2024-11-25 1250 Oceanside LLC Response to PD

Home

Application of Hawaii Elec. Light Co., Inc.,60 Haw.625 (1979) 594 P.2d 612 Before RICHARDSON, C. J., OGATA and MENOR, JJ., KOBAYASHI, Retired Justice, and KATO, Circuit Court Judge, assigned by reason of vacancies. Opinion OGATA,Justice. This is an appeal from Decision and Order No. 4123 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of Hawaii(Commission) and from the Commission's denials of the Petitions for Reconsideration and Successive Petition for Reconsideration. See Order No. 4205 and Order No. 4261. The parties to this appeal are the State of Hawaii Public Utilities Division(Division)and Lima Kokua(LK),as appellants,and the Hawaii Electric Light Company,Incorporated(HELCO),as appellee.IIIHRS ss 91-14 and yt1ul 269-16(f)(1976)provide the jurisdiction for this appeal. **616 In the proceeding below,the Commission issued Decision and Order No. 4123 which, among other things, approved HELCO's request for(I)an 8.95%Rate of return on HELCO's rate base and(II)a revised residential rate structure.The Division and LK each challenge different aspects of the case on appeal.The Division's basic challenge is whether the 8.95%Rate of return is just and reasonable,and LK's basic challenge is whether the revised rate schedule for residential customers is unreasonably discriminatory. We affirm the Commission's order with respect to the rate of return but remand to the Commission for further proceedings with respect to the residential rate schedule. PRELIMINARY FACTS On January 30, 1975, HELCO, a wholly owned subsidiary of Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HECO), and a public utility engaged in the production,transmission,distribution *628 and sale of electricity on the island of Hawaii,filed an application pursuant to HRS s 269-16(1974 Supp.)requesting approval of proposed rate increases and revised rate schedules.HELCO requested a rate increase of$3,508,200, or a 20.3%Increase in test year annual revenues, which would amount to an 8.95% Return on its proposed rate base. By law,the Division was a party to the rate proceeding before the Commission.LK,an organization of low income residents of the island of Hawaii,was allowed to intervene.Public and economic hearings were held by the Commission in Hilo and Kona. On January 29, 1976,the Commission issued Decision and Order No.4123 which approved the requested 8.95%Rate of return. The order also granted HELCO a rate increase of$3,411,400 or a 20% Increase in annual revenues and approved virtually unchanged the proposed rate schedules submitted by HELCO. The Division and LK filed petitions for reconsideration,urging as grounds for reconsideration the same issues each now raises on appeal. On March 30, 1976,the Commission issued Order No. 4205 which denied the petitions.LK then filed a Successive Petition for Reconsideration which was denied by Commission's Order No.4261.This appeal follows from Decision and Order No. 4123 and the subsequent denials of the petitions for reconsideration. DISCUSSION The issues presented to us in this appeal are(I)whether the 8.95%Rate of return is reasonable and(II)whether the residential rate structure is unreasonably discriminatory. Before turning to the issues, we note that our standard of review of this case is limited by IIIHRS s 91-14(g) (1976), which provides that: w ESTI.AW CD 2024 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 3