Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee debates baseline environmental impact studies for facilities handling regulated substances
Summary
Sponsors presented an amendment to HB1621 that would require a baseline environmental impact report for proposed manufacturing or storage facilities handling substances already regulated under state law; language moved responsibility for permitting decisions to local authorities while requiring applicants to fund technical reviews.
Representative Christine Perez and Representative Germana framed an amendment to HB1621 that would require a baseline environmental impact study for proposed manufacturing or storage facilities that would employ or store substances already regulated by state statutes (the amendment enumerates relevant RSAs including oil and underground storage, hazardous waste and solid waste statutes, and a table of air pollutants). The amendment replaces an earlier size‑based trigger (square footage) with a trigger based on the classes of regulated materials in use or storage.
Key amendment features crafted in the subcommittee: (1) triggers tied to materials regulated under specified RSA chapters (e.g., RSA 146‑A, 146‑C, 147‑A/B, 147‑F, 149‑M, and Env‑A 1450 pollutant tables) rather than arbitrary square‑foot thresholds; (2) applicants would pay for required studies and DEES may contract with qualified environmental professionals to support technical evaluation; (3) the completed report would be submitted to the local enforcement agency and to DEES for recordkeeping, but issuance of local building permits would remain within local jurisdiction (the amendment removes language that would have required DEES to make pre‑permit determinations); and (4) the study would be repeated every 10 years or whenever operations change in ways that affect impacts.
Agency and industry questions: DEES and industry witnesses sought clearer triggers and asked for ballpark cost estimates for conducting the technical studies; DEES said the fiscal note will depend on how the statute is defined and whether DEES performs technical review or relies on contractor expertise. Industry representatives said many prospective developers already obtain ESAs and environmental permitting and asked that the amendment not overburden small operators; they cautioned that ESA practice and EIS-style forwardlooking studies are related but different exercises.
Next steps: sponsors will refine wording (including the statute reference for local building permits), DEES will produce rough cost ranges and procedural guidance, and the subcommittee will reconvene to consider refined amendment language.
