California Assembly Bill AB2744

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/26

Caption

An act to amend Section 3103 of the Public Resources Code, relating to oil and gas.

Summary

AB 2744 makes a narrow, technical amendment to Section 3103 of the Public Resources Code governing the qualifications for a chief deputy in the Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM). Under existing law, the State Oil and Gas Supervisor appoints one chief deputy for each district, and the chief deputy must be a competent engineer or geologist with experience in oil and gas development and production. The bill restates that requirement and adds that the chief deputy is preferably licensed in California. The measure does not change the structure of CalGEM, the supervisor’s authority, or the state’s oil and gas regulatory framework. Its practical effect is limited to clarifying the statutory description of the chief deputy’s qualifications, with no appropriation, fiscal committee referral, or local program impact identified in the bill materials.

Impact

AB 2744 would amend Public Resources Code Section 3103, which sets qualifications for district chief deputies within CalGEM. The bill’s only substantive wording change is to specify that the chief deputy should be a competent engineer or geologist, preferably licensed in the state, and experienced in oil and gas development and production. Because the bill is described as nonsubstantive, it is not expected to materially alter state oil and gas law, agency powers, or regulated parties’ obligations.

Sentiment

The available record suggests little to no controversy around AB 2744. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, and the bill’s digest characterizes it as a nonsubstantive change. That indicates the measure is likely viewed as a technical cleanup or clarification rather than a policy shift, with no evident opposition or support arguments captured in the record provided.

Contention

No notable points of contention appear in the provided materials. The bill does not raise fiscal issues, local program impacts, or changes to enforcement authority, and there are no recorded committee debates or votes to show disagreement. If any concern were to arise, it would likely be limited to the wording of the qualification standard for chief deputies—specifically the preference for California licensure—but the text and available history do not show active dispute over that point.