Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Justice Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances environmental-justice permitting bill with amendments after stakeholder talks
Summary
Committee staff summarized House Bill 109 as providing “for environmental permitting procedures in environmental justice areas, including consideration of cumulative impacts and public input.”
The House Environmental Committee considered House Bill 109, a measure intended to add environmental-justice criteria to state permitting for certain facilities. Committee staff summarized the bill as providing “for environmental permitting procedures in environmental justice areas, including consideration of cumulative impacts and public input.”
Sponsor Representative Steele and staff explained the bill’s aims: applicants for defined permits in designated environmental‑justice areas would need to conduct cumulative-impact studies and public hearings; the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) would be given added authority to modify or deny permits based on those analyses.
Representative Kazim, who represents parts of Chester and raised stakeholder testimony from her district, described three categories of concerns she filed as an amendment package and then withdrew for further work. “I believe in transparency, I believe in justice, and I believe in due process and fairness as well,” Kazim said, explaining she had proposed language to require the DEP to review the environmental-justice designation at specific intervals (she proposed every two years rather than the three-year interval in the bill) and to clarify appeal rights for permit applicants and affected parties.
After discussion and a committee amendment (Amendment 274) that broadened the definition of covered air permits and added public‑health considerations to the cumulative-impact definition, the committee approved the amended bill and reported it as committed. The committee also recorded Representative Kazim’s intent to prepare more targeted floor amendments after coordinating with DEP staff; she withdrew another amendment (Amendment 288) while preserving her intent to return with refined language.
Why it matters: Supporters said the bill fills a regulatory gap by requiring agencies and applicants to consider cumulative impacts in historically burdened communities; opponents warned about potential effects on local land-use control and on business recruitment. The committee debated how the bill interacts with municipal zoning and DEP’s permitting authority.
The bill was reported out of committee as amended and will proceed in the legislative process.
