Hot Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Xcel agrees to take immediate steps to reduce wildfire risks linked to its infrastructure


A temporary injunction has been agreed to between the office of Ken Paxton and Xcel Energy, requiring the utility provider to take immediate steps aimed at reducing wildfire risks linked to its infrastructure.

According to the Attorney General’s office, the injunction requires the company to “take immediate action” by replacing damaged or deteriorating utility poles and conducting expanded inspections across its system in the Texas Panhandle. The agreement mandates both large-scale inspections and the replacement of poles deemed to pose an unreasonable wildfire risk.

The office stated that the injunction will require Xcel Energy to immediately replace damaged and dilapidated utility poles “and conduct rigorous and thorough large-scale inspections and to replace utility poles that pose an unreasonable risk of causing additional wildfires in the Texas Panhandle.”

“This injunction requiring Xcel to inspect and replace its dilapidated and damaged utility poles is critical for protecting the safety and livelihood of Texans,” said Attorney General Paxton. “This win is the first part of holding Xcel accountable and ensuring preventative measures are being taken as the case continues to move forward. Xcel has made the right decision in working with my office and ultimately agreeing to take these critical first steps. The Smokehouse Creek Fire caused devastation throughout the Texas Panhandle, and I will continue to fight to ensure that justice is served and that wildfires will no longer be sparked by the negligence of a utility provider.”

The agreement comes as part of an ongoing legal process that began in December 2025, when Paxton’s office filed a lawsuit following an investigation into the 2024 Smokehouse Creek Fire and Windy Deuce Fire. Investigators have stated that the Smokehouse Creek Fire was started by a power line owned and operated by utility companies including Xcel Energy, Southwestern Public Service Company, and Osmose Utilities Services. The Windy Deuce Fire, according to investigators, was linked to power lines connected to an oil and gas operation.

As part of the injunction, Xcel Energy is required to replace poles identified as being at imminent risk of failure, particularly those located in areas considered to have elevated wildfire danger. The agreement also calls for the company to continue inspecting and replacing high-risk poles under an accelerated timeline and to inspect approximately 35,000 poles annually within its Texas service territory.

The injunction arrives while litigation remains ongoing. Paxton’s December 2025 lawsuit seeks to recover economic damages for the state, including property losses, the diminished value of wildlife and habitat, and potential civil penalties for alleged violations of Texas law.

Xcel Energy has previously stated that it conducted its own internal review of the fires, alongside investigations by outside organizations, and disputes claims that it acted negligently in maintaining or operating its infrastructure. The company has also maintained that it does not believe its equipment played a role in the Windy Deuce Fire.

In a statement, Xcel Energy representatives said, “We’re pleased to have had productive conversations with the Attorney General’s office in Texas. This agreement largely tracks the pole-replacement procedures Xcel Energy proactively implemented two years ago, after the Smokehouse Creek fire. We’ll continue working with the state of Texas as we focus on the wildfire mitigation work to help keep the public safe.”

Separately, the company has been compensating individuals affected by the Smokehouse Creek Fire through a voluntary claims process. As of August 2025, Xcel Energy reported resolving 187 of 253 claims and committing $176 million in settlement agreements, with $123 million already paid.

Despite agreeing to the injunction’s terms, the company continues to deny the allegations outlined in the state’s petition. The injunction explicitly states that participation does not waive any legal rights, claims, or defenses by any party as the case proceeds.

The legal proceedings and infrastructure requirements outlined in the injunction are expected to continue unfolding as the broader lawsuit moves forward.