Relating to risk mitigation planning and associated liability for providers of electric service; providing an administrative penalty.
CriticalImmediate action required
High Cost
Effective:2025-06-20
Enforcing Agencies
Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) • Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM)
01
Compliance Analysis
Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation
Implementation Timeline
Effective Date:June 20, 2025 (Immediate application for liability provisions).
Agency Rulemaking: The Public Utility Commission (PUC) must adopt implementation rules by December 17, 2025 (180 days post-enactment).
Compliance Deadline: WMPs must be filed "as soon as practicable" following the adoption of PUC rules. Expect a filing deadline in Q1 2026. However, data collection and expert retention must begin immediately to meet this window.
Immediate Action Plan
Map Your Territory: Immediately direct GIS/Engineering to identify high-risk wildfire areas within your service territory to anticipate the scope of your WMP.
Gap Analysis: Compare your current wildfire protocols against the 10 statutory requirements in Section 38.080(b).
Secure Experts: Issue RFPs for independent fire risk mitigation experts immediately to avoid the end-of-year bottleneck.
Update Vendor Contracts: Amend vegetation management contracts to align performance metrics strictly with anticipated WMP standards.
Operational Changes Required
Contracts
Vegetation Management MSAs: Review all Master Service Agreements with tree-trimming vendors immediately. Your statutory liability shield depends on "strict compliance" with your vegetation plan. Contracts must mandate adherence to WMP specifications and include indemnification clauses if vendor negligence voids your liability protection.
Independent Expert Retainers: You must contract with an "independent expert in fire risk mitigation" to analyze your plan prior to submission. Secure these vendors now; demand will exceed supply in Q3/Q4 2025.
Pole Attachments: Review attachment agreements. Ensure third-party equipment does not interfere with your ability to execute the WMP, as the statute preserves existing contract rights.
Hiring/Training
De-Energization Protocols: Control room staff require immediate training on new Public Safety Power Shut-off (PSPS) procedures and recloser disablement protocols.
Community Liaison: Designate specific personnel responsible for the mandatory community outreach and first-responder coordination required by the WMP.
Reporting & Record-Keeping
The 10-Point WMP: You must compile a plan containing 10 statutory components, including vegetation management, infrastructure inspections, and restoration procedures.
Compliance Audits: Establish an internal audit trail. To claim the liability defense in court, you must produce records proving you were in compliance with your plan at the time of ignition.
Self-Insurance Petitions: If commercial insurance is cost-prohibitive, prepare data to petition the PUC for self-insurance authority under amended Section 36.064.
Fees & Costs
Consulting Fees: Budget for high-cost independent expert analysis required for the WMP.
Administrative Penalties: Failure to file or follow the plan triggers Chapter 15 Utilities Code penalties (typically up to $25,000 per violation, per day).
Operational Increases: Expect significant budget increases for vegetation management to meet the "strict compliance" standard in designated risk areas.
Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations
"Wildfire Risk Area" Definition: The statute allows TDEM or the utility to define these areas. If TDEM defines these broadly in upcoming rules, your vegetation management obligations—and costs—will expand significantly.
"Strict Compliance" Standard: The liability shield requires strict compliance with the WMP. It is currently unclear if a minor deviation (e.g., a single missed inspection) voids the entire liability shield. We must advocate for a "substantial compliance" standard during the PUC rulemaking comment period.
Expert Qualifications: The law requires an "independent expert" but does not define the credentials. The PUC will likely set these standards in the December rules.
Need Help Understanding Implementation?
Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.
Information presented is for general knowledge only and is provided without warranty, express or implied. Consult qualified government affairs professionals and legal counsel before making compliance decisions.
According to a report by the Investigative Committee on the Panhandle Wildfires, on February 26, 2024, a downed power line started what would become the largest wildfire in Texas history, burning over one million acres. Following the fires, the committee heard testimony from individuals involved with the containment of the fires and discussed potential mitigation efforts to prevent future fires, if possible. C.S.H.B. 145 seeks to expand existing mitigation efforts by requiring certain electric utilities and electric cooperatives to submit a mitigation plan to the Public Utility Commission of Texas that includes information regarding how the utility or cooperative will reduce fire risks and respond to a fire event.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that rulemaking authority is expressly granted to the Public Utility Commission of Texas in SECTION 3 of this bill.
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 145 amends the Utilities Code to include wildfire losses that could not have been reasonably anticipated and included under an electric utility's operating and maintenance expenses among the specified types of potential liability or catastrophic property losses for which the utility may self-insure. The bill also authorizes an electric utility to self-insure all or part of potential damages the utility may be liable for resulting from personal injury or property damage caused by a wildfire but expressly does not authorize a utility to self-insure for damage from a wildfire event the utility caused intentionally, recklessly, or with gross negligence.
C.S.H.B. 145 provides the following conditions under which the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) must approve an otherwise qualifying self-insurance plan as an alternative to the PUC finding that the plan, considering all costs, is a lower cost alternative to purchasing commercial insurance:
·the PUC finding that commercial insurance alone is insufficient to cover potential liability, damages, or catastrophic property loss; or
·the PUC finding that the electric utility cannot obtain commercial insurance for a reasonable premium.
The bill requires the PUC, in approving a self-insurance plan, to prioritize the consideration of the presence and potential extent of wildfire losses, including historical data, actuarial studies and analyses, and the possibility of the electric utility's exposure to losses from multiple types of disasters occurring within the utility's service territory.
C.S.H.B. 145 requires an electric utility or an electric cooperative that owns a transmission or distribution facility in a wildfire risk area to file, and authorizes a municipally owned utility or an electric utility that is a river authority to file, a wildfire mitigation plan with the PUC that includes the following:
·a description of each area to which the utility or cooperative provides transmission or distribution service that is in a wildfire risk area and the utility's or cooperative's process for periodically inspecting the utility's or cooperative's transmission and distribution facilities in those areas;
·a detailed plan for vegetation management in the wildfire risk area;
·a detailed operations plan for reducing the likelihood of wildfire ignition from the utility's or cooperative's facilities and for responding to a wildfire;
·a description of the procedures the utility or cooperative intends to use to restore the utility's or cooperative's system during and after a wildfire event, including contact information for the utility or cooperative that may be used for coordination with the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and first responders, defined by reference to the Texas Disaster Act of 1975;
·the utility's or cooperative's community outreach and public awareness plan regarding wildfire risks and actual wildfires affecting the utility's or cooperative's service territory or system, including a specific communications plan for responding to a wildfire event;
·any infrastructure report, maintenance report, or distribution pole maintenance plan required by the PUC;
·an analysis of the wildfire mitigation plan prepared by an independent expert in fire risk mitigation; and
·any other information the PUC may require.
The bill requires the PUC to issue an order not later than the 180th day after a wildfire mitigation plan is filed with the PUC that approves the plan, if the PUC finds that approval is in the public interest, or modifies or rejects the plan as necessary to be consistent with the public interest. The bill defines "wildfire risk area" as an area determined by TDEM or an electric utility, electric cooperative, or municipally owned utility to be at an elevated risk for wildfire.
C.S.H.B. 145 subjects an electric utility or electric cooperative that does not implement an approved plan to an administrative penalty under relevant provisions of the Public Utility Regulatory Act providing for judicial review, enforcement, and penalties. This provision does not apply to an electric utility that is a river authority.
C.S.H.B. 145 exempts an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative that submits and obtains PUC approval for a wildfire mitigation plan from liability for damages resulting from a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's facility unless a trier of fact in a civil action finds that the utility or cooperative intentionally, recklessly, or negligently caused the damage. The bill establishes as an affirmative defense to liability in an action brought against such a utility or cooperative for damages resulting from a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's facility that the utility or cooperative was in compliance with relevant measures of its approved wildfire mitigation plan with respect to the specific equipment alleged to have ignited or propagated the wildfire that caused the damages. These liability provisions do not apply to an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative that does not file a wildfire mitigation plan or that files a plan that is rejected by the PUC.
C.S.H.B. 145 authorizes a trier of fact, in an action brought against an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative for damages resulting from a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's facility, to consider relevant factors contributing to the wildfire ignition or propagation to the extent the utility's or cooperative's approved wildfire mitigation plan departed from nationally accepted safety standards, including the National Electrical Safety Code as published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, in effect at the time the plan was approved.
C.S.H.B. 145 requires the PUC to adopt any rules necessary to implement the bill's provisions relating to self-insurance and wildfire mitigation plans not later than the 180th day after the bill's effective date. The bill authorizes an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative to file a wildfire mitigation plan at any time after the bill's effective date, regardless of whether the PUC has adopted any such rules before the date of the filing.
C.S.H.B. 145 makes its provisions relating to liability for damages caused by wildfire applicable only to a cause of action that accrues on or after the bill's effective date.
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2025.
COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 145 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
Both the introduced and the substitute set out the contents of wildfire mitigation plans authorized or required to be submitted to the PUC, as applicable. However, the substitute includes among those contents any infrastructure report, maintenance report, or distribution pole maintenance plan required by the PUC and an analysis of the wildfire mitigation plan prepared by an independent expert in fire risk mitigation, which did not appear in the introduced.
The substitute extends the deadline by which the PUC is required to issue an order approving, modifying, or rejecting a wildfire mitigation plan from not later than the 60th day after the plan is filed with the PUC, as in the introduced, to not later than the 180th day after that date.
The substitute includes provisions absent from the introduced subjecting an electric utility or electric cooperative that does not implement an approved plan to an applicable administrative penalty and making that provision inapplicable to an electric utility that is a river authority.
While both the introduced and the substitute exempt an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative for which the PUC has approved a wildfire mitigation plan from liability for damages resulting from a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's facilities, the bill versions differ in the following ways:
·the introduced additionally provided such an exemption for damages resulting from a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's actions, whereas the substitute does not;
·whereas the introduced established that the exemption does not apply if a court of competent jurisdiction finds that the utility or cooperative intentionally, recklessly, or with negligence caused the damage, the substitute establishes that the exemption does not apply if a trier of fact in a civil action makes such a finding; and
·the substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced establishing that these liability provisions do not apply to a utility or cooperative that does not file a wildfire mitigation plan or that files a plan that is rejected.
Whereas the introduced established as an affirmative defense to liability in a civil action brought against an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative for personal injury or property damages caused by a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's facilities that a court of competent jurisdiction finds that the utility or cooperative was in material compliance with relevant measures of its approved plan, the substitute establishes as an affirmative defense to liability in an action brought against such a utility or cooperative for damages resulting from such a wildfire that the utility or cooperative was in compliance with relevant measures of its approved plan with respect to the specific equipment alleged to have ignited or propagated the wildfire that caused the damages.
The substitute includes a provision absent from the introduced authorizing a trier of fact, in an action against an electric utility, municipally owned utility, or electric cooperative for damages resulting from a wildfire ignited or propagated by the utility's or cooperative's facility, to consider relevant factors contributing to the wildfire ignition or propagation to the extent the utility's or cooperative's approved wildfire mitigation plan departed from applicable nationally accepted safety standards in effect at the time the plan was approved.
The substitute omits the provision from the introduced establishing that a wildfire mitigation plan filed with the PUC after the bill's effective date is subject to review, modification, approval, or rejection by the PUC under the bill's provisions regardless of whether the PUC has adopted relevant rules before the date of the filing.
Whereas the introduced required the PUC to adopt any rules as necessary to implement any of the bill's provisions, the substitute requires the PUC to adopt any rules necessary to implement the bill's provisions relating to self-insurance and wildfire mitigation plans.
Honorable Ken King, Chair, House Committee on State Affairs
FROM:
Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:
HB145 by King (Relating to risk mitigation planning and associated liability for providers of electric service.), As Introduced
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
It is assumed that any costs associated with the bill could be absorbed using existing resources.
Local Government Impact
There could be an impact on municipally owned utilities and electric cooperatives in wildlife prone areas related to submitting a mitigation plan, as would be amended by the bill.
Source Agencies: b > td >
473 Public Utility Commission of Texas
LBB Staff: b > td >
JMc, WP, GDZ, JBel
Related Legislation
Explore more bills from this author and on related topics
Effective June 20, 2025, HB145 mandates that all electric utilities, municipally owned utilities, and electric cooperatives operating in "wildfire risk areas" submit comprehensive Wildfire Mitigation Plans (WMP) to the PUC. This legislation creates a critical trade-off: entities that strictly adhere to their approved WMP are granted a statutory affirmative defense against liability for wildfire damages; those that fail to file or comply face administrative penalties and unlimited liability exposure. Implementation Timeline Effective Date: June 20, 2025 (Immediate application for liability provisions).
Q
Who authored HB145?
HB145 was authored by Texas Representative Ken King during the Regular Session.
Q
When was HB145 signed into law?
HB145 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025.
Q
Which agencies enforce HB145?
HB145 is enforced by Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) and Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM).
Q
How urgent is compliance with HB145?
The compliance urgency for HB145 is rated as "critical". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.
Q
What is the cost impact of HB145?
The cost impact of HB145 is estimated as "high". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.
Q
What topics does HB145 address?
HB145 addresses topics including civil remedies & liabilities, disaster preparedness & relief, insurance, insurance--general and utilities.
Legislative data provided by LegiScanLast updated: November 25, 2025
Need Strategic Guidance on This Bill?
Need help with Government Relations, Lobbying, or compliance? JD Key Consulting has the expertise you're looking for.