|
LEE: Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Clarkson, Commissioners, Commission staff As I
<br />mentioned earlier, I'm still Warren Lee, the president of Hu Honua Bioenergy LLC. Our petition
<br />for a declaratory ruling seeks to confirm our understanding that, one, the Condition No. 5, which
<br />limits sound levels and noise, only applies to noise during plant operations, and not during
<br />construction of the plant itself, and secondly, the sound limitations in Condition No. 5 apply to
<br />normal plant operations only, and not during emergency or other non -normal situations.
<br />Condition No. 5 states, "Sound levels shall follow Department of Health rules for residential
<br />areas (55 dBA daytime), HAR, Title 11, Chapter 46 (Community Noise Control), and noise at
<br />the site property boundary shall be limited to 55 dBA at all times. Fuel truck deliveries shall be
<br />permitted only between the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The use of `fake brakes' shall be
<br />prohibited on Sugar Mill Road."
<br />Regarding the 55 dBA limitation during operations only, Condition 5 talks about noise at the site
<br />property boundary be limited to 55 dBA at all times, and also says that fuel deliveries, which will
<br />only happen during the hours of operations by the way, are only permitted between 6:00 a.m. to
<br />6:00 p.m. But nothing in the condition specifically addresses sound levels or noise during pre -
<br />operations or construction of the plant. Our understanding has always been that at all times
<br />means at all times during normal plant operations—excuse me [for coughing].
<br />On December 27, 2017, the Planning Department issued a letter informing Hu Honua that it
<br />"cannot conclude that there is a clear enough distinction between operational noise and
<br />construction noise in relation to Condition Number 5, which states `at all times."' So the
<br />Planning Department instructed us to request clarification by the Planning Commission to
<br />specify whether Condition No. 5 allows for flexibility during construction activities.
<br />So, although Hu Honua believes SMA Permit 221, Condition No. 5 is clear, when read together
<br />with the entire June 7, 2011, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order, that
<br />the 55 dBA noise level was intended to apply to normal operational noise only, and not pre-
<br />operation construction noise, Hu Honua has filed the instant petition to seek clarification on the
<br />applicability of Condition No. 5.
<br />Findings of Fact, 49, 50, and 51 either specifically state or imply that the noise limitation applies
<br />to operational noise, such as during plant operations. We discussed this in detail in our petition
<br />filed on February 27. None of these three Findings of Fact provisions nor any other provision in
<br />the Decision and Order specifically places a limitation on noise during construction. Condition
<br />No. 4 states that the operation of the biomass facility shall comply with all applicable County,
<br />State and Federal requirements related to air quality, water quality and discharge, and noise. We
<br />understood this to mean that the default County, State, and Federal requirements relating to noise
<br />would apply during construction.
<br />In addition, during the contested case hearing in 2010 testimony and evidence was offered on the
<br />issue of noise during plant operations and its mitigation. Specifically, the following testimony
<br />and evidence were presented: The intervenors have raised the issue of noise related to plant
<br />operations and the delivery of biomass; Hu Honua is zoned as an industrial site, and has
<br />voluntarily agreed to a permit condition that limits the noise at the site property boundary to 55
<br />EXHIBIT D
<br />4
<br />
|