HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-06-23 EMC testimony (06-17) Demoruelle, Sandra - ESA_Comment_North Kona SPS DEA April 2021 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Applicability to North Kona Sewer Pump
Station (SPS)
Congress enacted the Endangered Species Act to “provide a program for the
consideration of … endangered species and threatened species” and to “provide a
means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened
species depend may be conserved.” 16 U.S.C. Sec.1531(b).
In the North Kona Sewer Pump Station Draft Environmental Assessment
(DEA) the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) stated that the data
indicate numerous federally listed species may occur or transit through the vicinity
of the proposed project area. Therefore, before the construction and operation of
this North Kona SPS, DEM must determine if it is likely to jeopardize these listed
protected Hawaiian species or destroy or adversely modify their critical habitat, the
action may not proceed as proposed. See 16 U.S.C. 1536 (a)(2). However, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) may determine a “reasonable and prudent
alternative” that would avoid the jeopardy to the species and destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat. Id Sec.1536 (b)(3)(A).
Throughout the North Kona SPS DEA, the DEM has designated that a
“Section 7 consultation” for this determination would be done by the State of
Hawaii Department of Health (DOH). The Preliminary Design Report Section 6-2
Project Schedule shows “Section 7 consultation” and the project timeline shows
“Task 12 Section 7 through DOH.” Page 6 of the task timeline Tasks 294 through
299 break down the Section 7 consultation as: Task 295) Prepare consultation
package for DOH; Task 296) DOH submits consultation package to USFWS; Task
297) Consultation period; Task 298) USFWS issues letter; Task 299) Section 7
consultation complete. (For another example of this DEM attempt to designate
DOH instead of a Federal agency for Section 7 consultation, see Naalehu
Wastewater System Contract c007672 Exhibit A Scope of Work Section 2.3.3
Page 2 of 6
Subtask 3.2. C. Endangered Species Act (EA), Section 7: “1) Coordinate DOH’s
consultation with the U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFSW) pursuant to the EA as it pertains to threatened or endangered species .”).
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), called “Interagency
Cooperation,” is the mechanism by which Federal agencies ensure the actions
they take, including those they fund or authorize, do not jeopardize the continued
existence of any listed species. In fact, the North Kona SPS DEA states: “Section
7 of the Act, Interagency Cooperation (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1536), states each federal
agency shall, in consultation with and the assistance of the Secretary of the
Interior, ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency
(an ‘agency action’) is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of habitat of such species which is determined, after consultation as
appropriate with affected states, to be critical, unless such agency has been granted
an exemption for such action.” (emphasis mine) North Kona SPS DEA, Page 5-9.
When an action is likely to adversely affect a listed species, the Federal
agency submits to FWS a request for formal consultation. During formal
consultation, FWS and the Federal agency share information about the proposed
project, after which FWS will prepare a “biological opinion” or concurrence letter
(called “letter” in the DEA Tasks). When the project is reasonably certain to result
in the incidental take of an endangered species, the FWS provides the Federal
agency with an incidental take statement with the biological opinion. The
anticipated incidental take is not subject to the take prohibitions of the ESA as long
as the Federal agency or applicant implements the terms and conditions provided
in the incidental take statements.
But the State of Hawaii DOH is not a Federal agency.
Page 3 of 6
I. Endangered Species Act, Section 9: Violations
To avoid violation of the ESA Section 9 for incidental take on otherwise
legal projects on U.S. lands, every “person” (other than a Federal agency who is
covered by following ESA Section 7 incidental take consultation procedures) must
apply for a Federal Incidental Take Permit (ITP) which requires preparation of a
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The ESA is a comprehensive federal statute
applicable to every “person” including DEM, declaring that endangered and
threatened species are of “esthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational,
and scientific value to the Nation and its people.” 16 U.S.C. 1531 (a)(3).
The ESA has a suite of substantive legal protections that apply to “species,”
id. 1532(16) (defining “species”), once they are listed as endangered, ESA Section
9 prohibits, among other actions, “any person” from “taking” protected animals
without a lawful authorization from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Id.
1538(a)(1)(B) and 1539. Other provisions require the Secretary to designate
“critical habitat” for listed species, id. 1533(a)(3)(A) and enforce regulations for
civil and criminal penalties for take under ESA Section 9. Id. 1540(e)(1).
II. “Person”
Section 9 of the ESA makes it unlawful for any person to take individuals of
an endangered species. 16 U.S.C. 1538(a). “Person” is broadly defined to include
everyone, from private citizens to public entities such as the Department of
Environmental Management. 16 U.S.C. 1532(13).
III. “Take” and ESA Section 10 Incidental Take Permits
Once listed, Section 9 of the ESA makes it unlawful for any person,
including private and public entities, to “take” individuals of an endangered
species. 16 U.S.C. 1538(a). “Take” means “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
Page 4 of 6
wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” 16
U.S.C. 1532(19). However, among the limited exemptions to these strict Section 9
prohibitions, one allows the FWS to issue permits to take listed species incidental
to otherwise lawful activities upon submission of a habitat conservation plan
(“HCP”). 16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(B).
An HCP must detail the anticipated impact of the activity on listed species
and their designated critical habitat. 50 C.F.R. 17.32(b)(1)(iii); 222.307(b). To
approve an HCP, the FWS must find, among other things, that the applicant will
monitor, minimize and mitigate the impacts of any incidental taking to the
maximum extent practicable, and that the taking will not appreciably reduce the
likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild. 50 C.F.R.
17.32(b)(2); 222.307(c). In addition to exempting any incidental take of listed
species from the prohibition of Section 9, HCPs come with an additional benefit
called “No Surprises.” See 63 Fed. Reg. 8859(Feb.23, 1998). Once an HCP has
been issued, and so long as the permitted activity is not jeopardiz ing listed species,
the FWS may not require the commitment of additional funding or resources from
the HCP holder. 50 C.F.R. 17.32(b)(5)(iii)(B); 222.307(g)(2).
Unlawful “take” of endangered species means “to harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or attempt to engage in any such
conduct.” 16 U.S.C. 1532(19). “Harm” is further defined to include significant
habitat modification or degradation which “actually kills or injures fish or wildlife
by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including, breeding,
spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding or sheltering.” 50 C.F.R. 17.3.
IV. Endangered Species Act, Section 11: Penalties and Enforcement
The ESA is administered by the United States Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service for terrestrial species. Section 4 of the ESA authorizes
Page 5 of 6
FWS to “list” species as endangered or threatened, depending on the risk of
extinction to that species, after conducting a status review and considering the best
scientific and commercial data available. 16 U.S.C. 1533(a), (b).1
There are two types of penalties assessed for violation of any part of the
Endangered Species Act and any regulation authorized under the ESA. Civil
violations are enforced administratively, usually within the Department of Interior
Office of the Secretary.2 The ESA assesses civil penalties when a violation was an
accident, mistake, or oversight.3 Criminal violations are enforced judicially in U.S.
District Court.4 The ESA allows rewards to be paid for information leading to an
arrest, criminal conviction and civil assessment penalties from violating the Act.5
V. CONCLUSION
The Endangered Species Act makes it a crime for any “person” “knowingly”
to “take” any member of a listed endangered species. Without the HCP for the
North Kona SPS, the Department of Environmental Management takes the risk that
ITP unpermitted construction and sewage pump operation is likely to annoy listed
endangered species to such an extent as to cause an injury to the species by
significantly disrupting normal behavior patterns (e.g. breeding, feeding or
sheltering, etc.).
Instead of allowing violation of ESA Section 9, risking Section 11 civil and
criminal penalties, DEM should voluntarily develop the Habitat Conservation Plan
to receive FWS’ permission for incidental take (receivin g the Incidental Take
1 Cherise Gaffney, A Primer on the Endangered Species Act: The Species List, Take Prohibition, Permits, and Federal
Consultation Requirements, Stoel Rives llp, Seattle WA, website, (undated).
2 ESA Overview Module & Section 11, Penalties and Enforcement,
ntc.blm.gov/krc/upload/656/m7_Types_of_penalties_final_ly.pdf.
3 Id.
4 Id.
5 Id.
Page 6 of 6
Permit) and an Incidental Take License from the State of Hawaii Board of Land
and Natural Resources (BLNR) for this otherwise lawful construction and
operation of an industrial sewage pump station.
DEM has no Federal agency named for Section 7 consult, so following
Section 10 procedures is the only way for DEM to avoid civil and criminal
penalties for harming Hawaii’s federally listed endangered birds and bats.