Relating To Electric Utilities.
SB1500 amends Hawaii’s utility receivership law to expressly allow the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to appoint a receiver for a regulated investor-owned electric utility when the utility is failing, or is in imminent danger of failing, to provide adequate and reasonable service and that failure poses a serious and imminent threat to health, safety, and welfare. The bill also allows a receiver to be appointed, after notice and hearing, when a regulated water, electric, or sewer utility consistently fails to provide adequate and reasonable service.
Under the bill, the receiver may take temporary action necessary to restore or maintain service, access utility assets and records, manage those assets, expend existing revenues for labor and materials, and commit additional resources as needed to bring service up to regulatory standards. The bill also states that any costs incurred by the PUC, its staff, or the receiver are the responsibility of the utility in receivership or its ratepayers, and that control remains with the receiver until the utility is returned to its owners, transferred, or liquidated as determined to be in the public interest.
The bill expands Section 269-14.5 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes by adding regulated investor-owned electric utilities to the existing receivership framework that already applied to regulated water and sewer utilities. It gives the PUC explicit authority to intervene in a failing electric utility and to authorize temporary operational control through a receiver, while also clarifying the receiver’s powers, funding rules, and responsibility for costs. The bill further protects labor interests by requiring the receiver to honor existing collective bargaining agreements and prohibiting layoffs or terminations except for cause consistent with those agreements.
The available voting history shows strong and unanimous support at each recorded committee stage, with all votes passing 5-0, 4-0, 13-0, and 3-0 in conference committees. The bill’s findings and purpose language indicate a broad policy concern about utility reliability, financial stability, and wildfire-related infrastructure underinvestment, suggesting the measure was framed as a public protection and continuity-of-service bill. No committee transcripts were provided, but the unanimous votes indicate generally favorable sentiment and little formal opposition in the recorded process.
The main policy issue underlying the bill is whether the PUC should have direct receivership authority over a failing investor-owned electric utility, a significant expansion of state intervention powers in the electric sector. Potential points of contention include the impact on utility ownership and management, the possibility that receivership costs could ultimately be borne by ratepayers, and the balance between emergency service restoration and labor protections. The bill specifically addresses employee concerns by preserving collective bargaining agreements and limiting layoffs, which suggests labor protections were an important consideration in the final version.