An act to add Chapter 6.12 (commencing with Section 25405) to Division 20 of, and to add Chapter 7.5 (commencing with Section 105435) to Part 5 of Division 103 of, the Health and Safety Code, and to add Sections 2060.1, 2060.2, 14048, and 15009.2 to the Insurance Code, relating to smoke damage, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
AB 1795, the Smoke Damage Recovery Act, would create a new statewide framework for evaluating and remediating wildfire-related smoke damage in residential properties. It directs the California Environmental Protection Agency, by June 30, 2027, to develop health-based standards for sampling, testing, chemical screening, and clearance of smoke-damaged homes, with tiered default zones based on distance from a fire perimeter and the ability for state or local agencies to designate a specific smoke exposure zone that overrides the defaults. The bill also allows CalEPA to issue wildfire-specific interim requirements before permanent regulations are adopted.
The measure further requires the Department of Insurance to establish training and certification programs by January 1, 2028 for insurance adjusters and public insurance adjusters who inspect or evaluate smoke damage, and it creates a Wildfire Remediation Certification and Training Fund to support those programs through certification fees. In the insurance context, the bill would require insurers to follow the new health guidance, pay for required sampling and testing, inspect claims promptly, pay actual cash value and replacement cost amounts on specified timelines, provide claim documents and estimates, and keep additional living expense coverage in place until a property is cleared for habitation. It also requires licensed, trained, and certified vendors or contractors for smoke remediation work and gives policyholders the right to choose the restoration contractor.
AB 1795 would add new provisions to both the Health and Safety Code and the Insurance Code, creating statewide standards for smoke-damage assessment and remediation after wildland-urban interface fires and urban conflagrations. It would impose new duties on CalEPA, the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the Department of Insurance, insurers, adjusters, public adjusters, and remediation contractors, while also establishing a new special fund for certification and training. The bill would affect residential property insurance claims handling by setting presumptions, deadlines, coverage rules, and documentation requirements for smoke damage claims, and it would apply to policies issued, amended, or renewed on or after the operative date.
The bill appears to have generally favorable momentum in committee, with both recorded votes showing strong support and relatively few no votes. The legislative findings and urgency language frame the measure as a consumer- and public-health response to recent major wildfires, emphasizing inconsistent insurer practices and the need to protect residents returning to smoke-damaged homes. The absence of committee transcript excerpts limits insight into detailed debate, but the vote margins suggest broad agreement on the need for clearer standards and stronger claim-handling rules.
The main points of potential contention are likely the bill’s regulatory and financial burdens on insurers and the state, and the extent to which it shifts claim costs and compliance obligations onto the insurance industry. Insurers may object to mandatory payment timelines, responsibility for sampling and testing, rebuttable presumptions favoring higher-impact classifications, and the requirement to keep additional living expense coverage open until habitation clearance. There may also be concern about the bill giving CalEPA authority to impose wildfire-specific requirements and exempting some of those requirements from the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as the practical challenge of defining and enforcing certification standards across multiple categories of professionals.