Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee defers HB 256 after debate over H‑Power emissions standards and pending federal rulemaking
Summary
Lawmakers deferred HB 256 to review whether state language should be updated to reflect proposed EPA standards after testimony from the Department of Health, environmental groups and community advocates about missing pollution controls at H‑Power.
The House Committee on Consumer Protection & Commerce deferred HB 256 on Feb. 19 after testimony and questioning about emissions controls at Honolulu’s waste‑to‑energy facility known as H‑Power and about pending federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rulemaking.
Witnesses urged the committee either to strengthen the bill so it would not lower existing state protections if federal standards were revised downward or to explicitly adopt the more protective federal proposals now under public comment.
Mary Anne Rosio of the Department of Health told the committee the department stands on its written testimony and that H‑Power’s permits meet current state and federal regulations. She said permits are usually issued for five years and undergo reevaluation at permit renewal. "When we evaluated that facility, we made sure they met all of the state and federal regulations at that time," Rosio said.
Environmental groups urged stronger state standards. Mike (Energy Justice Network) told the panel the first two combustion units at H‑Power lack modern pollution controls present on the newer unit, including controls for nitrogen oxides, mercury and dioxins, and warned that relying on current federal rules could leave a regulatory gap. "They have no controls for the nitrogen oxides that trigger asthma attacks and they have no controls for the mercury and dioxins," he said.
Ted Bolen of Climate Protectors Hawaii said the state can and should adopt stricter standards rather than relying on federal action. Several speakers urged the committee to consider EPA’s proposed rulemaking, which the Department of Health described as being in the public‑comment period and due to close in July.
Committee members asked whether DOH had commented on the federal proposal; the department replied it had not and that it preferred waiting for the federal public comment period to close and the data to be evaluated before deciding how to proceed.
Action: Chair Matayoshi deferred HB 256 until the next committee meeting to allow staff and members to consider whether to amend the bill to reflect the EPA proposal or to adopt other state‑level strengthening language. The transcript records a scheduled deferral to the following day at 2:00 p.m. in Room 329.
The hearing included technical exchanges about permit review timelines, pollutant controls and the scope of state versus federal authority. The committee did not adopt amendments on Feb. 19.
