Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative raises oversight concerns about proposal to exempt new 'sea glider' transport from PUC review
Summary
Representative Iwamoto registered reservations during consideration of committee reports about a bill she said would exempt a novel passenger sea-gliding transport from Public Utilities Commission oversight, citing community concerns over noise, collisions with whales, and unclear complaint channels.
During floor consideration of standing committee reports, Representative Iwamoto spoke at length about a provision she said would exempt a new passenger sea-gliding transport method from oversight by the state Public Utilities Commission (PUC).
"This bill feels a little premature," Iwamoto said, noting community concerns about where to raise questions about noise and marine-safety risks. "I heard in committee that the Coast Guard would be the one to have to oversee the flight path... I think people are very comfortable with the PUC being a place where there can be third-party interveners... it's just unclear to me where community members would take concerns with the Coast Guard." The comments came while the House considered Standing Committee Reports 1803-26 and 1804-26; the measures were adopted by voice vote.
Iwamoto specifically flagged potential safety and environmental issues if a vessel that glides near the ocean surface operates near whales. She asked where coastal residents and other stakeholders could register and have their concerns heard if regulation shifted to a federal maritime authority rather than a state utility regulator. No formal amendment or change was recorded on the floor; members adopted the committee reports as presented.
The transcript does not specify the bill number tied to Iwamoto’s remarks on the House floor; her concerns were voiced during consideration of the standing committee reports. The record indicates the committee discussion referenced the Coast Guard as a potential overseer, but the House did not take further local action on the oversight questions during this session.
