2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB145
HB145 requires electric utilities, municipal utilities and electric cooperatives owning transmission or distribution facilities in a wildfire-risk area to file a wildfire mitigation plan with the Public Utility Commission (PUC).
Official caption: Relating to risk mitigation planning and associated liability for providers of electric service; providing an administrative penalty.
Official report lists House author(s): King. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- HB145 requires electric utilities, municipal utilities and electric cooperatives owning transmission or distribution facilities in a wildfire-risk area to file a wildfire mitigation plan with the Public Utility Commission (PUC).
- This is not blanket immunity for utility-caused wildfires: An approved plan can be evidence in a damages case.
- The law also broadens electric-utility self-insurance authority for wildfire injury and property damage.
- HB145 took effect June 20, 2025.
What does it do?
HB145 requires electric utilities, municipal utilities and electric cooperatives owning transmission or distribution facilities in a wildfire-risk area to file a wildfire mitigation plan with the Public Utility Commission (PUC). Either the Texas Division of Emergency Management or the utility can identify an elevated-risk area. The plan must cover inspections, vegetation management, ignition prevention, emergency response and restoration, public communications, infrastructure and pole-maintenance reports, an independent fire-risk expert’s analysis, power shutoffs and disabling automatic reclosers, operating standards, and compliance monitoring. The PUC can require more information or accept substantially similar information required by other law. It must approve, modify or reject a plan within 180 days; approval must serve the public interest. Failure to implement an approved plan can bring administrative penalties. Final law, Section 2.
This is not blanket immunity for utility-caused wildfires. An approved plan can be evidence in a damages case. Subject to any applicable tariff provision, the law’s protection from liability requires the judge or jury deciding the facts to find all three things: the utility submitted, obtained approval for and implemented a plan; it complied with the relevant measures for the specific equipment found to have ignited or spread the fire; and it did not cause the wildfire intentionally, recklessly or negligently. No-plan and rejected-plan cases do not receive these protections. Express contractual rights involving communications facilities, shared electric facilities and pole attachments remain intact. Final law, Section 2, new Utilities Code 38.081.
The law also broadens electric-utility self-insurance authority for wildfire injury and property damage. Approval still requires a public-interest finding and ratepayers receiving the benefit of savings, but now any one of three conditions can qualify: lower overall cost than commercial insurance, insufficient commercial coverage, or inability to obtain a reasonable premium. The PUC must prioritize wildfire-loss evidence, including historical data, actuarial studies and exposure to multiple disasters. The new damages authority excludes fires caused intentionally, recklessly or with gross negligence—a different standard from the ordinary-negligence limitation on liability protection above. Final law, Section 1.
HB145 took effect June 20, 2025. The PUC had 180 days to adopt necessary rules; covered utilities must file plans as soon as practicable after those rules. The new lawsuit provisions apply only to causes of action accruing on or after the effective date. These are statutory requirements, not a claim that every utility has complied. Official history; final law, Sections 3–5.
What changed along the way?
The House committee version lengthened the proposed plan-review period from 60 to 180 days, added expert analysis and infrastructure reporting, and introduced penalties. The House then adopted an amendment preserving express communications-facility and pole-attachment contract rights; that protection survived. Introduced bill; House committee text; House amendment 1.
The Senate committee made filing mandatory for municipal utilities as well as the other covered providers, removed the earlier river-authority exceptions, added shutoff and compliance-monitoring provisions, allowed equivalent reporting information, and required filing after rulemaking. It replaced the House’s separate liability defense and express national-safety-standard comparison with a provision allowing an approved plan as evidence. A Senate floor amendment restored conditional liability protection. House-passed bill; Senate committee text; Senate amendment 1.
The chambers went to conference. The final agreement replaced the Senate floor amendment’s “not liable … unless” formulation with the explicit three-part fact-finding test described above, including compliance for the specific equipment involved. The earlier stand-alone affirmative defense is not the final law. Both chambers adopted the report. Full conference report in the May 31 House journal, HB145 entry; amendment index; final text.
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Residents, landowners and emergency responders could benefit from better vegetation management, equipment inspections, shutdown planning and response coordination. Utilities gain a defined planning process, broader self-insurance options and a conditional liability protection. Those benefits are not guaranteed reductions in fires, bills or insurance premiums. Customers and utilities may face planning, expert-review, maintenance and implementation costs; shutoff plans also raise practical service-continuity tradeoffs. People seeking wildfire damages must still establish their claims, but plan approval does not by itself excuse negligence.
The Legislative Budget Board’s final note anticipated no significant state fiscal impact, assuming existing resources could absorb implementation. It identified possible impacts on municipal utilities and cooperatives in wildfire-prone areas without estimating a dollar amount. That is not a finding that compliance is free or that private losses and customer-rate effects are zero. Final fiscal note.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.