Breaking news
Hawaiian Electric Company to construct power plant for US Army 52402163.
| 2016
|
|
|||
|
Defence & Security News - Hawaiian Electric Company
|
|||
|
|
|||
| Hawaiian Electric Company to construct power plant for US Army | |||
|
The Department of the Army announced the signing of a "record of decision" to proceed with Hawaiian Electric's construction and operation of a 50-megawatt biofuel-capable power generation plant, in Schofield Barracks, Hawaii.
|
|||
|
|
|||
 The 50-megawatt, multi-fuel, biofuel-capable power plant (Courtesy of Hawaiian Electric Company) |
|||
|
|
|||
|
The selected action is to lease land and grant easements on Schofield Barracks and Wheeler Army Airfield to HECO for the company to construct, own, operate and maintain a 50-megawatt (MW) capacity, biofuel-capable generating station, referred to as the Schofield Generating Station, and associated power poles, high-tension power lines and related equipment and facilities.
The selected action was the preferred alternative identified in the final environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed project. The record of decision explains the potential environmental and socioeconomic impacts associated with the construction and operation of the station and associated infrastructure, none of which were determined to be significant adverse effects. The selected action will provide improved energy security for the Army and citizens of Oahu; support renewable energy goals; and improve future electrical generation capabilities on Oahu by providing new secure, firm, dispatchable, flexible and renewable energy generation to the grid on Oahu. Implementation of the selected action will not result in significant impacts. The Army and HECO will employ best management practices to avoid or minimize adverse environmental effects. The Army's decision incorporates analysis contained in the final EIS for the proposed project, which considered all comments provided during formal comment and review periods. The decision also considered all comments provided on the final EIS during the formal waiting period. The Army determined that the waiting period comments did not constitute significant new information relevant to environmental concerns, and therefore supplementation of the analysis in the EIS was not required. The final EIS was reviewed by the executive director of the U.S. Army Installation Management Command, which made the decision to proceed with the selected action. |
|||