When will All American Trucking remove its unauthorized baseyard on the state’s ‘Ewa feedlot parcel at Campbell Industrial Park?
“If we have to ask the question six ways from Sunday, it gets frustrating,” Kaiwi Yoon told Hawai‘i Meats president Bobby Farias at the December 9 meeting of the state Board of Land and Natural Resources.
Yoon and his fellow board members were faced that day with a recommendation from the Department of and and Natural Resources’ Land Division to seek the cancellation of former governor David Ige’s 2019 executive order transferring the 110-acre parcel known as the ‘Ewa feedlot from the DLNR to the state Department of Agriculture (DOA).
Hawai‘i Meats operates the state’s largest slaughterhouse on an adjacent property. Its affiliate Hawai‘i Land & Livestock, also run by Farias, was granted a 35-year lease for the feedlot by the Board of Agriculture in late 2019 for use as a holding area for cattle awaiting slaughter. The company also needed the parcel as an additional water source for the slaughterhouse.
The Land Division argued that in the few years that the company has controlled the property, it has not been using it for agricultural purposes in accordance with the executive order. Rather, it has allowed a trucking company to establish a baseyard or “bone yard” on a large swath and left the rest of the land unused.
That company, All American Trucking, LLC, is not a business registered with the state Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs. Owner Robert “Brian” Ka‘aha‘aina’s previous company, American Hauling, was involuntarily dissolved years ago.
Farias argued that the trucking company has been providing essential equipment repair and land clearing services to Hawai‘i Land & Livestock, with permission from the DOA.
But the baseyard grew to include equipment and material not related to agricultural operations and after repeated inspections, the DOA issued Hawai‘i Land & Livestock a cease-and-desist notice on November 15 requiring the trucking company to vacate the property in two weeks.
It was still there when the Land Board met on December 9. Board members repeatedly pressed Farias, as well as the DOA deputy director Morris Atta, for an estimate of how long it would take for the trucking company to leave.
Farias finally replied, “Within a year, I know we can do it. I’m not going to be put on the spot to give some time frame that I cannot adhere to. … I’m near-positive it can happen sooner. That’s the best I can do.”
Parenting Styles
The Land Division’s recommendation came several months after the Land Board granted Eurus Energy America, LLC, a right-of-entry permit to conduct due diligence studies of the property. The board granted the permit over objections from Farias, as well as former DOA director Scott Enright, who both argued that the move signaled a lack of support for agriculture and food self-sufficiency.
Eurus is interested in developing a solar farm on the lot and using the power generated to create hydrogen, which it could then sell to Hawai‘i Gas. In its permit application, it suggested that it would use 90 acres, leaving 20 for the cattle holding area. Raising the solar panels to allow cattle to graze underneath is also a possibility, albeit a more expensive one.
Under the 2019 EO, the Land Board retained its right to enter into renewable energy leases for the property, so long as they did not unreasonably interfere with the DOA’s activities there.
Back in April, Farias insisted that the energy project would be incompatible with his cattle operation and that somehow, it would threaten his lease with the DOA. Land Division administrator Russell Tsuji clarified that any Land Board lease to Eurus would not void HLL’s lease with the DOA.
When the Land Division released its recommendation in late November to cancel the EO, Farias not only objected, he asked for an investigation by the Attorney General and the Governor’s office.
In a November 29 letter to then-Land Board chair and DLNR director Suzanne Case, Farias asked the Land Board to defer acting on the Land Division’s recommendation to cancel the EO.
“While we have cooperated in spite of our objections to Eurus’ right-of-entry, we are fully cognizant of them and your intent to use the property solely for energy purposes. Your hasty potential actions, at the December 9th meeting, the last DLNR board meeting prior to the installation of the new administration is evidence of this intent. … [T]his is not pono,” he wrote.
With regard to the Land Division’s given reason for the EO cancellation — the trucking baseyard and the lack of agricultural activities — Farias noted that the DOA had initially consented to the trucking company’s presence because it provided “integral services to our meat processing facility.”
He added that given the concerns that had been raised by the Land Board and the Land Division, “we worked with the DOA land agent to rectify the situation, clearing on a monthly basis as much of the unnecessary equipment, etc., onsite,” he wrote.
Although the DOA had given a deadline of November 30 for the trucking company to vacate, Farias insisted that it was impossible. “They have yet to find an alternate location and there is simply too much to move within such a short period of time. The imposed deadlines are arbitrary and unreasonable. Your further actions, that of requesting that the Executive Order transferring the parcel from Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) to DOA be rescinded, is equally arbitrary and unreasonable,” he wrote.
Written testimony submitted by DOA then-director Phyllis Shimabukuro-Geiser blamed COVID restrictions and related economic impacts for inhibiting HLL’s progress toward making the lot usable.
“The delayed plans included clearing the premises of abandoned equipment and remnants of derelict livestock pens, concrete troughs, abandoned vehicles, and derelict livestock loading machinery that were abandoned and left by previous occupants of the land when the lease expired,” she wrote.
She added that a Brownfields study of hazardous materials on site “was of significant concern as it became apparent from DOA’s research that no follow-up studies or remediation work had been done prior to the parcel’s transfer to DOA. DOA met with DOH staff regarding the study and it was determined that applications for funding of further studies could be made through DLNR, the landowner.”
What’s more, homeless encampments that pre-dated the EO “needed to be humanely handled and its occupants relocated to new locations off the premises,” she wrote.
She stated that her department had serious concerns about the DLNR’s proposed EO cancellation.
“The set-aside for this land was accomplished through extensive negotiations and legislative input concluding that the additional acreage and water allocations were critical to the upgrading and long-term expansion plans of the existing slaughter operations, which provide invaluable meat processing capacity for the state. All parties agreed, at the urging of legislative leaders, that giving HDOA management jurisdiction was the appropriate way to achieve those objectives. Historically, when DLNR sets aside public lands to other agencies, those agencies would be afforded the courtesy of reasonable time to remedy any use or non-use compliance issues that may occur on the transferred lands prior to seeking a return of those lands. It is our understanding that in most instances that time period would be measured in multiple years if not more. We are not aware of any reasons why this situation would require different treatment and would prefer to be provided a reasonable opportunity to cure any compliance matters that are the source of DLNR’s concerns. In fact, HDOA has initiated such enforcement action and it is our understanding that the lessee is in the process of taking actions to bring those matters into compliance. Given that the current lease is an HDOA lease that is issued for agricultural use, we believe continued management by HDOA would be proper and appropriate. Moreover, to the extent that this action could in any way diminish or hinder HDOA’s efforts to support agriculture and pursue food sustainability and security, we urge restraint in pursuing this course of action,” she finished.
At the Land Board’s meeting, Tsuji reiterated that the set aside was not for industrial uses and certainly not a “bone yard,” adding that his division has recommended lease termination in cases where such uses were occurring on DLNR lands designated for agriculture.
He said that while giving a tenant years to resolve a problem or default may be a courteous way to handle things, the DLNR has faced lawsuits over how it’s managed state lands leased to or controlled by the U.S. military (Pohakuloa) and the University of Hawai‘i (Mauna Kea).
Board chair Case also explained to the DOA’s Atta, a former Land Division administrator himself, “You have your priorities and we have our priorities and sometimes they don’t mesh. … I have the utmost respect for you and Phyllis.”
The EO reserves the Land Board’s ability to do a renewable energy project, but Farias is “not on board with that. … It should be a cooperative relationship,” she said.
As of two days before the Land Board meeting, the property still wasn’t being used for agriculture. “Worse, it’s being used as baseyard. That’s an economic use,” she said.
Farias replied that he was open to any kind of partnership regarding a renewable energy project, but on his third meeting with Eurus, “they said they needed a direct lease and 90 acres. That is the non-compromise.”
With regard to the baseyard, he was clearly torn over its removal. On the one hand, he assured the Land Board that the cease-and- desist order would eventually be complied with. On the other, he explained that the slaughterhouse is a factory that requires a certain level of industrial support.
More than $25 million has been spent upgrading the adjacent slaughterhouse, he said. “It’s way overbuilt. … Hopefully, we can grow into it.”
He added that he has been clearing the feedlot parcel over the past year and that perimeter fencing still needs to be installed.
Land Board member Riley Smith said he was fine with some earth-moving equipment kept on the property, but not U-Hauls and broken machines.
Farias said that All American Trucking, which has been using the feedlot as its home base, does have access to another lot that is too small to hold all of its equipment.
Atta said later that the DOA understood that not everything on the feedlot property was going to be for moving earth but had concluded that the trucking company was supporting Farias’ plans. “We didn’t know specific arrangements for compensation. That really wasn’t a concern,” he said.
Getting the property in shape will take years, he continued. “As long was we didn’t see any egregious conduct, we held off [enforcement]. … We’re trying to support this last slaughterhouse,” he said.
Board member Aimee Barnes expressed some sympathy for Farias, given that the DOA had initially supported the trucking company’s presence.
“The nature of modern agriculture is more industrial than we might like to think it is,” Barnes said.
She also had questions about the proposed energy project, noting that using solar power to produce hydrogen is a super water-intensive process. “Where is the water for that coming from?” she asked. The water needs for both projects needed to be kept in mind moving forward, she said.
She predicted that conflicts between agricultural and energy uses will continue to come before the Land Board. “I feel a little bit like we [DOA and DLNR] are parents with different approaches to parenting. Maybe you guys are free-range and we’re helicopter parents.”
She encouraged Land Division staff to figure out how to be aligned with the DOA on how it approaches people like Farias. “I think where we get into trouble is sending different messages and creating confusion in terms of what the right approach is,” she said.
The board ultimately voted to defer acting on the Land Division’s recommendation for 60 days but asked that Farias return to the Land Board in February with a schedule for the baseyard’s removal and plans for the property’s use.
Allowed Uses
As of press time, Eurus was nearly complete with its study of the property. If the company chooses to move forward with a lease — if it’s found to not interfere with the agricultural activities — it must first complete an environmental assessment.
In addition to Eurus with its solar-to-hydrogen project, O‘ahu hog farmers have also expressed interest in using a portion of the feedlot for their own slaughter facility, although a recent feasibility study done by EKNA Services, Inc., for the DOA suggests it might be quite an expensive endeavor. Such a facility, which has been estimated to take up no more than five acres, would also require an EA.
The use of the feedlot as a grazing and holding area for cattle was last assessed in a 1999 environmental assessment for a proposed Barbers Point agricultural park slaughterhouse and meat processing plant. The EA, prepared by Engineering Concepts, Inc., for the Palama Meat Company, Inc., and Hawai‘i Livestock Cooperative, covered both the slaughterhouse parcel as well as a portion of the feedlot parcel.
With regard to the feedlot parcel, the EA evaluated the potential environmental impacts of using just 24 acres as a wastewater effluent disposal area and potential animal grazing and holding area.
No uses were considered within the makai third of the parcel, which lies within the city’s Special Management Area.
The slaughterhouse capacity was anticipated to be 40 head of cattle and 200 hogs per day. It would require a 5,000-square-foot pen capable of holding up to 100 animals for up to one week.
“California grass or other forage crop could be grown within the effluent disposal area and probably grazed by animals prior to slaughter,” it stated. It anticipated that the maximum carrying capacity for the 24-acre holding area would be four to five head per acre, although it stated that 10 head per acre was a “manageable density” with regard to animal waste impacts.
No agricultural park was ever established.
Farias’ current vision for the property is quite different. Although the adjacent slaughterhouse does process hogs twice a month, the facility will be used mainly for cattle.
Back in April, he told the Land Board he planned to construct pens across the entire 110 acres for grass-fed cattle. The longer the stay, the larger the pen. The smallest pens would be closest to the slaughterhouse.
“It would look somewhat like a rotational grazing project,” he said.
The parcel would serve as a holding area for cattle, many of which would come from off-island. He said he would want to secure enough animals to keep the slaughterhouse busy and suggested that all 110 acres would be needed.
“We’re going to have to have a certain amount of cattle. Surge tank is the best term,” he said. Those cattle would need to be on the lot for one month to get acclimated, he continued. Ample space also needs to be available for an emergency, such as a fire at Parker Ranch on Hawai‘i island. The ranch’s cattle could be shipped to the ‘Ewa property. “Otherwise, the only option would be to euthanize,” he said.
Farias said that he didn’t think the parcel would be a good place to grow feed for the cattle to graze on and suggested that bales could be brought in from elsewhere on the island.
Last month, he said that five to ten cattle per acre, or up to 20 per acre, would fit on the 110 acres. He also changed his position on the cattle feed.
He said he planned to clear the property and lay down topsoil to grow forage.
“It’s gonna take some work to get that place to grow enough forage to hold animals,” he said.
Contamination
Whether Farias brings in bales or grows forage, any use of the property without further environmental study could be premature.
In 2007, with a small EPA Brownfields grant secured by the Department of Business and Economic Development and Tourism, EnviroServices & Training Center, LLC conducted an environmental site assessment (ESA) for the property.
The Phase 1 ESA report noted that some portions of the property had been used for bioremediation of petroleum-contaminated soil by Aloha Bio when Hawai‘i Meat Company leased the land. Another area had been used in the past for sugarcane cultivation. Old structures had been abandoned and the property was littered with solid waste. The report suggested that contaminants may have also migrated from several adjacent industrial and military sites.
For Phase 2, the consultant sampled groundwater and soil from 13 areas, or decision units (DU), and found contaminants throughout the property, some at levels beyond the state Department of Health’s environmental action levels for both residential and commercial use.
Even so, EnviroServices stated in a June 2008 briefing to DBEDT that based on the findings, “preliminary remedial actions cannot be identified at this time without collection of additional data.”
It did state that for commercial uses, “impacts to sensitive populations do not appear to be a concern and actions to minimize other impacts would be minimal.” However, it added that before any commercial redevelopment of the property, further investigation be done of surface and subsurface soils and groundwater to identify the extent and magnitude of the contaminants’ impacts.
“The soil investigation should be focused … within decision units DU1 and DU11 for petroleum-related impacts … and surface soil within the decision unit DU5 for dieldrin and petroleum-related impacts.
“The groundwater investigation should focus on potential for off-site migration of petroleum-related contaminants onto the property, particularly TPH-DRO in the vicinity of boring B6 located across Olai Street from the Hawai‘i Independent Oil Refinery,” the briefing stated.
Calen Miyahara of the Department of Health’s Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) branch agreed that more work needed to be done. In a letter to the DLNR commenting on a draft of the Phase 2 ESA, Miyahara stated that if funding is secured for further site characterization, the range of pollution, both down into the soil and across the surface, should be investigated.
When the final report came out in November 2008, Miyahara suggested in a February 2009 letter to the DLNR that the specific environmental hazards be identified. He also stated that the contaminants of potential concern “need to be evaluated in more detail in order for the property to be redeveloped.”
Further investigation, he said, should: “State whether additional investigation is really needed for commercial/industriaI use of the site. Indicate whether direct-exposure hazards are high enough to warrant capping or removal of soil, or are action levels only marginally exceeded. State whether the lateral and/or vertical extent of contamination with a given [unit] need to be better defined to develop a conceptual site model. Discuss whether leaching tests need to be carried out on soil that poses potential leaching hazards, or do groundwater data indicate that significant leaching of the flagged contaminants is not occurring. Indicate whether vapor intrusion a potential hazard for future commercial/ industrial buildings in areas where petroleum contaminated was identified.”
It does not appear from DOH records that any of those revisions to the Phase 2 ESA were made. Even so, the DLNR entered into a development agreement with a renewable energy company that planned to develop a solar farm on the property. That project failed to secure a power purchase agreement with Hawaiian Electric Company and ultimately fizzled.
When asked about the current proposed uses of the site, HEER chief Fenix Grange said it was her understanding from speaking with the DOA that the cattle pens would occupy a small portion of the property.
The DOA’s Atta said he believed the ESA was done in advance of the DLNR’s efforts to lease the property for renewable energy development and seemed doubtful that it would impede HLL’s use of the property.“I don’t have any specific answers about the ESA. It was done for a different purpose. I don’t think the current use was anticipated what the ESA was done,” he said.
He added that the former DOA director’s testimony to the Land Board that the contamination on site had contributed to the delay in developing the property “needs to be read in context.” He suggested that she was referring to the possible development of a small animal slaughter facility, not the cattle-holding pens.
The contamination is an obstacle to putting a small animal slaughter facility on the property, Atta said. The smaller facility is being considered because local hog farmers have complained that the slaughterhouse charges too much and doesn’t have an accommodating schedule.
“There were going to be issues raised if you build a slaughter facility. There are different concerns that need to be addressed — wastewater, offal,” he said. He added that the Special Management Area that covers the makai section of the property heightens the environmental concern.
“It would probably warrant a second look. … When Phyllis made that statement, those are unanswered questions. Are there going to be ESA-type issues that still need to be addressed? There is a big difference between feedlot versus building a slaughter facility on that footprint and all the infrastructure that needs to support that facility,” he said.
With regard to putting cattle on the property, all 110 acres may eventually be used, he said. “It depends how many animals we end up having to bring from the neighbor islands.”
The small animal slaughterhouse, mobile or modular, would take up three to five acres of the lot, but there has only been a feasibility study to date. And that study showed that it would cost more per head to develop and run a new facility than the current slaughterhouse charges.
The study noted that the Phase 2 ESA revealed that the northeast area of the feedlot where the mobile/modular slaughterhouse would go contains arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and dioxins/furans, along with organochlorine pesticides, chlorinated herbicides, and triazine herbicides as much as six inches below ground surface.
“All the constituents are below the environmental action levels. As the area will be paved, exposure to humans and/or animals will be greatly reduced. … [C]ontaminants that were reported as over the EAL within DU7 and DU8 in the Phase II EAL, such as toxaphene, are no longer over the EAL. Therefore, additional coordination with the Hawai‘i Department of Health is required,” it states.
Atta said that for feedlot purposes, nothing further needed to be done, but “if we were to proceed to build a small animal slaughter facility … before any money is spent, it would be prudent to do another ESA or a supplemental one.”
— Teresa Dawson
Me
The trucking company does not provide any on-going service to Hawaii Meats.