The Wildfire Safety Advisory Board on June 4 described a new, prioritized approach to reviewing the wildfire mitigation plans (WMPs) submitted by publicly owned utilities (POUs) and cooperatives. The board will review all POU plans but will select 14 POUs for deeper, topic-specific evaluations each year; this year the board will emphasize risk assessment and preemptive de‑energization capability.

Board staff explained the change as an attempt to use limited volunteer and staff time more efficiently while ensuring subject-matter expertise informs advisory opinions. The board will issue advisory opinions to every POU but will produce more detailed, focused feedback for the selected 14 that have higher overhead exposure in High Fire Threat Districts.

Staff said the board will develop a rubric and feedback template to drive consistent evaluations and to identify maturity and improvement opportunities. The rubric will allow the board to categorize plans as developing, accomplished, or exemplary across statutory topic areas and to rotate which POUs receive deeper review in future years. "We plan on developing a feedback rubric ... that we can be clear of, like, when a plan is developing and the areas in which it is developing," the presenter said.

Staff indicated 21 POUs have some overhead circuits in High Fire Threat Districts; the initial prioritization targets those with the most exposure. The board will seek analytical feedback from all members and aim to limit individual board-member review burdens by preparing targeted questions that match each member’s expertise.

Municipal and cooperative representatives at the meeting welcomed the approach but urged early visibility into which topics will be prioritized in subsequent years so POUs can align their submissions. Justin Milne of the California Municipal Utilities Association asked whether the 14 statutory topic areas would be reviewed for every POU; staff clarified that all 14 topic areas will be evaluated for every POU, but the 14 prioritized POUs will receive deeper analysis on a small number of topics each year. A SMUD representative said the timing matters because many POUs will submit comprehensive plans in 2026 and urged early engagement so programmatic changes can be considered in those filings.

Staff proposed a tentative schedule: WMPs arrive by the July 1 statutory deadline, staff completes targeted reviews and queries in July–August, a public draft in early October, and a final staff draft for board consideration in December. Staff also said it will solicit clarification from POUs during the July–August review period when necessary.

The discussion included operational clarifications — staff will rotate which POUs receive deep review over time, and advisory opinions will be issued for all POUs. The board and several stakeholders stressed transparency and early engagement with POUs so the review process can inform upcoming comprehensive filings.

Less critical details: staff noted the board’s internal capacity has recently increased (from two to four staff), and that the new process grew out of the board’s experience reviewing plans in prior years where limited reviewer bandwidth produced broad comments rather than detailed, expert feedback.