Water Commission staff had initially recommended approval of the permit in April of last year, but public testimony arguing that there had been insufficient analysis or consideration of the possible effects the well might have on the groundwater ecosystem resulted in the commission deferring a decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ruth Loke Aloua and Kimberly Crawford Salina of the community group Hui Ola Ka Wai expressed their concerns that the additional groundwater withdrawals may impact the amount of freshwater flowing into the ocean \u2013 in particular, into the Kaloko fishpond that they look after.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Salina shared results from her water quality studies within the fishpond. \u201c[T]here\u2019s areas in the ki\u2018apua (the nursery pond), that should be able to sustain the life of the pua\u2018ama (mullet), \u2018awa (milkfish), \u0101holehole as well as the damselflies and other native plants and animals. While doing the tests, I consistently saw salinity above the threshold for those to thrive and survive. \u2026 That tells me we\u2019re already at the danger level and need to make smart decisions moving forward so we don\u2019t impact these environments anymore greatly than we already have,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation attorney Ashley Obrey, who represents the hui, told the commission that a decision on Ota Well sets the tone for future groundwater management in North Kona. Is the commission going to allow development that puts coastal resources and traditional and customary practices at risk or is it \u201cwilling to promote reasonable decision making in keeping with your kuleana over water management in Hawa\u02bbi?\u201d she asked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe are inclined to ask for a contested case but that unfortunately puts the burden on Loke, Kim and Hui Ola Ka Wai, which is in violation of Ka Pa\u02bbakai, <\/em>so we would like to give the opportunity for the commission to deny this permit,\u201d she said. Ka Pa\u2019akai <\/em>refers to a court decision that spells out how agencies are required to identify and mitigate impacts a proposed action may have on traditional and customary native Hawaiian practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The commission ultimately deferred voting on the permit so that a Ka Pa\u2019akai <\/em>analysis could be completed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Originally, a symposium on mitigating impacts to traditional and customary practices in the area was going to be convened, but after consulting with lineal descendants of the area and representatives of the \u02bbAha Moku, commission staff instead held 20 h\u0101l\u0101wai, which are \u201csmall intimate gatherings with individual \u2018ohana and practitioners,\u201d according to a staff report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The h\u0101l\u0101wai identified practices and resources connected to Kona\u2019s groundwater, including \u201cmauka and kula gathering and resources, coastal fishing and gathering, limu, fishponds, anchialine ponds, ulu niu and springs for drinking, bathing, and heiau rituals and ceremony,\u201d it adds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conditions<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n On August 16, commission staff recommended approving the well construction permit with several conditions to mitigate the ecological impacts of the additional water withdrawal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201c[W]ells are withdrawing water from aquifers that are recharged by native forests that capture rain on the slopes of Hual\u0101lai. If there\u2019s no investment or reciprocity, then that well development is purely extractive. Families expect water-neutral well development to mitigate impacts and ensure that there are sustainable resources into the future. More specifically, any proposed well development should directly contribute to watershed protection efforts and the collection\/creation of water. For example, if a well is proposing to use 1 million gallons a day, then a contribution to watershed protection that will result in the protection of surface water and\/or ground water quantity must be made to offset that extraction,\u201d the staff report states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Staff proposed a special permit condition that requires the well owner to pay $13,940 a year into the Water Resource Management Fund to assist the state Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) with watershed protection. Staff arrived at that amount by dividing the well capacity (1 mgd) by the sustainable yield for the Keauhou aquifer (38 mgd), then multiplying the result by $525,500, which is the annual cost of water recharge-related activities in the Honua\u02bbula Forest Reserve Watershed Management Plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIf pump capacity increases or decreases, then the contribution will be adjusted accordingly based on the Watershed Management Cost-Share Formula. Management costs increase over time, so it is expected that the management contribution will be revisited every five years,\u201d the special condition states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other required \u201cmauka to makai mitigation measures\u201d include real-time monitoring of rainfall and water levels at the well site; funding, designing, and implementing an annual inventory of resources along the shoreline and nearshore waters of Lanihau 1-2, Moeauoa ahupua\u02bba; and holding annual community meetings to share updates on mitigation measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Also included in the special conditions were requests from the consulted cultural practitioners that the well water not be wasted, that it be reused as much as possible, and that the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant be upgraded to produce high-quality R-1 recycled water.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other special permit conditions included providing water level data from various wells during pumping tests of the Ota Well, conducting a tracer\/isotope study to assess changes in flow direction of high-level water and any connection between high-level and basal aquifer water near the well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Finally, CWRM staff, \u02bbAha Moku, HHFDC, NELHA, DHHL, the National Park Service, and the county DWS must meet at least once a year to collaborate on mitigation measures recommended by the NPS, as well as the special conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Objections<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n While Water Commissioner Mike Buck, a former director of DOFAW, praised the proposed fee for watershed protection, Barbour thought it needed some tweaking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He argued that the groundwater recharge rate, which he said was 86 mgd, should be used in the fee calculation, not the aquifer\u2019s sustainable yield. That would result in an annual fee of only $6,100. He also said he thought the fee should only apply for 20 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe agree to the five-year reassessment [and] would like to see an audit of what the money is used for,\u201d he told the commission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He added that NELHA and HHFDC should not be solely responsible for doing the coastal resources surveys, which are \u201cimpacted by numerous mauka land uses, sea level rise, and stressors to the coastal ecosystem.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201c[W]e propose to contribute up to $5,000 annually for 20 years to the Department of Land and Natural Resources to fund a study beginning with the time that the Pump Installation Permit and Well Management certificate are issued,\u201d he wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe really tried hard to do everything properly over the years. \u2026 I don\u2019t think we tried to fast-track. We tried to be patient and ensure everybody\u2019s concerns are addressed,\u201d he concluded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In written testimony, the Hawai\u02bbi County Department of Water Supply shared Barbour\u2019s recommendations regarding the watershed management fee, adding that it wanted to know what statute or rule allows the commission to impose it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe implementation of this fee could potentially have impacts across Hawai\u02bbi island and the state of Hawai\u02bbi,\u201d it stated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The DWS also stated that it did not agree to funding or doing an annual inventory of coastal resources or collaborating on mitigation measures proposed by the National Park Service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Water Commissioner Neil Hannahs told Barbour he was perplexed by the request to limit the watershed protection fee to 20 years. \u201cWhat, in your data, \u2026 lets you assume it will be less important than it is now?\u201d Hannahs asked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Barbour replied that NELHA may be using a different water source decades from now and did not want to commit to a perpetual fee for a well it may not be using.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dean Minakami, development branch chief for HHFDC, noted that the well has the potential to serve 2,000 homes in North Kona, but the watershed protection fees will be passed onto developers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A First Step<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n \u02bbAha Moku representative Charles Young said the organization sees the mitigation measures as a step in the right direction and a way \u201cto bring our people together to sort through issues in a holistic way.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n He and other members of the public thanked commission deputy director Kaleo Manuel for his work toward developing mitigation measures and the commission for calling for that work to be done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The hui\u2019s Aloua noted that there were a lot of things asked for by h\u0101l\u0101wai participants that were left out of the recommended mitigation measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThis is really just a minimal first step. \u2026 I would hate for it to be modified or downsized because it\u2019s inconvenient,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Obrey added that it was troubling to hear the permit applicants \u201ctry to nickel-and-dime the conditions,\u201d and suggested that if the commission watered them down at all, she may want to ask for a contested case hearing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With regard to the request in the special conditions that the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant be upgraded to produce R-1 water, it was made clear that task would fall solely on the county, not NELHA or HHFDC. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Bobby Command, representing Mayor Mitch Roth, testified that the county does plan to upgrade Kealakehe one day. \u201cHowever, priority is a question. Our number one priority is to upgrade the Hilo Wastewater Treatment Plant.\u201d Upgrading that facility will cost $175 million, he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “We\u2019re aligned with all the goals. It\u2019s matter of cost. \u2026 One of our goals is to get [agriculture] off of potable water,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Commissioner Buck echoed Obrey\u2019s sentiments about the applicants\u2019 reactions to the permit conditions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI\u2019m really surprised the small amount of money \u2026 people are resisting,\u201d he said of the watershed protection fee. He suggested that condition could be amended to clarify that the fee would only apply to an actively used well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAnd just a comment,\u201d he added. \u201cWe keep hearing \u2018What we typically do on these water permits \u2026\u2019 The word \u2018typical\u2019 just is not going to fly anymore in the future, especially for such a water stressed area. In Kona and all the deliberations we\u2019ve had. I just really encourage all the water users to realize times have changed. Climate [change] is coming. The ability to spread the cost of maintaining the public trust, which includes tradition and customary native Hawaiian rights as well as the watershed protection, needs to be incorporated in your use of the water at all levels.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Commissioner Hannahs pushed to add some teeth to the aspirational conditions encouraging more water reuse, but Case expressed her concern that the county will have the ultimate say in how and whether that occurs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cEveryone is recognizing getting to R-1 is a priority. The Hilo situation sounds very important [but] I don\u2019t want us, as a society, to be kicking the can down the road. \u2026 We gotta get there. We\u2019re running out of water. We\u2019re getting a drier society. We\u2019re getting drought. We\u2019re getting fires. We have population increases and this is not getting any better. We do need to move from somebody\u2019s nice idea to reuse water to something \u2026 we\u2019re all recognizing is a critical part of our overall water budget,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hannahs said he agreed but noted that the county could commit zero dollars toward upgrading the Kealakehe plant under the proposed conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Command said there was a possibility of working with HHFDC and maybe with the Water Commission on a memorandum of understanding to get where commissioners and members of the public wanted to go. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe\u2019re committed to doing it. Again it\u2019s a matter of cost,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the end, the commission approved the permit and the special conditions, with Buck\u2019s proposed amendment and a few other small changes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hours after the vote, Barbour requested a contested case hearing. Young and Obrey expressed their interest in being parties to the case should one be granted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2014 Teresa Dawson<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" On August 16, the Commission on Water Resource Management finally approved a permit for the construction of a well to serve the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaiʻi Authority (NELHA) in Keahole and the Hawaiʻi Housing Finance and Development Corporation’s (HHFDC) … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":14627,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[501],"tags":[3],"class_list":["post-14626","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-september-2022","tag-teresa-dawson"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14626","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14626"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14626\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/14627"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14626"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14626"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14626"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/Image-8-25-22-at-7.07-PM.jpg\")
<\/a>