California’s SB 122 infrastructure project streamlining framework lets the Governor certify qualifying energy, transportation, water, and semiconductor projects for faster environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Certified projects get two things standard CEQA projects don’t: an administrative record built concurrently with the environmental review, and a judicial review target of 270 days for any litigation, including appeals. In exchange, the applicant covers the costs of record preparation and court proceedings, and commits to no net increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
What “SB 122” Refers To Here
SB 122 was signed as Chapter 51 of the Statutes of 2023, a public resources budget trailer bill covering unrelated topics from western Joshua tree protection to dam safety to oil and gas well remediation.1California Legislative Information. SB 122 Bill Text 2023-2024 Regular Session The CEQA streamlining provisions most people search for under this name sit in standalone Public Resources Code sections, primarily Chapter 7 of Division 13 (Sections 21189.80 through 21189.83) and the concurrent record procedures in Section 21167.6.2. Those are the sections that actually govern the fast-track process, and they’re what this article addresses.
Which Projects Qualify
Public Resources Code Section 21189.81 sorts eligible projects into four buckets: energy infrastructure, semiconductor or microelectronic manufacturing, transportation, and water-related projects.2California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.81 Each category has its own rules.
Energy Projects
Eligible renewable energy resources such as solar and wind facilities qualify without a specific dollar threshold, though biomass combustion facilities are excluded. New energy storage systems of 20 megawatts or more that can discharge for at least two hours qualify, as do electrical transmission facilities and hydrogen production facilities that don’t use fossil fuel feedstock.2California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.81
The one energy subcategory with a dollar threshold is manufacturing. A project producing energy storage components, wind system components, solar photovoltaic components, or specialized products integral to renewable energy technologies must involve a capital investment of at least $250 million over five years.2California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.81 Lower thresholds sometimes cited for this program, such as $100 million or $50 million, do not appear in the statute.
Transportation Projects
A transportation project must advance at least one goal from the state’s Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure. Examples include an integrated statewide rail and transit network, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and zero-emission freight systems. The Governor may certify up to 20 transportation projects at a time, split evenly between state projects proposed by Caltrans and local or regional projects.3California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.82
Water-related and semiconductor manufacturing projects have their own definitions within the same section.
Governor Certification and Applicant Commitments
Fitting a project category isn’t enough. The Governor has to certify the project, and certification comes with strings attached when the applicant isn’t the lead agency, which is the typical situation for private-sector projects. Before certifying, the Governor must confirm three commitments from the applicant:3California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.82
- Agreement to pay the costs of the trial court and court of appeal in any case challenging the environmental review, including costs for a court-appointed special master.
- Agreement to fund concurrent preparation of the administrative record in the format the lead agency specifies.
- If environmental review is already underway, a showing that the record is already being prepared in compliance with the statute.
The financial obligations attach whether or not litigation ever materializes. An applicant seeking certification is effectively pre-funding the machinery that would move a lawsuit quickly through the courts.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rule
Certified projects cannot cause a net increase in greenhouse gas emissions, but the calculation differs by project type. For energy infrastructure and semiconductor projects proposed by private entities, the requirement covers all greenhouse gas emissions, including employee transportation, and the applicant must show the Governor a binding mitigation commitment.4California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21189.83
Transportation projects face the same no-net-increase rule, but employee transportation emissions are excluded. Where direct reductions aren’t feasible, transportation applicants can use offsets, provided they are real, permanent, and verifiable and provide quantifiable environmental and public health benefits in the same air district as the project. If that isn’t fully achievable, remaining impacts can be offset regionally.4California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21189.83 The applicant pays for the emissions analysis.
Concurrent Administrative Record
The concurrent administrative record is the mechanical core of the streamlining. Under the traditional approach, the lead agency assembles the record of proceedings after a lawsuit is filed, which can take months. Public Resources Code Section 21167.6.2 requires the record to be built alongside the environmental review itself.5California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21167.6.2
The process is triggered when the applicant submits a written request within 30 days of the lead agency’s initial determination, and the lead agency consents. From then on, the lead agency posts every record document on its website. Posting starts when the draft environmental document is released, and any document the agency prepares or receives afterward goes up in accessible electronic format within five business days.5California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21167.6.2
The lead agency has to encourage electronic public comments and convert paper comments to electronic format within seven business days. After filing its notice of determination or approval, the agency has 30 days to certify the complete record.
Notice Requirement
The environmental document itself must include a prominent notice in at least 12-point type explaining that the record is being prepared concurrently, that documents will be posted on the lead agency’s website, and that written comments should be submitted electronically.5California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21167.6.2 The notice appears in the draft and final EIR or negative declaration, not in a separate mailing before review begins.
Who Pays
The applicant’s written request must include an agreement to pay all of the lead agency’s costs for preparing and certifying the record, and the agency can charge a reasonable fee to recover those costs.5California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21167.6.2 Costs scale with complexity. A straightforward project with limited comment costs far less than a controversial one generating thousands of documents. Payment is owed regardless of whether litigation follows.
270-Day Judicial Review Target
Courts must resolve all litigation challenging a certified project’s environmental review, including any appeals to the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court, within 270 days of the certified administrative record being filed with the court, to the extent feasible.6California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code PRC 21185 The Judicial Council adopted rules of court to implement the accelerated schedule.
The “to the extent feasible” qualifier matters. Standard CEQA litigation can stretch across several years, and compressing trial, briefing, and possible appellate review into nine months is ambitious. Courts prioritize these cases and allow little room in briefing schedules for extensions. The 270 days is a directive, not a jurisdictional deadline that voids a late decision, and complex technical disputes or multi-party cases can push the timeline past nine months.
Because the applicant has already agreed at certification to pay the trial and appellate court costs, including a special master if one is appointed, resource constraints on the court are meant not to be the reason a case drags.3California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.82
When the Program Ends
The streamlining provisions in Chapter 7 of Division 13 aren’t permanent. Section 21189.80 is set to be repealed on January 1, 2034.7California Legislative Information. California Code Public Resources Code 21189.80 A project needs certification before that date to use the fast-track review. The Legislature can extend the sunset, but a project planned around this framework should track the date rather than assume renewal.