House Standing Committee on Energy & Environmental Protection

All right. Good morning, everyone. And it is Thursday, February 5th, 9:00 a.m., Conference Room 325. We are here with the Committee on Energy and Environmental Protection, and first up on the agenda, we have a bunch of bills about cesspools today. And first up to testify on House Bill 2245, relating to the environment--and this is the bill about requiring additional denitrification capacity in wastewater systems close to the shoreline--and first up we have Department of Health.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair. John Nagato, Department of Health, Wastewater Branch. The Department stands on its written testimony, providing comments, and are available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. And Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Aloha and good morning, Chair Lowen, Vice Chair Perruso. Charlie Taylor, on behalf of DLNR's Division of Aquatic Resources. We stand on our written testimony in support of this bill and are available for any questions. Mahalo.

Thanks. And then Hawaii County Council Member Kimball, in support, Friends of Hanauma Bay, in support. VINE, in person.

Good morning, Chair Lowen, Vice Chair Perruso--

Can you please speak up?

Good morning, Chair Lowen, Vice Chair Perruso. My name is Jessica Paisley, here on behalf of VINE. We stand on our written testimony to be available for questions.

Thank you. Puako for Reefs, in support. Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition.

Thank you, Chair Lowen, Vice Chair Perruso. Ted Bolan for the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, in strong support of this bill. The reason this bill is needed is that individual wastewater systems, which include cesspools, release nitrogen into the groundwater, and that can harm our reefs.

So the conventional septic systems that are being put in a lot of places don't do enough to protect the reefs, particularly in West Hawaii, where there's good coral, which is very much in jeopardy if we add a lot of septic systems. Ideally, you would have sewering. Where that's feasible, we should do that, but where we don't, we need a individual wastewater system that is not nitrogen-releasing.

So, there are technologies. This would require that any new septic systems meet standards for denitrification, and there are some issues raised by the Department of Health, I think, in their testimony. We don't object to the amendment that they've got.

The questions we have about GIS, mapping, etcetera, are things that can be worked out. I would urge the committee to move the bill forward, and we can work out those details with DOH in subsequent hearings. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'm available for questions.

Thank you. And then, Nature Conservancy.

Good morning, Chair Lowen, Chair Perruso. Thank you for having us today. Nature Conservancy submitted testimony. I'm Dr. Kim Falinski. I work for Nature Conservancy and also hold status at UH Manoa and the Water Resources and Research Center. I wanted to just clarify two points.

It's hard to understate that we do have a lot of nitrogen coming from cesspools hitting the coastline. I studied the data across the state and know that that is true, so that part we can really stand on.

We can also stand on the fact that the nitrogen from those-- that when it hits those reefs, will make those reefs less able to recover from bleaching events. So that's why this is important. When it comes to the technology, the word, denitrification, is such a big, kind of complicated word, but it basically means trying to convert that nitrogen into nitrogen gas so that it isn't harmful, but I want to make sure that you realize that those extra technologies would also add ability to take out pharmaceuticals, organic matter, phosphorus.

It's not just nitrogen that would be removed in those extra technology layers. I appreciate the comments of the Department of Health with the GIS layers, as my colleague said here, and I hope we can work out a solution that would allow us to prioritize.

If we are to prioritize one thing, it's cesspools next to the shoreline in hard rock soils, like the Big Island, that are next to reefs. Like, that is our priority, and we'd really like to see that particular issue improved. Thank you.

Thank you. And then, Surfrider Foundation Hawaii, in support, and we have three additional individuals in support. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? Please come forward.

Aloha, Chair Lowen and Vice Chair Perruso. My name is Hannah Lisiak, and I'm testifying on behalf of the Hawaii Ocean Legislative Task Force in support of this measure. I just wanted to echo the sentiments of Ted Bolan, one of our fellow task force members. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? If not, Members questions? All right, no questions for me. We will move on to House Bill 1985, relating to cesspool conversions. And this establishes the authority of Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority to provide cesspool conversion loans to eligible homeowners. First up to testify, we have Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Gwen Yamamoto Lau. Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority stands on its written testimony with comments in support. I just also wanted to mention two things. One is maybe consider making this a revolving loan fund so that loan repayments can be lent and reused and recycled.

Secondly, I appreciate the comments from the procurement office. But as an existing loan program, we have other existing loans programs going on and that their comments could be problematic. Thank you.

Thank you. And next up we have Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Charlie Taylor on behalf of DLNR's Division of Aquatic Resources. We stand on our written testimony providing comments and are available for any additional questions.

The main, our main comments though basically are that we generally do not want, do not really want to extend deadlines, but we do support any types of outreach and education for homeowners in the Bill. Thank you.

Thanks. I think I might be referring to the next Bill.

Oh, I'm sorry. 1985?

We are currently on 1618. Okay.

We stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. And next we have State Procurement Office. Not present. Public Utilities Commission.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Ashley Norman, Utilities Commission. We stand on our written testimony in support and available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Department of Health.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, John Nagata, Department of Health, Wastewater Branch. The Department stands on its written testimony in support will be available for any questions. Thank you.

And University of Hawaii Darren Lerner, Water Resources in support. Hawaii Realtors.

Thank you. We stand on our testimony in suppoprt.

Friends of Hanauma Bay in support. Have public access to sunscreens in support. Ocean Legislative Task Force.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Member of the Committee. Thank you again, my name is Hanna Lesiak, here on behalf of the Ocean Legislative Task Force in strong support of this measure. One of the big, one of the biggest priorities for our task force this year and in previous years has been cesspool conversion and wastewater management.

And I think this Bill would really help solve the affordability issue that comes for eligible homeowners for cesspool conversion. Our task force represents more than 150 individual across 20 different organizations. And we want to thank you for hearing this measure. I'm available for questions. Thank you.

And then we have Fi.

We also stand on our written testimony available for questions. And mahalo for hearing this measure.

Climate Change and Health Working Group. And Nature Conservancy.

Hello. We stand on our written testimony. Thank you.

Thanks. Puako Reefs in support. And then we have five additional individuals in support. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? Oh, sorry. How did I miss you Ted?

In the chaos

Thank you. Ted Bohlen on behalf of Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition. Good morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Committee Member. This bill's important because many homeowners cannot afford, cannot qualify for loans which they would need to pay for the conversion of their cesspools. We need a dedicated revolver with low interest financing for low and moderate income customers, which this Bill would provide.

So this Bill eliminates barriers, it helps homeowners upgrade without undue financial strain. And it puts the management of this in the Green Infrastructure Authority, which has expertise not only with clean energy, but also infrastructure financing. So I think it's a really good Bill. I urge the Committee to pass it.

Available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, was there anyone else that I missed who's here to testify on this measure? If not Members, questions? For Gwen, for HDIA. Just to address the concerns raised in the testimony from the State Procurement Office, can you just explain why you would say not to adopt those amendments?

So we already have an existing loan program and we have our servicers and our application portals.

And so if we went through an RFP process and say there's another servicer that is selected, it would be problematic and confusing and also not cost effective to have to start up another servicer to do a new loan program when it's a lot more efficient to just add another program to existing tasks.

Okay, and then do you have a sense of how much funding might be appropriate? Like how quickly you think you'd be able to move it out and what kind of ask there would be?

Yeah, so it depends on the source of funding. So if it's a one time funding, then of course there's a lot of cesspools and needs. But if it's an ongoing source of funding, then you know, off the top I would say say a million dollars a year to start because you know, adoption has been stalled.

But if we can get the tools out for our homeowners to then convert, then to start maybe a million dollars a year and then we'll see how the demand goes.

And we had the thought about maybe making or giving the ability for some of these loans to be forgivable for, you know, based on income. Do you guys have the ability to do that? How much more complicated is that as sort of a financing?

So it's something that we could put into the design of the loan program. So, you know, not difficult, just a different way of and different criteria that we would have and just put it into the design.

And are there instances where you have a loan program and you would make it forgivable like up to a certain amount, for example? So this would be kind of a way to address the very like very low income.

So we don't have any of that existing. But there, there are those types of loans that do exist. So it's not new. It's just something that we would again put into the design of the program.

Okay. All right. Thank you so much.

All right. Members, any other questions? All right. Seeing none, we'll move on to House Bill 1985. This is the bill that gives Department of Health a little more ability to grant extensions to the cesspool conversion deadline and also adds a section for outreach and education and creating a website to house all the information about cesspools and programs available. So, first up to testify, we have Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, member of the committee. The Department's--Charlie Taylor, on behalf of DLNR's Division of Aquatic Resources. We stand on our written comments-- providing comments on our written testimony, providing comments, just, again, noting that we don't support extension of the deadlines but do support the education and outreach initiatives. Mahalo.

Thank you. And then, Department of Health.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, and member of the committee. John Nagato, Department of Health, Wastewater Branch. The Department stands on its written testimony, providing comments. We'll be available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Then we have Office of Planning and Sustainable Development.

We stand on our written testimony in support and are available for questions.

Thank you. Hawaii Realtors.

Thank you, Chair. We stand on our testimony in support.

Thank you. Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, member. Ted Bolan for the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition. This bill is also important. Outreach is important. If we're going to ask people to upgrade their wastewater systems, individual wastewater systems, they need information, they need education, and in other places where there have been similar programs, like Suffolk County, New York, outreach was critical.

So I think this bill, the outreach part of this bill, is really important. I do have some concerns about the extension that's in the first part of the bill. I would add some amendments to that, if the Chair pleases.

But I think if you're going to extend and give people an extension due to financial inability to pay, that's a whole complicated issue and I think we should go down that path very carefully. I don't really support it at this point, but details will need to be worked out. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'm available for questions.

Thank you. And then we have an additional individual that submitted testimony. Was there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not, members, any questions? All right. We will move on. Next bill on the agenda, House Bill 2079, and this reestablishes the cesspool upgrade conversion or connection income tax credit. And first up to testify, we have Hawaii Department of Taxation.

Morning. Clinton Piper, Department of Taxation. We'll stand on our written comments. Available for questions.

Thank you. And then we'll go to Department of Health.

Department of Health stands on its written testimony in support.

Thanks. Department of Land and Natural Resources.

DLNR stands on its written testimony in support.

Office of Planning and Sustainable Development.

We stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. University of Hawaii, in support. City and County of Honolulu Department of Environmental Services, Roger Babcock on Zoom. Not present. Offering comments. County of Hawaii Mayor's Office, in support.

Kim Chung, on behalf of Mayor Kimo Alameda. We stand on our written testimony in support.

Thank you. County of Kauai, Mayor Kawakami, in support. City and County of Honolulu Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resilience, in support. Hawaii Realtors.

Thank you, Chair. We stand on our testimony in support.

In support. Nature Conservancy.

And we're here for answer questions. We stand on our testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Tax Foundation of Hawaii, Tom Yamachika on Zoom. Not present. And we have additional-- one individual or two individuals in support on this. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? Please come forward.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair, member. Ted Bolan for Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition. Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition supports measures that will help owners be able to afford successful upgrades, and if this-- tax credits have complications, I think, but if we can work out the details, it's one way in which additional support can be granted.

I'd rather see grants, I'd rather see direct help, but tax credits may help for some people, and in that sense I would support the bill. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not, members, any questions? I guess DOTAX. Just to clarify, because we've had people saying that grants are preferable to tax credits, but I would just get-- curious of your opinion.

I mean, if we have a refundable tax credit, compare that to a grant that essentially functions as a rebate, because we don't hand out money in advance of the work being done, even with the grants that were created under our Department of Health. I mean, it's a essentially a similar idea.

Sorry. Clinton Piper. There are policy-- I know there are policy concerns as far as why you would prefer one or the other, which is a little bit beyond DOTAX's expertise. We're more on the administration side.

I mean, generally speaking, if you are going to do a rebate, you do have to have additional oversight and structure in order to do that rebate program. How that affects the behavior of the consumer, whether it drives more or not, it's something beyond my expertise, so I won't be able to directly answer.

Just to clarify, a refundable tax credit means that--

Oh, I'm sorry. I misunderstood. I--

--no matter if somebody's level of income, if a tax credit is refundable or refundable below a certain threshold of adjusted gross income, then someone gets the full amount paid out in the first year?

I'm sorry, I misunderstood the question. So our general concern with a refundable tax credit is that it will encourage folks who--sorry. When you have a fundable tax credit, you have individuals who might not have a sufficient tax liability but will claim the credit.

And if it was done improperly, we have to go and catch after the fact. There's just an-- whenever there's a handing out of cash, there's an incentive on some dishonest folks--not most taxpayers--but a small percentage to take advantage of it.

So by doing it as a nonrefundable credit, it's simply reducing a debt that's owed, which doesn't have the same dishonesty drivers. And again, I'm not trying to imply that this is the majority of taxpayers; it's that small majority who would take advantage of the system that we're concerned about.

So would you have, if we did a refundable tax-- but to clarify, just because I think other people in the room have had questions about it, if a tax credit is refundable, fully refundable, that means whoever is claiming it can get paid that full-- even if they don't have tax liability to offset it, they get paid back the full amount in the first year?

Correct. So you might have individuals who, for example, don't have income within the state for whatever reason--either they're not working in the state or something along those lines--they claim the credit. The credit is basically a check is written to the individual and--

Yeah, but we're talking about instances that you don't want to see, but just as a general tool, for most cases, somebody is in the state, they get the work done, they claim the tax credit. They don't-- oh, they have-- they're not very wealthy and they don't owe a lot of taxes. They get paid back--

Correct.

--the full amount? Okay. Would you recommend, if we did go that route, would there be--because there are concerns about fraud--would there be-- would you want language in the bill that had, like, Department of Health reviewing the qualified expenses or something to that affect?

Well, there's language in the bill to that effect already, so that would be a bulwark against that type of thing. I mean, of course nothing is perfect, but this is a way that we can have eyes on as to whether or not what's being claimed was actually done.

Okay. Okay, thank you. I just have questions; there's not that many people here. Maybe Department of Health. I was really curious, and I'm curious your thoughts on this about the-- I mean, of course it would be only for qualified expenses, but from my understanding, typically when an individual connects to a sewer as opposed to converting their cesspool to an individual wastewater system, that's usually the cheapest option for the homeowner. They have to pay the cost of the lateral on private property. That's typically less than converting from a cesspool to a septic?

I'm not one hundred percent sure of the costs. I think it just depends where we're doing it, which colony you're working in, and then the engineering costs can sometimes be higher, from my experience talking to firms that work on sewer connection designs. It's a simple idea and concept, but I've heard the engineering costs are more than when they're just doing the individual wastewater system design.

Do you know why that is?

I don't think a lot of the civil engineers that do individual wastewater system designs are doing sewer connection because it's a whole different type of engineering they got to work with, you know, the cost-- just drawing the connections. That's from my talking with different firms. The ones that do the connections don't usually dabble in IWSs and bracers.

But from-- that was from years ago. So I just-- I gotta consider the engineering costs and then the construction costs, and then going into the right of way. It's just a different thing, so I don't have that--

Okay. All right.

Okay. All right. Okay. Thanks. Any other questions, Members? If not, we'll move on to. House Bill 1921 relating to cesspool. So this allows that an existing cesspool in priority three, can- DOH can allow them to add an additional bedroom. And first up to testify, we have Department of Health.

Member of the Committee John Nagato, Department of Health Wastewater branch. The Department stands on its written testimony providing comments and available for any questions. Thank you.

Hawaii Realtors.

Thank you. We stand on our testimony in support.

Grassroots Institute of Hawaii in support. By Home, LLC with comments and two individual or one individual in support and one in opposition. Was there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not Members, questions? All right.

Seeing none, we will move right along House Bill 2232 relating to clean water. So this preserves a state law protections for water quality that are at least as protective as the federal Clean Water Act. First up to testify, we have House Bill 223- or we have Department of Health.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. Daryl Long from the Department of Health Clean Water Branch. The Department stands on our written testimony and comments. I'll be available to answer any questions.

Thank you. And then Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition.

Just stand on our testimony. I'm sorry. Excuse me. Too many bills, too confused. Stand on written testimony and support. State law needs to be upheld here and I strongly urge the Committee to.

And then we have additional five individuals in support. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not Members, questions? All right, seeing none, we'll move on. House Bill 1567 relating to energy equity. This requires the PUC to establish rate structures that prioritize affordability and equity. First step to testify. We have Department of- we have the Consumer Advocate.

Board Chair, Vice Chair, Member of the Committee. We stand on our written testimony providing comments. Thank you.

Thank you. And Public Utilities Commission.

Good morning again, Chair Lowen, Vice Chair Caruso and Member of the Committee, Representative Kush.

We stand a written testimony in support and comments and available for questions.

Thank you. And then Kupuna for the Mopuna in support. KIUC on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair Lowen, Vice Chair Peruso and Member of the Committee. My name is Scott Sato and I'm the Government Affairs and Energy Services Manager at Kauai Island Utility Cooperative. KIUC stands on its written testimony in respectful opposition of this proposal.

We kindly ask that the state Legislature allow the PUC to conclude its work on the equity and disconnection dockets before legislation such as this is considered as recommendations from that process may be valuable to this specific legislation. So thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.

Thank you. And then we have Free Access Coalition in support and Sierra Club of Hawaii on Zoom.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Wayne Tanaka with the Sierra Club of Hawaii. We'll stand on our written testimony in showing support of this measure and happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. And then we have additional 27 individuals in support. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure if not Members questions?

Nope. Okay. All right, that's. We're moving fast. All right, we'll move on. House Bill 1984 relating to renewable energy. So this is requiring government entities to establish a self certification process for installing essentially distributed energy resources. First up to testify we have Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Morning, Chair, Vice chair, Member of the Committee, Carol Tyau-Bream with DLNR Engineering Division. The Department stands on our written testimony, we offer comments and I'll be here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you.

And then Hawaii Solar Energy Association.

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Rocky Mould, Hawaii Solar Energy Association. I'll stand on my written testimony in strong support of this measure. And just note that we made a major breakthrough working with DLNR on this Bill to find a solution to the FEMA issue. It's been a long standing issue for our industry.

So just wanted to point that out. And thank you. I'm here for questions if you have them.

Thank you. And then we have Alternate Energy Inc. in support. Photonworks Engineering in support. KIUC on Zoom.

Good morning again. KIUC stands on its written testimony in respectful opposition of this proposal and has noted a suggested suggested amendment for consideration. Thank you.

Thank you. And then Climate Protectors Hawaii, Ted Bohlen in support.

Thank you. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Ted Bohlen for Climate Protectors Hawaii. First, I note that I had a typo in my testimony and I had the wrong number. This is 1984, not 1985. That sounds a little too prophetic. Actually. This is a good Bill. It would save customers money.

It would improve the stability of the electricity grid and reduce the state's greenhouse gas emissions by streamlining solar permitting with a self certification process. We had to make it as easy as feasible for people to get on with their solar and that would help in many ways. So I urge you to pass the Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. And 350Hawaii in support. Grassroots Institute of Hawaii in support. And then we have an additional six individuals in support. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? Please go forward.

Morning Chair Lowen and Members of the Committee. My name is Karrie Shahan. I'm the Executive Direct Officer for the Contractor's License Board. I apologize, our testimony was not submitted. I thought it had been. The board has not had the opportunity to review this year's Bill.

But based on last year's discussions on a similar Bill, the board appreciates the intent of this Bill but has concerns regarding commercial and large scale photovoltaic systems being put in with self certification and believes that this is more suitable to residential with inspection following.

I will provide a copy of my testimony at the end of the meeting and I'm here if you have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not Members, any questions? Hawaii Solar Energy Association. I guess because it's new. It's new testimony or new that we're just hearing. Do you want to speak to any concerns about commercial scale?

So this legislation would call for self certification by a design professional. It does not relinquish the need for an inspection at the end. All these projects would be inspected eventually and if there are any issues, the design professional would be on the hook to fix those issues with it.

So there's still compliance check at the end, this allows the project to proceed to build upon submission of a stamped plan, which is just a huge efficiency measure. And again, a compliance check with an inspection at the end.

Okay. All right, thank you. All right. If not, any other questions, Members? All right. Seeing none, we will move on to House Bill 2608 relating to water heating systems. And first up to testify we have Department Hawaii Department of Taxation.

Good morning. Clinton Piper, Department of Taxation will stand on the written comments available for questions.

Thank you. And then Interisland Solar Supply Solar Array Corporation with comments. Hawaii Gas.

Good morning. Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Julie Anker with Hawaii Gas in strong opposition of removing demand gas water heaters from the current variance process. The current law states that solar water heaters are required for new single family residential construction.

No building permits are issued that do not include a solar water heater unless the chief energy officer approves a variance. Variance applications are only accepted if submitted by an architect or licensed mechanical engineer who attests that the installation is impractical and cost prohibitive.

Variances are arduous to obtain and are only granted when other options have been evaluated and determined to be infeasible.

The largest share of the variances for demand water heaters are rural subdivisions off grid or weak grid areas, widespread propane use which is the majority of the neighbor islands and a high prevalence of multiple gas appliances in the home.

Already in analyzing the variance data, Hawaii island received 60% of the demand water heater variances in Kauai and Maui Paulo. Eliminating demand water heaters would disproportionately impact where all the neighboring island homes and forces homeowners into hot water systems that are impractical or not affordable.

Additionally, the Energy Policy and Conservation act prohibits state and local governments from restricting the use of federally regulated appliances. Prohibiting gas water heaters would be in violation of federal law. For these reasons, Hawaii Gas respectfully urges the Committee to retain the existing variants for gas water heaters in HB2608 by removing the deletion in A4.

This will not change the main intent of the Bill which is to add in electric heat pumps. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you.

Let's see. Hawaiian Council. Hawaiian Council standing in strong support. Honoring. Thank you. Stanford Carr in opposition. Castle and Cook Homes in opposition. Pia Hawaii opposition Kapolei Chamber of Commerce in opposition. And then we have testimony from six additional individuals in support and 56 in opposition. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not Members?

Questions. Going once, going twice. No question. Okay, we'll move on. Next on the agenda we have House Bill 2435 relating to portable plug in solar generation devices. First up to testify we have Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Commission.

Hello Chair, Vice Chair Perusa Leia Laramie with the Hawaii State Climate Change Commission. We stand on our testimony as well. Available questions. Thank you. DCCA Mike Angela.

Chair, Vice Chair, Member of the Committee. Stand on our testimony. Provide comments. Thank you. Available questions.

Hawaii State Energy Office and comments.

Morning Chair, Vice Chair, Member of the Committee. Morning Sanis. We stand for the Hawaii State Energy Office. We stand on our right and state on any providing comments. Thank you.

Public Utilities Commission.

Ohan, Chair Lohan, Vice Chair Caruso and Members of the House Committee on Energy Environmental Protection. My name is Andrew Kabe. I'm a utility analyst of the Public Utility Commission. I'm here on behalf of Chair Itamura and the Commission.

I signed the Commission's written testimony offering comment and supporting the intent of HB 2435 and available for any questions the Committee may have. Thank you.

Thank you. Next we have Clean the Pacific in support Kauai Climate Action Coalition in support, Hawaii Solar Energy association in support KIUC on Zoom.

Good morning again. KIUC stands on its written testimony providing comments on this measure. Thank you.

Thank you. And we have Climate Protectors Hawaii.

Thank you. Chair Law and Vice Chair Peluso Members Hawaii Climate Climate Protectors Hawaii supports this Bill. We need more distributed solar power that will help the grid, that will help the individuals save money. Good for the environment.

Many residents and renters of condominiums and multi family housing are prevented from accessing less expensive solar power by ownership restrictions, structural limits, et cetera. We want to pass this Bill and see if we can get more portable plug in devices available by eliminating some of those barriers. So I support this Bill. Urgent passive.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Chamber of Sustainable Commerce in support. 350Hawaii in support on Zoom.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay. Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Sherry Pollock and I'm with 350Hawaii. We stand in strong support of this measure that would remove unnecessary barriers and allow plug in solar systems in Hawaii. Our Members are very anxious to see this implemented.

Hawaii has the highest electricity costs in the nation and costs are rising. These systems are game changing. This is about cutting energy costs and reducing emissions by updating our rules to match the realities of new safe proven technologies.

We want to ensure unnecessary barriers are avoided so everyone who could greatly benefit from them has access to installing them. For too long, the benefits of solar energy have been limited to homeowners with the capital to invest in rooftop projects. Plug in Solar reinvents this narrative, making cheap clean energy a viable option for everyone.

Something critical to alleviate our high electricity rates. 4 million households in Germany already have plug in solar systems. Utah unanimously passed a Bill last year approving them. These systems are safe, low cost and they work for renters, apartments and homes unsuitable for routes. So many could benefit from plug in Solar, but outdated regulations are preventing this.

We strongly urge the Committee to pass this measurement and encourage the Committee to keep language in the measure free of unnecessary barriers so that we can maximize access to affordable renewable energy, making it easy for everyone to participate. Our written testimony provides more details on this.

We want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on this really wonderful measure. Mahalo.

Thank you. Let's see. Next up we have Greenpeace, Hawaii and support on Zoom.

Good morning. Thank you so much for hearing this proposal and for putting it forward. This is essential. We have to get off of fossil fuels. We are in getting. It's getting pretty desperate here. The climate crisis is getting worse. As the Legislature has just noted in 2021, we are already in a climate emergency.

We have houses falling into the ocean. On the North Shore. Our shorelines are receding. We had this huge horrible, obliterated fire that wiped out Lahaina. And this is just the beginning. So we really have to start working diligently to get off of fossil fuels. And this is a really wonderful way to start. It's very simple.

It's safe, clean and efficient. As was just reported, these have been. Used for many, many years safely in Europe. So this is safe tech. It's much safer than lng. They just had a huge explosion, explosion in Louisiana from lng. And so this is a much safer way to go to bring clean energy to Hawaii.

Thank you so much for your ongoing efforts. I appreciate the chair and the co. Chair and this Committee. You guys have really been working hard to get us clean energy and get us off of fossil fuels. We appreciate your efforts so much. You have a very good day. Aloha.

Thank you. Next up we have Brights Saver on Zoom. Hannah Ellis, please.

Good morning. Yes, good morning. Chair Lohan, Members of the Committee, my name is Hannah Ellis representing Bright Saver, a nonprofit dedicated to building the plug and solar movement in the US Making solar ownership affordable and accessible to everyone.

We stand in our written testimony and strongly support HB 2435 to allow the people of Hawaii to access Plug In Solar, saving money by reducing their electricity bills. This is a market driven solution requiring no tax credits or public funds. It's just cutting red tape.

Systems installed according to the safety standards in the Bill will not shock users, overload circuits or create fire hazards. Back feed during power outage which protects line workers and anyone working on a multi unit building. This is an equity issue. Plug In Solar provides meaningful access for renters and apartment residents who otherwise could not access solar.

This technology ensures that access to clean energy is not limited by housing status. In addition, Plug and solar reduces electricity bills and improves energy resilience. This is especially relevant given residents of Hawaii have the highest energy costs in the country.

For these reasons, I urge the Committee to issue a favorable report on HB 2435 and support legislation that extends access to affordable, scalable clean energy solutions. Thank you.

Thank you. And then carbon cashback Hawaii and support. We have 32 additional individuals all in support. Some, it looks like, might be present. We have Life of the land. oh, sorry, wrong.

Well, I'll add anyway and then submit written comments. Henry Curtis, Life of land. Hawaii has the highest electric rates. Nobody pays electric rates. They pay bills. When one considers all sources of energy that is sold to residences across the country, Hawaii's average cost is about average compared to the national average.

That's because we use a lot of electricity here and one out of four customers gets gas. But three out of four customers get gas on the mainland and 10% of mainland customers get three or more utility bills. So when you consider the total energy Bill of a residence, ours are no higher than anybody else's. Mahalo.

Thank you. All right, we had a couple people signed up for Zoom. I think our one person, Douglas Hagan on Zoom, not present. Was there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not, questions? Members? Okay, I guess really quickly for. Excuse me, Brightsaver on Zoom. I'm just curious because I'm still learning about these myself.

Like typically, how large are these systems? I mean really realistically, how many kilowatts is it?

Yeah, it's a 1200 kilowatt Max. And in terms of size, we're talking about four feet or so. And it depends on the four feet. Like four feet wide four feet by four feet by wide, four feet by four feet. It depends on the system that one orders, but approximately that currently.

So I mean, how much of an average electricity Bill does it offset?

It's a really hard question to answer. Depending on how much people are using and how much the sun is out so it's, it's almost impossible to answer in that way.

Okay, I guess. Hawaii Solar Energy Association. Do you know much about. I'm just curious, like I'm for all of the above, right? Like let's have this balcony solar or whatever. Plug in solar. But I'm curious like how big the impact really is or if it's relatively small.

So I think it makes a really big impact for renters, people in condos, people that are in buildings that, that have limited roof space. It makes a really big impact. Like if you think about it, a panel is about 400 watts each.

So we're talking about like a max of three of those panels per place up to 1200 watts.

I mean you'd have to have a pretty big. To have three panels.

You would. So you can scale it up to any size and literally like one panel will defray. Will defray a lot of cost for a typical Bill here in Hawaii. I mean, a typical Bill here in Hawaii is. What about. They use about 500 to 700 kilowatts a month, Kwh a month, somewhere around those.

And this could probably defraud. I mean, I can't, don't quote me on these numbers. But like it could take a pretty significant chunk out of that Bill for the average, you know, apartment dweller or renter, like a third that Bill type of thing. So it's pretty big. It's a big impact.

And then how does it, how does it work? Like the plug in aspect of it? I mean, what is the, what are the regulatory concerns?

It's like an appliance. It's UL certified. It's like plugging in an appliance into your, into your home. There are some issues with installation of it and how to do that. And you need to take, take into account some of those things to make sure that they're installed properly.

But in terms of the electrical aspects of it, it's like a plug in appliance.

So it's something that can function independently of any connection to the grid.

Yes.

So where does the PUC get involved?

I think there are some proposals out there that call for registering these systems with the Public Utilities Commission and keeping track of them. I think we would support something like that to keep an eye on it and to allow the Public Utilities Commission to understand what's out there and what impacts it might have. Because it might have.

It will have some impacts. By lowering people's bills, we're lowering. It's an energy efficiency measure. Right.

Do these systems have an opportunity to be grid tied and participate in some kind of demand response.

I do believe there are some programs where they could be grid tied, but if it's grid tied, it would need to be regulated by the Public Utility Commission for sure.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Yes, please.

Could you come back? Sure.

Oh, yes, thank you. Yeah, when this was kind of being discussed earlier, I love the idea, but there's just some practical issues and I just wanted to ask you questions related to technical aspects. So 1200 watts, isn't that just about like what a fridge would burn for a day? I don't have the exact numbers on me.

I mean, just ballpark. Isn't it like a kilowatt, what a refrigerator burns in 24. A modern energy. Something along those lines.

Yeah, it could be.

Yeah. So that's would be like, would be the offset. And since solar is daytime and for the average working person, you're not at home in your condo, wouldn't be offsetting like maybe, or maybe very little air conditioning.

Eventually energy storage appliances are coming.

And I don't know, I forget if this, this is specifically about portable solar, but you could, but there are, and there are storage devices that act like portable solar devices that could act in conjunction with a portable solar device that's an appliance so that you could actually extend the ability of that solar generation to actually, you know, store energy in the day and then use it in the evening.

So. Which is really cool. Powerful combinations that could be a play. Yeah.

And I just, in that conversation that I had was like the cost efficiency, like, if you're, what do you think a unit like this would cost because you're plugging it into a single circuit and it basically backflows up through your panel to, say, power an air conditioner that's cycling on and off to monitor or like your refrigerator, or maybe you're charging your laptop from the day before for.

So I'm just trying to like, like the cost to those, you know, kilowatt that you're offsetting.

So I believe you're about, it's about not 800 to a thousand dollars per panel. So if you do three of those, it goes up to $3,000. So with that, you're defraying, I don't know, a fifth of your energy costs maybe. I think, you know, it's going to take a few years for that to pay off fully.

But you're gonna have resiliency, you know, you're gonna have, you're gonna have other benefits as well along the way. It's not Just that energy needed serving. It's. It's backup power for you. Okay, thank you.

Would it be. I mean, I guess when you talk about your. Talk about how much a panel produces, you're sort of comparing it to numbers you would typically get if it was installed on the roof of a single family residence. But would it be. It would be a little bit different.

It would be different, yeah. There are going to be shading issues, they're going to be orientation issues. In Hawaii, we're at a low latitude, so we have the benefit of having direct sunlight coming directly down. And so the angle, the lower the angle to 12 degrees is that you can get, the better the efficiency.

So you can't always get that optimal angle.

So there's going to be north of the apartment building.

And sometimes these portable panels can be moved. And so someone during the day could place them in a perfect position during the day and then move them, you know, later in the day. So it just depends. There's a lot of options here.

There might be some consumer concerns about making sure people understand the variability of how it might provide electricity to them based on the orientation of their particular unit.

Agreed. This needs to be appropriately caveated, for sure, in selling. And you know, we're all for consumer protections. We're promoting a Bill in that regard. So we think proper education is really important at the outset.

Yeah.

One more question. Sorry, take a seat up there. You made me think like I've installed in agriculture, agricultural systems, you know, just low wattage solar trickle chargers. And the thing about them is that as soon as they look at the sun, there's power coming out of the leads and you can zap yourself. Do these have.

Do these kind of systems come with, for lack of proper technical terms, where the plug is not live soon as they see the sun that they have to be plugged in and sense of, you know, 100.

I don't know the exact answer, but. But you. I am sure UL certification covers things exactly like that. Okay. That's really what it's for. The UL certification is a really powerful tool for safety. It's like an appliance that you can use. Yeah. Because 1200 watts will wake you up.

Yeah.

Any other questions, Members? All right, thank you. I guess that's a good conversation. We will move on to House Bill 1623 relating to the environment. And this is making some changes to the climate commission structure and some of the enabling language about decarbonization. So first up to testify, we have the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission.

Thank you and then Hawaii Tourism Authority, comments. Hawaii State Energy Office, comments.

Thank you. Democratic Party of Hawaii in support. Life of the land.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members. We assumed that there was simply a comma placed in the wrong section. If the comma is there, then it allows the commission to go from a policy position to actually setting standards. And that opens up a whole can of worms. We assume that was just a typographical error. Mahalo.

Thank you. And one additional individual with testimony in support. Was there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not Members, questions? I have a question for climate commission. To this question of the missing comma. I do think, I mean, I think if the comma was intended to not be there, actually it's probably not like doesn't make sense anyway.

So I assume the intention was to empower the commission to set standards. And I'm not sure what standards you mean or what the process would be or what that would apply to.

Yeah, excuse me. I think that there's just been some confusion as to, you know, the commission doesn't have any regulatory capacity or ability to implement anything that's legally required.

But, you know, in order to make recommendations to set standards, there's been some concern or some confusion as to whether the commission itself can come forward and say, hey, this is what we recommend. Xyz.

So this just kind of clarifies that the commission is empowered to make those recommendations that then could be taken on either by the Legislature or other entities as clearer guidance.

Is that the ability to make recommendations generally or to make recommendations for setting standards?

It's generally. And I think it's make recommendations and set standards.

Did you have something specific in mind when you made that change to.

I think specifically we're thinking of guidance for sea level rise recommendations. We're also looking at potentially recommendations for clean fuel standards, you know, other, you know, various things that haven't actually have policy guidelines just yet. We can, you know, based off of the current science, make recommendations.

And so the language in your statute already includes make recommendations broadly. So does it really make a difference?

It adds like that just like little bit of clarification. But you know, it is okay to be very clear rather than have kind of General recommendations. But I think we can live without it if it's causing.

Okay. All right, thank you. Are there any other questions, Members? All right. If not, we will move on to the last Bill on the agenda, House Bill 1774 relating to centralized access to resources. So this has the climate commission being in charge of a kind of Catch all resource website on a lot of topics.

First up we have Climate Commission. Thank you. And then we have Democratic Party of Hawaii in support and one individual in opposition. Is there anyone else here to testify on this measure? If not Members questions? All right, if that brief recess and we'll be back shortly for decision making.

All right, we are back for decision making on the 9am agenda. First up, we have House Bill 2245 relating to the environment. For this we will clarify the definition of shoreline so that it matches up to shoreline as defined in 205A as determined by DLNR. We will clarify I think the most recent soil surveys in gis.

I think there's still work to be done on figuring that part out. However, we will adopt DOH's other suggested amendments and affect the date to the year 3000. With that, any discussion? Members seeing none, please take the vote.

House Bill 2245, Chair's recommendation is passed with the amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Representative Chen. Representative Kahaloa. Aye. Representative Kush, Representative Quinlan. Aye. Representative Matsumoto? Aye. Chair recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you.

And then for House Bill 1618, relating to cesspool conversions, this is the HDIA financing. We will adopt White Green Infrastructure Authority suggested amendments in testimony and then we will add language and I don't have the specific language yet, but we're going to add language that enables Kauai Green Infrastructure Authority to make some of these loans forgivable to eligible households.

And we will also note in the Committee report that we would like to look at green fee funds potentially as a sustainable source of funding that some amount could go to this on an annual basis to continue capitalizing this loan program. If that is considered, then I think a million dollars might be an appropriate recommendation.

If it's a one time appropriation to HCIA, we might need to be looking at higher numbers. So we'll have some language in the Committee report reflecting that. We will also have technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style. And we will defect the date to the year 3000. Let's see. Am I missing anything? I think I.

We might actually additionally. Sorry, there's a lot of amendments add language to create a revolving loan Fund into which any money to finance this program would be held. And with that it will defect the date to the year 3000. With that, Members, any discussion?

If not Vice Chair,

House Bill 1618, Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any nos or reservations seeing? None. Chair, your recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. And then House Bill 195 relating to cesspools and also the public outreach and education. Again, we have a number of amendments here.

So first off we're going to add some language just clarifying that that ability for Department of Health to grant an extension would also depend upon the applicant's demonstration of having made efforts to finance their conversion.

And we will adopt Department of Health suggest an amendment to change means of financing for the outreach and education, a website piece from the Special Fund to General funds and adopt their other recommendations. I think it's changing the word homeowners to property owners and some other small amendments to section three.

We are going to add a goal to this section of statute to prioritize a goal for DoH to prioritize conversion of cesspools that pose the highest risk to human health or the environment. And we will defect the date to the year 3000 with that Members, any discussion? Seeing none.

Vice Chair House Bill 1985 Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting I Are there any nos or reservations? Seeing none. Chair recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. And then moving on to House Bill 2079 relating to cesspools. This is the tax credit bill. So for this we're going to make a bunch of changes as well. We're going to have the tax credit be equal to qualified expenses up to a maximum of 10,000.

So there won't be different amounts for different types of conversions. It will be the same amount for every homeowner. We will change the language to have this qualify for Director approved systems as opposed to being specific about septic and ATU's. That was a change that we made some time ago.

I think that just got in here because we're this was referring back to the 2015 legislation. We'll delete any unnecessary definitions in the later part of the Bill that I think were also partly a carryover. And we will make the tax credit refundable for people below a certain income threshold amount.

We're going to leave that blank for now for further discussion. And we will have some technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style and affect the date to the year 3000. So so with that Members, any discussion? Seeing none Vice Chair, please take the vote.

House Bill 2079 chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any nos or reservations? Seeing none. Chair recommendation has been adopted. Thank you.

And For House Bill 1921, this is the additional bedroom for Assessable Priority 3 we will adopt Department of Health suggested amendments and defect the dates the year 3000 without Members. Any discussion?Seeing none Vice chair please Bill

house bill 1921 chairs recommendation is passed with amendments Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any no's or reservations? Seeing none Chair recommendation has been adopted.

House Bill 2232 relating to clean water. So based on Department of Health's testimony that these federal standards are already upheld and in state law we're going to defer this Bill. House Bill 1567 relating to energy equity we're going to adopt all of PUC suggested amendments defect the date to the year 3000 Members. Any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair.

House Bill 1567 Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments Chair and Vice Chair are voting aye. Are there any nos or reservations? Seeing none Chair recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. House Bill 1984 relating to solar renewable energy. This is the self certification process for solar so we will put a fill in date in the blank here of 07-01-2027 and then we will take KIUC suggested amendment which basically exempts KIUC and we will defect the date to the year 3000 with that Members Any questions? Seeing none Vice Chair.

House Bill 1984 Chairs recommendation is passed with amendments Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there notice reservations Seeing Non Chair recommendation has been adopted.

Thanks. And then House Bill 2608 relating to water heating systems we're going to remove the tax credit language from the Bill because we have another tax credit bill coming up so we'll use that as a vehicle to consider if we want to add tax credits for this.

I just don't want mixed messages from the Committee about what we want to do with the tax credit. And we will remove, we will unstrike through the language regarding gas water here so we'll keep that in as an option and we will defect the date to the year 3000. With that Members any discussion?

House Bill 2608 Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any nos or reservations? Reservations from representative Matsumoto. Chair recommendation has been adopted.

Thank you. And then House Bill 2435 relating to portable plug in solar generation devices. Excited to be talking about this. We have a couple other bills that also look at how we want to approach this and so we're going to consider some of the language in the other bills as well.

So for now we're going to defer decision making on this. The Tuesday, February 10th at the end of day the the 11:15 decision making agenda that we already have. And then House Bill 1623 relating to the environment I think we'll just move remove that set standards language to clarify just remove any confusion.

We will make some technical amendments for clarity, consistency and style. We will consolidate the reporting requirements and we will defect the date to the year 3000 and move this forward. Members any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair.

House Bill 1623 Chair's recommendation is passed with amendments Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any no's or reservations? Seeing none Chair your recommendation has been adopted.

and then finally we have House Bill 1774 and for this we're just going to defect the date to the year 3000 move this forward for further discussion and that's it.

Members any discussion? Seeing none, Vice Chair

House Bill 1774 Chairs recommendation is to pass with amendments Chair and Vice Chair voting aye. Are there any nos or reservations? Seeing none Chair recommendation has been adopted.

All right and with that we are adjourned.