An act to add Section 8570.7 to the Government Code, and to add Section 590.5 to the Public Utilities Code, relating to emergency preparedness.
AB 2543 would create a new state process focused on keeping direct-current fast charging electric vehicle station sites operational during emergencies. By July 1, 2027, the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, working with the Office of Emergency Services and the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, would have to identify the emergency scenarios most relevant to fast-charging stations, such as earthquakes, public safety power shutoffs, extreme weather, and wildfires. The agencies would also identify which charging sites are most important to keep open during those events, using factors like population density, geographic coverage, charger count, distance to the next station, access safety, and whether mobile charging could serve the area.
The bill would also require the agencies to develop recommendations on how long power should be maintained at those sites and what backup power or other operational requirements should apply. Public comment would be required during that process, and the agencies would review and update the work annually. Beginning January 1, 2028, operators of identified fast-charging station sites would have to submit annual emergency management plans describing how they would maintain operations during emergencies and report on whether, how, and when the site was kept operating during an event.
In addition, the bill would amend the Public Utilities Code to require electrical corporations to consider electric vehicle charging stations in their annual emergency response and disaster preparedness plans prepared under Public Utilities Commission General Order No. 166. This ties EV charging infrastructure more directly into utility emergency planning and could influence how utilities prioritize resilience investments and outage response planning.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill’s legislative history appears strongly supportive. The measure passed committee votes unanimously, including a 6-0 vote and an 18-0 vote, suggesting broad agreement that EV charging infrastructure should be incorporated into emergency preparedness planning. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded floor or committee debate to indicate organized opposition.
The main points of contention, based on the bill text itself, are likely to be implementation and cost-related rather than policy direction. The bill places planning and reporting obligations on state agencies, charging-station operators, and electrical corporations, and it contemplates possible backup power requirements for selected sites. Because violations of the Public Utilities Act or implementing orders can be crimes, the bill also creates a state-mandated local program, though it states no reimbursement is required. The fiscal and operational burden of identifying critical sites, maintaining backup power, and preparing annual plans would likely be the central issue for affected parties.
AB 2543 would add Section 8570.7 to the Government Code and Section 590.5 to the Public Utilities Code, expanding California emergency preparedness law to specifically address direct-current fast charging station sites and electric vehicle charging infrastructure. It would require state agencies to evaluate emergency resilience needs for selected fast-charging sites, require annual emergency management plans from operators of identified sites, and require electrical corporations to include EV charging stations in their emergency response and disaster preparedness planning. The bill also creates a potential state-mandated local program, while declaring that no reimbursement is required.
The bill appears to have received favorable and noncontroversial treatment in committee. It advanced with unanimous votes in the Assembly committees reflected in the history, and there is no transcript evidence of opposition or significant debate. The legislative posture suggests broad support for strengthening emergency resilience for EV charging infrastructure, especially in light of wildfire, seismic, and power shutoff risks.
The likely areas of contention are practical implementation, compliance costs, and the scope of obligations placed on charging-station operators and utilities. The bill would require agencies to determine which stations are critical, what backup power is needed, and how long stations must remain operational during emergencies, which could raise questions about cost, feasibility, and enforcement. Operators of identified sites may face new planning and equipment requirements, while electrical corporations may need to adjust emergency planning to account for EV charging stations. No explicit opposition is shown in the available history, but these are the main policy and administrative pressure points.