The risk of future wildfires from Hawaiian Electric’s operations is top of mind for residents across the state who are served by the utility, as the shock waves caused by Maui’s deadly fires continue to reverberate. It’s not yet known whether the Aug. 8 fire that destroyed Lahaina was caused by a fallen or sparking HECO power line — but it is known that HECO’s poles swayed and toppled during high winds, starting at least one grass fire on West Maui, blocking roads needed for evacuations and leaving power out or disrupted for tens of thousands of users.

Given the devastation and loss of life that resulted, it’s proper and necessary that HECO’s consumers would seek assurance from Hawaii’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that the utility is not exposing the islands it serves to undue risk. So it’s disappointing to hear evasions from PUC Chair Leodoloff R. Asuncion Jr., who seems reluctant to commit the PUC to a vigorous examination of HECO’s fire-related safety risks and operational vulnerabilities.

It’s urgently necessary that the PUC take responsibility, now, for assessing this risk, and then for ensuring that adequate mitigation and safety measures are in place. Hawaii’s energy consumers must be able to rely on the PUC to take a leadership role in pushing this process forward.

Advocacy organization Life of the Land (LoL) is pressing the issue. The nonprofit, which watchdogs statewide energy and environmental concerns, has intervened in the PUC’s consideration of a HECO plan to spend $190 million on “system resiliency” fixes. It is asking the PUC to immediately look at existing risks posed by power generation and transmission, statewide.

In response to questions from Star-Advertiser reporter Peter Boylan, the PUC’s Asuncion offered an explanation of the PUC’s inability to forensically investigate the Maui fires’ causes. Such an investigation is indeed crucial, he said, but the PUC is deferring to the probe now underway by the state attorney general.

“What we’re doing right now is keeping our options open,” said Asuncion, explaining that the agency is reviewing utilities’ existing emergency and disaster plans.

That’s not enough. And it shouldn’t prevent the PUC from launching an assessment of Hawaii’s overall exposure to wildfire risk from utility operations.

“The worst-case scenario is a massive fire with more deaths, while we wait on the sidelines,” said LoL executive director Henry Curtis, and he is absolutely right.

Hawaii’s consumer advocate also supports further action. On Sept. 18, Michael S. Angelo recommended the PUC “assess the vulnerabilities of … Hawaii’s regulated utilities to threats and disasters, whether they be man-made or caused by extreme natural events.” Such proaction, he said, would “allow for identification and a thorough assessment of critical vulnerabilities … and risk mitigations to be proposed, evaluated and prioritized.”

Angelo is correct in recommending that the PUC move forward separately on this matter, so that HECO’s pending $190 million resiliency plan can stay in motion, and the federal funding promised to support it can be locked in.

The PUC can and should open a new risk review proceeding, with its own scope and timeline. Hawaii might look to California for some broad guidance on this issue. After suffering from destructive fires connected to its energy utilities, that state now requires utilities to develop a Wildfire Mitigation Plan (WMP), documenting their initiatives to reduce risk of a catastrophic wildfire. Hawaii must similarly look at fire risks in a wide-ranging, holistic manner, and insist that they be addressed.

The deadly Lahaina fire alerted all who live in this state that Hawaii faces risks far higher than have been previously recognized. Lives, communities and ecosystems are at stake. Therefore, a “business as usual” approach by the PUC to assessing utilities’ and related stakeholders’ fire-safety standards and procedures must not be accepted.