Committee hears broad support but practical concerns on CRB biosecurity bill

Acting Vice Chair Matthias Kush presided over testimony on SB2885 SD1, a measure to establish mandatory handling and storage rules for commercial and residential coconut rhinoceros beetle (CRB) host material beginning Jan. 1, 2027.

Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity representative Bridal Yu told the committee the department stands on its written testimony and supports the bill. Patrick Chi of the Department of Land and Natural Resources said the measure would help reduce CRB spread but noted that other science-backed response options exist that could be added.

Marvin Mann of Hawaiian Earth Recycling summarized written comments offering practical amendments. "We respectfully offer several recommendations to strengthen this bill based on practicality and experience," Mann said, urging the committee to: explicitly include erosion-control materials as potential CRB hosts; align the measure with Department of Health and EPA solid-waste regulations and permitting; allow future, state‑validated treatment methods; and replace the bill’s 60‑day pile‑turning requirement with approaches tied to established thermophilic performance standards (for example, achieving minimum temperatures consistent with PFRP).

Public commenters and community speakers emphasized cultural and outreach concerns. Daniel Anthony told members that past response efforts lacked community and cultural consultation and urged creation of a cultural advisement role so work on coconuts reflects subsistence and customary practice. "We're asking for the state's help to equip those hard‑to‑reach communities with the necessary equipment so that we can fight this in our community," Anthony said.

Committee members pressed witnesses on enforcement and logistics for rural areas without municipal green‑waste collection. DAB staff said they expect Department of Health and local counties to play roles on solid‑waste regulation and described an "educate before you regulate" enforcement approach; they acknowledged practical barriers to establishing state‑run drop‑off sites (land availability, liability, security).

Because committee members raised concerns that some regulatory language (notably the 60‑day turning requirement) may conflict with existing DOH standards and county variations, the committee deferred SB2885 for further work later in the session.

The committee did not adopt new statutory text during the hearing; witnesses and stakeholders were left to work with staff on aligning the bill’s technical standards and implementation details.