Senate Standing Committee on Transportation

I think it's good afternoon today. And it's February 12, and this is the Committee on Transportation, into its agenda, February 12. We're in Room 229, and this is with regards to, SB 2,699 and members. We are on a deferred item for this first, agenda item for today on the Committee on Transportation and referencing SB 2699.

And this is relating to public transit, and this establishes within the DOT, a fair free youth transit program to be coordinated with the counties, establish a fair free youth transit program, special fund, chair members, we've heard extensive, hearing and it was well received on this particular measure.

And for your information, there were two other bills introduced by other colleagues in the Senate as well. However, I would like to make some statements with regards to this, measure as well. The attorney general sent comments, strongly recommended that the bill and explaining this special fund that meets the criteria for a special fund as was required in Section 37 dash 52 hourS.

There's a good support from the department of education, state energy office, did make some comments as well, and that they would defer to the budget and finance on the budgetary impact, of this measure, environmental response, energy, and the food security tax fund. DOTAX had sent comments as well, and re recommends that the effective date should be amended to 07/01/2026.

And that just to give them more time, for changes necessary to implement this new funding out of the environmental resource, energy and food security tax. Let me explain that that tax is the so called barrel tax. And so, there are issues, with regards to, the funding mechanism for this bill. There were good support coming out of department of health, DLNR, and DOT.

In the discussions with DOT, and my explanation on the gas tax with regards to this particular measure, The gas tax is already committed to several other areas.

The bulk of the 50% of the gas tax goes back into the general fund. So what this bill does is actually taking funds out of the general fund. The two measures I spoke with, that already, isn't a pipeline as well, speaks to, appropriations from, other areas as well, including the general fund. My recommendation, with this, is, defer this item in my discussions with DOT is because of the funding of this bill.

I think we need a little more detail, as how we should proceed because this particular measure is we're not talking small sense.

We're talking big bucks over the years, as well. And so we're, DOT and I are committed, to work, with this measure with DLNR, with DOT as well to find a mechanism for funding, and that's a big ticket item. So my recommendation, today is we're gonna defeat, defer this measure.

Any discussions? And it's pretty much unfortunate, but knowing where we are today with what the feds are doing and not contributing to our state treasury as well, it's best that we work on this measure, during the interim, and we're committed to that as well. So if there's no discussions, this measure will be deferred. Alright? And this, also ends the deferred measure for the Committee on Transportation.

Good afternoon. Again, this is the Committee on Transportation. We'll proceed with the items, on the agenda as well, but just some housekeeping measures. And we'll ask the testifiers to speak on your written testimony, or we will allow you two minutes to speak as well and be available in the event that we have some questions for you. And also that this hearing can be found on the Senate's YouTube channel.

Decision-making will follow the hearing from all the testifiers, time permitting as well. We will proceed with SB 3162, and this is relating to the administrative license revocation, and this clarifies Administrative Driver's License Revocation procedures by requiring timely disclosure of documents, aligning review timelines, and standardizing administrative review and the hearing process. DOT. Okay. DOT is not on Zoom.

I'm on-- I'm on Zoom.

Chair, we have them on Zoom.

Oh, yes. Sorry. DOT.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Robin Shishido with HDOT, and we stand by our submitted testimony in support. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Judiciary. Great. Come on up.

Thank you.

We'd love to hear those that take time, particularly out of the agencies. You know, you all work so hard and, you know, we'd love to hear comments on our agenda items, for my committee anyway.

Thank you.

Aloha.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Inouye, Vice Chair Elefante, and members of the committee. The Judiciary is here to support SB 3182 SD 1 that will be introduced later, I believe, but I need to respectfully oppose SB 3182 as it is written now. I do stand on my written testimony, but I would just like to highlight some of the Judiciary's concerns.

We have significant operational, logistical, staffing, and fiscal concerns with the implementation of this measure that requires ADLRO to mail a copy of all documents it receives from law enforcement to every respondent within five calendar days of our office receipt. Under the current law, all respondents have the right to request copies of their entire case file by completing a form on the ADLRO website.

Almost all respondents and counsel request that copies be sent via email, and by using this form, our office can verify that we have the correct address, both physical and email on file. We currently process about 3,000 to 4,000 DUI cases statewide each year. So if we're required to mail all documents in the case file--they can range from 60 to 100 plus pages--to respondents within five calendar days of receiving it, it would be very costly.

The mailing would have to be by certified mail to satisfy proof of mailing. It should also be noted that in many cases, a physical address provided on the police documentation is either incomplete or not correct, and so we end up sending review decisions to multiple addresses to ensure receipt. Certified mailing to multiple addresses would be even more costly. Currently, we're understaffed with only three clerical staff processing the over 3,000 DUI cases statewide each year.

So if this bill passes, we would need at least two additional clerical positions at a cost of approximately $83,000. Copying and mailing thousands of our case file documents would take substantial time, especially with a five calendar day deadline. If the deadline is not met, ADLRO would have to rescind the revocations, raising significant public safety concerns.

Okay. I-- yes. I read your comments and I'm glad you shared that with the committee as well, but I was going to ask you, how do you feel about SD 1? And I'm glad you are supporting that then.

Fully supportive.

Okay. All right. Members, since we have Karilee here, any questions? Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. Let's see. Attorney General. And thank you as well for being here.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Inouye, Vice Chair Elefante, committee members. Michael Moriyama, Deputy Attorney General. The Department of the Attorney General recommends that the committee consider the proposed SD 1 that we understand is gonna be introduced by the Hawaii County Office of the Prosecutors. Thank you.

Yeah. Both Prosecutor's Office, City and County in Hawaii County likes that vision as well, and I'm sure-- you know, it's a big responsibility, and reading, you know, the Judiciary's comments, that's a lot to do. And so I'm glad that the Prosecuting Attorneys were able to come up with a more-- actually a little more sensible, I would say, for everybody and the time that's spent. Appreciate you also agreeing to the SD 1. Okay. Thank you so much. City and County of Honolulu. Hey, we're together on this.

Yes.

Thank you. Thank you so much.

Hi. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and Senator DeCorte. Daniel Hugo for the Honolulu Prosecutor's Office, and we support the intent of the bill, but we also join the Hawaii County Prosecutors with the proposed SD 1. First, we do believe that it alleviates the concerns that the Judiciary raised about backlog and the administrative burden for the ADLRO.

The second thing that we pointed out in our testimony is that, oftentimes, the most meaningful punishment that people will get in a DUI case will be the license revocation. And there are some defendants who continue to drive and then we prosecute them for driving.

Right now, many of these defendants can raise the defense that they didn't know they were on a revocation, and so we would have to prove recklessness. With the proposed SD 1, there's gonna be a presumption of revocation, which will make those cases much easier to prosecute and will allow us then to focus our resources. So we appreciate the Hawaii County for taking the lead on this, and I'm available for questions. Thanks.

It makes a notification hearing so much easier, too, right?

Yes. And this is something that we've discussed also with Senator Lee and other members of this committee.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. County of Hawaii Office of the Prosecutor. Kelden, are you there? He normally is, but I'm sure they're tied up. But, as his testimony-- and Daniel, you did an excellent review of the SD 1 and appreciate the work that you all have put in. Is there anyone who wishes to speak to SB 3182? Okay. Hearing none then, we'll proceed.

Members, any questions? Okay. Let's proceed then to-- and for those of you who won't be here, you don't need to be here for the rest. We'll be-- the recommendation from the committee is to support and pass SD 1, just for your info. I know you're all busy, so. Okay. All right.

...With this measure.

Attorney General. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Chair.

Thanks for being here as well.

Thank you, and members of the committee. The Office of the Attorney General has significant concerns regarding this bill. Specifically, and most importantly, the Airline Deregulation Act, which is codified at 42—49, I'm sorry—USC Section 41713, is likely to preempt much of the bill as currently drafted. The bill basically takes the states out of regulating routes, prices, and other similar things, which is pretty much at the center of what the bill is doing.

In addition, setting that aside, if that is not a concern, there's also a local higher provision in the bill, which would likely be subject to challenge under both the Commerce and Privileges and Immunities Clauses.

Okay. With that, if the committee has any questions, I'm happy to take them.

Okay. Yes. While Michael is here, any questions, members? Okay.

Hearing none. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

DOT. Department of Taxation. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Robert Avila on behalf of DOTAX. We stand on our written testimony providing comments. I'm here to answer any questions you may have, but we'd just like to reiterate, as in the written testimony, that this would be a very complicated program to administer for DOTAX. And therefore, we would recommend that the certification be done by a third party.

I see. And also, if this measure moves along, your recommendation is to amend the effective date as well as well, if it moves forward.

That's correct.

Okay. Thank you.

Thanks so much for your presence here. Appreciate it. Alright. Let's see. Antoinette Davis, and she is with Activities and Attractions Association, Antoinette Davis. Okay. Here—let's see. Anyone else wishes to speak to SB 3313? All right.

Hearing none. Let's proceed then members with SB 3337 relating to taxation. And this eliminates the state taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel for motor vehicles. Let's see. 3337. DOT.

Hey. Kyle Robin again with HDOT, and stand by our submitted testimony in strong opposition. Thank you.

Okay. Let's see. DOT. Oh, sorry. We got the DOT twice.

Sorry. I should get yes. Taxation.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. Robert Adula on behalf of DOTAX. We We stand on our written testimony providing comments, and I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Okay? Thank you.

Thank you. Tina Yamaki on Zoom.

Aloha and good afternoon. I'm Tina Yamaki, the managing director for the Hawaii Transportation Association, and we stand on our testimony and support. Mahalo.

Okay. Thank you. Ted, Kefalas, Grassroots Institute. Okay.

Is there anyone else wishes to speak to SB 3337? Hearing none, members, any questions? Let's proceed then to SB 2896. And this is relating to commercial driver's licenses. This lowers the age of whom they drive commercially within the state from 19 to 18.

It repeals the requirement that a person only operates category three vehicles to qualify, to drive commercially in the state. And it also requires the department of transportation to amend its rules, to lower the minimum age required for a commercial driver's license.

Department of transportation.

Good afternoon, Robin, Tishida again, and stand by our send the testimony in strong support.

Okay. Thank you. City and county of Honolulu, department of customer services, sends communication in support. Yes. Tina, are you there with Hawaii Transportation Association on Zoom?

Absolutely. I'm still here and we are in very strong support of this bill. We would like to, suggest, some added language, for those between the ages of 18 and 20 years old to have companies train them for an additional, three twenty hours, and keep a record of their training. Mahalo.

Okay. Thank you very much members. Any questions of Tina? Okay. Hearing none.

Then we do have, let's see, Veronica Moore, in support. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to? Yes. Please come on forward. Yes.

And state your name, please. Are you Veronica? No. Oh, okay. State your name, please.

Jermaine Myers. Aloha, chair Inouye, vice chair Elefante, and honorable members of the committee. My name is Jermaine Myers.

I'm from the Wai'anae Coast and a Nanakuli Hawaiian homestead lessee. I rise in strong support of Senate bill 2896. My father was a commercial license driver of my entire life. Growing up at the Wai'anae Coast, I saw firsthand that driving commercially isn't just a job in our community. It's a calling, it's a skill, and a responsibility passed down through generations.

Many men and some women along the coast have driven commercially for decades. They train their sons, daughters, nieces, and nephews not just how to drive, but how to do it safely, patiently, and with pride. These young people are already working, already contributing, and already carrying the values of discipline and accountability that commercial driving requires. This bill recognizes that reality. It removes unnecessary barriers while keeping strong safety guardrails in place.

It allows capable, trained young adults to step into meaningful careers, support their families, and stay rooted in their communities. For families like mine, this bill isn't theoretical. It's practical, respectful, and overdue. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify, and I respectfully urge your your support. God bless all of you.

Okay. Mahalo. Thank you for taking the time. All right. Let's see.

Yes.

Okay. Pane.

Yes. Hello, chair, vice chair, members of the committee. Pane Matsonga the third, deputy political director for operating engineers, local three.

Wanted to offer comments on this bill. We are general support. We would kindly ask the committee to consider that when training these young men and young women for these CDLs that they be tied to some sort of training program whether that's an apprenticeship or some kind of state certified program or a company that does CDL and trucking for a living.

CDL training does require closed courses, places where they can actually train on the equipment and know how to use them before actually going out on the road. So just some things that I think would add to the bill because we are generally supportive, but having the right type of training would definitely help.

You know, I think I believe, I think the unions in all different trades as well do have training for youth or those that, need a job, take the time, you know, to really get into a trade. And, I believe, did you have it in writing? I thought I saw something in writing for

not sure.

Yes. I can you okay. Did you alright. Maybe I missed something very late.

Okay. Alright.

There was some amendments that we drafted. We feel would help to, encourage that type of training program.

And particularly being 18 years of age and you know, I really believe that, I think the training that the unions and other areas, whether it's the community colleges or whatever, I think for that age level, it's best, I think at least for a period. So if you have, sort of a training period for this matter, how long would the person be there in order to qualify to get there? Are you recommending any time period?

Not specifically. I mean, for our, I can only speak to our training program, which encompasses not only the CDL, but all types of heavy equipment from skid steers, the hub toes, backhoes, excavators. The formal training period is in the intensive two weeks at initially, and then it is a mix of on-site on job. For the CDL specifically, we move into areas where I mean, on-site in our training facilities, before we move on to any on road testing type of thing and training.

But encompassing everything you could be looking at two to three, four months depending on the skill of the driver.

It just depends. Some people really have good coordination and know how to work the gears wait. But we work with all of our members, all of our apprentices to make sure that they have not only their CDLs, but all the other requirements.

Well, it kind of makes sense as well, because I can't see an 18 year old and thinking, oh, if my son was 18 at that time, I think I would prefer him actually getting a little education first before you start driving commercially. And to me, I think it also leads to a liability for whoever they work for. So I think, having, you know, some training coming out of, the entity is, the best thing to do. Senator Adelafonte.

Thank you, Mr. Maitoga. The only question I have is a clarification in your testimony. So what you're offering in your amendments, it's everything that's in bold?

I believe yes.

Okay. Got it. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you so much. Yes. Senator Senator DeGort. Thank you,

Thank you, Pani, for being here.

Does your union currently have these kinds of classes that are available? Yes. Subsidize the cost?

That is correct.

Okay. How many typically do you folks can you take in per class or per course?

So our our pop classes run throughout the year. That's what we call them. And usually our average is about 20 to 25 apprentices that go out throughout the year. So you're looking at a total of maybe like can you do a 100, maybe a 150 at the most. It kinda depends on what the needs are for our contractors who we work with.

But like I said, CDL is just one part of what we train, right? We train on all the heavy equipment. So, for an apprenticeship to apprentice to journey out, you're looking at almost two years of practical training on-site as well as at our training site.

And I don't wanna assume, but I'm hoping that maybe there might be a potential hiring opportunity after that.

I mean, for us, if in our unions apprenticeship program, you are, put right into it.

Nice. Thank you. Yeah.

Thank you, Chad. That will help our young men who wants to get out to

And women. Yes.

Yeah. And in this day and age, you know, there's the contributions coming out from the young ones who don't wanna extend going out into, college to another state or into the military. There's an opportunity for them to help their families. Okay. Thank you.

Appreciate it. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to SB 2896? Okay. If not, members let's proceed then to, last item on the agenda is SB 2400. And this is relating to transportation.

This exams persons operating wing in ground craft from the application of the Hawaii waters act, and defines wing in ground, craft, as well. This is exciting, exciting for us in this decade and this generation. PUC, thanks for bearing with us today and appreciate your presence.

No problem. Chair, Chair Inouye, Vice Chair Lafontay, Aloha. Good afternoon. And members of the Senate Committee on Transportation. My name is Andrew Okabe.

I'm a utility analyst at the public utilities commission. I'm here on behalf of chair Itamura and the commission. I stand on the commission's written testimony offering comment and supporting the intent of SB 2400. I'll be available for any questions the committee may have. Thank you very much.

Alright. Thank you so much for being here. Appreciate it. Okay. Testifying for Regent Kraft, Michael Prullox.

You're on Zoom.

Hello, chair, vice chair, members of the committee on the

Can I Oh? Yes. And your I'm sorry for that pronunciation. Can you repeat what I What's your name? Michael?

It's it's Michael Peru.

Peru. Thank you.

Yep. No problem. Aloha. Aloha. I'm the regional director for North America at Regent Craft, and I'm here to testify today in strong support of SB 2400.

As you may already know through my written testimony, Regent Craft is the manufacturer of all electric winging ground effect vehicles known as sea gliders. And these sea gliders are a new mode of transportation designed to move people and cargo between coastal communities efficiently. And over the past two years, I've had the privilege of working with an incredible locally grown coalition called the Hawaii Seaguar Initiative.

Our members, which are now 38 in total, range from major airlines like Hawaiian and Southwest to community leading organizations like Kamehameha Schools and the Hawaiian Council, all with the intent, to look at how this technology can solve the state's specific logistics challenges. And through our interactions, we see three clear benefits for Hawaii.

The first being, of course, decarbonization because sea gliders are all electric and they directly support the state goal of a 100% clean energy by 2045. The second is about access and equity. So providing a high speed lifeline for underserved communities. We're talking about improving access to critical care and and lowering the cost of travel to get to that care. And then finally resiliency, so providing rapid emergency response to areas that are difficult to reach.

And this bill is is vital because it recognizes that sea girders are a unique class of innovative vessels and subjecting them to the same PUC regulation as heavy water carriers would create red tape that could stifle innovation and drive up costs for the residents. We would we want to ensure that this remains an affordable and competitive service for Hawaii And, I urge the committee to pass Senate bill 2400 to hope Hawaii lead in sustainable maritime tech.

Mahalo for your time, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Your time is up. However, we want to ask some questions as well. And if you can, can you stay on Zoom with us?

Of course.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. HTDC?

Aloha and

good afternoon. Chair, vice chair, members of the committee. I am David Molinaro with Hawaii Technology Development Corporation. As our written testimony, states, we stand in support of this bill. I'll be here to address any questions you might have.

Thank you. Yes. I think there will be some questions that will, this is something new for us, but this is exciting as well, particularly for me coming from the neighbor islands. Alright. Thank you for being here.

You're welcome. Thank you.

Alright. Maritime Institute, Dave Abrams, in support. Walden Au, HMSA, in support. IBEW local union 1186 in support, grassroots Institute in support. And we also have, yes, David Uchiama in support.

Okay. You'll be available for questions. All right. Justin Pua Oi in support and Thomas McClellan, on zoom or not. Okay.

In support. Michael questions on zoom. This is an interesting, entity, knowing that, here in Hawaii and our island state, and as I say, with the eight islands, but with the four active counties, this is an exciting time. However, I'm kinda curious. So where would you be based out of?

And question why I asked that is your, let's see, your operation is not gas and it's electricity. So wherever you are, you need to connect to the source. So can you answer that for now? Or the plans? What are the plans?

That's a it's a it's a great approach. So first, just our approach is to leverage the existing harbor and dock infrastructure as much as possible. And, you know, Seaguars are really designed to operate from those current facilities and, you know, we're not, you know, coming in and asking for massive new terminals or or dedicated burst things like that. We will need, like you said, shore side charging infrastructure. That's true.

But Sure. I'd encourage the committee to think that not as a cost unique to sea gliders, but as a investment in the future of Hawaii's harbors. Maritime electrification is is happening. It's not a question of if. It's a question of when, and electric vessels of all kinds are coming.

And So the

infrastructure the infrastructure there, if it's not available at anywhere that you decide and work with DOT to see where you'll be Harbored yeah. I guess the connections, the outlets. Are you available to do the infrastructure, or what's what's the plan?

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So so to be clear, we function strictly as the main center. So it would be entirely an operator's decision of where they want to locate their operation.

And there's a few avenues that we've been working through which is you know you could pull power directly from the grid if it is available there. You can you know use a battery electric storage system or potentially work with micro grid providers which is a providers, which is a rising, vertical in the energy industry. So it will ultimately come down to the operator and for the operator to work directly with the location they plan to operate, out of to make those certain decisions.

And that is something that we actively discuss within the sea glider initiative and actively have have looked at different harbors to see their unique setup and what is available in those specific locations.

Do you know other services done in other states right now with sea gliders?

No. Not currently. We have initiatives in in other parts of The United States, specifically being in South Florida and also in in the Northeast. So we're building similar coalitions that would be very reflective of what we've done in Hawaii, but Hawaii is far and wide more advanced from that perspective because we've been doing it much longer here almost two to three years. But we're all all looking, you know, at the same sort of avenues to generate power for those different locations.

Alright. Now with the aircraft, in times of the emergencies, and we know that right now we only have the air services by Hawaiian Airlines in Southwest for for our inter island services. And, you know, right now there's Senator Kanuha and myself, neighbor islands here. However, you know, the services are so critical in terms of, you know we had a bad weather on Monday here in Hawaii the storm that hit us and so there were flight delays as well now the comparison to the sea gliders, in case of heavy winds or whatever, can you still operate?

Yes. So the unique thing about sea gliders is, as you might know, the airplanes typically land into the wind. A sea glider is a maritime vessel, and the landing space is all around it so that provides the added leverage to always face into the wind and in land directly that way.

There will be of course limitations as as every vessel has in these certain conditions, but the unique thing about sea gliders is we have the added benefit of hydrofoils which gives us a greater wave tolerance in these types of conditions. Yes.

And also you know enabling us to take off from a hydro full into flight also helps with the sea state condition so essentially we can fly over those rougher sea states to a more calmer or more open area to service those more obscure or more disconnected locations as you mentioned.

Well, reason I bring that up as well is because there is some our neighbor islands like Molokai and Lanai, you know, who probably is disadvantaged in, in air travels right now, as well. So, I would think that the hearing that I think you'll probably be able to service, you know, our, our constituents there, there are our colleagues, constituents, those that needs to get back to Oahu in case of, you know, healthcare, as well. So there are some benefits, to it now. David, come on up. Yes.

Come on up. NHGDC as well. Yeah. Let's talk story to see where, where we are. I and we're very happy that you've, you folks already have been discussing this issue the last couple of years.

And so, you know, that's an advantage that we have here at this point in time, you know, and and having POC here as well. So where are we with a moment in time sort of, okay. Today, we are hearing this. We don't end the session until, you know, May 8. And so, so what happens if all goes well?

If all goes well, we're, we've identified 12 ports throughout the state.

Okay. Can you identify some of them?

Koihai, Kahului, Maneli Bay, Kanakakai, Kewalo Basin, Kehihu Lagoon, and.

So you'll be actually in areas that it would be accessible, you know, to to many, you know, on the different islands as well. And so are there now, Michael, wait, am I talking to Michael? Are you the producer of the sea glider as well?

The

manufacturer. Yes.

Yes, I am .

Interesting. Okay. So you've identified the ports. Now, okay. I'm familiar with Hilo Bay, Hilo Bay.

So but you're not using the the pier side? No. Okay. So you're going towards, oh, okay. I can see where the like the some of the sailboats are already there.

So do you have to do your own landing or or infrastructure or you need a

Right.

Well, in some ports, there there may be some infrastructure build out in a lot of the ports

Because right now at Hilo Bay, there's none.

Right. But there is, I understand a dock by Hilo Hawaiian?

No. Nani Loa.

Nani Loa.

Yes. That could be a possibility. Yeah. And there's another side closer to the restaurant, the Hilo Bay that used to, I understand years ago, some benefit to to voters or whoever. Okay.

So we're looking at time frame. What now do you need a certification from the state or, you know, I know coast guard.

Yeah.

Coast guard. That's the jurisdiction. And I I thought I surprised and unsurmized that as well.

But but we've been doing this since 2021 and we've done basically community outreach. We'd like to have a local operator. Regent Craft would supply the the vessel, but we we'd like to have Hawaiian as invested in Regent Craft. We're hoping that they come on board.

I see.

I think they would like the larger vehicle. So there's two vehicles, the Viceroy, which is a 12 seater, and the Monarch, which is a 100 seater. So it's more in line with what they they have.

Okay. Yeah. Is are those aircrafts available? Like, Michael, what state are you? Where where are we building these?

So we are building the the seaglider in Rhode Island, and we're in the prototyping phase. So that's us going through the the test case with our campaigns through float, foiling, and flying, and then they'll move through the certification process. And then from there, they'll be manufactured at our facility in Rhode Island and delivered to our operators.

Okay. Great. And please, and David, you folks notify us as soon as you have some aircrafts already done. Many of us, here travel to the Mainland for Conferences, and certainly it would be an opportunity for us, as well as those, perspective, you know, companies that would want to, you know, have, purchase these aircrafts as well. So, keep us posted, and whatever, there, you know, needs to, at least apprise us, with regards to how you're doing going forward.

Good luck.

And this sounds exciting. Thank you so much. Any yes. Senator.

Yes. Question. Mister Chita, would it require EIS? Yes. Okay.

And you guys are in the process now? Yes.

So we've gone through a feasibility study on all of the ports, and we will be entering into an EIS. We're hoping that we can partner with the state to do a blanket EIS for all the locations. So we're working with both Department of Transportation and DLNR.

Thank you. Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you. Any further questions? K. Hearing none, members, thank you. Thank you, Michael, as well.

We'll continue conversation during the coming months as well. Good luck. Okay. Okay. Thanks, David.

Alright. I have a question on

this to this, if it's okay.

Sure. Yeah.

Why don't you At the end of

the day. Yes. Why why don't we we do that now? Senator, Elefante, pertaining before we, go into decision making, you want to go back to what measure? SB?

SB 3337 if deputy director Shishito is still online.

Yeah. What's his first name though?

They're not present on Zoom, chair.

Okay. Okay.

Alright. Why don't you ask the question?

It's okay.

You sure?

Yeah.

Oh, okay. Alright. Then yes? Since we're going back to

nine, we go back to 3313, if I could bring up the AG. Wait. The AG left. Oh, he's still here. Good.

Okay. SB 3313, let's see. Senator, the court has a question relating to interlinear service and, the attorney general.

ma'am. Hi. Thank you so much. In your folks' testimony, you implied that this could not line up with federal regulations.

Yes,

That's correct, Senator.

Okay. So you see this as being a potential concern if we start issuing tax credits. Excuse me. I'm getting confused with some of the bills. 3313.

Okay. Hold on one second. Stay right there.

Oh, okay. Thank you very much. I apologize. Thank you for your patience. Thank you, chair.

So I just wanted to bring highlight that in the event that the state could potentially run into some financial, legal or administrative risks to subsidizing the private airlines.

That's correct, Senator. The current bill, there is a fairly significant legal risk, if it's challenged in court that it would be found to be preempted and false.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you, chair.

Thank you.

Alright. Any further questions for the attorney general? Thanks so much for being here as well. Let's proceed then. Let's see.

Do we have time? Wait. I think we made decision. We don't need to go into recess. Committee on transportation is going into decision making on the measures before us of February twelfth, Thursday.

Okay. On SB 3182, and this is the administrative license revocation. A chair's recommendation is to pass with the amendments. And this is to include the prosecuting attorneys, SD one, which is the Senate version one, which was attached, and as well-being supported, by the judiciary, and the attorney general as well. And so, members SB 3182, relating to administrative license revocation chair's recommendation is to pass with the amendments on the SD one.

Any discussion? Hearing none, vice chair for the vote, chair goes aye.

Chair's recommendation is to pass SB 3182 with amendments, chair and vice chair vote aye. Senator Kanuha? Aye. Senator Lee? Aye.

Senator Descourt?

Aye. Madam chair, recommendations adopted. Okay. Thank you. SB 3313 relating to the inter island air service.

We did have comments from the attorney general and DOTAX recommends, that it, the bill moves forward the vector date to be amended, to apply to the taxable years beginning after 12/31/2027 to allow time for implementation. And the chair, recommendation, is to, pass this with, with DOTAX recommendation and just have future, more discussions on this measure as well, because it goes into the, ways and means committee and judiciary. So chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments on SB 3313, any discussions? Hearing none vice chair for the vote chair goes votes aye.

Chair's recommendation is to pass SB 3313 with amendments of the five members present. Any no vote or vote or reservation? No vote for Senator Decourt. Madam Chair, recommendation's adopted.

Thank you. On SB 3337 relating to taxation. And this, is eliminating the state taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel, for the motor vehicles, department of transportation, opposes this measure, purely because that's what the income of our highways needs, to take care of all our roads, as well as their projects. So chair's recommendation is to defer this measure. Moving on to SB 2896.

Okay.

And this is relating to the commercial driver's licenses and chair's recommendation is to amend this. And we liked the operating engineers, recommendations that, prior to, our 18 year olds, must go through at least two, the trades, to proceed, allowing them to get educated before they get onto the roadways, and work for in, the private sector. Chair's recommendation then is to pass, SB 2896 with amendments. Any discussions? Hearing none, vice chair for the vote.

Chair votes aye.

Chair's recommendation is to pass SB 2896 with amendments of the five members present. Any no votes or votes with reservations? Hearing none, Madam Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Thank you. SB 2400 relating to transportation, chair's recommendations, and we've heard the presentations and it came with a resounding approvals and support. Chair's recommendation is to pass this measure as is unamended. Any discussions?

Hearing none vice chair for the vote chair goes aye.

Chair's recommendation is to pass SB 2400 unamended of the five members present, any no votes or votes or reservations? Hearing none, madam chair, recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, members, and thank you folks for being here as well. This concludes the transportation committee hearing agenda of February 12.