In place of hollowed-out bottle ban, House takes a shot at mining permit reform

A bill proposed earlier this year as a path to reducing plastic pollution in New Hampshire has been put on a different course with a replace-all amendment regarding mining and prospecting.

House Bill 1141 was sponsored by Democratic Rep. Tony Caplan of Henniker and originally sought to forbid the use of plastic bottles in any future New Hampshire water bottling operations. New Hampshire has a waste problem, Caplan said in December, and he intended the bill to help stem the flow.

But an amendment approved by the House in March changed the title and all contents of the proposal, shifting its focus to the processing of mining applications in the state. The amended bill generated some discussion before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Tuesday, April 21. 

Amendment author Rep. Judy Aron said she was inspired to propose the language in response to a mining company’s struggle to obtain a permit for an operation in her town of Acworth. Aron, a Republican, is also the chair of the House Committee on Environment and Agriculture. 

“The current application process is really unacceptable,” she said at the Senate hearing on Tuesday. Her goal, she added, was to update and “streamline” outdated mining permit rules. 

The amendment proposes repealing some state laws governing mining, including RSA 12-E, “Mining and reclamation.” Certain provisions are shifted into a section of state law governing water pollution and waste disposal, which already contained a section relative to the permitting of mining, excavation, and other activities that would alter the state’s terrain and existing water bodies or water runoff patterns. The amendment adds “prospecting” to that list of activities and expands the scope of projects subject to permit requirements through that section.

The proposal would also shift the responsibility for issuing mining permits away from the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources and on to the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. 

Representatives of both departments said on Tuesday they supported the change. Richard Head, an attorney for the Department of Environmental Services, said that department and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources were currently both involved in the permitting of mining. Cultural Resources handles applications for smaller mines, while Environmental Services deals with applications for operations over 100,000 square feet, he said.

More from this section

Movies and TV shows casting in Portsmouth

The proposal would also lower some fees for certain smaller applications, lowering the base fee from $500 to $250 and reducing the additional cost, based on the area of the proposed operation, from $0.05 to $0.04 per square foot of disturbed ground.

Sen. David Watters, a Democrat from Dover, questioned a provision that removed the requirement for the two departments to consult on an application regarding its potential to disrupt historic sites.

Aron said the removal of that requirement was the result of conversations between the departments during the drafting process. “I don’t really suspect that, you know, there would be mining permitting going on if there was some sort of historical thing nearby, or in that area,” she said.

But Watters requested a change to the language to preserve the requirement that the Department of Environmental Services consult with the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources.

“I just would like some assurance in statute that the rule making would incorporate consultation with cultural resources, particularly on, you know, historic burying grounds, archaeological sites, Native American and other,” he said. 

Head said that a requirement to consider a site’s history could be added to the bill. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Commissioner Adam Crepeau said later that it had not been included because historic review was not currently a requirement for a mining permit.

The committee has not yet voted on whether to recommend the amended bill for passage.