HB1802 establishes a new conservation banking framework in Hawaii law for threatened, endangered, candidate, and proposed species. It authorizes the Department of Land and Natural Resources, as well as certain public or private bank sponsors, to seek approval from the Board of Land and Natural Resources to create and operate conservation banks that generate credits used as compensatory mitigation under approved incidental take licenses and habitat conservation plans. The bill defines key terms such as credits, credit bundling, credit stacking, performance standards, monitoring requirements, and site protection instruments, and it sets out the required contents of a conservation bank instrument, including a resource management plan, financial assurances, and long-term stewardship measures.
The bill also creates a detailed approval, oversight, and enforcement process. Conservation bank applications must be reviewed by the endangered species recovery committee, and board approval requires a two-thirds vote. The committee is given explicit authority to review conservation bank applications, conduct annual compliance reviews, and make recommendations on approvals, amendments, or rejections. The bill allows credits to be sold or transferred only after they are created under the approved system, prohibits credit stacking, limits credit bundling to one use, and retires credits once used. It also authorizes the department to collect fees for rulemaking, application processing, and ongoing oversight, and it excludes aquatic life and their habitats from the new part.
HB1802 also amends the membership of the endangered species recovery committee by replacing a prior federal USGS position with the associate director of the United States Geological Survey, Ecosystem Mission Area. The committee’s duties are expanded to include conservation banks and conservation bank instruments, and its site-visit limit is updated to include those instruments. The bill directs the department to adopt implementing rules and makes the new provisions effective upon approval.
The bill’s impact on state law is to add a formal statutory conservation banking program to Chapter 195D, creating a market-based mitigation tool for species conservation and land-use permitting. It gives DLNR and private or public sponsors a clearer legal pathway to establish banks, sell mitigation credits, and operate under enforceable standards, while also strengthening committee oversight and tying approvals to scientific review, financial assurance, and long-term land protection. It also changes the composition and responsibilities of the endangered species recovery committee to reflect the new program.
The overall sentiment appears strongly favorable and noncontroversial. The bill passed Senate Water, Land, and Agriculture, Senate Ways and Means, and the conference committees unanimously or near-unanimously, and it was transmitted to the Governor. The main policy support reflected in the bill text is that conservation banks can increase certainty, speed project review, and make mitigation costs more predictable while providing long-term habitat protection. Any contention appears limited and technical rather than ideological, centered on safeguards such as scientific standards, committee oversight, credit rules, and ensuring that private sponsors have adequate expertise, funding, and land protection before credits can be used.
HB1802 adds a new conservation banking part to Chapter 195D, Hawaii Revised Statutes, creating a statutory process for approving, operating, monitoring, amending, suspending, and revoking conservation banks used as compensatory mitigation for incidental take permits and habitat conservation plans. It also amends the endangered species recovery committee statute to include conservation bank review and to update committee membership, while authorizing DLNR to adopt implementing rules and collect fees from bank sponsors for administrative and oversight costs.
The bill appears to have broad support and little recorded opposition. It advanced through Senate committees and conference with unanimous or near-unanimous votes, and the bill text frames conservation banking as a way to improve certainty, efficiency, and predictability while protecting species. The discussion record provided contains no transcript-based criticism, suggesting the measure was viewed as a technical conservation and permitting reform rather than a contested policy change.
The main points of potential contention are procedural and regulatory rather than partisan. The bill gives the Board of Land and Natural Resources significant discretion, requires a two-thirds board vote, and bars approval if the endangered species recovery committee recommends disapproval, which may concern applicants seeking faster approvals. Private bank sponsors must show scientific and technical competence, financial assurances, and durable site protection, and credits cannot be stacked or reused, reflecting a cautious approach to mitigation integrity. The bill also excludes aquatic life and habitats, which narrows its scope, but no specific opposition is reflected in the available record.