This Week in Dover

By Tyler Micik

A new environmental justice proposal, HB 422, known as “cumulative impacts” was introduced today. The bill has been assigned to the House Natural Resources & Energy Committee. The State Chamber is opposed and has significant concerns with the bill. The proposal would require any businesses seeking a permit for a new facility, expansion of an existing facility, or renewal of an existing permit, located in or an overburdened community, to provide an environmental justice impact report. It would also establish an “Environmental Justice Board” comprised primarily of persons within the impacted community, who would be tasked with reviewing the report and making recommendations to DNREC.  Based on the recommendations, DNREC could impose additional conditions on the permit or deny the permit, even if the applicant meets all applicable permit criteria and operates in good faith.
 
Bills that saw movement this week included:
 
HS 2 for HB 350: Hospital Cost Review Board

• Status: Passed the Senate. Senate Amendment 1 also passed. The bill and amendment now move back to the House for consideration. | Position: Opposed

 
SB 258: Autonomous Vehicles  

• Status: Released from Senate Banking, Business, Insurance & Technology Committee and placed on the Senate Ready List. | Position: Opposed
• We offered the following testimony in committee: “This proposal would require a “human observer” to be physically present in all autonomous vehicles weighing over 10,000 pounds, effectively banning autonomous trucks in Delaware. AVs could help augment the workforce and solve supply chain issues and workforce shortages. According to the American Trucking Association, there’s a nationwide shortage of nearly 80,000 truck drivers and that’s set to double by 2031. Delaware needs truck drivers and AV’s. Delaware should be supporting AV operation and reducing barriers to the deployment of AV’s. No other state requires a human observer to be present in the vehicle…If passed, this will make Delaware an outlier and could forestall AV investment, development, and operations in the state.”

 
HB 127: Fire Protection Fees

• Status: Released from Senate Elections & Government Affairs Committee and placed on the Senate Ready List. | Position: Opposed
• We offered the following testimony in committee: “The State Chamber acknowledges the valuable service fire companies provide to all of us and we understand the reasoning behind the bill. However, we have concerns with the proposal because it only applies to businesses.* We all benefit from the services of fire companies, and everyone should share in the expense. Additionally, we’re concerned because it grants the counites broad and ambiguous authority. They decide whether to impose the fee, there’s no cap on the fee they could charge, and this establishes penalties for failure to pay.”

 
SB 290: Protection of Wetlands

• The bill was heard in committee but will be replaced by a substitute and go back through the committee process. During the hearing, the sponsor committed to working with interested stakeholders to form a working group and come up with a substitute that reflects their feedback due to requests from the public. The State Chamber will participate in those discussions and will share a copy of the substitute once it is introduced.
• However, the State Chamber is opposed to the bill as written and stated the following during the hearing: “The State Chamber understands the intent of the bill, which is to fill a gap left by changes in Federal wetlands jurisdiction. However, we have significant and meaningful concerns with the proposal before you today. For example, it appears to establish a permitting requirement from DNREC for “construction of any kind” in any wetlands, regardless of acreage or linear feet involved. This is overly burdensome, ambiguous in size and scope, and will impact businesses throughout the state. Essentially, it could impact anyone that builds, digs, or has anything located in wetlands. Businesses, including our members, invest thousands of dollars to protect the environment and communities in which they operate, live, and work. They understand the economic and ecological value wetlands offer. We oppose SB 290 and hope to work with the sponsor to come to a solution that recognizes the concerns of businesses while accomplishing the goal of this proposal.”

 
The General Assembly will be in session next week and then go on JFC break for two weeks. It’s likely some of these bills and others like HS 2 for HB 55 (The Homeless Bill of Rights) could see movement next week. You can view the latest draft substitute bill here, which is being circulated by the sponsor for feedback. The State Chamber remains opposed to the bill and the draft substitute.
 
If you have questions or feedback about any of these bills or others, please contact me at [email protected]. ​

*Editor's note: After publishing this article, clarification was received by the bill sponsor that this bill applies to both businesses and residents. 

---