Committee advances bill allowing some permitted activities to continue during environmental review after amendments

The House Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs on Feb. 27 advanced House Bill 661 (HD1) after adopting amendments that narrow the measure’s scope and add procedural language. The bill, as amended, would permit certain previously permitted or authorized activities to continue while an affected agency completes compliance with Hawaii’s Environmental Policy Act (HEPA), chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes.

Supporters, including the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), argued the measure provides an administrative path to keep lawfully permitted activities operating while state agencies conduct the required environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). Don Chang, Chair of DLNR, said the department would itself carry out the chapter 343 analysis and was not seeking exemption from HEPA; rather, DLNR sought a way for existing permitted activities to continue pending completion of environmental review.

Opponents, which included conservation groups, cultural practitioners and community organizations, said the bill would undermine HEPA’s purpose to assess environmental impacts before activities proceed. Testimony from the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, Earthjustice, the Center for Biological Diversity and multiple Native Hawaiian and fishing groups described cases where continued operations had led to measurable harm or where court orders required review before further permitting. Speakers urged the committee to defer or reject the measure unless it was significantly narrowed.

Committee amendments incorporated language from the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and DLNR to limit the measure’s application to previously permitted or authorized activities and to remove broader phrasing that could capture non‑permitted undertakings. During decision making the committee adopted the amendments and advanced the bill with technical edits for clarity, consistency and style.

The record shows deep disagreement among members over the policy tradeoffs. Two members explicitly stated they would vote no on the bill; several members recorded reservations but supported advancing the measure so the Legislature and agencies could continue working through the issue. The committee chair said the amendments will prevent the bill from affecting the then‑current status of aquarium fisheries because no aquarium permits were in effect at the time.

The committee’s action moves the measure forward with tightened language intended to ensure agencies continue to comply with HEPA while providing an administrative path to manage existing permitted activities during the completion of required environmental reviews.

Votes at committee decision: the committee adopted the motion to advance HB661 (HD1) with amendments; the chair announced the recommendation adopted after recording two explicit 'no' positions and several reservations.