HB2989 creates the Wildland Fire Mitigation Act and the Wildland Fire Mitigation Program Act. The bill is aimed at reducing the risk and impact of wildland fires by encouraging electric utilities to develop voluntary electrical wildland fire mitigation plans and by creating a state mitigation program within the Oklahoma Conservation Commission. The utility plan provisions describe possible components such as identifying high-risk geographic areas, vegetation management standards, infrastructure inspections, facility upgrades, restoration procedures, and other measures intended to reduce the chance that utility equipment will start or worsen a wildland fire.
The bill also establishes a liability framework for wildland fire damage. It provides that a person who negligently, recklessly, or intentionally causes or spreads a wildland fire is liable for property damage regardless of whether the fire began on federal, tribal, state, or private land. For electric utilities, the bill creates a standard under which a utility is not considered negligent if its facilities and operations complied with the National Electric Safety Code, absent exceptional conditions. It also limits property-damage awards to the lesser of restoration costs or the difference in fair market value before and after the fire, and bars punitive and treble damages for those claims. The bill expressly says it does not address bodily injury claims arising from wildland fires.
On the state-program side, the bill directs the Oklahoma Conservation Commission, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry, to develop and implement a wildland fire mitigation program using existing conservation programs. The program is intended to incentivize voluntary mitigation practices by landowners, land managers, and other stakeholders, and it must include annual guidelines, rules, and periodic evaluation. The bill also creates a revolving fund to receive appropriations, grants, donations, and other funding for program implementation.
The general sentiment reflected in the available legislative history is strongly favorable. The bill passed the House Utilities Committee 8-0 and the House Energy and Natural Resources Oversight Committee 14-0, both as amended by committee substitute, indicating broad bipartisan support and little recorded opposition at the committee stage. No committee transcript was provided, so the discussion record does not show detailed debate.
The main points of potential contention are the liability and damages provisions. The bill protects utilities from being deemed negligent when they meet National Electric Safety Code requirements, which may be viewed as a liability shield by property owners or wildfire victims. The limits on damages and the exclusion of punitive or treble damages could also draw concern from those seeking fuller recovery after wildfire losses. By contrast, utilities and other stakeholders likely support the bill’s emphasis on mitigation planning, cost recovery in rates, and clearer liability standards.
HB2989 would add new provisions to Titles 17 and 27A of the Oklahoma Statutes governing electric-utility wildfire mitigation and state wildfire-prevention programming. It authorizes electric utilities to prepare wildfire mitigation plans, requires public availability of those plans upon request, allows utilities to seek rate recovery for prudently incurred implementation costs, and sets a negligence and damages framework for wildfire-related property claims. It also creates a new conservation-program mandate for the Oklahoma Conservation Commission and establishes a revolving fund to finance the mitigation program.
The available voting history shows unanimous committee approval at both recorded committee stops, suggesting the bill was received positively overall. The absence of recorded dissent and the use of a committee substitute indicate the measure was considered workable and broadly acceptable in committee. No transcript was provided, so there is no direct record of floor debate or stakeholder testimony, but the committee votes point to strong support.
The most notable contention centers on the bill’s treatment of liability for wildfire damage. Property owners and potential plaintiffs may object to the provision that shields electric utilities from a negligence finding when they comply with the National Electric Safety Code, as well as the cap on damages and the prohibition on punitive or treble damages. Utilities and their supporters are likely to favor those protections because they provide clearer standards and limit exposure. Another possible point of debate is the bill’s allowance for utilities to recover mitigation costs through rates, which could raise concerns about passing expenses to customers.