Relating To Declaration Of Water Shortage And Emergency.
Summary
SB145 amends Hawaii law governing how the Commission on Water Resource Management may declare and respond to water shortages and related emergencies. The bill expands the commission’s authority to declare a shortage in all or part of an area whether inside or outside a designated water management area, and it directs the commission to adopt published criteria for determining shortages, expressly including impacts and effects of the climate crisis. It also clarifies that shortage plans and permit classifications may apply to well and stream diversion works owners and operators outside management areas.
The bill also strengthens notice requirements. When a shortage is declared, the commission must publish notice in a newspaper of general circulation and on its website, with repeated publication over time until the declaration is rescinded. Permit holders must also be notified by regular mail and, when available, email of permit changes, suspensions, or other restrictions during the shortage. If a shortage escalates into an emergency and existing restrictions are not enough to protect public health, safety, welfare, or other listed uses and resources, the commission may issue emergency orders requiring actions such as apportioning, rotating, limiting, or prohibiting water use, subject to expedited hearing rights for affected parties.
Impact
SB145 would amend Section 174C-62 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, broadening the geographic scope and procedural framework for water shortage declarations and emergency orders. It would give the commission clearer authority to act outside water management areas, require rule-based criteria for shortage determinations, add website and electronic notice requirements, and extend the reach of restrictions to certain well and stream diversion works owners and operators. The bill would therefore affect water users, permittees, and water resource managers by making shortage planning more explicit, more public, and more adaptable to drought and climate-related conditions.
Sentiment
The available committee votes suggest strong support and little opposition. The bill passed the Senate Water and Land Committee 5-0 and the Senate Judiciary Committee 4-0, both unamended. The absence of recorded dissent or amendments indicates that the measure was viewed favorably as a practical response to drought conditions and the need for clearer water shortage procedures.
Contention
No major contention is reflected in the available transcripts or voting history. The main policy choices embedded in the bill are the expansion of commission authority beyond water management areas, the inclusion of climate crisis impacts in shortage criteria, and the enhanced notice and emergency powers. If any concerns existed, they would likely have centered on the breadth of regulatory authority, the effect on permit holders and water users, and the balance between rapid emergency action and due process, but those concerns are not documented in the provided materials.