STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1075-00

                                 Honolulu, Hawaii
                                                   , 2000

                                 RE: S.B. No. 2971
                                     H.D. 1




Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say
Speaker, House of Representatives
Twentieth State Legislature
Regular Session of 2000
State of Hawaii

Sir:

     Your Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection, to
which was referred S.B. No. 2971 entitled: 

     "A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
     STATEMENTS,"

begs leave to report as follows:

     The purpose of this bill is to require environmental impact
statements (EIS) to include the effects a proposed action may
have on the "welfare" and "cultural practices" of the community
and State.

     For purposes of the public hearing, your Committee
circulated a proposed draft that deletes the provisions of the
bill and inserts new language requiring agencies to gain the
concurrence of the Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC)
before:

     (1)  Making a determination on whether a project requires an
          EIS; or

     (2)  Accepting an EIS if an EIS is required.
     
     The OEQC, the Sierra Club, Hawaii Chapter, and Hawaii's
Thousand Friends testified in support of this bill.  The
University of Hawaii's Environmental Center supported the intent
of this measure.  The Estate of James Campbell, the Hawaiian
Electric Company and its subsidiaries, Hawaii Electric Light
Company and Maui Electric Company, the Land Use Research

 
 
                                 STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1075-00
                                 Page 2

 
Foundation of Hawaii, and the City and County Department of
Planning and Permitting opposed passage of this measure.  

     Your Committee finds that even with its existing staff, OEQC
is already performing these consultative services for agencies
and reviews all environmental documents and determinations
regardless of whether it is consulted.

     During its review, OEQC has found most documents to be
complete and proper.  However, at least ten percent do not meet
the necessary requirements.  Deficiencies have included: improper
analysis of significant criteria, noncompliance with content
requirements, missing comment letters, and inadvertent mistakes.

     Your Committee further finds that the proposed bill will
address the awkward situation when a proposing agency and the
determining agency is the same body, thereby giving the
appearance that concurrence of a finding of no significant impact
is merely a formality.  Providing for concurrence by OEQC prior
to these determinations would help to eliminate any perception of
conflicts of interest.

     Your Committee has amended this bill by:

     (1)  Inserting a definition of "concurrence" to mean the
          consent given by OEQC that the following criteria have
          been satisfied:

          (a)  The procedures for the review of the environmental
               assessment (EA) or EIS have been followed
               properly;

          (b)  The content requirements of the EA or EIS have
               been met;

          (c)  The comments submitted during the review process
               have been responded to satisfactorily and
               incorporated in the EA or EIS; and

          (d)  OEQC agrees with the agency's determination;

     (2)  Specifying that if OEQC does not concur with the
          agency, the agency shall:

          (a)  Take corrective action; or

          (b)  Request that the Governor make a final
               determination;


 
                                 STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1075-00
                                 Page 3

 
     (3)  Amending the purpose section; and

     (4)  Making technical, nonsubstantive amendments for the
          purpose of clarity.

     Your Committee finds that the 15-day time period is
reasonable and represents a wise investment, especially when
considering the long and costly delays that might result if legal
challenges are made to a deficient document or determination.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your
Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection that is attached
to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and
purpose of S.B. No. 2971, as amended herein, and recommends that
it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as S.B. No.
2971, H.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee on Finance.

                                   Respectfully submitted on
                                   behalf of the members of the
                                   Committee on Energy and
                                   Environmental Protection,



                                   ______________________________
                                   HERMINA M. MORITA, Chair