Hawaii Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Regulatory Proceeding (Docket No. 2007-0346) re Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) - Imperium Services (Imperium Renewables) Biofuel Supply Contract Docket. Parties: HECO, Consumer Advocate, Life of the Land (38 year old environmental and community action group and utility watchdog). HECO plans to use biofuel to generate electricity. Imperium Renewables plans to Import Palm Oil subject to NRDC - HECO sustainable biofuels agreement.
Statement of Issues (PUC Order 24144 dated April 10, 2008)
1. Are the terms and conditions of HECO’s Biodiesel Supply Contract with Imperium reasonable, prudent, and in the public interest?
2. Is it reasonable for HECO to include the costs for biodiesel fuel, transportation, storage, and related taxes incurred pursuant to the Imperium Contract in its [ECAC], to the extent that they are not recovered in HECO’s base rates?
3. Is it reasonable for HECO to use biodiesel blended with no more than 0.2% petroleum diesel in order to benefit from the Federal biofuel blender’s credit?
4. Is it reasonable, prudent and in the public interest for HECO to enter into the subject biofuel supply contract even though it does not expressly
(1) require meeting the Internal Revenue Service’s requirements to qualify for any available tax credits, including, the renewable fuel mixture tax credits; and
(2) require the satisfaction of biofuels sustainability principles contained in HECO and Natural Resources Defense Council’s Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil Principles and Criteria?
Timeline (PUC Order 24144 dated April 10, 2008)
1. HECO Application October 18, 2007
2. Other Parties’ Information Requests to HECO, April 28, 2008
3. HECO’s Responses to Information Requests, May 26, 2008
4. Written Testimonies, Exhibits and Workpapers of Other Parties, June 23, 2008
5. Information Requests to Other Parties, July 7, 2008
6. Other Parties’ Responses to Information Requests, July 28, 2008
7. HECO’s Written Rebuttal Testimonies, Exhibits, and Workpapers, August 18, 2008
8. Other Parties’ Information Requests to HECO, September 1, 2008
9. HECO’s Responses to Information Requests, September 22, 2008
10. Prehearing Conference Week of September 29, 2008, subject to the call of the commission.
11. Evidentiary Hearing Oral Argument Week of October 6, 2008, subject to the call of the commission.
12. Simultaneous Proposed Findings of Facts/Conclusions of Law 3 weeks after filing of the Evidentiary Hearing transcript.
13. Simultaneous Comments to Proposed Findings of Facts/Conclusions of Law 2 weeks after the filing of Findings of Facts/Conclusions of Law.
HECO Application (PUC Order 24144 dated April 10, 2008)
The HECO Application included narrative exhibits that were intended to support the Application in lieu of directtestimony. This narrative presentation has been used by HECO in other fuel contract proceedings, e.g., In theMatter of the Application of Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. for Approval of Low Sulfur Fuel Oil Contract Amendments with Chevron Products Company and Tesoro Hawaii Corporation and to Include Contract Amendments Costs in HECO’s Energy Cost Adjustment Clause, Decision and Order No. 21522, Docket No. 04-0128 (filed Dec. 30, 2004).
Protective Order (PUC Order 24145 dated April 10, 2008)
HECO intends to provide only to the Consumer Advocate and the Commission certain confidential information regarding contract pricing and related pricing provisions that is not pertinent to LOL’s [c]oncerns but which is necessary in order for the agencies to carry out their respective statutory duties and obligations (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Level Two Confidential Information”)
If HECO designates information as confidential pursuant to paragraph 4 above or paragraph 6 below, it shall produce the Confidential Information in accordance with the procedures described in paragraphs 11 through 14 below, and concurrently provide that Confidential Information in writing to the Commission and the Consumer Advocate.
Furthermore, HECO shall: describe the document containing the Confidential Information with reasonable specificity;
(2) identify, in reasonable detail, the information’s source, character, and location,
(3) state clearly the basis for the claim that the document and/or information qualifies as Confidential Information, and
(4) describe the harm or prejudice to HECO from any misuse or unauthorized disclosure of the information.
HECO shall provide the information described above concerning the Confidential Information to the Commission, the Consumer Advocate and LOL. HECO shall bear the burden of proof in supporting its claim of confidentiality.
If LOL determines that the Confidential Information is relevant and necessary to support its position in this docket, LOL may request that the Commission determine whether the information should be disclosed to it under the terms of this protective order. Any challenge to the confidentiality of any information shall be made in accordance with paragraph 24 below.
To the extent that any of the documents covered by this protective order consist of “government records,” as defined in HRS Section 92F-3, the provisions of HRS Chapter 92F (“Uniform Information Practices Act” or “UIPA”) shall apply to the disclosure of information contained in such documents.
PUC Orders 24144, 24145
http://hawaii.gov/dcca/areas/dca/dno/dno2008/
