HAWAIIAN ELECTRIC CO INC - Annual Report: 2008 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D. C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008

OR

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Indicate by check mark if Registrant Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if Registrant Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if Registrant Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if Registrant Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ¨

Table of Contents

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer  x    Accelerated filer  ¨    Non-accelerated filer  ¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)    Smaller reporting company  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer  ¨    Accelerated filer  ¨    Non-accelerated filer  x (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)    Smaller reporting company  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

HEI’s Annual Report to Shareholders (Selected Sections) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008—Parts I, II, III and IV

HECO’s Consolidated Selected Financial Data—Part II

HECO’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Part II

HECO’s Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Part II

HECO’s Consolidated 2008 Financial Statements—Parts I, II, III and IV

Selected sections of Proxy Statement of HEI for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed—Part III

This combined Form 10-K represents separate filings by Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. and Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. Information contained herein relating to any individual registrant is filed by each registrant on its own behalf. Neither registrant makes any representations as to the information relating to the other registrant.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Defined below are certain terms used in this report:

ii

Table of Contents

GLOSSARY OF TERMS (continued)

iii

Table of Contents

GLOSSARY OF TERMS (continued)

iv

Table of Contents

Forward-Looking Statements

This report and other presentations made by Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc. (HEI) and Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc. (HECO) and their subsidiaries contain “forward-looking statements,” which include statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, and usually include words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “predicts,” “estimates” or similar expressions. In addition, any statements concerning future financial performance, ongoing business strategies or prospects and possible future actions are also forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and projections about future events and are subject to risks, uncertainties and the accuracy of assumptions concerning HEI and its subsidiaries (collectively, the Company), the performance of the industries in which they do business and economic and market factors, among other things. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance.

Risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements and from historical results include, but are not limited to, the following:

v

Table of Contents

Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of the report, presentation or filing in which they are made. Except to the extent required by the federal securities laws, HEI, HECO, ASB and their subsidiaries undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

vi

Table of Contents

PART I

HEI

HEI was incorporated in 1981 under the laws of the State of Hawaii and is a holding company with its principal subsidiaries engaged in electric utility, banking and other businesses operating primarily in the State of Hawaii. HEI’s predecessor, HECO, was incorporated under the laws of the Kingdom of Hawaii (now the State of Hawaii) on October 13, 1891. As a result of a 1983 corporate reorganization, HECO became an HEI subsidiary and common shareholders of HECO became common shareholders of HEI.

HECO and its operating utility subsidiaries, Hawaii Electric Light Company, Inc. (HELCO) and Maui Electric Company, Limited (MECO), are regulated electric public utilities. HECO also owns all the common securities of HECO Capital Trust III (Delaware statutory trust), which was formed to effect the issuance of $50 million of cumulative quarterly income preferred securities in 2004, for the benefit of HECO, HELCO and MECO. In December 2002, HECO formed a subsidiary, Renewable Hawaii, Inc., to invest in renewable energy projects. In September 2007, HECO formed another subsidiary, Uluwehiokama Biofuels Corp. (UBC), to invest in a biodiesel refining plant to be built on the island of Maui.

Besides HECO and its subsidiaries, HEI also currently owns directly or indirectly the following subsidiaries: HEI Diversified, Inc. (HEIDI) (a holding company) and its subsidiary, ASB, and the subsidiaries of ASB; Pacific Energy Conservation Services, Inc. (PECS); HEI Properties, Inc. (HEIPI); HEI Investments, Inc.; Hawaiian Electric Industries Capital Trusts II and III (formed in 1997 to be available for trust securities financings); and The Old Oahu Tug Service, Inc. (TOOTS).

ASB, acquired in 1988, is one of the largest financial institutions in the State of Hawaii with assets of $5.4 billion as of December 31, 2008.

HEIPI, whose predecessor company was formed in February 1998, holds venture capital investments (in companies based in Hawaii and the U.S. mainland) with a carrying value of $1.5 million as of December 31, 2008.

HEI Investment Corp. (HEIIC), incorporated in May 1984 primarily to make passive investments in corporate securities and other long-term investments, changed its name to HEI Investments, Inc. (HEIII) in January 2000. HEIII is not an “investment company” regulated under the Investment Company Act of 1940. HEIII’s long-term investments previously consisted primarily of investments in leveraged leases, the last of which was sold in November 2007. HEIII has filed articles of dissolution and is winding up its affairs.

PECS was formed in 1994 and currently is a contract services company providing limited support services in Hawaii.

In November 1999, Hawaiian Tug & Barge Corp. (HTB) sold substantially all of its operating assets and the stock of YB for a nominal gain, changed its name to TOOTS and ceased maritime freight transportation operations. TOOTS currently administers certain employee and retiree-related benefits programs and monitors matters related to its former operations and the operations of its former subsidiary.

For additional information about the Company, see HEI’s MD&A, HEI’s “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” and HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements, which are incorporated by reference into Part II of this Form 10-K.

The Company’s website address is www.hei.com. The information on the Company’s website is not incorporated by reference in this annual report on Form 10-K unless specifically incorporated herein by reference. HEI and HECO currently make available free of charge through this website their annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports (since 1994) as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC.

Recent developments and updates (to information incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K from HEI’s and HECO’s MD&As and HEI’s and HECO’s Consolidated Financial Statements in HEI Exhibit 13 and HECO Exhibit 99 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 19, 2009) are included in the discussions below, including “HEI—Securities ratings,” “Electric utility—Regulation—Environmental regulation—Air quality controls” and “Bank—Regulation—Capital Purchase Program.”

1

Table of Contents

Regulation

HEI and HECO are each holding companies within the meaning of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005 and implementing regulations (2005 Act) and filed a required notification of that status on February 21, 2006. The 2005 Act requires holding companies and their subsidiaries to grant the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) access to books and records relating to FERC’s jurisdictional rates, and also imposes certain record retention, accounting and reporting requirements. However upon application, FERC granted HEI and HECO a waiver of these record retention, accounting and reporting requirements, effective May 2006.

HEI is subject to an agreement entered into with the PUC (the PUC Agreement), which agreement among other things, requires HEI to provide the PUC with periodic financial information and other reports concerning intercompany transactions and other matters. It also prohibits the electric utilities from loaning funds to HEI or its nonutility subsidiaries and from redeeming common stock of the electric utility subsidiaries without PUC approval. Further, the PUC could limit the ability of the electric utility subsidiaries to pay dividends on their common stock. See “Restrictions on dividends and other distributions” and “Electric utility—Regulation” below.

As a result of the acquisition of ASB, HEI and HEIDI are subject to OTS registration, supervision and reporting requirements as savings and loan holding companies. In the event the OTS has reasonable cause to believe that any activity of HEI or HEIDI constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of ASB, the OTS is authorized under the Home Owners’ Loan Act of 1933, as amended, to impose certain restrictions on HEI, HEIDI and/or any of their subsidiaries. Possible restrictions include limiting: (i) the payment of dividends by ASB; (ii) transactions between ASB, HEI or HEIDI, and their subsidiaries or affiliates; and (iii) the activities of ASB that might expose ASB to the liabilities of HEI and/or HEIDI and their other affiliates. See “Restrictions on dividends and other distributions” below.

OTS regulations generally prohibit savings and loan holding companies and their nonthrift subsidiaries from engaging in activities other than those which are specifically enumerated in the regulations. However, the OTS regulations provide for an exemption which is available to HEI and HEIDI if ASB satisfies the qualified thrift lender (QTL) test discussed under “Bank—Regulation—Qualified thrift lender test.” ASB met the QTL test at all times during 2008; however, the failure of ASB to satisfy the QTL test in the future could result in a need to divest ASB. If such divestiture were to be required, federal law limits the type of entities eligible to acquire ASB.

HEI and HEIDI are prohibited, directly or indirectly, or through one or more subsidiaries, from (i) acquiring control of, or acquiring by merger or purchase of assets of another insured institution or holding company without prior written OTS approval; (ii) acquiring more than 5% of the voting shares of another savings association or savings and loan holding company which is not a subsidiary; or (iii) acquiring or retaining control of a savings association not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

Restrictions on dividends and other distributions. HEI is a legal entity separate and distinct from its various subsidiaries. As a holding company with no significant operations of its own, the principal sources of its funds are dividends or other distributions from its operating subsidiaries, borrowings and sales of equity. The rights of HEI and, consequently, its creditors and shareholders, to participate in any distribution of the assets of any of its subsidiaries are subject to the prior claims of the creditors and preferred stockholders of such subsidiary, except to the extent that claims of HEI in its capacity as a creditor are recognized as primary.

The abilities of certain of HEI’s subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions to HEI are subject to contractual and regulatory restrictions. Under the PUC Agreement, in the event that the consolidated common stock equity of the electric utility subsidiaries falls below 35% of total electric utility capitalization (including the current maturities of long-term debt, but excluding short-term borrowings), the electric utility subsidiaries would, absent PUC approval, be restricted in their payment of cash dividends to 80% of the earnings available for the payment of dividends in the current fiscal year and preceding five years, less the amount of dividends paid during that period. The PUC Agreement also provides that the foregoing dividend restriction shall not be construed as relinquishing any right the PUC may have to review the dividend policies of the electric utility subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2008, the consolidated common stock equity of HEI’s electric utility subsidiaries was 56% of their total capitalization (as calculated for purposes of the PUC Agreement). As of December 31, 2008, HECO and its subsidiaries had common stock equity of $1.2 billion of which approximately $506 million was not available for transfer to HEI without regulatory approval.

2

Table of Contents

The ability of ASB to make capital distributions to HEI and other affiliates is restricted under federal law. Subject to a limited exception for stock redemptions that do not result in any decrease in ASB’s capital and would improve ASB’s financial condition, ASB is prohibited from declaring any dividends, making any other capital distributions, or paying a management fee to a controlling person if, following the distribution or payment, ASB would be deemed to be undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized or critically undercapitalized. See “Bank—Regulation—Prompt corrective action.” All capital distributions are subject to a prior indication of no objection by the OTS. Also see Note 12 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

HEI and its subsidiaries are also subject to debt covenants, preferred stock resolutions and the terms of guarantees that could limit their respective abilities to pay dividends. The Company does not expect that the regulatory and contractual restrictions applicable to HEI and/or its subsidiaries will significantly affect the operations of HEI or its ability to pay dividends on its common stock.

Environmental regulation. HEI and its subsidiaries are subject to federal and state statutes and governmental regulations pertaining to water quality, air quality and other environmental factors. See the “Environmental regulation” discussions in the “Electric utility” and “Bank” sections below.

Under the terms of the agreement for the sale of YB, HEI and TOOTS had certain environmental obligations arising from conditions existing prior to the sale of YB, including potential obligations regarding petroleum releases in the Honolulu Harbor area. In 2003, TOOTS paid $250,000 to fund response activities related to the Honolulu Harbor area as a one-time cash-out payment in lieu of continuing with further response activities.

Securities ratings

See the Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s Investors Service’s (Moody’s) ratings of HEI’s and HECO’s securities and discussion under “Liquidity and capital resources” (both “HEI Consolidated” and “Electric utility”) in HEI’s MD&A. These ratings reflect only the view of the applicable rating agency at the time the ratings are issued, from whom an explanation of the significance of such ratings may be obtained. There is no assurance that any such credit rating will remain in effect for any given period of time or that such rating will not be lowered, suspended or withdrawn entirely by the applicable rating agency if, in such rating agency’s judgment, circumstances so warrant. Any such lowering, suspension or withdrawal of any rating may have an adverse effect on the market price or marketability of HEI’s and/or HECO’s securities, which could increase the cost of capital of HEI and HECO. Neither HEI nor HECO management can predict future rating agency actions or their effects on the future cost of capital of HEI or HECO.

Revenue bonds are issued by the Department of Budget and Finance of the State of Hawaii for the benefit of HECO and its subsidiaries, but the source of their repayment are the unsecured obligations of HECO and its subsidiaries under loan agreements and notes issued to the Department, including HECO’s guarantees of its subsidiaries’ obligations. The payment of principal and interest due on all revenue bonds currently outstanding are insured either by Ambac Assurance Corporation, Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, MBIA Insurance Corporation or Syncora Guarantee Inc. (formerly XL Capital Assurance Inc.). See the discussion of the downgrades of the ratings of these insurers under “Electric Utility—Liquidity and capital resources” in HEI’s MD&A. Following MBIA Insurance Corporation’s announced restructuring, the revenue bonds issued for HECO and its subsidiaries and insured by MBIA Insurance Corporation have been reinsured by MBIA Insurance Corp. of Illinois (MBIA Illinois), whose financial strength rating by S&P is “AA-” compared to a rating of “BBB+” for MBIA Insurance Corporation. Moody’s has announced it will assign ratings to the reinsured municipal securities based on the higher of its insurance financial strength rating of MBIA Illinois or the published underlying rating. The insurance financial strength rating of MBIA Illinois by Moody’s is “Baa1,” which is the same as Moody’s issuer rating for HECO.

Employees

As of December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004 the Company had full-time employees as follows:

3

Table of Contents

The employees of HEI and its direct and indirect subsidiaries, other than the electric utilities, are not covered by any collective bargaining agreement. Of the 2,203 full time employees of HECO and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008, 57% were covered by collective bargaining agreements. See the discussion of “Collective bargaining agreements” in Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

Properties

HEI leases office space from nonaffiliated lessors in downtown Honolulu under leases that expire in May 2011. HEI also subleases office space in a downtown Honolulu building leased by HECO under a lease that expires in November 2021, with an option to extend to November 2024.

Electric utility

HECO and subsidiaries and service areas

HECO, HELCO and MECO are regulated operating electric public utilities engaged in the production, purchase, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity on the islands of Oahu; Hawaii; and Maui, Lanai and Molokai, respectively. HECO acquired MECO in 1968 and HELCO in 1970. In 2008, the electric utilities’ revenues and net income amounted to approximately 89% and 102%, respectively, of HEI’s consolidated revenues and net income, compared to approximately 83% and 62% in 2007 and approximately 84% and 69% in 2006, respectively.

The islands of Oahu, Maui, Lanai, Molokai and Hawaii have a combined population estimated at 1.2 million, or approximately 95% of the Hawaii population, and comprise a service area of 5,766 square miles. The principal communities served include Honolulu (on Oahu), Wailuku and Kahului (on Maui) and Hilo and Kona (on Hawaii). The service areas also include numerous suburban communities, resorts, U.S. Armed Forces installations and agricultural operations. The state has granted HECO, MECO and HELCO nonexclusive franchises, which authorize the utilities to construct, operate and maintain facilities over and under public streets and sidewalks. Each of these franchises will continue in effect for an indefinite period of time until forfeited, altered, amended or repealed.

For additional information about HECO, see HECO’s MD&A, HECO’s “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” and HECO’s Consolidated Financial Statements, which are incorporated by reference into Part II of this Form 10-K.

Sales of electricity

The following table sets forth the number of electric customer accounts as of December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 and electric sales revenues by company for each of the years then ended:

Seasonality. Kilowatthour (KWH) sales of HECO and its subsidiaries follow a seasonal pattern, but they do not experience the extreme seasonal variation due to extreme weather variations like some electric utilities on the U.S. mainland. KWH sales in Hawaii tend to increase in the warmer summer months, probably as a result of increased demand for air conditioning.

Significant customers. HECO and its subsidiaries derived approximately 10% in 2008, 9% in 2007 and 10% in 2006 of their operating revenues from the sale of electricity to various federal government agencies.

Under a new Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA) with the federal Department of Defense (DOD) entered into in 2007, which expires in 2012, and earlier BOAs and other agreements, HECO has completed energy conservation and other projects for federal agencies over the years, although the number of projects completed has decreased through the years.

Executive Order 13123, adopted in 1994, mandated that each federal agency develop and implement a program to reduce energy consumption by 35% by the year 2010 to the extent that these measures are cost

4

Table of Contents

effective. The 35% reduction was measured relative to the agency’s 1985 energy use. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 further mandated that federal buildings reduce energy consumption by up to 20% by fiscal year 2015 relative to base fiscal year 2003 consumption to the extent that these measures are cost effective. The Act also establishes energy conservation goals at the state level for federally funded programs; stricter conservation measures for a variety of large energy consuming products; tax credits for energy efficient homes, solar energy, fuel cells and microturbine power plants; and includes other energy-related provisions. HECO continues to work with various federal agencies to implement DSM programs that will help them achieve their energy reduction objectives. Neither HEI nor HECO management can predict with certainty the impact of federal mandates on HEI’s or HECO’s future financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Selected consolidated electric utility operating statistics

5

Table of Contents

Generation statistics

The following table contains certain generation statistics as of, and for the year ended, December 31, 2008. The net generating and firm purchased capability available for operation at any given time may be more or less than shown because of capability restrictions or temporary outages for inspection, maintenance, repairs or unforeseen circumstances.

Generating reliability and reserve margin

HECO serves the island of Oahu and HELCO serves the island of Hawaii. MECO has three separate electrical systems—one each on the islands of Maui, Molokai and Lanai. HECO, HELCO and MECO have isolated electrical systems that are not interconnected to each other or to any other electrical grid and, thus, each maintains a higher level of reserve generation than is typically carried by interconnected mainland U.S. utilities, which are able to share reserve capacity. These higher levels of reserve margins are required to meet peak electric demands, to provide for scheduled maintenance of generating units (including the units operated by IPPs relied upon for firm capacity) and to allow for the forced outage of the largest generating unit in the system. Although the planning for, and installation of, adequate levels of reserve generation have contributed to the achievement of generally high levels of system reliability, HECO is below preferred levels of total firm generating capacity and has made several public calls for energy conservation when reserves were especially narrow. See “Integrated resource planning, requirements for additional generating capacity and adequacy of supply” in HEI’s MD&A under “Electric utility.”

Integrated resource planning and clean energy scenario planning

The PUC issued an order in 1992 requiring the energy utilities in Hawaii to develop integrated resource plans (IRPs), which may be approved, rejected or modified by the PUC. The goal of integrated resource planning is the identification of demand- and supply-side resources and the integration of these resources for meeting near- and long-term consumer energy needs in an efficient and reliable manner at the lowest reasonable cost. In November 2008, the parties to the Energy Agreement filed requests with the PUC to move from the IRP process to a new Clean Energy Scenario Planning (CESP) process intended to be used to determine future investments in transmission, distribution and generation that will be necessary to facilitate high levels of renewable energy production. In November and December 2008, the PUC closed the utilities’ IRP dockets and directed them to suspend all activities pursuant to the IRP framework to allow for resources to be diverted to the development of CESP frameworks. See “Integrated resource planning, requirements for additional generating capacity and adequacy of supply” in HEI’s MD&A under “Electric utility.”

6

Table of Contents

Nonutility generation

The Company has supported state and federal energy policies which encourage the development of renewable energy sources that reduce the use of fuel oil. The Company’s renewable energy sources range from wind, geothermal and hydroelectric power, to energy produced by the burning of bagasse (sugarcane waste) and municipal waste.

HECO PPAs. HECO currently has three major PPAs. In March 1988, HECO entered into a PPA with AES Barbers Point, Inc. (now known as AES Hawaii, Inc. (AES Hawaii)), a Hawaii-based, indirect subsidiary of The AES Corporation. The agreement with AES Hawaii, as amended, provides that, for a period of 30 years beginning September 1992, HECO will purchase 180 megawatts (MW) of firm capacity. The AES Hawaii 180 MW coal-fired cogeneration plant utilizes a “clean coal” technology and is designed to sell sufficient steam to be a “Qualifying Facility” (QF) under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). On December 28, 2007, AES Hawaii filed an application with the FERC for a limited waiver of FERC’s operating standard for a qualifying cogeneration facility for 2007, because it determined that it will be unable to meet the QF operating standard for 2007. Under the PPA between HECO and AES Hawaii, any change in QF status does not affect either HECO’s or AES Hawaii’s obligations. In 2003, HECO consented to AES Hawaii’s proposed refinancing and received consideration for its consent, primarily in the form of a PPA amendment that reduced the cost of firm capacity retroactive to June 1, 2003, which benefit is being passed on to ratepayers through a reduction in rates. AES Hawaii also granted HECO an option, subject to certain conditions, to acquire an interest in portions of the AES Hawaii facility site that are not needed for the existing plant operations, and which potentially could be used for the development of another coal-fired facility.

In October 1988, HECO entered into an agreement with Kalaeloa Partners, L.P. (Kalaeloa), a limited partnership, which, through affiliates, contracted to design, build, operate and maintain the facility. The agreement with Kalaeloa, as amended, provided that HECO would purchase 180 MW of firm capacity for a period of 25 years beginning in May 1991. The Kalaeloa facility is a combined-cycle operation, consisting of two oil-fired combustion turbines burning low sulfur fuel oil (LSFO) and a steam turbine that utilizes waste heat from the combustion turbines, and is designed to sell sufficient steam to be a QF. After two additional amendments, effective in 2005, Kalaeloa currently supplies HECO with 208 MW of firm capacity.

HECO also entered into a PPA in March 1986 and a firm capacity amendment in April 1991 with the City and County of Honolulu with respect to a refuse-fired plant (HPower). The HPower facility currently supplies HECO with 46 MW of firm capacity. Under the amendment, HECO will purchase firm capacity until mid-2015.

HECO purchases energy on an as-available basis from two nonutility generators, which are qualifying cogeneration facilities at two oil refineries, Chevron USA, Inc. (10 MW) and Tesoro Hawaii Corporation (19 MW). Both contracts continue unless either party wants to terminate with 90 days notice. In addition, HECO has a contract to purchase as-available energy from Hoku Solar’s photovoltaic facility (up to 300 kWdc) to be located on the roof of HECO’s Archer Substation and expects to purchase energy by June 2009.

The PUC has allowed rate recovery for the purchased energy costs related to HECO’s as-available energy PPAs and for the firm capacity and purchased energy costs related to HECO’s three major PPAs that provide a total of 434 MW of firm capacity, representing 26% of HECO’s total net generating and firm purchased capacity on Oahu as of December 31, 2008.

7

Table of Contents

HELCO and MECO PPAs. As of December 31, 2008, HELCO has PPAs for 90 MW and MECO has PPAs for 16 MW (includes 4 MW of system protection) of firm capacity, which PPAs have been approved by the PUC.

HELCO has a 35-year PPA with Puna Geothermal Venture (PGV) for 30 MW of firm capacity from its geothermal steam facility expiring on December 31, 2027.

In October 1997, HELCO entered into an agreement with Encogen, which has been succeeded by Hamakua Energy Partners, L. P. (HEP). The agreement provides that HELCO will purchase up to 60 MW (net) of firm capacity for a period of 30 years, expiring on December 31, 2030. The dual-train combined-cycle DTCC facility, which primarily burns naphtha, consists of two oil-fired combustion turbines and a steam turbine that utilizes waste heat from the combustion turbines.

MECO has a PPA with Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Company (HC&S) for 16 MW of firm capacity. The HC&S generating units primarily burn bagasse (sugar cane waste) along with secondary fuels of diesel oil or coal through December 31, 2014, and from year to year thereafter, subject to termination on or after December 31, 2014 on not less than two years prior written notice by either party.

HELCO and MECO purchase energy on an as-available basis from a number of nonutility generators, including hydroelectric facilities, windfarms and photovoltaic systems. The PUC has allowed rate recovery for the firm capacity and purchased energy costs for HELCO’s and MECO’s approved firm capacity and as-available energy PPAs.

Fuel oil usage and supply

The rate schedules of the Company’s electric utility subsidiaries include ECACs under which electric rates (and consequently the revenues of the electric utility subsidiaries generally) are adjusted for changes in the weighted-average price paid for fuel oil and certain components of purchased power, and the relative amounts of company-generated power and purchased power. See discussion of rates and issues relating to the ECAC below under “Rates,” and “Electric utility—Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition—Regulation of electric utility rates” and “Electric utility–Material estimates and critical accounting policies–Revenues” in HEI’s MD&A.

HECO’s steam power plants burn LSFO. HECO’s combustion turbine peaking units burn No. 2 diesel fuel (diesel). MECO’s and HELCO’s steam power plants burn medium sulfur fuel oil (MSFO) and their combustion turbine and diesel engine generating units burn diesel.

In March and April of 2004, HECO executed 10-year extensions of the existing contracts, commencing January 1, 2005, for the purchase of LSFO with Chevron Products Company (Chevron) and Tesoro Hawaii Corporation (Tesoro) with no material changes in the primary commercial arrangements including volumes and pricing formulas. HECO pays market-related prices for fuel supplies purchased under these agreements. In December 2004, HECO executed long-term contracts with Chevron for the continued use of certain Chevron fuel distribution facilities and for the operation and maintenance of certain HECO fuel distribution facilities.

In March and April of 2004, HECO, HELCO and MECO executed 10-year extensions of existing contracts with Chevron and Tesoro, commencing January 1, 2005, for the purchase of diesel and MSFO, including the use of certain petroleum storage and distribution facilities, with no material changes in the primary commercial arrangements including volumes and pricing formulas. The electric utilities pay market-related prices for diesel and MSFO supplied under these agreements.

The diesel supplies acquired by the Lanai Division of MECO are purchased under the provisions of a contract with a local petroleum wholesaler, Lanai Oil Co., Inc., which provides for automatic one-year term extensions unless terminated by either party with 180 days notice.

See the fuel oil commitments information set forth in the “Fuel contracts” section in Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

8

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the average cost of fuel oil used by HECO, HELCO and MECO to generate electricity in the years 2008, 2007 and 2006:

The average per-unit cost of fuel oil consumed to generate electricity for HECO, HELCO and MECO reflects a different volume mix of fuel types and grades. In 2008, 99% of HECO’s generation fuel consumption consisted of LSFO. The balance of HECO’s fuel consumption was diesel. Diesel made up approximately 25% of HELCO’s and 76% of MECO’s fuel consumption. MSFO made up the remainder of the fuel consumption of HELCO and MECO. During 2008, the prices of LSFO, MSFO and diesel rose with crude oil prices, peaked in the August-September period, and gradually fell to end the year below the January 2008 level. In 2007, over 98% of HECO’s generation fuel consumption consisted of LSFO. The balance of HECO’s fuel consumption was diesel. Diesel made up approximately 26% of HELCO’s and 76% of MECO’s fuel consumption. MSFO made up the remainder of the fuel consumption of HELCO and MECO. In 2006, over 99% of HECO’s generation fuel consumption consisted of LSFO. The balance of HECO’s fuel consumption was diesel. Diesel made up approximately 30% of HELCO’s and 75% of MECO’s fuel consumption. MSFO made up the remainder of the fuel consumption of HELCO and MECO. In general, MSFO is the least costly fuel, diesel is the most expensive fuel and the price of LSFO falls between the two on a per-barrel basis. During 2006, the prices of LSFO, MSFO and diesel rose with crude oil prices during the first half of the year, peaked in the May-June period and gradually fell in the year’s second half to end relatively close to the January 2006 level.

In December 2000, HELCO and MECO executed contracts of private carriage with Hawaiian Interisland Towing, Inc. (HITI) for the shipment of MSFO and diesel supplies from their fuel suppliers’ facilities on Oahu to storage locations on the islands of Hawaii and Maui, respectively, commencing January 1, 2002. The contracts were extended for a second 5-year term commencing January 1, 2007 and contain options for two additional 5-year extensions. On August 14, 2007 the equity interest of Smith Maritime, Ltd., the parent company of HITI, was acquired by a subsidiary of K-Sea Transportation Partners L.P., which provides refined petroleum products marine transportation, distribution and logistics services in the U.S. domestic marine transportation industry.

HITI never takes title to the fuel oil or diesel fuel, but does have custody and control while the fuel is in transit from Oahu. If there were an oil spill in transit, HITI is generally contractually obligated to indemnify HELCO and/or MECO for resulting clean-up costs, fines and damages. HITI has liability insurance coverage for oil spill related damage of $1 billion. State law provides a cap of $700 million on liability for releases of heavy fuel oil transported interisland by tank barge. In the event of a release, HELCO and/or MECO may be responsible for any clean-up, damages, and/or fines that HITI or its insurance carrier does not cover.

The prices that HECO, HELCO and MECO pay for purchased energy from nonutility generators are generally linked to the price of oil. The AES Hawaii energy prices vary primarily with an inflation indicator. The energy prices for Kalaeloa, which purchases LSFO from Tesoro, vary primarily with world LSFO prices. The HPower, HC&S and PGV energy prices are based on the electric utilities’ respective PUC-filed short-run avoided energy cost rates (which vary with their respective composite fuel costs), subject to minimum floor rates specified in their approved PPAs. HEP energy prices vary primarily with HELCO’s diesel costs.

The Company estimates that 76% of the net energy generated and purchased by HECO and its subsidiaries in 2009 will be generated from the burning of oil. HECO generally maintains an average system fuel inventory level equivalent to 35 days of forward consumption. HELCO and MECO generally maintain an average system fuel inventory level equivalent to approximately one month’s supply of both MSFO and diesel. The PPAs with AES Hawaii and HEP require that they maintain certain minimum fuel inventory levels.

Rates

HECO, HELCO and MECO are subject to the regulatory jurisdiction of the PUC with respect to rates, issuance of securities, accounting and certain other matters. See “Regulation” below.

9

Table of Contents

All rate schedules of HECO and its subsidiaries contain ECACs as described previously. Under current law and practices, specific and separate PUC approval is not required for each rate change pursuant to automatic rate adjustment clauses previously approved by the PUC. All other rate increases require the prior approval of the PUC after public and contested case hearings. PURPA requires the PUC to periodically review the ECACs of electric and gas utilities in the state, and such clauses, as well as the rates charged by the utilities generally, are subject to change. Further, Act 162 may impact the ECACs. See Act 162 discussion in “Energy cost adjustment clauses” in Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

See “Electric utility–Results of operations–Most recent rate requests,” “Electric utility–Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition–Regulation of electric utility rates” and “Electric utility–Material estimates and critical accounting policies–Revenues” in HEI’s MD&A and “Energy cost adjustment clauses” in Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

Public Utilities Commission and Division of Consumer Advocacy of the State of Hawaii

Serving as Chairman of the PUC is Carlito P. Caliboso (whose term expires in June 2010), an attorney previously in private practice. Also serving as commissioners are: (1) John E. Cole (whose term expires in June 2012), who previously served as the Executive Director of the Division of Consumer Advocacy and, prior to holding that position, served as a member of the Governor of the State of Hawaii’s Policy Team, and (2) Leslie Kondo (whose term expires in June 2014), an attorney previously in private practice and who previously served as the Director of the State of Hawaii Office of Information Practices.

Serving as Executive Director of the Division of Consumer Advocacy is Catherine P. Awakuni, an attorney formerly with the PUC staff.

Competition

See “Electric utility–Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition–Competition” in HEI’s MD&A.

Electric and magnetic fields

Research on potential adverse health effects from exposure to electric and magnetic fields (EMF) continues. To date, no definite relationship between EMF and health risks has been clearly demonstrated. In 1996, the National Academy of Sciences examined more than 500 studies and stated that “the current body of evidence does not show that exposure to EMFs presents a human-health hazard.” An extensive study released in 1997 by the National Cancer Institute and the Children’s Cancer Group found no evidence of increased risk for childhood leukemia from EMF. In 1999, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Director’s Report concluded that while EMF could not be found to be “entirely safe,” the evidence of a health risk was “weak” and did not warrant “aggressive” regulatory actions. In 2002, the NIEHS further stated that for “most health outcomes,” there is “no evidence that EMF exposures have adverse effects,” and also that there “is some evidence from epidemiology studies that exposure to power-frequency EMF is associated with an increased risk for childhood leukemia.” In the same brochure, the NIEHS further concluded that this association is “difficult to interpret in the absence of reproducible laboratory evidence or a scientific explanation that links magnetic fields with childhood leukaemia.” In 2007, the World Health Organization issued a fact sheet stating that “the evidence related to childhood leukemia is not strong enough to be considered causal.” Regarding studies of a number of other health effects including childhood cancers, cancers in adults, developmental disorders and neurobehavioral effects, among others, the World Health Organization’s fact sheet concluded “that scientific evidence supporting an association between ELF (extremely low frequency) magnetic field exposure and all of these health effects is much weaker than for childhood leukemia.”

While EMF has not been established as a cause of any health condition by any national or international agency, EMF remains the subject of ongoing studies and evaluations. EMF has been classified as a possible human carcinogen by more than one public health organization. In 2004, the U.K. National Radiological Protection Board published a report that supported a precautionary approach and recommended adoption of guidelines for limiting exposure to EMF. In the U.S., there are no federal standards limiting occupational or residential exposure to 60-Hz EMF.

10

Table of Contents

The implications of the foregoing reports have not yet been determined. However, HECO and its subsidiaries are monitoring the research and continue to participate in utility industry funded studies on EMF and, where technically feasible and economically reasonable, continue to pursue a policy of prudent avoidance, in the design and installation of new transmission and distribution facilities. Management cannot predict the impact, if any, the EMF issue may have on HECO, HELCO and MECO in the future.

Global warming

The Company shares the concerns of many regarding the potential effects of global warming and the human contributions to the phenomenon, including burning of fossil fuels for electricity production, transportation, manufacturing, agricultural activities and deforestation. Recognizing that effectively addressing global warming requires commitment by the private sector, all levels of government, and the public, the Company is committed to taking direct action to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from its operations.

In July 2007, Act 234 of the 2007 Hawaii State Legislature became law and requires a statewide reduction of GHG emissions by January 1, 2020 to levels at or below the statewide GHG emission levels in 1990. It also establishes a task force (including HECO and its subsidiaries), which is charged with preparing a work plan and regulatory approach for “implementing the maximum practically and technically feasible and cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from sources or categories of sources of greenhouse gases” to achieve 1990 statewide GHG emission levels. HECO and its subsidiaries have been tracking carbon dioxide emissions, the primary greenhouse gas emitted by fossil fuel combustion for electricity production, since 1996 and reporting them to the federal Department of Energy. HECO and its subsidiaries have taken and continue to identify opportunities to take direct action to reduce such emissions from their operations, including, but not limited to, creating a DSM program that fosters energy efficiency, using renewable resources for energy production and purchasing power from IPPs generated by renewable resources, committing to burn renewable biodiesel in HECO’s next unit, and using biodiesel for startup and shutdown of selected MECO generation units. HECO seeks to identify and support viable technology for electricity production that will increase energy efficiency and reduce or eliminate GHG emissions. Implementation of actions included in the Energy Agreement under the Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative can further help achieve reduction or elimination of GHG emissions.

Legislation

See “Electric utility–Results of operations–Legislation and regulation” in HEI’s MD&A.

Commitments and contingencies

See “HEI Consolidated–Selected contractual obligations and commitments” and “Electric utility–Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition–Other regulatory and permitting contingencies” in HEI’s MD&A, Item 1A. Risk Factors, and Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of important commitments and contingencies, including (but not limited to) fuel contracts, PPAs, interim increases, HCEI, ECACs, major projects and the Honolulu Harbor environmental investigation and response.

Regulation

The PUC regulates the rates, issuance of securities, accounting and certain other aspects of the operations of HECO and its electric utility subsidiaries. See the previous discussion under “Rates” and the discussions under “Electric utility–Results of operations–Most recent rate requests” and “Electric utility–Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition–Regulation of electric utility rates” in HEI’s MD&A.

Any adverse decision or policy made or adopted by the PUC, or any prolonged delay in rendering a decision, could have a material adverse effect on consolidated HECO’s and the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

The PUC has ordered the electric utility subsidiaries to develop plans for the integration of demand- and supply-side resources available to meet consumer energy needs efficiently, reliably and at the lowest reasonable cost. See “Integrated resource planning, requirements for additional generating capacity and adequacy of supply” in HEI’s MD&A under “Electric utility.”

In 1996, the PUC issued an order instituting a proceeding to identify and examine the issues surrounding electric competition and to determine the impact of competition on the electric utility infrastructure in Hawaii. In October 2003, the PUC closed the competition proceeding and opened investigative proceedings on two specific issues (competitive bidding and DG) to move toward a more competitive electric industry environment under cost-

11

Table of Contents

based regulation. For a discussion of the decision and orders issued by the PUC in the competitive bidding and DG proceedings, see “Electric utility–Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition–Competition” in HEI’s MD&A.

Certain transactions between HEI’s electric public utility subsidiaries (HECO, HELCO and MECO) and HEI and affiliated interests are subject to regulation by the PUC. All contracts (including summaries of unwritten agreements) made on or after July 1, 1988 of $300,000 or more in a calendar year for management, supervisory, construction, engineering, accounting, legal, financial and similar services and for the sale, lease or transfer of property between a public utility and affiliated interests must be filed with the PUC to be effective, and the PUC may issue cease and desist orders if such contracts are not filed. All such affiliated contracts for capital expenditures (except for real property) must be accompanied by comparative price quotations from two nonaffiliates, unless the quotations cannot be obtained without substantial expense. Moreover, all transfers of $300,000 or more of real property between a public utility and affiliated interests require the prior approval of the PUC and proof that the transfer is in the best interest of the public utility and its customers. If the PUC, in its discretion, determines that an affiliated contract is unreasonable or otherwise contrary to the public interest, the utility must either revise the contract or risk disallowance of the payments for ratemaking purposes. In ratemaking proceedings, a utility must also prove the reasonableness of payments made to affiliated interests under any affiliated contract of $300,000 or more by clear and convincing evidence. An “affiliated interest” is defined by statute and includes officers and directors of a public utility, every person owning or holding, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting securities of a public utility, and corporations which have in common with a public utility more than one-third of the directors of that public utility.

In January 1993, to address community concerns expressed at the time, HECO proposed that the PUC initiate a review of the relationship between HEI and HECO and the effects of that relationship on the operations of HECO. The PUC opened a docket and initiated such a review and in May 1994, the PUC selected a consultant. The consultant’s 1995 report concluded that “on balance, diversification has not hurt electric ratepayers.” Other major findings were that (1) no utility assets have been used to fund HEI’s nonutility investments or operations, (2) management processes within the electric utilities operate without interference from HEI and (3) HECO’s access to capital did not suffer as a result of HEI’s involvement in nonutility activities and that diversification did not permanently raise or lower the cost of capital incorporated into the rates paid by HECO’s utility customers. In December 1996, the PUC issued an order that adopted the report in its entirety, ordered HECO to continue to provide the PUC with status reports on its compliance with the PUC agreement (pursuant to which HEI became the holding company of HECO) and closed the investigation and proceeding. In the order, the PUC also stated that it adopted the recommendation of the DOD that HECO, HELCO and MECO present a comprehensive analysis of the impact that the holding company structure and investments in nonutility subsidiaries have on a case-by-case basis on the cost of capital to each utility in future rate cases and remove such effects from the cost of capital. The PUC has accepted, in subsequent rate cases, the presentations made by HECO, HELCO and MECO that there was no such impact in those cases.

HECO and its electric utility subsidiaries are not subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under the Federal Power Act, except under Sections 210 through 212 (added by Title II of PURPA and amended by the Energy Policy Act of 1992), which permit the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to order electric utilities to interconnect with qualifying cogenerators and small power producers, and to wheel power to other electric utilities. Title I of PURPA, which relates to retail regulatory policies for electric utilities, and Title VII of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, which addresses transmission access, also apply to HECO and its electric utility subsidiaries. HECO and its electric utility subsidiaries are also required to file various financial and operational reports with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The Company cannot predict the extent to which cogeneration or transmission access will reduce its electrical loads, reduce its current and future generating and transmission capability requirements or affect its financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Because they are located in the State of Hawaii, HECO and its subsidiaries are exempt by statute from limitations set forth in the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Act of 1978 on the use of petroleum as a primary energy source.

See also “HEI—Regulation” above.

12

Table of Contents

Environmental regulation. HECO, HELCO and MECO, like other utilities, are subject to periodic inspections by federal, state, and in some cases, local environmental regulatory agencies, including, but not limited to, agencies responsible for regulation of water quality, air quality, hazardous and other waste, and hazardous materials. These inspections may result in the identification of items needing corrective or other action. When the corrective or other necessary action is taken, no further regulatory action is expected. Except as otherwise disclosed in this report (see “Certain factors that may affect future results and financial condition—Environmental matters” for HEI Consolidated, the Electric utility and the Bank sections in HEI’s MD&A and Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements, which are incorporated herein by reference), the Company believes that each subsidiary has appropriately responded to environmental conditions requiring action and, as a result of such actions, such environmental conditions will not have a material adverse effect on the Company or HECO.

Water quality controls. The generating stations, substations and other utility subsidiaries facilities operate under federal and state water quality regulations and permits, including but not limited to the Clean Water Act National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (governing point source discharges, including wastewater and storm water discharges), Underground Injection Control (regulating disposal of wastewater into the subsurface), the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) program and other regulations associated with discharges of oil and other substances to surface water.

For a discussion of section 316(b) of the federal Clean Water Act, related U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and their possible application to the electric utilities, see “Environmental regulation” in Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Federal Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) governs actual or threatened oil releases in navigable U.S. waters (inland waters and up to three miles offshore) and waters of the U.S. exclusive economic zone (up to 200 miles to sea from the shoreline). In the event of an oil release into navigable U.S. waters, OPA establishes strict and joint and several liability for responsible parties for 1) oil removal costs incurred by the federal government or the state, and 2) damages to natural resources and real or personal property. Responsible parties include vessel owners and operators of on-shore facilities. OPA imposes fines and jail terms ranging in severity depending on how the release was caused. OPA also requires that responsible parties submit certificates of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the responsible party’s maximum limited liability.

During 2008 and up through February 10, 2009, HECO, HELCO and MECO did not experience any significant petroleum releases. Except as otherwise disclosed herein, the Company believes that each subsidiary’s costs of responding to petroleum releases to date will not have a material adverse effect on the respective subsidiary or the Company.

EPA regulations under OPA also require certain facilities that store petroleum to prepare and implement SPCC Plans in order to prevent releases of petroleum to navigable waters of the U.S. HECO, HELCO and MECO facilities subject to the SPCC program are in compliance with these requirements. In July 2002, the EPA amended the SPCC regulations to include facilities, such as substations, that use (as opposed to store) petroleum products. HECO, HELCO and MECO have determined that the amended SPCC program applies to a number of their substations. Since 2002, the EPA issued several extensions of the compliance dates for the amended regulations. In 2008, the EPA issued an extension requiring existing facilities that started operation prior to August 16, 2002 must maintain or amend, and implement SPCC plans by July 1, 2009. In mid-January 2009, the EPA again extended the compliance date until November 20, 2009. Regulated facilities that started operations after August 16, 2002 were also required to prepare and implement an SPCC Plan by November 20, 2009. On January 20, 2009, however, President Obama’s Chief of Staff issued a memorandum entitled “Regulatory Review,” which delayed the effective dates of then pending regulations for 60 days. The EPA then withdrew the regulation extending SPCC compliance deadlines. Accordingly, it appears that the compliance deadline remains July 1, 2009, unless it is again extended. HECO, HELCO and MECO are developing and implementing SPCC plans for all facilities that are subject to the amended SPCC requirements.

Air quality controls. The generating stations of the utility subsidiaries operate under air pollution control permits issued by the Department of Health of the State of Hawaii (DOH) and, in a limited number of cases, by the EPA. The entire electric utility industry has been affected by the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA), changes to the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone, and adoption of a NAAQS for fine particulate matter.

13

Table of Contents

Effective March 29, 2005, the EPA delisted coal-fired and oil-fired utility boilers (electric generating units or EGUs) from regulation under Section 112 of the CAA (the Delisting Rule). On the same date, the EPA issued a rule designed to control mercury emissions from coal-fired EGUs. The preamble to the mercury control rule stated that the EPA would not require control of nickel emissions from oil-fired EGUs. Subsequently, on October 21, 2005, the EPA issued a notice that it would reconsider the Delisting Rule. On May 31, 2006, the EPA confirmed the Delisting Rule, thereby confirming that the EPA was not requiring control of nickel emissions from the electric utilities’ oil-fired EGUs.

In February 2008, the federal Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated the EPA’s Delisting Rule, which had removed coal- and oil-fired EGUs from the list of sources requiring control under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. The EPA’s request for a rehearing was denied.

In October 2008, the EPA petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacating the EPA’s Delisting Rule. Also, an industry group sought review of the Delisting Rule decision. On February 6, 2009, the EPA filed a motion with the Supreme Court to dismiss its petition for review. In the motion, the EPA indicated that it would begin rulemaking to establish Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards for EGUs. On February 23, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the petitions filed by the EPA and industry group requesting review of the decision vacating the EPA’s Delisting Rule.

The EPA is required to develop MACT standards for oil-fired EGU hazardous air pollutant emissions, including nickel compounds. Depending on the MACT standards developed, costs to comply with the standards could be significant. The Company is currently evaluating its options regarding potential MACT standards for applicable HECO steam units, but will need to review the standards adopted by the EPA before determining its ultimate response and course of action.

For a discussion of the July 1999 Regional Haze Rule amendments, see “Environmental regulation” in Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

CAA operating permits (Title V permits) have been issued for all affected generating units.

Hazardous waste and toxic substances controls. The operations of the electric utility and former freight transportation subsidiaries of HEI are subject to EPA regulations that implement provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) and the Toxic Substances Control Act. In 2001, the DOH obtained primacy to operate state-authorized RCRA (hazardous waste) programs.

Both federal and state RCRA provisions identify certain wastes as hazardous and set forth measures that must be taken in the handling, storage, treatment, disposal and transportation of these wastes. Some wastes generated at steam electric generating stations possess characteristics that subject them to RCRA regulations. Since October 1986, all HECO generating stations have operated RCRA-exempt wastewater treatment units to treat potentially regulated wastes from occasional boiler waterside and fireside cleaning operations. Steam generating stations at MECO and HELCO also operate similar RCRA-exempt wastewater management systems.

The EPA issued a final regulatory determination on May 22, 2000, concluding that fossil fuel combustion wastes do not warrant regulation as hazardous under RCRA. This determination allows for more flexibility in waste management strategies. The electric utilities’ waste characterization programs continue to demonstrate the adequacy of the existing treatment systems. Waste recharacterization studies indicate that treatment facility waste streams are nonhazardous.

RCRA underground storage tank (UST) regulations require all facilities with USTs used for storing petroleum products to comply with leak detection, spill prevention and new tank standard retrofit requirements. All HECO, HELCO and MECO USTs currently meet these standards and continue in operation.

The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act under SARA Title III requires HECO, HELCO and MECO to report potentially hazardous chemicals present in their facilities in order to provide the public with information so that emergency procedures can be established to protect the public in the event of hazardous chemical releases. All HECO, HELCO and MECO facilities are in compliance with applicable annual reporting requirements to the State Emergency Planning Commission, the Local Emergency Planning Committee and local fire departments. Since January 1, 1998, the steam electric industry category has been subject to Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting requirements. All HECO, HELCO and MECO facilities are in compliance with TRI reporting requirements.

14

Table of Contents

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulations specify procedures for the handling and disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), a compound found in some transformer and capacitor dielectric fluids. The TSCA regulations also apply to responses to releases of PCB to the environment. HECO, HELCO and MECO have instituted procedures to monitor compliance with these regulations. In addition, HECO and its subsidiaries have implemented a program to identify and replace PCB transformers and capacitors in their systems. Management believes that all HECO, HELCO and MECO facilities are currently in compliance with PCB regulations.

Hawaii’s Environmental Response Law, as amended (ERL), governs releases of hazardous substances, including oil, to the environment in areas within the state’s jurisdiction. Responsible parties under the ERL are jointly, severally and strictly liable for a release of a hazardous substance. Responsible parties include owners or operators of a facility where a hazardous substance comes to be located and any person who at the time of disposal of the hazardous substance owned or operated any facility at which such hazardous substance was disposed. The DOH issued final rules (the State Contingency Plan) implementing the ERL in August 1995.

HECO is currently one of many parties involved in an ongoing investigation and remediation of releases of petroleum to the subsurface in the Honolulu Harbor area. (See Note 3 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.)

HECO, HELCO and MECO, like other utilities, periodically identify leaking petroleum-containing equipment such as USTs, piping and transformers. In a few instances, small amounts of PCBs have been identified in the leaking equipment. Each subsidiary reports releases from such equipment when and as required by applicable law and addresses impacts due to the releases in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.

Research and development

HECO and its subsidiaries expensed approximately $4.0 million, $4.0 million and $1.8 million in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively, for research and development (R&D). In 2008 and 2007, the electric utilities’ contributions to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) accounted for approximately half of the R&D expenses. In 2006, HELCO made contributions of $0.3 million to the EPRI and HECO and MECO did not make any contributions. There were also utility expenditures in 2008, 2007 and 2006 related to new technologies, customer use and pricing (e.g., peak pricing and tiered rates base on usage), biofuels and other renewables (e.g., wind power).

Properties

The utilities own transmission lines, distribution lines, underground cables, poles (some jointly) and towers. Electric lines are located over or under public and nonpublic properties. Lines are added when needed to serve increased loads and/or for reliability reasons. In some design districts on Oahu, lines must be placed underground. Under Hawaii law, the PUC generally must determine whether new 46 kilovolt (kV), 69 kV or 138 kV lines can be constructed overhead or must be placed underground.

See “HECO and subsidiaries and service areas” above for a discussion of the nonexclusive franchises of HECO and subsidiaries. Most of the leases, easements and licenses for HECO’s, HELCO’s and MECO’s lines have been recorded.

See “Generation statistics” above and “Limited insurance” in HEI’s MD&A for a further discussion of some of the electric utility properties.

HECO owns and operates three generating plants on the island of Oahu at Honolulu, Waiau and Kahe. These plants, along with distributed generators (at three substation sites, at HECO’s Kalaeloa pole yard and at HECO’s Iwilei tank farm), have an aggregate net generating capability of 1,238.1 MW as of December 31, 2008. The three plants are situated on HECO-owned land having a combined area of 535 acres and one 3-acre parcel of land under a lease expiring December 31, 2018. In addition, HECO owns a total of 138 acres of land on which substations, transformer vaults, distribution baseyards and the Kalaeloa cogeneration facility are located.

HECO owns overhead transmission lines, overhead distribution lines, underground cables, poles (fully owned or jointly owned) and steel or aluminum high voltage transmission towers. The transmission system operates at 46 kV and 138 kV. The total capacity of HECO’s transmission and distribution substations was 6,815,500 kilovoltamperes as of December 31, 2008.

HECO owns buildings and approximately 11.5 acres of land located in Honolulu which houses its operating, engineering and information services departments and a warehousing center. It also leases an office building and certain office spaces in Honolulu. The lease for the office building expires in November 2021, with an option to

15

Table of Contents

extend through November 2024. The leases for certain office spaces expire on various dates from October 31, 2009 through November 30, 2017 with options to extend to various dates through January 31, 2020.

HECO owns 19.2 acres of land at Campbell Industrial Park used to situate fuel oil storage facilities with a combined capacity of 1,002,000 barrels. HECO also owns fuel oil tanks at each of its plant sites with a total maximum usable capacity of 816,000 barrels and underground fuel pipelines that transport fuel from HECO’s tank farm at Campbell Industrial Park to HECO’s power plants at Waiau and Kahe. HECO also owns a fuel storage facility at its Iwilei site with a maximum usable capacity of 77,218 barrels, and an underground pipeline that transports fuel from that site to its Honolulu power plant.

HELCO owns and operates five generating plants on the island of Hawaii, two at Hilo and one at each of Waimea, Kona and Puna, along with distributed generators at substation sites. These plants have an aggregate net generating capability of 181.9 MW as of December 31, 2008 (excluding a small run-of-river hydro unit and a small windfarm). The plants are situated on HELCO-owned land having a combined area of approximately 44 acres. The distributed generators are located within HELCO-owned substation sites having a combined area of approximately 4 acres. HELCO also owns fuel storage facilities at these sites with a total maximum usable capacity of 76,041 barrels of bunker oil, and 48,812 barrels of diesel. HELCO also owns 6 acres of land in Kona, which is used for a baseyard, and one acre of land in Hilo, which houses its accounting, customer services and administrative offices. HELCO also leases 4 acres of land for its baseyard in Hilo under a lease expiring in 2030. In addition, HELCO owns a total of approximately 99 acres of land, and leases a total of approximately 9 acres of land, on which hydro facilities, substations and switching stations, microwave facilities, and transmission lines are located. The deeds to the sites located in Hilo contain certain restrictions, but the restrictions do not materially interfere with the use of the sites for public utility purposes. HELCO occupies 78 acres of land (located in Kamuela on the island of Hawaii) for the Lalamilo windfarm (with an aggregate net capability of 0.3 MW as of December 31, 2008), pursuant to a long-term agreement with the Water Commission of the County of Hawaii expiring in 2010.

MECO owns and operates two generating plants on the island of Maui, at Kahului and Maalaea, with an aggregate net generating capability of 244.3 MW as of December 31, 2008. The plants are situated on MECO-owned land having a combined area of 28.6 acres. MECO also owns fuel oil storage facilities at these sites with a total maximum usable capacity of 176,355 barrels. MECO owns two 1 MW stand-by diesel generators and a 6,000 gallon fuel storage tank located in Hana. MECO owns 65.7 acres of undeveloped land at Waena. Prior to September 12, 2007, the Waena land was used for agricultural purposes by the former landowner under a license agreement dated November 19, 1996. On September 12, 2007, the parties executed an amendment, which terminated the license with respect to a portion of the property measuring approximately 15 acres which has been identified as the site for a proposed biofuel plant. The September 12, 2007 amendment extended the term of the license for the remainder of the parcel on a month to month basis, terminable by either party upon thirty days written notice until the area is required for development by MECO for utility purposes, or until July 31, 2009, whichever occurs first.

MECO’s administrative offices and engineering and distribution departments are located on 9.1 acres of MECO-owned land in Kahului.

MECO also owns and operates smaller distribution systems, generation systems (with an aggregate net capability of 21.1 MW as of December 31, 2008) and fuel storage facilities on the islands of Lanai and Molokai, primarily on land owned by MECO.

Bank

General

ASB was granted a federal savings bank charter in January 1987. Prior to that time, ASB had operated since 1925 as the Hawaii division of American Savings & Loan Association of Salt Lake City, Utah. As of December 31, 2008, ASB was one of the largest financial institutions in the State of Hawaii based on total assets of $5.4 billion and deposits of $4.2 billion. In 2008, ASB’s revenues and net income amounted to approximately 11% and 20%, respectively, of HEI’s consolidated revenues and net income, compared to approximately 17% and 63% in 2007 and approximately 17% and 52% in 2006, respectively.

16

Table of Contents

At the time of HEI’s acquisition of ASB in 1988, HEI agreed with the OTS’ predecessor regulatory agency that ASB’s regulatory capital would be maintained at a level of at least 6% of ASB’s total liabilities, or at such greater amount as may be required from time to time by regulation. Under the agreement, HEI’s obligation to contribute additional capital to insure that ASB would have a capital level required by the OTS was limited to a maximum aggregate amount of approximately $65.1 million. As of December 31, 2008, as a result of certain HEI contributions of capital to ASB, HEI’s maximum obligation to contribute additional capital has been reduced to approximately $28.3 million. ASB is subject to OTS regulations on dividends and other distributions applicable to financial institutions and ASB must receive a letter of non-objection from the OTS before it can declare and pay a dividend to HEI.

ASB’s earnings depend primarily on its net interest income—the difference between the interest income earned on earning assets (loans receivable and investment and mortgage-related securities) and the interest expense incurred on costing liabilities (deposit liabilities and other borrowings, including advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) of Seattle and securities sold under agreements to repurchase). Other factors affecting ASB’s operating results include provision for loan losses, fee income, other noninterest income (including gains and losses on sales of securities and notes and other-than-temporary impairments of securities) and noninterest expenses (including the loss on the early extinguishment of debt due to the balance sheet restructuring in June 2008).

For additional information about ASB, see the sections under “Bank” in HEI’s MD&A, HEI’s “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” and Note 4 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

The following table sets forth selected data for ASB for the years indicated (average balances calculated using the average daily balances):

All of the foregoing ratios and returns for 2008 were affected in 2008 by ASB’s restructuring of its balance sheet in June 2008.

ASB’s tangible efficiency ratio – the cost of earning $1 of revenue – increased from 65% in 2006 to 85% in 2008 primarily due to charges to noninterest income and noninterest expenses in 2008 as a result of the restructuring of its balance sheet.

Consolidated average balance sheet

See “Average balance sheet and net interest margin” in HEI’s MD&A.

In 2008, average investment and mortgage-related securities decreased by $1.1 billion primarily due to the restructuring of ASB’s balance sheet which included the sale of mortgage-related securities and agency notes. In 2007, average investment and mortgage-related securities decreased by $180.9 million primarily due to the use of proceeds from repayments in the portfolio to fund loans.

In 2008, average loans receivable increased by $249.3 million, or 6.4%, over 2007 average loans receivable. The growth in the loan portfolio was due to growth in home equity lines of credit, continued growth in commercial market loans and residential loans purchased. The average residential mortgage portfolio balance grew by

17

Table of Contents

$158.4 million, or 5.5%, over 2007. The average commercial loan portfolio balance increased by $66.6 million, or 14.3%, due to higher originations. The average home equity line of credit loan portfolio balance grew by $42.0 million, or 21.9%, due to higher originations. The average commercial real estate loan portfolio balance was $13.4 million, or 4.2%, lower than 2007 primarily due to repayments of construction loans. Average consumer loan balances also decreased by $2.6 million, or 3.3%, over 2007. Average deposit balances decreased in 2008 by $183.5 million, as the downward trend in interest rates made it difficult to retain interest-bearing deposits. Average other borrowings decreased in 2008 by $531.8 million due to the early extinguishment of other borrowings in the balance sheet restructuring.

In 2007, average loans receivable increased by $206.0 million, or 5.6%, over 2006 average loans receivable. The average residential mortgage portfolio balance grew by $172.9 million, or 6.3%, over 2006 primarily due to the continued strength of the Hawaii economy and the stability of the Hawaii real estate market and loan purchases. See “Economic conditions” in HEI’s MD&A for a discussion of the Hawaii housing market. The average commercial loan portfolio balance was $20.4 million, or 4.6%, higher than 2006 due to higher originations. The average commercial real estate and consumer loan portfolios grew by $6.8 million and $6.1 million, respectively, over 2006. Average deposit balances decreased by $97.6 million compared to 2006 as competitive factors and the level of short-term interest rates have made it difficult to retain deposits. Average other borrowings increased by $99.0 million over 2006 to replace the decrease in deposit balances.

Asset/liability management

See HEI’s “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.”

Interest income and interest expense

See “Results of operations—Bank” in HEI’s MD&A for a table of average balances, interest and dividend income, interest expense and weighted-average yields earned and rates paid for certain categories of earning assets and costing liabilities for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006.

The following table shows for the periods indicated the effect on net interest income of (1) changes in interest rates (change in weighted-average interest rate multiplied by prior year average balance) and (2) changes in volume (change in average balance multiplied by prior period weighted-average interest rate). Any remaining change is allocated to the above two categories on a pro rata basis.

Noninterest income

In addition to net interest income, ASB has various sources of noninterest income, including fee income from credit and debit cards and fee income from deposit liabilities and other financial products and services. Noninterest income totaled approximately $46.1 million in 2008, $68.4 million in 2007 and $59.6 million in 2006. The decrease in noninterest income was primarily due to the loss on sale of securities from the balance sheet restructuring ($19.3 million) and an other-than-temporary impairment charge on two mortgage-related securities ($7.8 million). The increases in noninterest income for 2007 were due to higher fee income on deposit liabilities and other financial services, partially offset by lower income from the sale of investment and insurance products.

Lending activities

General. Loans and mortgage-related securities of $4.8 billion represented 88.4% of total assets as of December 31, 2008, compared to $6.2 billion, or 90.1%, and $6.0 billion, or 88.1%, as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The decrease in the loans and mortgage-related securities balance was primarily due to the sale

18

Table of Contents

of mortgage-related securities in the balance sheet restructuring. See the discussion of “Balance sheet restructure” in Note 4 to HEI’s Consolidated Financial Statements. ASB’s loan portfolio consists primarily of conventional residential mortgage loans.

The following table sets forth the composition of ASB’s loan and mortgage-related securities portfolio as of the dates indicated: