriation amount blank: without a finalized sum and budget action, the Marshal may lack resources to commission rigorous testing, large‑scale field studies, or stakeholder outreach.
Second, the statute directs the group to examine issues “not already addressed” in the 2025 code, but it does not define the review standard or the threshold for proposing new mandatory standards versus nonbinding guidance. That ambiguity matters because proposing mandatory code changes triggers a distinct, resource‑intensive regulatory process at the Building Standards Commission.
Third, membership is weighted toward industry, fire service, and building regulators but omits explicit representation from consumer advocates, tenants’ groups, or electric vehicle manufacturers — perspectives that could reshape risk assessments and cost allocation decisions. Fourth, the bill authorizes a range of outputs from informational bulletins to mandatory standards without setting decision rules, which could produce competing recommendations or delay consensus.
Finally, the firm January 1, 2028 deadline requires concentrated effort but the statute does not require interim transparency (e.g., public meetings or draft reports), potentially limiting stakeholder input before recommendations are finalized.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.