Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024-04-23 Hakalau Stream Bridge Draft EA
DeVera, Ashley From: Honolulu Planning <HonoluluPlanning@wsp.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2024 11:21 AM To: Honolulu Planning Cc: Sun, Robert Subject: HRS 343 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft EA Aloha, HDOT wishes to inform you that the Draft Environmental Assessment(Draft EA)for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation has been published in the April 23, 2024 Environmental Notice. The document will be available at ERP's website at https://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/erp/Doc Library/2024-04-23-HA-DEA-Hakalau-Stream-Bridge- Rehabilitation.pdf. To access and review the Draft EA, please visit the ERP's website. The statutory 30-day comment period will end on May 22, 2024. If you would like to submit comments, please send them to HDOT using the contact information below. We thank you very much for your continued participation. HDOT Project Manager: Mr. Robert Sun, c/o e-mail: HonoluluPLanning@wsp.com 601 Kamokila Boulevard,#609, Kapolei, HI 96707 NOTICE:This communication and any attachments("this message")may contain information which is privileged,confidential,proprietary or otherwise subject to restricted disclosure under applicable law.This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s).Any unauthorized use,disclosure,viewing,copying, alteration,dissemination or distribution of,or reliance on,this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,or you are not an authorized or intended recipient,please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message,delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies. 1 JOSH GREEN,M.D. EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR DIRECTOR KE KIAAINA .� ya s°`•'"-"" ' KA LUNA HO'OKELE 4 1 el ��' . t# Deputy Directors f. Na Hope Luna Ho'okele l'.,�y DREANALEE K.KALILI - / TAMMY L.LEE . ' ROBIN K.SHISHIDO STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU'AINA'0 HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I KA`OIHANA ALAKAU 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET DEP-HWY 24-2.80011 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-5097 April 16, 2024 TO: JAMES KUNANE TOKIOKA, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TOURISM THROUGH: MARY ALICE EVANS, INTERIM DIRECTOR OFFICE OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT FROM: EDWIN H. SNIFFEN DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION SUBJECT: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ANTICIPATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FOR HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE REHABILITATION FEDERAL-AID PROJECT NO. BR- 019-2(075) HAKALAU, HILO MOKU, ISLAND OF HAWAII The Hawaii Department of Transportation has reviewed the Draft Environmental Assessment and anticipates a Finding of No Significant Impact determination for the proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project on the island of Hawaii for publication in the next available edition of The Environmental Notice. Should you have any questions,please contact Ms. Holly Yuen at(808) 692-7548, or by email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. Enclosure From: webmaster@hawaii.gov To: DBEDT OPSD Environmental Review Program Subject: New online submission for The Environmental Notice Date: Tuesday,April 16,2024 4:13:43 PM Action Name Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Type of Document/Determination Draft environmental assessment and anticipated finding of no significant impact(DEA-AFNSI) HRS§343-5(a)Trigger(s) • (1) Propose the use of state or county lands or the use of state or county funds Judicial district South Hilo,Hawai`i Tax Map Key(s)(TMK(s)) Right-of-Way; (3)2-9-002:023; (3)2-9-002:025; (3)2-9-002:039; (3)2-9-002:080; (3)2-9-002:999; (3)3- 1-001:001; (3)3-1-001:002; (3)3-1-001:003; (3)3-1-001:004; (3)3-1-001:005; (3)3-1-001:006; (3)3-1- 001:777; (3)3-1-001:999. Action type Agency Other required permits and approvals NEPA Categorical Exclusion; DA Permit pursuant to Clean Water Act(CWA)Section 404 or Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10; Endangered Species Act(ESA)Section 7 consultation; Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act(Magnuson-Stevens Act) Essential Fish Habitat coordination; ESA Section 7 consultation; National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)Section 106 consultation; Coast Guard Bridge Permit Exception; Coastal Zone Management(CZM) Federal Consistency Review coordination; Remedial Alternatives Analysis(RAA); Response Action Memorandum (RAM); National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for storm water discharges related to construction activities; CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) blanket certification (pending DA permit); Community Noise Permit; Community Noise Variance; HRS Chapter 6E-8 Review; HRS Chapter 195D Conservation of Aquatic Life, Wildlife, and Land Plants Review; Shoreline Certification; Shoreline Setback Variance; Conservation District Use Permit; Stream Channel Alteration Permit (SCAP); Grading, Grubbing, and Stockpiling Permit; Solid Waste Management Plan; USDOT Act Section 4(f) Exemption concurrence; Special Management Area(SMA) Permit Proposing/determining agency Department of Transportation Agency contact name Holly Yuen Agency contact email (for info about the action) holly.yuen@hawaii.gov Email address or URL for receiving comments HonoluluPlanning@wsp.com Agency contact phone (808)692-7548 Agency address 601 Kamokila Boulevard Room 688 Kapolei,Hawai`i 96707 United States Map It Is there a consultant for this action? Yes Consultant WSP USA Consultant contact name Allen Kam Consultant contact email alien.kam@wsp.com Consultant contact phone (808)566-2230 Consultant address 1001 Bishop Street Suite 2400 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 United States Map It Action summary The Proposed Action has two main components: (1)soil remediation so that public use of Hakalau Beach Park and surrounding areas can be restored; and (2) bridge rehabilitation to allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge and increase its resilience to extreme natural hazards. Because roadway pavement damage is anticipated during construction, a third project component is also proposed: (3) road resurfacing on Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road, coupled with formalizing a permanent maintenance easement for Old Mill Access Road. The project area lies within Hakalau Gulch,which is currently undeveloped, including the County's Hakalau Beach Park and private properties surrounding the state-owned Hakalau Stream Bridge. The park has been closed to the public since 2017. The area has stream and shoreline access, contains the ruins of Hakalau Sugar Mill, and is lush with vegetation. Reasons supporting determination See Chapter 5 of the DEA. Attached documents(signed agency letter&EA/EIS) • DEP-HWY-24-2.80011-Hakaiau-Stream-Bridge-Draft-EA-Cover-Memo-part-1-signed.pdf • 20240416.HakaiauStreamBrRehab.DEA .pdf Action location map • HakalauProjectArea.zip Authorized individual Allen Kam Authorization • The above named authorized individual hereby certifies that he/she has the authority to make this submission. Draft Environmental Assessment Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau, Big Island, Hawaii , . , ..., . ... ,.. . • 4 -----.if.; #1 i if4 1: , z‘•,'•./_11-0-4!r•] yrt..;,* , ;.1 •.gb....diftb. .. ;;`,....i.--_ ,. ..... - - .. _ Al 1 ,i, .............„ ;.,,„--.., ,:,, 1 ..„.......... . . ‘, , ..., , ;;,,,,,:,,00...:,.',. 1 iiierp,,,,i - -. i i ........... . N ip Tad 1 nilmosir - ..-..aA . ;.-. ..- . . - , re , 44, ;.,, , ....lir. :,... ti . 1.. . , ft . A 1 i l ,,,,,4-111- ., 1 . ..,.41 TAdi 1 • dip.: ‘1114. ItP ')'#' J:ittil I k.: , • `i I• ' : ;•.. '11111,71 1 • 4 ;i..• :: ,..“.• Ailk,.•16 1 • 'i*Ililltil'arill2 . % 1 "4 3t f7,k; .q4, • --- 1 k State of Hawaii Department of Transportation .i , . ,. '- -t.r. - ' -` , ' April 2024 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE REHABILITATION PROJECT No. BR-019-2(075) HAWAII BELT ROAD, HILO, HAWAII ISLAND April 2024 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Hawaii Belt Road, Hilo, Hawaii Island Submitted Pursuant to the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and Title 11, Chapter 200.1, Hawaii Department of Health Administrative Rules by the: Department of Transportation, State of Hawaii The following person may be contacted for additional information concerning this document: Ms. Holly Yuen,Project Manager Department of Transportation 601 Kamokila Boulevard, #688 Kapolei, HI 96707 (808) 692-7548 This Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) discloses the foreseeable primary, secondary, and cumulative environmental impacts that could result from the proposed project's implementation and commits to specific measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts to the environment. This EA also contains a record of consultation activities conducted to date as part of project planning. The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) proposes two primary actions: (1)remediate lead-contaminated soils around the bridge; and (2)rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure. HDOT also proposes road resurfacing on Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road, coupled with formalizing a permanent maintenance easement for Old Mill Access Road. The project is intended to restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park and the surrounding area and allow continued unrestricted operation and increase the bridge's resilience to extreme natural hazards. Hakalau Stream Bridge would not be widened, and its traffic capacity would not increase. HDOT anticipates that the project is not likely to have a "significant" effect in accordance with Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 343 and Hawaii Administrative Rules 11-200.1-13. Therefore,an EA process was selected for the environmental review. If,during the consideration of comments received on this Draft EA, HDOT determines that a"significant"impact would occur,HDOT will either revise the project to avoid or mitigate the impact's severity or start preparing an Environmental Impact Statement. April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 CHAPTER 1: DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1-1 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Purpose of This Document and Naming Conventions 1-1 1.2.1 Purpose of This Environmental Assessment(EA) 1-1 1.2.2 Naming Conventions Used in this Document 1-4 1.3 Project Purpose and Need 1-5 1.3.1 Restore Public Use to Hakalau Beach Park and Surrounding Areas 1-5 1.3.2 Allow Continued Unrestricted Operation and Increase Resilience of the Bridge 1-5 1.4 Proposed Action 1-6 1.4.1 Soil Remediation 1-6 1.4.2 Bridge Rehabilitation with New Concrete Trestles 1-11 1.4.3 Road Resurfacing and Permanent Maintence Easements 1-12 1.5 Other Alternatives Considered 1-16 1.5.1 No Action Alternative 1-16 1.5.2 Soil Remediation Alternatives 1-17 1.5.3 Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives 1-20 1.6 Project Cost 1-25 1.7 Project Schedule 1-25 1.8 Permits and Approvals 1-25 CHAPTER 2: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, POTENTIAL IMPACTS, AND PROPOSED MITIGATION 2-1 2.1 Physical Geography and Soils 2-1 2.1.1 Existing Conditions 2-1 2.1.2 Potential Impacts 2-3 2.1.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-3 2.2 Land Use 2-3 2.2.1 Existing Conditions 2-3 2.2.2 Potential Impacts 2-4 2.2.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-4 2.3 Hazardous Materials 2-12 2.3.1 Existing Conditions 2-12 2.3.2 Potential Impacts 2-16 2.3.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-16 2.4 Historic and Archaeological Resources 2-17 2.4.1 Regulatory Context 2-17 2.4.2 Existing Conditions 2-17 2.4.3 Potential Impacts 2-24 2.4.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-25 Page i April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.5 Cultural Resources 2-26 2.5.1 Existing Conditions 2-26 2.5.2 Potential Impacts 2-28 2.5.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-28 2.6 Biological Resources 2-29 2.6.1 Regulatory Context 2-29 2.6.2 Existing Conditions 2-30 2.6.3 Potential Impacts 2-32 2.6.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-37 2.7 Surface Water Resources and Wetlands 2-38 2.7.1 Existing Conditions 2-38 2.7.2 Potential Impacts 2-39 2.7.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-40 2.8 Parks and Recreational Resources 2-45 2.8.1 Existing Conditions 2-45 2.8.2 Potential Impacts 2-46 2.8.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-46 2.9 Visual and Aesthetic Resources 2-46 2.9.1 Existing Conditions 2-46 2.9.2 Potential Impacts 2-51 2.9.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-51 2.10 Transportation Infrastructure and Traffic 2-52 2.10.1 Existing Conditions 2-52 2.10.2 Potential Impacts 2-52 2.10.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-53 2.11 Natural Hazards and Sea-Level Rise 2-55 2.11.1 Existing Conditions 2-55 2.11.2 Potential Impacts 2-56 2.11.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-60 2.12 Public Services and Utilities 2-60 2.12.1 Existing Conditions 2-60 2.12.2 Potential Impacts 2-60 2.12.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-60 2.13 Noise 2-60 2.13.1 Regulatory Context 2-61 2.13.2 Existing Conditions 2-61 2.13.3 Potential Impacts 2-61 2.13.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-62 2.14 Air Quality 2-63 2.14.1 Existing Conditions 2-63 2.14.2 Potential Impacts 2-64 2.14.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-65 2.15 Social and Economic Conditions 2-65 2.15.1 Existing Conditions 2-65 2.15.2 Potential Impacts 2-65 2.15.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures 2-65 Page ii April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.16 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 2-66 2.16.1 Secondary Impacts 2-66 2.16.2 Cumulative Impacts 2-66 CHAPTER 3: CONSISTENCY WITH GOVERNMENT PLANS AND POLICIES 3-1 3.1 State of Hawaii Plans and Controls 3-1 3.1.1 Hawaii State Plan 3-1 3.1.2 Hawaii Statewide Federal-Aid Highways 2045 Transportation Plan 3-3 3.1.3 Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawaii 3-3 3.1.4 Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan 3-4 3.2 County of Hawaii Plans 3-5 3.2.1 County of Hawaii General Plan 2005 3-5 3.2.2 Hamakua Community Development Plan 3-7 CHAPTER 4: COMMENTS AND COORDINATION 4-1 4.1 Early Consultation 4-1 4.2 Draft EA 4-3 4.3 RAA and RAM 4-3 4.4 Regulatory Coordination 4-4 4.4.1 Federal Coordination 4-4 4.4.2 State and Local Coordination 4-8 CHAPTER 5: ANTICIPATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 5-1 CHAPTER 6: REFERENCES CONSULTED 6-1 APPENDICES APPENDIX A EARLY CONSULTATION, REGULATORY COORDINATION AND CORRESPONDENCE, AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES APPENDIX B REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS (RAA) REPORT FOR LEAD IMPACTED SOIL AT HAKALAU BEACH PARK AND RESPONSE ACTION MEMORANDUM (RAM) FOR LEAD IMPACTED SOIL AT HAKALAU BEACH PARK APPENDIX C ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDY APPENDIX D CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT APPENDIX E BIOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT APPENDIX F WETLAND DELINEATION TECHNICAL REPORT Page iii April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Figure 1-1: Project Location 1-2 Figure 1-2: Project Area Map 1-3 Figure 1-3: View of the Existing Hakalau Bridge Deck(looking south) 1-4 Figure 1-4: Profile View of the Existing Hakalau Bridge(looking west) 1-4 Figure 1-5: Existing Bridge Elevation(Profile)Plan with Bent Numbers 1-8 Figure 1-6: Extent of 2016, 2020, 2022 Soil Testing and Results 1-9 Figure 1-7: Proposed Soil Remediation Areas 1-10 Figure 1-8: Proposed Bridge Elevation(Profile)Plan 1-13 Figure 1-9: Rehabilitation with New Concrete Trestle 1-14 Figure 1-10: Drilling Platform Construction Access Plan 1-15 Figure 1-11: Example of a Temporary Drilling Platform 1-16 Figure 1-12: Hybrid Trestle 1-24 Figure 2-1: Soils in the Project Area 2-2 Figure 2-2: State Land Use Districts 2-5 Figure 2-3: Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii 2-6 Figure 2-4: County Zoning Map 2-7 Figure 2-5: County Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map 2-8 Figure 2-6: Special Management Area Map 2-9 Figure 2-7: Tax Map Key Map 2-10 Figure 2-8: Hazardous Materials Sites Identified by HEER Office 2-13 Figure 2-9: 2016, 2020, and 2022 Soil Sampling Test Results 2-15 Figure 2-10: Historic Properties 2-19 Figure 2-11: Site 26591 —Feature J, Stone Stairs 2-20 Figure 2-12: Site 26591 —Feature K, Concrete Flume Supports 2-21 Figure 2-13: Site 26591 —Feature L, Concrete Foundation and Seawall 2-21 Figure 2-14: Site 26591 —Feature L, Remnants of Former Crane 2-22 Figure 2-15: Site 26591 —Feature M, Raised Concrete Ford on Old Mill Access Road 2-22 Figure 2-16: Site 30187—Old Mamalahoa Highway 2-23 Figure 2-17: Vegetation Communities 2-34 Figure 2-18: Hakalau Watershed 2-41 Figure 2-19. National Wetland Inventory(NWI) Habitat Types 2-42 Figure 2-20. Wetland Delineation and Waters of the U.S. 2-43 Figure 2-21: Viewpoint 1 —View of Hakalau Stream Bridge from Old Mamalahoa Highway 2-47 Figure 2-22: Views of Project Area 2-48 Figure 2-23: Viewpoint 2—View of Hakalau Stream Bridge from the Hilo-side shoreline (Looking Mauka) 2-49 Figure 2-24: Viewpoint 4—View of Hakalau Gulch from Hawaii Belt Road(Looking Mauka) 2-50 Figure 2-25: Viewpoint 5—View of Hakalau Bay from Hawaii Belt Road(Looking Makai) 2-51 Page iv April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment Figure 2-26: Roadway Network in the Project Area 2-54 Figure 2-27: Tsunami Evacuation Zone Map 2-57 Figure 2-28: Flood Zone Map 2-58 Figure 2-29: SLR Exposure Area Map 2-59 LIST OF TABLES Table Pa2e Table 1-1: Soil Remediation Alternatives Summary 1-18 Table 1-2: Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives Summary 1-21 Table 1-3: List of Permits and Approvals by Agency 1-26 Table 2-1: Tax Map Keys in Project Area 2-11 Table 2-2: Hazardous Materials Sites identified by HEER Office 2-12 Table 2-3: Historic Site Significance, Impacts, and Proposed Treatment 2-24 Table 2-4: Threatened and Endangered Plant Species That May Occur in Project Area 2-31 Table 2-5: Threatened and Endangered Animal Species That May Occur in Project Area 2-31 Table 2-6: Construction Equipment Noise Levels 2-62 Table 2-7: National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards 2-64 Table 4-1: Summary of Early Consultation Comments and Responses 4-3 Page v April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AAQS Ambient Air Quality Standards AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials AIS Archaeological Inventory Survey ALISH Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii APE Area of Potential Effects BMP Best management practices BSR Biological Survey Report CatEx Categorical Exclusion C-EHMP Construction environmental hazard management plan CFR Code of Federal Regulations CIA Cultural impact assessment County County of Hawaii CRC Cultural Resources Commission CWA Clean Water Act CWRM Commission on Water Resource Management CY Cubic yard CZM Coastal Zone Management CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act DA Department of Army DAR Division of Aquatic Resources dBA A-weighted decibels DEM Department of Environmental Management DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources DOFAW Division of Forestry and Wildlife DPS Distinct Population Segment EA Environmental Assessment EFH Essential Fish Habitat EHMP Environmental hazard management plan EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FDA Food and Drug Administration FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact General Plan County General Plan HAER Historic American Engineering Record HAR Hawaii Administrative Rules HDOH Hawaii Department of Health HDOT Hawaii Department of Transportation HEER Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response HHF Historic Hawaii Foundation Page vi April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment HRS Hawaii Revised Statutes HSTP Hawaii Statewide Transportation Plan IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation KPC Kealamahi Pacific Consultants MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act mg/kg milligrams of lead per kilogram MOA Memorandum of Agreement MUS Management unit species NAC Noise Abatement Criteria NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHO Native Hawaiian Organization(s) NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NOA A National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRHP National Register of Historic Places NWI National Wetland Inventory NWP Nationwide Permit OPSD Office of Planning and Sustainable Development PIFWO Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office of the USFWS PIRO Pacific Islands Regional Office of the NMFS ppb parts per billion The project Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project RAA Remedial Alternatives Analysis RAM Response Action Memorandum RFD Request for Determination RHA Rivers Harbors Act SCAP Stream Channel Alteration Permit Section 106 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act sf square feet SHPD State Historic Preservation Division SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer SIHP State Inventory of Historic Places SLR Sea-level rise SLR-XA Sea-level rise exposure area SMA Special Management Area SSV Shoreline setback variance State State of Hawaii TMK Tax Map Key USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation USDOT Act 1966 U.S. Department of Transportation Act USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Page vii April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment WQC Water Quality Certification Page viii April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Name Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Proposing Agency State of Hawaii Department of Transportation(HDOT) Determining Agency HDOT Landowner State of Hawaii; County of Hawaii;various private land owners Hakalau, South Hilo,Hawaii Island General Location Hakalau Stream Bridge is located at Milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19)at roughly 19°53'58.00"N, 155°07'47.00"W Right-of-Way; (3) 2-9-002:023; (3) 2-9-002:025; (3) 2-9-002:039; (3) 2-9- Tax Map Keys 002:080; (3) 2-9-002:999; (3) 3-1-001:001; (3) 3-1-001:002; (3) 3-1- 001:003; (3) 3-1-001:004; (3) 3-1-001:005; (3) 3-1-001:006; (3) 3-1- 001:777; (3)3-1-001:999. Roughly 15-acres encompassing the entire length of Hakalau Stream Bridge, plus approximately an additional 100 feet on Hawaii Belt Road on either end of the bridge. The project area also extends approximately 600 feet mauka Project Area and makai of the bridge, including most of the County of Hawaii's(County) Hakalau Beach Park property on the makai side. On the mauka end, the project area continues along just the paved portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road. The project area lies within Hakalau Gulch,which is currently undeveloped, including the County's Hakalau Beach Park and private properties Existing Uses of the Project Area surrounding the state-owned Hakalau Stream Bridge. The park has been closed to the public since 2017. The area has stream and shoreline access, contains the ruins of Hakalau Sugar Mill, and is lush with vegetation. The Proposed Action has two main components: (1)soil remediation so that public use of Hakalau Beach Park and surrounding areas can be restored;and (2) bridge rehabilitation to allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge and increase its resilience to extreme natural hazards. Because roadway pavement damage is anticipated during construction,a third project component is also proposed: (3) road resurfacing on Old Mamalahoa Proposed Project Highway and Old Mill Access Road, coupled with formalizing a permanent maintenance easement for Old Mill Access Road. Based on conceptual engineering, the total cost of the Proposed Action is estimated at approximately $70 million (in 2022 dollars). The soil remediation portion of the project is estimated at over $8 million, and the proposed bridge rehabilitation is estimated at $60 million. These costs will be refined as engineering details are developed. State Land Use Designation Conservation(Limited&Resource Subzones),Agricultural,and Urban. April 2024 Page ES-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment County Zoning A20a (Agricultural); MG-5a (General Industrial); RS-7.5 (Single-Family Residential). Special Management Area Partially within the Special Management Area(SMA). Anticipated Determination Finding of No Significant Impact pursuant to Chapter 343,Hawaii Revised Statutes(HRS). ANTICIPATED LONG-TERM PERMANENT IMPACTS • Land Use A shoreline certification by the state Department of Land and Natural Resources(DLNR)will be required to support the SMA permit application, which may revise shoreline parcel ownership. A shoreline setback variance (SSV)may also be required by the County. HDOT will coordinate with the County Planning Department regarding SMA and SSV requirements. • Hazardous Materials The proposed soil remediation would be beneficial as it would remove soils with the highest concentrations of lead contamination in the project area in agreement with the Remedial Alternatives Analysis (RAA) and Response Action Memorandum(RAM)reports approved by the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER)Office for this project.The proposed soil remediation would reduce future impacts to human health and the environment. HDOT will also coordinate with the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation to post signage clearly informing the public of the presence of lead in the areas proposed for remediation and will also install and maintain signage for areas not proposed for remediation. Anticipated Impacts • Historic Resources The replacement of the Hakalau Stream Bridge's (Site 09090)historic steel trestles with concrete bents would result in loss of character-defining features and a loss of historic integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling. Because of the anticipated effect on Hakalau Stream Bridge, a finding of"Adverse Effect"is anticipated under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) and a finding of"Effect, with Proposed Mitigation Measures" is also anticipated under HRS Chapter 6E-8 for the State review of the project's impacts to historic properties. FHWA and HDOT would prepare a Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement(MOA)to stipulate measures that will adequately mitigate these impacts. As a result, the project would result in no significant adverse impact on historic properties under HRS Chapter 343. Old Mamalahoa Highway(Site 30187)will be used to facilitate access to the soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation areas during construction. The anticipated impacts to the site would be related to normal wear and tear and are considered negligible.Those minor impacts to the road surface would be mitigated by roadway repaving which is already proposed as part of the project. At this time, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. In the unlikely event that the cobble rock walls are damaged during the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge (State), they would be repaired in coordination with SHPD.No further work is proposed for Site 30187 at this time. Page ES-2 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment • Parks and Recreational Resources The Proposed Action would result in beneficial impacts to recreational resources by enabling the re-opening of Hakalau Beach Park and stream and shoreline access to the public. Upon completion of soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation work, HDOT will repave the existing roads in the project area to facilitate vehicular access to Hakalau Beach Park. ANTICIPATED SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS The project's construction duration is anticipated to be roughly 2.5 years for both the bridge rehabilitation work and soil remediation work.The following construction impacts and mitigation measures may occur for approximately that length of time. • Hazardous Materials and Solid Waste Management During construction, hazardous materials will be encountered in lead- impacted soils and vegetation.The main human exposure pathway is through contact with contaminated soil but exposure could occur from dust, surface water runoff, and leaching. Exposure may also occur from contact with terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems via fugitive dust from construction activities. The potential exposure to contaminated materials that are disturbed during construction presents a health and safety concern mainly to construction workers because access to the area is and will remain restricted to public until Hakalau Beach Park is reopened. Contaminated soil and vegetation will be removed and disposed of at permitted off-site facilities, either on-island or on the mainland. HDOT and its contractor will be responsible for preparing and implementing a Construction—Environmental Hazard Management Plan (CEHMP) in conformance with the guidelines established by the HDOH HEER office to manage identified environmental hazards posed by known or suspected environmental contaminants at a site, and to provide clear procedures for how to manage these environmental hazards safely.With the CEHMP in place and followed,risk to construction workers should be minimal.HDOT and its contractor will also be responsible for preparing a solid waste management plan in coordination with the County Department of Environmental Services prior to the start of construction.No further significant short-term impacts are anticipated. • Historic,Archaeological,and Cultural Resources Project construction workers and all other personnel involved in the construction and related activities of the project will be informed of the possibility of inadvertent cultural finds, including human remains. If any potential historic properties are identified during construction activities, all activities will cease and State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD)will be notified pursuant to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-280-3. If human remains are encountered, all earth moving activities in the area will stop, the area will be cordoned off, and the SHPD and Police Department will be notified pursuant to HAR§13-300-40.In addition,in the event of an inadvertent discovery of human remains,the completion of a burial treatment plan,in compliance with HAR§13-300 and HRS §6E-43,is recommended. No significant impacts are expected. • Biological Resources Although temporary construction duration impacts to flora are unavoidable with the proposed vegetation clearing and earthwork, no significant permanent adverse impacts to biological resources are anticipated with the Proposed Action. No botanical resources of concern were identified in the project area, and to the extent feasible the project will use native plants for April 2024 Page ES-3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment restoring vegetation and landscaping, increasing the presence of native species.Although construction activities have the potential to impact various protected wildlife that may be present in the area, HDOT is consulting with multiple natural resource agencies and will incorporate measures mandated by federal and state agencies into the project to avoid and minimize impacts to protected species. The contractor may request the option to work at night to expedite the construction schedule. Construction mitigation measures include ceasing construction if waterbirds are present and avoiding nighttime construction activities during the seabird fledging season (September 15 to December 15). If construction is required during the Hawaiian hawk breeding season (March to September), a preconstruction survey will be conducted. HDOT will require contractors to conduct frequent and regular watch for the presence of green sea turtles, hawksbill turtle, and Hawaiian monk seals to avoid direct interaction with these animals. The selected contractor will incorporate best management practices (BMPs)to minimize the introduction and spread of invasive species during construction. BMPs for work in aquatic environments will also be incorporated into the project design to minimize the degradation of water quality and minimize the potential for impacts to fish and wildlife resources. HDOT will also obtain a Department of Army (DA)permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)for the proposed in-water work,which will call for aquatic BMPs. With these mandated mitigation measures,BMPs,and regulatory controls in place, no significant impacts on biological resources are anticipated during construction. • Visual and Aesthetic Resources During construction, views of the valley will be temporarily altered by soil remediation and vegetation clearing. These impacts, however, are only temporary as HDOT and its contractor will restore the soil and vegetation in the project area to its pre-construction state. No significant impacts are anticipated. • Traffic No significant traffic operational impacts or public safety concerns are anticipated with the proposed work. During construction, traffic control plans and construction phasing plans would be implemented to minimize potential traffic delays. No complete bridge closures are anticipated. Lane closures on Hawaii Belt Road may alter traffic patterns,driver behavior,and travel times. Truck traffic associated with construction activities will access Hawaii Belt Road and local roads,but these construction vehicles will avoid commuter peak periods and minimize traffic impacts.The public will be kept informed of planned construction activities and lane closures. • Noise Construction activities would involve heavy machinery and vehicles that at times may exceed the maximum levels allowed by community noise control regulations. The contractor will obtain a Community Noise Permit and will be required to comply with its terms and conditions. A Community Noise Variance will also be obtained if night, weekend, or holiday construction is needed. No significant impacts are anticipated with adherence to the restrictions in the Community Noise Permit and Community Noise Variance. • Air Quality Air quality impacts during construction generally consist of fugitive dust (airborne particulate matter)and mobile source emissions from construction Page ES-4 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment equipment. Airborne, visible fugitive dust generated during construction would be controlled at the project site by the contractor in accordance with the provisions of HAR Chapter 11-60.1-33, Fugitive Dust. Measures to address health and safety concerns associated with potential exposure to airborne lead due to the disturbance of contaminated materials during construction will be addressed by the CEHMP for this project.No significant impacts are anticipated. 1) Identification of the applicant or proposing agency. See Section 1.1, Introduction. 2) For applicant actions,identification of the approving agency. This project is an agency action. See"Determining Agency"in this Executive Summary and Section 1.1,Introduction. 3) List of all required permit sand approvals(state,federal,and county) and,for applicants,identification of which approval necessitates chapter 343,HRS,environmental review. See Section 1.8, Permits and Approvals,and Chapter 4, Comments and Coordination. 4) Identification of agencies,citizen groups, and individuals consulted in preparing the draft EA. See Chapter 4,Comments and Coordination, and Appendix A. 5) General description of the action's technical,economic, social, cultural,historical,and environmental characteristics. See Chapter 2, Affected Environment,Potential Impacts,and Proposed Mitigation. HAR 11-200.1-18(d) 6) Summary description of the affected environment,including suitable EA Content Requirements and adequate regional, location, and site maps such as Flood Insurance Rate Maps,Floodway Boundary Maps,U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps,or state sea level rise exposure area maps. See Chapter 2,Affected Environment,Potential Impacts,and Proposed Mitigation. 7) Identification and analysis of impacts and alternatives considered. See Chapter 2,Affected Environment,Potential Impacts,and Proposed Mitigation. 8) Proposed mitigation measures. See Chapter 2,Affected Environment, Potential Impacts,and Proposed Mitigation. 9) Proposing agency or approving agency anticipated determination, including findings and reasons supporting the anticipated FONSI,if applicable. See Chapter 5,Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact. 10) Written comments and responses to comments received,if any. See Chapter 4,Comments and Coordination,and Appendix A. April 2024 Page ES-5 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 1: DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1.1 Introduction The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is proposing the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project (the project). Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is located at milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) on the Island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00" N, 155°07'47.00" W. Hakalau Stream Bridge is an aging steel-trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road roughly 180 feet above Hakalau Stream and spans roughly 775 feet across Hakalau Valley. See Figure 1-1: Project Location and Figure 1-2: Project Area Map. The project is listed as a system preservation project(HS 4) in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program(federal fiscal year 2022-2025), which programs federal funds for transportation improvements. 1.2 Purpose of This Document and Naming Conventions 1.2.1 Purpose of This Environmental Assessment (EA) HDOT proposes to remediate lead-contaminated soils surrounding the Hakalau Stream Bridge to restore public use of the Hakalau Beach Park and to rehabilitate the substructure of the bridge. See Figure 1-3: View of the Existing Hakalau Bridge Deck (looking south) and Figure 1-4: Profile View of the Existing Hakalau Bridge (looking west). The project requires an environmental review in accordance with Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 because it would use State of Hawaii (State) and County of Hawaii (County) lands and use State funds. HDOT is responsible for preparing this EA document, which must comply with HRS Chapter 343 and Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Title 11, Chapter 200.1. HDOT anticipates that the project would not have a"significant" effect in accordance with HRS Chapter 343 and HAR 11-200.1-13. Therefore, an EA process was selected for the environmental review.If, during the consideration of comments received on this Draft EA,HDOT determines that a significant impact would occur, HDOT will either revise the project to avoid or mitigate the impact's severity or start preparing an environmental impact statement. Because federal funds administered by the FHWA would be used to construct the project, the project is considered a federal action and must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a federally mandated environmental review process.To comply with NEPA,a Categorical Exclusion(CatEx) is anticipated for the project and will be documented separately from this HRS Chapter 343 EA. This EA provides supporting documentation for compliance with NEPA and other federal environmental regulations, the coordination for which is ongoing. Other federal laws that apply include Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act on Essential Fish Habitat(EFH), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) (Section 106), and Section 4(f)of the 1966 U.S.Department of Transportation(USDOT)Act(USDOT Act).These federal reviews—which have the potential to affect decision-making,including requiring avoidance and mitigation measures—are identified and addressed where relevant throughout this EA. See Appendix A-1, Pre-Draft Environmental Assessment Coordination and Consultation, for early consultation comments, which informed the preparation of this EA. See Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence, for correspondences with regulatory agencies. April 2024 Page 1-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 1-1: Project Location I.. . .,` ` ` \ y4�9/ Hawaii Hakalau .J"•.ax' " ��_. HAWAII COUNTY • Project Location HAWAII LOU NTY 13 Hilo 0 1 2 4 � A Miles • 34/1.,. Source:Esri 2023;USGS,Hawaii Statewide GIS Program 2013. Page 1-2 April 2024 'CO a wy,. p aOQ 4 4, . 4,.. , .. \ �, . \-0.4* .... •....• , ( y' ,:., tig , , ,, 4911 � . ..� Nam to 757 l c . 4'')''''' ' 11,, 14\ o % �L oad y �: a\\v,e�R as d \Ness , . , • Gv� 444' Asa , i +> laC . j LL rn 0 • a cn S � S . 00 LL g CIW U 4 �` L bbq�+ •O of of'A O G i- A O 'ill c,as Pi iiito g.', (G. o . N co- r4 o m ° A o N rct2' T g 3 c \ . N .. d V , Off... o as �o N m _m ii m 0 Nom•. ' 3 x „ o O. a , ca W S�.i C d 2 F ; ¢ U v o NO M N 0 4 u o& I , U 'y„ b4 a� xQw c%3 a, Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 1-3: View of the Existing Hakalau Bridge Deck(looking south) • • said it Source:Google Maps 2011 Figure 1-4: Profile View of the Existing Hakalau Bridge (looking west) • '•,� .!�•';�,. . .• e yip ., •R d u Source:ASM Affiliates 2023 1.2.2 Naming Conventions Used in this Document The project is located in Hakalau, a small unincorporated community on the east coast of Hawaii Island, governed by the County. The bridge is located at roughly the 15.3-mile mark on Route 19 (Hawaii Belt Road). Although Hawaii Belt Road is also called Mamalahoa Highway, this EA defaults to the name Page 1-4 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment "Hawaii Belt Road" to avoid confusion with Old Mamalahoa Highway, which is a separate route that intersects Hawaii Belt Road and also serves this community. This EA uses the terms "Hakalau Stream Bridge" and "Hakalau Bridge" interchangeably to refer to the state-owned bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road over Hakalau Stream. When referring to the County-owned bridge by the same name on Old Mamalahoa Highway,this EA clearly identifies it as the"County"bridge. The terms"Hakalau Valley"and "Hakalau Gulch"may also be used interchangeably to refer to the valley encompassing the area below the State's Hakalau Stream Bridge. This EA generally uses the standard directional terms north, south, east, and west in relation to Hakalau, as well as commonly used local directional conventions. For example, the direction of travel along Hawaii Belt Road in the vicinity of Hakalau going "north" is in the direction "toward Honokaa" (a town north of Hakalau), while the direction heading"south"refers to "toward Hilo" (the city located south of Hakalau). The Hawaiian terms "mauka/makai" are also used interchangeably with"west/east."Relative to Hakalau, "mauka"("toward the mountains")refers to the"west"direction,while"makai"("toward the ocean")refers to the"east"direction. 1.3 Project Purpose and Need The purposes of the project are the following: • Restore public use of Hakalau Beach Park and surrounding areas. • Allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge and increase its resilience to extreme natural hazards. The remainder of this section describes the need associated with each project purpose. 1.3.1 Restore Public Use to Hakalau Beach Park and Surrounding Areas Hakalau Stream Bridge is a historic steel-trestle bridge that was painted with lead-based paint. This lead paint has contaminated the soil around the bridge and Hakalau Beach Park,which is below and adjacent to the bridge. In 2000, the lead paint was removed from the Hakalau Stream Bridge, so it would not continue to further contaminate the environment. However, lead remains in the surrounding area, including at Hakalau Beach Park. Exposure to lead-contaminated soils can have detrimental effects on human health. For this reason,Hakalau Beach Park has been closed to the public since 2017, after initial lead testing was conducted and the degree of lead contamination in the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge was determined. Because of this contamination, soil remediation for lead abatement is needed to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe to officially reopen to the public. HDOT seeks to eliminate the lead contamination in the remediation area to protect human health and the environment to the greatest extent possible to minimize the possibility of continued reexposure to lead when the beach park is restored for public use. 1.3.2 Allow Continued Unrestricted Operation and Increase Resilience of the Bridge The existing substructure of the aging steel-trestle bridge is nearing the end of its useful life due to steel corrosion and scour conditions that undermine its foundations. Recent bridge inspections have revealed extensive corrosion at select internal joints and heavy corrosion on several towers. The structural integrity of the existing bridge is threatened further by various degrees of scour/scour potential observed at the in- stream footings located at Bents 7, 8, and 9. Figure 1-5: Existing Bridge Elevation(Profile)Plan with Bent Numbers is a profile drawing of the existing bridge and shows these numbered"bents"(or legs)of the steel trestles that support the bridge superstructure. April 2024 Page 1-5 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment A scour assessment of the Hakalau Stream Bridge conducted in January 2011 recommended a Scour Critical Bridge Rating of 3, which means the bridge is "scour critical" with"unstable"foundations. A March 2021 Post Event Inspection Report estimated that the downstream footing of Bent 8 (located by the north/Honokaa-side bank of the stream) was undermined by approximately 20 percent (or up to 7 inches). The inspection also documented up to 11.6 feet of exposed footings at Bents 7, 8, and 9, along with heavy scaling,spalling,cracking,and failed patches. HDOT is currently designing and reviewing immediate scour repairs for the worst scour area at Bent 8. This Hakalau Bridge Bent 8 Repair Project is anticipated to be completed before the proposed rehabilitation work; however, even with this maintenance and repair work on Bent 8,the trestle bridge will continue to deteriorate.With advancing deterioration,the substructure will eventually become unstable,and the bridge will likely require full closure to all vehicular traffic. Therefore, this project,which contemplates the rehabilitation of the bridge's entire substructure,is necessary to ensure future continued safe operation of the bridge. In addition, because of its location and the impacts of climate change, the bridge is highly susceptible to damage during extreme natural hazards such as tsunamis,high winds, seismic events(earthquakes),heavy rainfall, and flooding with debris loading. Replacing the existing steel bents and concrete foundations with new concrete bents and foundations will make the bridge more robust and able to withstand these extreme conditions better than steel trestles. 1.4 Proposed Action The Proposed Action has two main components: (1)soil remediation and(2)bridge rehabilitation,including design measures to increase resilience to natural hazard events. Because roadway pavement damage is anticipated during construction,a third component is also proposed: (3)road resurfacing on Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road, coupled with formalizing a permanent maintenance easement for Old Mill Access Road. The roughly 15-acre project area encompasses the entire length of Hakalau Stream Bridge plus an additional, approximately 100 feet on Hawaii Belt Road on either end of the bridge. See Figure 1-2: Project Area Map. The project area also extends approximately 600 feet mauka and makai of the bridge, including most of the County's Hakalau Beach Park property on the makai side. On the mauka end, the project area continues along just the paved portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road. The project area includes active construction areas with anticipated ground disturbance, as well as additional construction staging and foot-access areas. HDOT assumes no vegetation removal or ground disturbance would be needed to reach the project area. 1.4.1 Soil Remediation HDOT proposes to remediate the lead-impacted soils in the project area prior to conducting other work in the valley. In the Remedial Alternatives Analysis Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park (RAA) prepared for this project, HDOT, guided by the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), identified the degree and extent of lead contamination, and evaluated soil remediation alternatives (KPC 2023a). See Figure 1-6: Extent of 2016, 2020, 2022 Soil Testing and Results. The RAA report, which was prepared in cooperation with the HDOH Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) Office, is the basis for the proposed soil remediation described below. See Appendix B, Remedial Alternatives Analysis (RAA) Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park and Response Action Memorandum(RAM)for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park. Consistent with the RAA report and the subsequent Response Action Memorandum (RAM) approved by HDOH, HDOT proposes to remediate all areas that exceed 200 milligrams per kilogram(mg/kg)of lead in soil by removing up to 24 inches of contaminated soil and replacing it with up to 24 inches of clean fill. Up to an estimated 7,623 cubic yards [CY]of soil would be replaced in a roughly 2.4-acre proposed remediation Page 1-6 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment area (roughly 103,000 square feet [sf]). See Figure 1-7: Proposed Soil Remediation Areas. Actual depths of clean fill would correspond to actual soil removal depth; the area would be regraded to match preconstruction conditions.Any associated vegetation would be removed and replaced with new vegetation, except for large trees, which would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The clean soil would be used to re-level the site and allow for revegetation, drainage, and grading. At the Old Hakalau Sugar Mill site, soil remediation depths likely would be shallower to avoid disturbance of potential subsurface historic features. Of this soil proposed for remediation, about 3,811 CY of soils (in a roughly 43,000 sf area) with lower levels of lead contamination are anticipated for disposal on-island at West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill, a qualified on-island disposal site. The soils in the County property(Hakalau Beach Park)meet this standard for on-island disposal,but soils in other locations,particularly in the HDOT right-of-way and some private parcels, do not meet this standard and may require off-island disposal. About 123 CY of material (in a 13,278-sf area)with higher levels of lead contamination are anticipated to be disposed of on the mainland. Prior to the disposal of any soil or vegetation, HDOT will prepare and submit a solid waste management plan for the project to the County Department of Environmental Management(DEM).While no remediation is anticipated in areas with lead levels below 200 mg/kg, during the remediation work, HDOT's contractor would evaluate the soil at the currently anticipated boundaries of remediation to determine the exact extent of soil removal that is needed. Signage warning the public of the potential hazard would be installed to deter access to surrounding areas that are not tested or remediated;fencing is not proposed around untested and unremediated areas on steep slopes. The Proposed Action was selected from multiple soil remediation alternatives presented in the RAA and RAM. See Section 1.5.2, Soil Remediation Alternatives. The RAA demonstrated that this Proposed Action would best achieve substantial risk reduction according to multiple evaluation criteria. See Table 1-1: Soil Remediation Alternatives Summary.Although the implementation cost estimate for this alternative was the highest of all remedial alternatives evaluated in the RAA and RAM,estimated at$8.1 million in the October 2023 RAM,the RAA and RAM conclude that this alternative is cost-effective and provides the most overall protection of human health and environment, long-term and short-term effectiveness,permanent reduction of toxicity, lead mobility, and volume of lead contamination in the remediated areas, thus reducing the likelihood of lead-impacted soil from becoming exposed in the future. After completion of remediation, Hakalau Beach Park is not anticipated to need additional controls, such as an environmental hazard management plan(EHMP)with HDOH oversight to manage the hazardous conditions indefinitely.Hakalau Beach Park could be reopened for use by the public, with no additional monitoring or maintenance stipulations needed for site workers and construction workers within the remediated area.For protection of construction workers and the environment during construction, a construction environmental hazard management plan (C-EHMP) is being prepared for the project to identify and mitigate potential lead exposures during the soil remediation work. The RAA suggests that the Proposed Action would satisfy State regulators (HDOH) and the community the best. For these reasons, HDOT has determined that the Proposed Action would best meet the project's purpose and need of restoring public use of Hakalau Beach Park and surrounding areas. Section 1.5.2, Soil Remediation Alternatives; Section 2.3, Hazardous Materials; and Appendix B, Remedial Alternatives Analysis(RAA)Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park and Response Action Memorandum (RAM) for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park, present additional information about the RAA methodology and conclusions, lead testing results, and HDOH coordination. The subsequent RAM (also included in Appendix B) provides additional information on this Proposed Action. See Appendix B for copies of correspondence with the HEER office regarding the RAA and RAM, including their approval of the RAA and RAM. April 2024 Page 1-7 m c0\, 0 c00 0 0 O O O O O 0 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 P I N 1 I I I Lo h a� K a d v A hZ'ON;OGV �� o j 17 11 -- 1 I £L'ON lua8 \\//1\ • / \I/ \ I _.- --'''--- +.v Z 'oN wag I 1 0 I „0-,89 „0-,6171 O « �N1 21•109 In \ 1\ x._ \ x1 I \ /1•• J •\ \ / \/ "pI / v ' • vI •\ v v / \I/ \I/ v1/ \II _-__w___VL___w___Y___ W 01'ON luas 01 ,O-,99I N - I � 0 u9 /1\ /1\ /1\ /I\ /I ,X- 6' Nl 8 i 1 \ / 1 \ / 1 \ / I �b I IF I x. I •x 1 I fi m+I Qv �•I/ \\I// \\I// \\I 1 -41-r.; rcle q>•. 9• oN was 17) „0,1L1b 11 i Z o A !L 3 R o W m -11 L ON lua0 \ /1\ /I\ /I\ /I\ /1 5 . \ / \ / \/ A \ / I J M O / \ / \ /\ / \ 1 / \ I �lj PO p d'� / \I/ \I/ \I/ .1. \I • 9 oN was 1 o ! , A;ILI a y 0.IL! n Z i"� O /I /1\ /1\ /1\ /1 - ,, (le o S' Nwoe 8 \ \\ / I \ / I \ / 4 ••••,,, 1 \/ I n1 0 / \ 1 / \ 1 / \ /\ / \ `04 O N d • ,A-S91 a`m CI A I r3 4) o £'0N 1ua9 a' \\ //I\. ,/I\. ,/I\\ //,'' // ro I *-, 'F- /r W Pv QI // \\I// \\1/ I\//i MI O ---'/---�--'- bA Z'oN was = 0 I CT h t' POI N0, r_ v 1•oN wag 11 ~ w v �- I� y L'oN PT,' ,..-i N ca o N pp CO N C1-] •.--1 1 I1 O C ca• W S•cLe 1' Y '1 NI ----1'+• as 1?A Ov a N c-.) O O O O c:, `� oo s. F4 I—I 61 II i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 1 1 � C:6-4'. 3 tt TA n co i 411 G� �� w1/ a 4*.'44 .7 1 • J g/i, LL R.' ` `� �~ r, :: _ o:, i -x , I' a \µ r a 0e o'' No -co��� a w o N O T N E an \ Na ° 1%1 C14col s . A ^"J � ea` �on° bYo0 go N -0 1-13 u- N • N c CD U Q N _ iF O D •O o 0 5 N -3 a co r.+ Y E Y @OyO r° teN E0 E ,$aI—' M m d 8 m �74 ms W V � N C4 Gco co co am t3 .0 O c c c ; "0 p g a 5 m E E o R K � d`rp �>. E co N y c a Fitl N J J Q 3 Q U `�''.. .. J O 01 J OE i ,1 1 I r &+, O --' N y o ' P O o , BOJ �' 1. :� � .A n Q. SCACO \ M I 4 1,4*."* 8 e a .''` o • „• r L co I. C7 m07. CA 05 d a�C°N0� y cv co W o p\0.4o A M O to co O co p4 0 3 m oy 0 N h° L4 cr. O 3 sliii JJ �lNI CLe ct ��ZIg'1:100.'\� o Ia ( Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 1.4.2 Bridge Rehabilitation with New Concrete Trestles After the completion of soil remediation work,HDOT proposes to rehabilitate the existing Hakalau Bridge substructure to address the deterioration of the steel trestles and the scour conditions that are undermining the foundations of the bridge.The proposed bridge rehabilitation would involve replacing all seven existing bridge steel trestles with new, entirely concrete trestles and installing new bridge foundations. The use of concrete would allow the bridge to remain in operation without restrictions (such as vehicle weight limits) and make it possible to design the bridge to be more resilient to extreme natural hazards. Specifically, concrete trestles are proposed to replace the steel trestles because (1) the steel rivet technology used to construct the original railroad bridge trestles is no longer available; (2) implementing bolted steel member technology to emulate the look of rivets is costly because of intricate construction sequencing, lack of qualified contractors, and the need for proprietary equipment; (3) costs associated with maintaining concrete versus steel structures are more feasible, especially in a marine environment where steel is extremely prone to corrosion; and (4) concrete trestles allow for new, safer, and more robust foundations that can be designed to withstand tsunami loads and other extreme natural hazards. The concrete trestles would be constructed in approximately the same location as the existing trestles but would have a larger footprint surrounding each existing trestle. The existing trestles would remain in place until the new trestles are completed. See Figure 1-8: Proposed Bridge Elevation [Profile] Plan and Figure 1-9: Rehabilitation with New Concrete Trestle. Upon completion of the new trestles, the existing trestles would be disassembled. The structural integrity of the existing bridge would not affect construction of the new trestles, because they would be independent structures. Thus, the degree of corrosion on the existing steel members becomes less critical, as long as the existing bridge remains satisfactory to support the anticipated traffic loads until construction of the new substructure is complete. The new foundations for the concrete trestles would be designed for a 100-year storm event. In addition, the rehabilitated Hakalau Bridge would be designed for a 200-year check storm, meaning it would be designed not to fail during a super flood event. Concrete trestles would be installed using drilled shafts up to 6 feet in diameter. These drilled shafts would be constructed on both dry land and in the stream bed. During construction of the drilled shafts,multiple temporary drilling platforms may be installed to support the drill rig. These drilling platforms would be needed both on land and in the stream, next to each bridge bent. Construction details regarding these temporary drilling platforms, any associated access, and drill rig support system will be determined at the contractor's discretion or based on the contractor's means and methods.In some cases, depending on the topography,the contractor may excavate temporary construction access roads to the drilling platforms. See Figure 1-10: Drilling Platform Construction Access Plan and Figure 1-11: Example of a Temporary Drilling Platform. No vegetation clearing for access is anticipated. While no disturbance of Old Mamalahoa Highway's cobble rock walls is anticipated, should damage occur to the rock wall,the contractor will make repairs to match preconstruction conditions or better. Because the existing bridge deck is in good condition, it would remain in place and would not be widened. No work is proposed on the bridge railings or any other part of the bridge superstructure, which would remain largely intact with minimal repairs. The existing highway right-of-way is sufficient to accommodate the new bridge trestle towers and foundations. Only work on Hakalau Bridge's substructure is necessary at this time. Construction of Hakalau Bridge's concrete trestles would be conducted incrementally to allow for continued safe operation.No long-term full highway or bridge closure is anticipated. The project may cause disruptions in normal traffic patterns,but construction phasing and traffic control plans would be developed prior to construction,which would result in only limited traffic impacts to bridge users. Night work may be conducted to expedite the construction schedule. There may also be occasional 24-hour single-lane closures April 2024 Page 1-11 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment on the bridge to reduce vibrations or loads while the new concrete foundations are curing. Lane closures may require temporary illuminated signs or beacons for nighttime safety purposes only, but no new streetlights are proposed. Temporary best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize potential soil erosion into Hakalau Stream. Post-construction BMPs, including structural controls (e.g., erosion control matting) and nonstructural controls (e.g., plant establishment), would be implemented to ensure the project area is stabilized after the soil remediation work is completed. Because Hakalau Stream is not located within a regulatory floodway or Special Flood Hazard Area, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)No-Rise criteria do not apply. This Proposed Action would meet the project's purposes and needs of continuing unrestricted operational access to the Hakalau Bridge and increasing its resilience to extreme natural events. 1.4.3 Road Resurfacing and Permanent Maintence Easements From the south side of the valley, Old Mamalahoa Highway descends into the valley floor roughly 180 feet below. During its descent, a portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway travels underneath the south side of the steel-trestle bridge. As it reaches the bottom of the valley, Old Mamalahoa Highway travels over the County's Hakalau Stream Bridge before turning makai and continuing as the Old Mill Access Road into Hakalau Beach Park.The paved Old Mill Access Road crosses Hakalau Stream once over a ford,and travels between Bents 5 and 6 on the south side of the State bridge,before reaching the park. Another spur of the access road splits from Old Mill Access Road just before the ford and continues partially paved along the north bank of the stream until just past the State bridge. See Figure 1-2: Project Area Map. Pavement damage on these roads within the valley is anticipated to occur during soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation work. Therefore, after completion of soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation work, HDOT proposes to repair and resurface Old Mamalahoa Highway, Old Mill Access Road into the County's Hakalau Beach Park, and the beach park's parking area, as needed. This resurfacing may include a stream ford, where Hakalau Stream washes over Old Mill Access Road. But for the first two components of the project, HDOT would not contemplate this third project component. Because Old Mamalahoa Highway is a County-owned roadway, HDOT will coordinate with the County Department of Public Works regarding work on Old Mamalahoa Highway. Old Mamalahoa Highway on the north side of the valley would not be resurfaced because it is closed to traffic. Old Mill Access Road currently traverses private properties. HDOT would coordinate with private property owners to formalize any necessary easements for Old Mill Access Road and the spur road on the northern side of the stream. HDOT plans to maintain these roads,which would both allow ease of access to Hakalau Stream Bridge for HDOT maintenance work and facilitate vehicular public access to the beach park. Page 1-12 April 2024 -, $ I 1111111111111 1 1 ' IPI I II I a, r t= II P ti '� Y _ a ii \ m ti F,tgr 1. & .„ _ E ', g: M Y ti . :_I �nx ti 03Ep vN/09si -- '- r m'k � ._� � -- ori, 1-- -r I 54 - j a n t? v gi 1 -9 J ILI 1- l�NlJat. - 3LW 1 kli 43: 1 IEEE- 8. n , cc ~ k 4 bN lJa�. ozi ,...... t A . _ ] 1 O b ice. C]0.. s p'OA!rrr38 3 - _ TI— •..1 CC I t m Cle c i li 1" W F IDN PF,'' a ' Cr—n L17 ae i OtID r c ' _ [ ,•_,—=, 1;-.nrf 1 \r\.--1- '7N U Col Cr. GCS - a g -s _ M O te . N N Cn n it c‘i :d = : V y F�I //� rrC� ��,yy W I-1 I� ` w :� 1 �4�'p-I Q '"!,t J , 3 tr 1u $'K 4 .$131 1'1 3_w ::-----:: . ram 4 co 0 ` �� .177]}7 24-17:-..::' q!Y.....� _c5t =1:1:14';:;:C.ilti. ..e.4,-72: .,1 -::."4:-'::.1.1.:;1::).3.1.:...)::••• — - F[Ipilf ..;:c.c...17".-,....4:::,:;: . .:; >, :.. I ...7.„-1—::-.1_f em.„......1-........:- To O. 2 v ::153}37 :: ,''. _o s. O -, w Y . c, �J O d 31 0 !:. a d C E R g A_ r 0 p a. .� 1 4 a 4$ a w •% I-41 _ ''''''''''')c.j = _ 0 ------ 33131l1• ... Io::::::::::_ i ' r' E :I:: 113l131k113 d 0 wu�1::: •� ;3 r Z II �• ;moi::!: :I:w+`•1':;:a :,. 3 '-''''''.1:1,„ O •: I 11' ". :I:..:I:'.,. 11:;1 .. o Y � � '=,i`' il.'K�;1:7p 'ilc• .1[:^":.1":::::::.17 i.. :+lri; :11 a1Y -.- _. ., .t � ax 1■ .li i::l::; ;::7 I1 11!11] •1 :: :1:;::1:'•.' 4}1:1731111 0 ct CC --,�Y t.:::;i!�.1, �.. ]t!1!31117111�• CI .. u ,n • �L �_ •i:tt 1t 111:}]13115~ �1'•�,7, 711 71111 Y1 i1'3;1T{ •-- 'S"" n•i V ^c.' '' �� Ii1i1111171}5311313:1}ilS ++�� 6 �i rOii _ �f111]111 M1 1111113�• . o CC 'B -_ALL 11(i ....•i'r MM" W N W J W 4 =a M cod O N d # 2" C m N71- NI CI4 c- W ca l x+ Y X ' N ca � 1= r_ �' y . �ca•i Gi . �? by lyi Q in z I:1-i B 8 5 J ' ... .:.. --:.tr .zp Z m2� ��' -- i j Quo .. E,road.(/*3 Z c a __r t, G7J M 0 P .,.:-F2, .}IyI.--{may�{.,+{,, , Ci iV _ N ag a 9 vN/ua, li a; Wee45 ,"1 4.1 ta a t)i V O ne,e e, V _—_` of Q 9 1 ��y 1 YN fueg A 8.A. i-:IJ , L J . r .fir 9tiNfu � ' = �� c'�, $ Z ,14 U _ S nN/amem 1_,____.,...___-E ig g i ..-t.; n EDI;.'—____—L, 1 h 6 N lUa9 9 1 _ b I U U levy �71\!'-�-�'—*"—^� WkR i�r b 8. ___,--„_.,--,_.4 ti4510 — ,__..-,_—_,-i-=�b oI oe Cr) E"01)(NeB 9 © ©` _-- -- [- 06 €g • I p S 09 i ti_ w ti +, 4� '—__ C vr!NV 2 ///—Tr`-vy1� 77 u OB -4 t}r U cd . g� - A i 091 e e E w i - - - - - — 091 .e m N • O e $ • •,;., OCk O 4 a (Si cc:• W it o2 g' N' cu—cl)© N ,_, x QW Q P� Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 1-11: Example of a Temporary Drilling Platform111f - _... . I .-w .m 1 s • 'Viii5 '� 116," mW w r Image provided by KSF Inc. Note:Pipe piles are installed then cut to the correct elevation.Steel beams are placed on top of them,and the decking is installed to create a working platform for equipment such as a drill rig. 1.5 Other Alternatives Considered 1.5.1 No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative would leave the site "as is" with no soil remediation and no improvements to the Hakalau Stream Bridge substructure. Without soil remediation,the lead contamination from the lead paint that was removed from the aging steel bridge would remain in the environment surrounding the bridge. Hakalau Beach Park and the area around the bridge would remain contaminated by unsafe, elevated levels of lead, and the beach would remain officially closed to the public. The lead-impacted soil would remain unsafe for human exposure. Based on the elevated level of lead concentrations, the unmitigated lead-impacted soil poses an unacceptable risk to current and future park users and maintenance workers. This lead contamination would also continue to make the flora and fauna in the area unsafe for human consumption. HDOT and the County would need to maintain warning signs in the area to inform the public of the hazard posed by lead contamination. In addition, the access gate would need to be maintained and locked at all times. There are likely unforeseen complications and costs with keeping the park closed, such as security issues associated with trespassing and other unwanted activity. However, closing this popular park permanently is likely to be undesirable and unacceptable to the residents or the County. Page 1-16 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Although the bridge superstructure is in suitable condition for continued long-term use, frequent and ongoing maintenance and repairs on the bridge substructure would be necessary to keep the aged steel- trestle bridge operational. Due to advanced corrosion and deterioration of the existing steel members and scour that is undermining the concrete footings, the bridge would likely require weight restrictions in the near future.Eventually,the substructure will become unstable,and the bridge will likely require full closure. The deteriorating bridge substructure would also pose a danger to the portions of Old Mamalahoa Highway and the Old Mill Access Road, which both pass under the bridge. Although pedestrian access to the park would still be possible using the stairway at the top of the hillside on the Hilo side of Hakalau Valley/Gulch and unsanctioned use of the area by the general public may continue,the lack of vehicular access combined with hazardous lead contamination conditions in the valley means that Hakalau Beach Park would effectively remain permanently closed to public use as a recreational area. The existing bridge is also not capable of withstanding tsunami loads, high winds, seismic events, heavy rainfall, and flooding with debris loading. The Hakalau Stream Bridge could suffer failures similar to what occurred during the 1946 Alaskan tsunami when multiple steel-trestle bridges on the Hamakua Coast failed. Bridge failure under such catastrophic conditions would disrupt emergency and recovery operations and access along the Hamakua Coast, necessitating emergency action to replace the bridge. Under such emergency conditions, a comprehensive analysis to design a more resilient bridge would be unlikely. The No Build Alternative would not achieve the purpose and need of the project to restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park and surrounding areas or to allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge and increase its resilience to extreme natural hazards. Therefore, this alternative is not considered further in this EA. 1.5.2 Soil Remediation Alternatives As described in Section 1.4.1, Soil Remediation, Kealamahi Pacific Consultants (KPC)prepared an RAA, which the HEER office approved on May 23,2023.KPC also prepared the subsequent RAM dated October 2023. The RAA and RAM identified and evaluated multiple remedial action alternatives to determine which were most feasible to restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park and the surrounding stream area. This EA recaps only the most feasible soil remediation alternatives identified and evaluated in detail in the RAA and summarized in the RAM. These alternatives are the on-site isolation and containment (encapsulation), off-site disposal, and institutional controls alternatives summarized below. These alternatives are consistent with the HEER Technical Guidance Manual and the Hawaii State Contingency Plan (HAR 11-451-8(c)). See Table 1-1: Soil Remediation Alternatives Summary and the following discussion for a comparison of these alternatives adapted from the RAA and RAM. See Appendix B, Remedial Alternatives Analysis(RAA)Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park and Response Action Memorandum (RAM) for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park, for a full discussion of soil remediation alternatives considered, including methods such as chemical immobilization of lead in the soil which the RAA did not evaluate in detail. See Appendix B for copies of correspondence with the HEER office. April 2024 Page 1-17 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Table 1-1: Soil Remediation Alternatives Summary Alternative: Removal of Soil Exceeding 800 Proposed mg/kg for Lead Action: and Alternative: Removal of Replacement Institutional and Soil Exceeding Alternative: with Clean Fill. Engineering 200 mg/kg for No Action: On-Site Soil Cap for Soil Controls: Lead and No Remediation; Isolation and between 200 Partial Replacement Entire Site Containment mg/kg and 800 Reopening, Evaluation Criteria with Clean Fill Restricted (Encapsulation) mg/kg Restricted Area Overall protection of • O ® e O human health and the environment* Compliance with applicable or relevant • 0 (3) 0 e and appropriate requirements* Long-term • O 0 ® 0 effectiveness and permanence* Reduction toxicity, • O ® ® O mobility, volume dume through treatment* Short-term • • • • • effectiveness* Implementability* ® • ® ® • Cost** $8.1 Million $0.10 Million $1.81 Million $3.81 Million $0.25 Million State regulator • O O acceptance* Community • O e 0 e acceptance* Meets purpose and • O 0 e 0 need of project O Satisfies the criterion to a low degree or does not satisfy the criterion in a timely manner ® Satisfies the criterion to a moderate degree in a timely manner • Satisfies the criterion in a timely manner Sources: *KPC 2023a.Data from RAA Table 8-1,Evaluation of Cleanup Alternatives. **KPC 2023b.Data from Table 6-3,Cost Summary Table. 1.5.2.1 On-Site Isolation and Containment(Encapsulation) This soil encapsulation alternative would involve covering the soil with geotextile material to produce a visible barrier between the clean and impacted soils. In areas where this option would be impracticable(for example,because of steep slopes or areas of intense vegetation/trees on the Hakalau southern embankment), fencing and signs would need to be maintained to restrict access. Lead toxicity in the area would not be reduced, but the potential for the public and site workers (such as landscapers) to encounter it would be Page 1-18 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment reduced but not eliminated. This alternative would also reduce the likelihood of the lead affecting surface water resources. Because the lead would remain on site, an EHMP would be needed and project-specific C-EHMPs would be needed for each future repair and construction activity at the site indefinitely, which would make future site management costly and onerous. However, the RAA concludes that the lead would remain potentially mobile through erosion and surface runoff, because this soil cap is vulnerable to scouring from flooding. Because the park is located in an area that can experience torrential rains and associated flooding, the site would need to be maintained to ensure the containment soil cap is not breached. Similarly, this alternative may also not protect against lead mobilization during future seismic or climatic events (e.g., tsunami, flooding, or sea-level rise). Because this alternative may result in continued reexposure to elevated lead levels,this alternative does not meet the purpose and need of this project to restore public use in lead-impacted areas and to eliminate the lead contamination in the remediation area to protect human health and the environment to the greatest extent possible. This alternative is not considered further in this EA. 1.5.2.2 Removal of Soil Exceeding 800 Mg/Kg and Replacement with Clean Fill. Soil Cap for Soil between 200 Mg/Kg and 800 Mg/Kg In contrast to the Proposed Action to remove soils exceeding 200 mg/kg, this alternative would remove soils with only the highest levels of lead exceeding 800 mg/kg. Similar to the Proposed Action, that soil would be replaced with up to 24 inches of clean fill. Soils between 200 and 800 mg/kg would be encapsulated on site, similar to the encapsulation alternative described in Section 1.5.2.1, On-Site Isolation and Containment(Encapsulation). Both the replacement with clean fill and the reduction of lead mobility through the soil cap would offer reduce lead toxicity but would not eliminate the lead as thoroughly as the Proposed Action. The estimated volume of lead-impacted soil to be removed would be substantially lower than in the Proposed Action, making this option less costly. However, similar to the encapsulation alternative, this alternative may not protect against lead potentially mobilizing during future seismic or climatic events(e.g., tsunami, flooding, or sea-level rise), leaving contamination above 200 mg/kg in the remediation area. Because this alternative would leave this lead contamination on site, visitors and workers may continue to be vulnerable to reexposure to elevated lead levels. Similar to the encapsulation alternative, an EHMP and project-specific C-EHMPs would be needed indefinitely.Because of the possibility of continued reexposure to elevated lead levels, this alternative does not meet the purpose and need of this project to restore public use in lead-impacted areas and to eliminate the lead contamination in the remediation area to protect human health and the environment to the greatest extent possible. Therefore, this alternative is not considered further in this EA. 1.5.2.3 Institutional and Engineering Controls Under this alternative, no remediation work would be performed. However, unlike the No Action Alternative, the park would be reopened and all areas where lead concentrations exceed 200 mg/kg would be allowed to overgrow with vegetation to prevent the public from direct exposure to the soil. To prevent unintentional exposure, a healthy grass cover would be maintained,and any bare soil areas would be seeded and covered with jute netting to prevent direct exposure.A site-specific EHMP would be prepared to outline areas of lead contamination on the site to facilitate awareness and restrict work areas for future maintenance workers. Maintenance work, such as lawn mowing, would be conducted only where lead concentrations are below commercial/industrial environmental action levels. Signage warning the public of the hazards and some fencing would be installed to deter trespassing and access to areas with higher contamination levels. April 2024 Page 1-19 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment This alternative would leave the lead contamination in place on public and private land with no encapsulation and is believed to be not acceptable to the public. Similar to the No Action Alternative,there are likely to be unforeseen costs such as security and other issues associated with trespassing or other unwanted activity, as well as the associated potential cost to human and environmental health. The lead- impacted soil will need to be managed, including periodic inspections and documentation of the grass surface for exposed soil areas of erosion to protect the site from erosion. Such exposed areas may allow contaminated soil to wash into areas used by the general public and into Hakalau Stream and the Pacific Ocean. Visitors and workers may continue to be vulnerable to reexposure to elevated lead levels; site workers may be required to wear respirators due to the elevated levels of lead in some areas. The EHMP would need to be updated periodically, and project-specific C-EHMPs would be needed indefinitely. The effectiveness of this alternative would need to be reviewed periodically. Because of the possibility of continued reexposure to elevated lead levels,this alternative does not meet the purpose and need of this project to restore public use in lead-impacted areas and to eliminate the lead contamination in the remediation area to protect human health and the environment to the greatest extent possible. Therefore, this alternative is not considered further in this EA. 1.5.3 Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives HDOT is committed to retaining steel bridges along the Hamakua Coast to the extent that it is fiscally responsible and can be maintained for the long term. Unfortunately, due to the advanced state of corrosion at Hakalau Stream Bridge,retaining this existing steel bridge is not feasible.Recent bridge inspections have indicated that the existing steel members are nearing the end of their useful life because of extensive corrosion, and they cannot be salvaged or repaired. The condition of the bridge superstructure and existing reinforced concrete abutments is adequate, and the bridge can remain in long-term use if the substructure is rehabilitated. Table 1-2: Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives Summary,presents a high-level comparison of the bridge substructure rehabilitation alternatives considered in this EA with each alternative described below. With the exception of the New Bridge Alternative, the bridge geometry would generally remain the same in most alternatives, with the existing bridge length of approximately 775 feet and approximate height of 180 feet above Hakalau Stream. The bridge would continue to be configured with two travel lanes, one in each direction. The existing bridge deck would remain and not be widened, and bicyclists and pedestrians would continue to share the lanes with vehicular traffic. The existing posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour would remain unchanged. In contrast,under the New Bridge Alternative, different bridge dimensions and configurations could be accommodated. Page 1-20 April 2024 Z 0 / 0 f 2 ƒ 2 2 E T/ / C $ 7 69- 0Q 2 k / E / / > \ 2 2 2 E ƒ k k \ SI CDR 69- [ 69- k & 743 $ )CD / § 3 e / / / 0 =/ k 69- / = a e 2 \ _% § $ 2 o G o \ ƒ 2 x 2 E s o 7 = 2 = © J69- S• ■ E § E 7 ® § J t \ e 2 2 y y o _ ,- Z - 0 Z Z o / / 27 � � « a = § il kG •\ < / / E § Ca 7 f ƒ k ƒ E / ƒ = 0 7 � co \ # 2 o_ c-) \ § & / \ ) } bil\ 7 / » % % ii : Liii _ 7k \§o k / )$ f . 2 / j 7 _ 2 / e / k % \ 2a9 $ $ o - / / \— \ 2 3 -o a) E f © E ® ® - \ CI / § ± / L! x / \ �/ Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 1.5.3.1 Historic Rehabilitation The Historic Rehabilitation Alternative would replace the existing steel-trestle bridge members one for one with similar materials (i.e., steel) of approximately the same dimensions. The existing highway right-of- way is sufficient to accommodate the new trestle towers and foundations. This alternative would be designed following the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, particularly the Standards for Rehabilitation, which would likely result in a finding of"No Adverse Effect" for federal and state historic reviews. The replacement of individual steel members is extremely time consuming and costly,because the structural integrity of the bridge must be maintained during the removal and replacement process and only a limited number of beams can be removed at any one time. Each steel member would be custom designed and placed for each bent, such that the order in which work progresses is critical. Furthermore, the bolted technology used to emulate the look of the original riveted steel trestles is a slow construction process that would require proprietary equipment to manufacture and install. Only a few qualified contractors can perform such work. Extensive shoring would be required to support the existing bridge during construction.Due to the extensive corrosion, it is difficult to determine in advance whether struts can be adequately secured to the existing members. The time between the last inspection and the start of construction—even if it is just a year or two—could result in considerable changes to the structural integrity of the trestles. This uncertainty exponentially increases the risks associated with this construction method because changing site conditions caused by accelerated corrosion could result in significant changes to the construction approach. If a location is deemed to have insufficient structural capacity, a temporary tower may need to be constructed to bypass the deficient area. Each temporary tower would need to be customed designed per location and would require additional footings for support. The process for design, approval, permitting, and construction (including manufacturing, shipping, and site work) of each temporary tower would significantly increase the construction cost(over$10 million per tower) and project duration,which would further delay the full rehabilitation of the bridge and would expose the trestles to continued degradation. For the foregoing reasons, this construction method would not be feasible, and the initial costs associated with this construction method would be high. See Table 1-2: Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives Summary. Long-term maintenance costs would also be substantial. A steel-trestle bridge in a coastal marine environment is subject to constant salt spray and would require significant vigilance to maintain. Routine inspections for all steel members and joints would need to be conducted every two years. Regular inspections for in-stream scour conditions would also be needed. Maintenance activities—including cleaning, sandblasting, and painting the entire structure—would need to be done approximately every 25 years. Furthermore, this alternative would not meet the project's purpose and need of increasing the bridge's resilience to extreme natural events. The bridge foundation could not be designed to withstand tsunami loads without significant changes to the appearance of the trestle layout.Without these changes to the bridge foundation,the bridge would remain susceptible to suffering a repeat of the failure that occurred during the 1946 Alaskan tsunami. Failure of the bridge under such circumstances would require emergency action to replace the bridge, likely without consideration for potential impacts to the natural environment. 1.5.3.2 Rehabilitation with New Steel Trestle The Steel Trestle Alternative proposes to use new steel members to construct new trestle towers that would be offset from the existing towers (similar to Figure 1-9: Rehabilitation with New Concrete Trestle), such that the footprint of the new steel towers would extend outside the footprint of the existing towers. This would allow the existing towers to remain in place during construction of the new towers. The existing highway right-of-way is sufficient to accommodate the new trestle towers and foundations. Page 1-22 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment This design would require beams of longer spans, and consequently, much larger steel members than the existing steel beams. These larger steel beams would increase the weight of each full-height tower by a factor of two, from approximately 1 million pounds to 2 million pounds. The additional cost associated with this increased steel requirement is approximately $10 million per full-height trestle. Costly manufacturing, shipping/transportation,and specialized site construction are all considered in the steel cost. This alternative would retain the existing bridge in its current configuration until completion of construction, at which point the existing bridge trestles would be disassembled and removed from the site. The structural integrity of the existing bridge would not affect construction of the new towers because they are independent structures. Thus, the degree of corrosion on the existing steel members is less critical, as long as the existing bridge is deemed satisfactory to support the anticipated traffic loads until the construction of the new substructure is complete. Similar to the Historic Rehabilitation Alternative, this Steel Trestle Alternative could use the bolted technology to emulate the look of the original riveted steel trestles, but this construction method is slow and costly. However, a steel-trestle bridge in a coastal marine environment is subject to constant salt spray and would require significant vigilance to maintain. Routine inspections for all steel members and joints would need to be conducted every two years. Regular inspections for in-stream scour conditions that would affect the bridge foundations would also be needed. Maintenance activities—including cleaning, sandblasting, and painting the entire structure—would need to be done approximately every 25 years. Therefore, given the maintenance requirements, the difficulty and cost of constructing with steel, and its inability to withstand extreme natural hazard events as well as a concrete substructure,this alternative does not meet the project's purpose and need. Both the initial costs of construction and the long-term maintenance costs of this alternative would be substantial. See Table 1-2: Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives Summary. Because this alternative is also a steel-trestle bridge in a coastal marine environment subject to constant salt spray, routine inspection and maintenance requirements would be considerable. Therefore, this alternative is not considered viable and is not evaluated further in this EA. 1.5.3.3 Rehabilitation with New Hybrid Trestle The Hybrid Trestle Alternative would construct the five main full-height trestle towers that would be situated in the main valley(channel and floodplain) as hybrid towers—with concrete on the lower portions and steel on the upper 60 feet of each tower. See Figure 1-12: Hybrid Trestle. The quarter-height trestle towers closest to the abutments at each end of the bridge would be constructed entirely of steel. The lower portion of the towers would consist of approximately 5-foot square concrete columns with 5-foot-thick concrete tie beams at roughly 35-to 40-foot spacing.Note that this lower portion of the hybrid tower would not have a traditional trestle look. In profile,the concrete columns would be tapered similar to the shape of the existing steel towers. Similar to other alternatives,the footprint of these new hybrid trestle towers would also be offset from and extend beyond the footprint of the existing towers. This larger trestle footprint would allow the existing towers to remain in place during construction of the new towers. The existing highway right-of-way is sufficient to accommodate the new trestle towers and foundations. This alternative would allow the bridge foundation to be designed to withstand tsunami loads and other extreme natural hazards. However, the upper sections of the towers that are made of steel would require significant vigilance to maintain because they would be subject to constant salt spray. Routine inspections for all steel members and joints would need to be conducted every two years. Regular inspections for in- stream scour conditions would also be needed. Maintenance activities—including cleaning, sandblasting, and painting the entire structure—would need to be done approximately every 25 years. April 2024 Page 1-23 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 1-12: Hybrid Trestle Full-Height Tower Quarter-Height Tower 4.-Centerline Bridge 1— L'pfdPr 1.re 3:dgf Edsflrp Q ©I Q Q Exiatff� G`r�y ` 7 i ?i Superstructure ,, to Remein 111111Steel Bent cep 5UPtltVrteelure � T' To RCmbfn 'Be-.-w C..o AprySteer Trestle SteAll&L &Tresl�e AtIM Oliii° 1111r Typ. i \ FAIli4r4 t ` !! 1+ 1]rrffed Sher T . ! 1 ! Commie Tie ! Berry Tra '1 —--- IM M— I------ 1 P I .-,„.,c,snarl ! l rr'°' j ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 Drilled Shrift ! 1 cea'Typ ! 1 -- MI — — �j--- arl7hrd Sheri, P a TO. Note:Existing trestle not shown. This alternative, therefore, would not meet the project's purposes and needs of continuing unrestricted operational access to the bridge and increasing the bridge's resilience to extreme natural events. The steel-trestle portion of each hybrid tower would be fastened by using bolted technology to emulate the look of rivets, similar to the Historic Rehabilitation and Steel Trestle Alternatives. The Hybrid Trestle Alternative would also retain the existing bridge in its current configuration until completion of construction, at which point the existing bridge trestles would be disassembled and removed from the site. The structural integrity of the existing bridge would not affect construction of the new hybrid towers, because they would be independent structures. As long as the existing bridge is deemed satisfactory to support the anticipated traffic loads until rehabilitation of the bridge is complete, the degree of steel corrosion on the existing bridge is not critical. For this alternative,both the initial costs of construction and the long-term maintenance costs would be substantial. Therefore, this alternative is not considered viable and is not evaluated further in this EA. 1.5.3.4 Construct a New Bridge Adjacent to the Existing Bridge The New Bridge Alternative would involve constructing a two-lane bridge adjacent to the existing bridge. Note that a new bridge crossing Hakalau Valley at a completely different location was not considered because of the overwhelming impacts of acquiring and building a bridge through a completely new roadway Page 1-24 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment alignment. The new bridge would be approximately the same span (roughly 775 feet) and width (roughly 40 feet)to match the existing bridge. The bridge would be supported on tower bents up to roughly 180 feet high and could be placed either mauka or makai of the existing bridge. The support towers for the new bridge could be either concrete or steel or a combination of materials as described in the alternatives discussed previously. The existing highway right-of-way would not accommodate the relocated bridge, and considerable right- of-way would need to be acquired for the roadway transitions, bridge, and foundations. The alignment of the roadway approaches along Hawaii Belt Road would need to be modified to transition to the new bridge, which would likely involve significant cuts into the hillside above both sides of Hakalau Stream as well as acquisition of private property for additional roadway right-of-way. The new bridge would be designed in full compliance with current design codes, and it would meet the project's purpose and need of increasing the bridge's resilience to extreme natural events. In addition, enhancements such as pedestrian or bicycle paths could be easily incorporated in the new bridge design. On the other hand, this alternative would not meet the U.S. Secretary of Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, particularly the Standards for Rehabilitation of historic structures. This alternative would retain the existing bridge in its current configuration until completion of construction of the new bridge, at which point the existing bridge would be disassembled and removed from the site. The viability of this alternative depends on the existing bridge continuing to be deemed satisfactory to support the anticipated traffic loads until construction of the new bridge is complete. Because of the continuing degradation of the existing bridge, as well as the significant environmental and real property impacts of constructing a new relocated bridge,this alternative is not considered a viable alternative and is not considered further in this EA. 1.6 Project Cost Based on conceptual engineering, the total cost of the Proposed Action is approximately $70 million (in 2022 dollars). The soil remediation portion of the project is estimated at over$8 million, and the proposed bridge rehabilitation is estimated at $60 million. See Table 1-1: Soil Remediation Alternatives Summary and Table 1-2: Bridge Rehabilitation Alternatives Summary. These costs will be refined as engineering details are developed. 1.7 Project Schedule The construction duration would be roughly 2.5 years. The project's milestones are: • Finish Planning and Design Concepts: Summer 2024 • Begin Final Design: Late 2024 • Complete Final Design: Early 2025 • Initiate Construction: Summer 2025 • Construction Completion: Late 2028 1.8 Permits and Approvals Table 1-3: List of Permits and Approvals by Agency, lists approvals and permits that would be required prior to construction of the project. Permits or approvals that may be required due to construction means and methods selected by the contractor or permit conditions that are still unresolved are indicated with an asterisk (*). Coordination and approvals are ongoing. See Chapter 4 for additional information on regulatory permits and approvals. April 2024 Page 1-25 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Table 1-3: List of Permits and Approvals by Agency Agency Permit or Approval FEDERAL FHWA NEPA Categorical Exclusion U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)Act Section 4(f) Department of the Army(DA); U.S.Army Corps DA Permit pursuant to Clean Water Act(CWA)Section 404 or of Engineers(USACE), Regulatory Branch Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Endangered Species Act(ESA) Section 7 consultation; Administration, National Marine Fisheries Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Service(NMFS) (Magnuson-Stevens Act) Essential Fish Habitat coordination U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ESA Section 7 consultation State Historic Preservation Officer National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)Section 106 consultation U.S. Coast Guard *Coast Guard Bridge Permit Exception STATE OF HAWAII Department of Business, Economic *Coastal Zone Management(CZM) Federal Consistency Review Development&Tourism, Office of Planning and coordination (TBD: may be triggered by USACE Permit and Sustainable Development(OPSD) remediation action) Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), Hazard Remedial Alternatives Analysis(RAA) Evaluation and Emergency Response (NEER) Response Action Memorandum(RAM) Office HDOH, Clean Water Branch (CWB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Permit for storm water discharges related to construction activities *NPDES for project discharges related to dewatering activities *CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) blanket certification(pending DA permit) HDOH, Indoor Air and Radiological Branch Community Noise Permit (IARB) *Community Noise Variance(if night,weekend, or holiday construction is needed). Department of Land and Natural Resources HRS Chapter 6E-8 Review (DLNR), State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) DLNR, Division of Aquatic Resources(DAR) HRS Chapter 195D Conservation of Aquatic Life,Wildlife, and and Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) Land Plants Review DLNR, Land Division Shoreline Certification; Shoreline Setback Variance, if needed DLNR, Office of Conservation and Coastal Conservation District Use Permit Lands(OCCL) DLNR, Commission on Water Resource *Stream Channel Alteration Permit(SCAP) Management(CWRM) COUNTY OF HAWAII Department of Public Works Grading, Grubbing, and Stockpiling Permit Department of Environmental Management Solid Waste Management Plan Department of Parks and Recreation USDOT Act Section 4(f) Exemption concurrence Department of Planning Special Management Area(SMA) Permit Page 1-26 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 2: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, POTENTIAL IMPACTS, AND PROPOSED MITIGATION This chapter describes the existing environmental conditions of the project site, potential long-term and construction impacts of the project, and the proposed mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate those potential effects. The relative impact(s) that would likely remain after mitigation is also described. Each section within this chapter is dedicated to analyzing a specific environmental or social discipline. Short-term potential construction phase impacts are also discussed within each respective section. Existing conditions, potential impacts, and proposed mitigation measures presented in this chapter have been developed through a review of existing information related to the project areas (see references chapter); studies conducted specifically for the project; coordination with regulatory agencies; and consultation with the general public. 2.1 Physical Geography and Soils 2.1.1 Existing Conditions Thousands of years of waterflow erosion from Mauna Kea Volcano to the shoreline created what is now Hakalau Stream and Hakalau Valley, also referred to as Hakalau Gulch. The gulch stretches from the lower slopes of Mauna Kea to the Pacific Ocean, approximately 3 miles long. At the Hakalau Stream Bridge, the gulch is approximately 775 feet wide(the length of the bridge)and approximately 180 feet deep (the height of the bridge). According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS) Soil Survey of Islands of Hawaii, State of Hawaii (2019), the underlying soils within the project area categorized as HiloRock Outcrop Complex, consisting of hydrous silty clay loam on the surface, with 35 to 100 percent slopes. This soil consists of lava flows broken into a base of river cobble. See Figure 2- 1: Soils in the project area. HiloRock Outcrop Complex soil is generally comprised of 35 percent basalt rock outcrop and 65 percent Hilo and similar soils. These soils are typically found at elevations of 0 to 1,100 feet, in lava flow gulches along the bottom third mountain flank of Mauna Kea. Hilo Complex soil runoff is classified as "high" and considered "well drained." HiloRock Outcrop Complex soils are not considered prime farmland soils. The stream banks experience frequent erosion during storms and heavy rains, and the stream mouth regularly experiences physical changes. The terrain on either side of Hakalau Stream is relatively flat, consisting of alluvial deposits of sand, gravel, waterworn pebbles, cobbles, and boulders flanked by the steep, nearly vertical gulch edges to the north and south. The mouth of the stream often fluctuates between being open with the surface water connected to the ocean and closed by a rocky sandbar, depending on environmental and weather conditions. When closed by the rocky sandbar, there is a deeper pool in the stream. April 2024 Page 2-1 C O J :8- :it \,0o911,,111111 OC, a 41 CI ill 3. r . ,,, 14 . cs •S 10 ,, < pli.. 0. AoA4i5 it .s. iiii,,,„ ♦ ,i 0N O \• d co• •• N • - • o C • ;my 0 CO O Cy O LI- D .g a., O 6, E i/�\ N UJ W UV' : ..l x y• Q. o vs B B y a m Op` co � ~ S • 7bq . r y aE p A 0 'G © �amo s w AO Ny . N 7Y �'^ OC N >. N LI ID� !•• N '° i. d w m w u 3 • Y a m 6 n ? a K $• Cau) TO O u O aN .— Z +: I m C r.- L NK o 9 O N m G) c a 1- w xo x.- xn• ; a U i7 ` o N p = 4 � 0ElN I I l i -• � yNI ' z< bD i. x Q w a Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.1.2 Potential Impacts The Proposed Action would temporarily alter the topography of the project area. The proposed remediation would involve the removal of all soils that exceed 200 mg/kg of lead up to 24 inches in depth and replacing it with correspondingly same amounts of clean fill. The total amount of soils that would be displaced is estimated at up to 7,623 CY in a roughly 2.4-acre proposed remediation area, as described in Chapter 1. Vegetation, which helps to stabilize soil, would also be removed and replaced on these impacted areas. Bridge rehabilitation work would require ground disturbance on steep slopes in the valley to create temporary construction access roads and to drill foundations for the new concrete bridge trestles. The C- EHMP would address construction-duration activities on the sloped areas of the gulch. As part of the project, temporary and permanent erosion control measures, and construction BMPs, discussed below, would be implemented to ensure that the project area is stabilized after completion of construction. The proposed soil remediation actions or the hillside disturbance for the bridge trestle foundations should not result in significant adverse changes to the geological stability of the project area, such as increasing its susceptibility to hillside erosion. 2.1.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures HDOT would implement standard temporary erosion control measures during construction both on the banks of Hakalau Stream that would be disturbed by soil remediation work and also on the hillside areas that would be disturbed by bridge rehabilitation activities. Furthermore, permanent post-construction BMPs, including structural controls (e.g., erosion control matting) and nonstructural controls (e.g., plant establishment), would be implemented to ensure the project area is stabilized after the soil remediation work is completed.With the incorporation of these erosion control measures and BMPs to ensure the project area would be stabilized after completion of construction, the Proposed Action is not anticipated to result in significant changes to the geography and soils of the area. The bridge rehabilitation would also strengthen the bridge,making this critical component of Hawaii Belt Road more resilient to such hazards. 2.2 Land Use 2.2.1 Existing Conditions According to the State of Hawaii Land Use Commission's State Land Use Districts,most of Hakalau Valley is designated as Conservation District. See Figure 2-2: State Land Use Districts. The Conservation District mauka of Hakalau Stream Bridge is classified as a "Limited" subzone, while the coastal area makai of Hakalau Stream Bridge is classified as a "Resource" subzone. The Hakalau Beach Park property is classified as urban land use, and the remainder of the project area is classified as agricultural. Only a small portion of the project area is classified as Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii(ALISH). The ALISH area located on the perimeter of the project area partially overlaps the established HDOT right- of-way for Hawaii Belt Road. See Figure 2-3: Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii. There are no farms or agricultural facilities in the project area. According to the County Zoning designations, Hakalau Valley, excluding the Hakalau Sugar Mill,is zoned A-20a for agricultural use. The coastal Hilo side of Hakalau Beach Park is zoned MG-5a, a General Industrial designation. Toward the peak of the valley slope on the Hilo side, a short section of the project area is zoned RS-7.5 for residential use. However, there are no private residences in the project area. See Figure 2-4: County Zoning Map. The County's Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide map similarly specifies the project area as Conservation, Important Agricultural Land, Industrial, Low Density Urban, and Open Area designations. See Figure 2-5: County Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map. Specifically, the area on the mauka side of the Hakalau April 2024 Page 2-3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment Stream Bridge is categorized as Conservation, while most of the area makai of the bridge is Open Area. The makai Hilo side of the project area, which includes remnants of the Hakalau Sugar Mill, is designated as Industrial. On both sides of Hakalau Gulch, the Hamakua Plateau is considered prime important agricultural lands (County of Hawaii 2005a, 2005b). The project area is also located in the Special Management Area (SMA). See Figure 2-6: Special Management Area Map. In addition to the lands makai of the bridge, the SMA extends mauka for approximately 150 feet past the Hakalau Stream Bridge.Pursuant to HRS § 205A-28,no development shall be allowed in any county within the SMA without obtaining a SMA permit. See Section 4.4.2: State and Local Coordination for more information about SMA coordination with the County Planning Department. The majority the project area is privately owned. See Figure 2-7: Tax Map Key[TMK] Map and Table 2-1: TMKs in Project Area. The County owns Hakalau Beach Park and the Old Mamalahoa Highway right-of- way. HDOT owns the Hawaii Belt Road right-of-way. 2.2.2 Potential Impacts Under the Proposed Action, there would be no long-term changes to existing land use. Properties undergoing soil remediation, involving vegetation removal and replacement of lead-contaminated soil would experience short-term impacts related to the ground disturbance, during which time the property would be unusable for other purposes. See Table 2-1: TMKs in Project Area and Figure 2-7Figure : TMK Map. Where the access roads currently exist, HDOT would work with private property owners to formalize the access easement. No significant impacts on land use are anticipated. A shoreline certification by the state Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) would be required to support the SMA permit application,which may revise shoreline parcel ownership. A shoreline setback variance(SSV)may also be required by the County. HDOT would coordinate with the County Planning Department regarding SMA and SSV requirements. 2.2.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures There would be no long-term adverse impacts on land use; however, there would be beneficial impacts of returning the remediated County beach park property to public recreational use. Therefore, no avoidance, minimization,and mitigation measures are proposed.HDOT would seek a Conservation District Use Permit and SMA permit prior to start of construction; these permit processes are described in Section 4.4.2, State and Local Coordination. HDOT would obtain rights-of-entry from affected property owners prior to construction. Page 2-4 April 2024 r 7 J g ' oy Irt %r2- rct ,, t hyo2.6 06 '� .�• ,v ♦,,, r'j Nkat o ` '"opp , Anil �_ C7 006,: „ ,, . .,'., :- • 400 14% . , .,_ v a) al s,s, . yA N \ oo 6i hm 2 A M tiN A a r \tFto a LU 2� l3rn C7 a cV E Lt'.1 \ o d 3 a co SAO , c, N a, V] •y N ,o ° x 2 m o a , o 92 mm - N y � .' LJLJ N K , Z..411( E •tr Yb' r , a $ a\o\ f . m ofir �a� . Ai \ .w A. r 4. �`,' 'i �aGy'' 6 a �S. A ''' . \• • . CI ISI • N 4� � AJ\ iA� m O d eA , /A46''' t I 11)10\SA '\''. 3 CAas t s Vk o�°‘k O 3 ui- raj ♦; � CI O i 04 E o 4• w O "� o o CI O U N O cn ibe.\\ 0 6 v . °� y o� c� tl •nr % a A 0 N a A Yeii O ya V NOH Vr 4NC y . 0 10 0 ON cc N ` m A m o Q d w i °' ms♦ � ''' N o 3c € .E = r o o � �, o N I W it ` i 17) NI ca bA -IU�¢E= a° U y ct a w z< E pp s. x Q 61.1 i� 1:1-i li 3 Ti e .3° ' a Z �� 0. 'a a • PIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIP • ,, cs'ki ,., , ,,,., , ,- :o �� y,14 0 o A Amo oCO 6�� as • a) uiV D O X mss,",` \ LLJ rn 0 Clo \ . 0v N C Ti) o O LL a C Ro" a) E, N - `�J` ai m +.* ro. ,,,�° ,.,°a°. ,<m a �c5 w m bd a yAy o r4 m m a: 3 sy a n3 m d o g -g m a ,- `ik. O ,, ¢ n N rn ooC9 W= c o i O = HI c m u. m v d `o C U O N N W A 1 O C rn �" O U N N N y c " ii 1 lw i o :� �poP 3 0 "� .JC" .. \ 4i ''''''' Tik cm o k n . W ' o co Vto-..'' ,' ', t 1.i ,\ ,, co ASA �t cu MS 'S 3 ; v._ o GI a o V ♦ N nN rn ho o 04 et iii 8, 40 0.4 o \r O d • W y♦ 4 P\ a� Z m m �O . O ,� r�� $v N �;iap 4 c, ca Mir V t7 coo e • ^,,, i. N , m Y z.m m ¢ m p . o o "s i p x ,. . . m 2 pa m `� w O ? g m i m %.5 , .r� `o y el 1 c ff m U oo E a m a m a g N a F _ e U E c 0 3 ¢ U o cc O CC W Sr rn n_ g m O N NI N ca '� v '� o ro Q w a It C i .9 O .. N a. — \ o d n 40010° oad ui ...\.0c. e n S. ,OrN N L I CI 4P W co CD * O (D- -1- `E)p AAacS •Ao \ o % A-. a o-. N oad-, ti 0��� v `'\.,in getrt baa \ Fo as Cr ��� �\ o CI D CI S. v co 0 o c 04 P ' * 0Y ayY O L O 3 % ��yy y -I-, i��y i�l t , l Y CI S "m .0 d Sox• i m bn d a> a y�, 0 Y '/� oE '41, /ASG o �O\1Lon N v WM CA m T t d'`,/ al al Co 2 fl U % `o m G) c a vii a U •t ` o O c, Ij it m v O U N ' N ••• 4•1 3 a�_.....i OBC Z< y r c C O O " tD t0 O O co O 3 C O i p O N N9 J m Opt r l 0 M M l" ON ,O E. .3 M 0 c. , M 2\O CD p m Nco C 11 o A�- p '\''a r `O° N d O 1 N - :10 i O O M O !b. "00, O O N C9 �y � O �D O _� O 3 i= O M O O p O N N '� CV 04 co tri O O O M N O p CO o , ca N i CO CON M11: _ r M � . 0 M O n- U''. stli"Ct* \ Cil66 o N L ' O ,•$CM t , N CD r 0 .� . O W p 1 CV N M M 8' M O0 o I , 0 O p O M O N *" - ,. a �, A ` cco o ' 'PS ..t- S, aCL f ,., a, • M �A 6, A \ N N o m J0, A� a .s142,�O ce 3 ,‘a�(off \ i ti V a E , CV c Op \Oil 11411111k , O mO } Of co N N,\ Y O , N M a M N M O c C2.1 e N t U CCI M a)/ Sria ,."yl�-,,,.na a) o , 0� O Ihilk. et g' • i ' \ o N i c di J `. O U M c co "0, CI Of ° m f il M -0 ��, M O U 0 U ea 2 .= T m �A1 N +� G7 V+ T yy D. 3° r c 3 m 3 �,. -N T L , dy O N 3 y 2i ani l� a c15 ns o o ° �° ec `o cA y NcLe 2 d gC' d 112 U Q U O 2o 1 z` L i. x Q w a 0 0 0 _ o » » Cl) 0 0 = U) _ _ o o 0 •\ = = = = = = 0 0 2 2 3 7 7 7 2 2 2 7 3 3 3 0 5 3 3 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 ¥ o 0 0 CD CD CD _ ¥ \ \ \ © > > _ > > > > © 2 2 2 / i 2 / / / 2 2 £ i CV 2 $ ) 0 K -0 0 �\ So E /0 UJ = 0 0 o G o £ 2 o G o o G o 7 >- 2 » >- z » z z » 2 y$ z 2 2 7 o2 _ 2 co a) \ § �\ k § /) I- ' \ k\ 45 < Ca CO G G G G 2 § 8 G G G G Gm eL /\ E @ @ @ @ @ G % % % % % % % !) o r 0 d- d- » r a r@ « = c 3 z a w 0 & & 0 a a s- 0 a a \y \/ CD \ Q \ _ / ƒ b m . {e I- E \{ 3 % : / 0 . ƒ { a / 0 [ / ) ) & o G G G G b ƒ % 2 @ § « / % % % * 2 2 % % % \ #} / ' » 0 a a 0) e@@ CO m / \ o 2 = n n n 7 0 » ,- » ± 0 � \ 04 \\ \ § A \ j 45 CI /\\ /« r4 _ yyM ( ] .. $ ) ) C.) r r 0) 0 c (N n # r = w = 2 / \ 0 \ '' / / / / / k 3 S 8 3 8 N- ± )) \ / 3 4 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >> - N - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a A - 0 m m m m m CO n n n n n n n § \ cd \ n CO n n n n CO n CO CO CO n n a \ / Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.3 Hazardous Materials A hazardous material is any substance that may be hazardous to humans, animals, or plants. They may include pesticides, herbicides,toxic metals and chemicals,volatile chemicals,explosives,and nuclear fuels or low-level radioactive wastes. This section discusses the potential for the presence of contaminated soils or groundwater and other hazardous materials resulting from previous and existing uses in areas where new project construction may disturb such materials. The section also summarizes the measures that would be implemented to avoid adverse impacts from exposure of such materials to the workers and the surrounding community. 2.3.1 Existing Conditions 2.3.1.1 Environmental Records Review WSP USA Inc. reviewed the Hawaii Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) office online database of cleanup sites (iHEER) in October 2023, which identified three sites within 0.25 mile of the Proposed Action. See Table 2-2: Hazardous Materials Sites identified by HEER Office and Figure 2-8: Hazardous Materials Sites identified by HEER Office. Table 2-2: Hazardous Materials Sites Identified by HEER Office Distance from Project Direction Site Number, Name,and Location iHEER ID Area(miles) (N,S,W,E) 1 —Hakalau Sugar Mill, 29-2306 Mamalahoa Hwy, Hakalau, HI 96710 277 0.0 Within project area 2—Hakalau Stream Bridge, MP 15.3 Mamalahoa 2285 0.0 Within project area Hwy, Hakalau, HI 96710 3—Hakalau Pesticide Mixing and Seed Dipping 2284 0.04 Adjacent to project area Site,29-2306 Mamalahoa Hwy, Hakalau, HI 96710 Source:HDOH 2023 Key:iHEER= HEER office online database Past land uses that may contribute to the presence of hazardous materials in the project area include the cultivation and processing of sugar cane at the former Hakalau Sugar Mill in the project area. Along with the large volumes of wastewater released during sugar cane production,a variety of fertilizers and pesticides may have been used in the production process. The former sugar mill (Site 1) and an associated site connected to former mill operations (Site 3)were identified as sites of concern during the review of HEER files. Hakalau Stream Bridge(Site 2)is included in HEER as a site of concern due to long-term application of lead-based paint on the steel bridge. Page 2-12 April 2024 14. ' , w ,. ,,,, ,,, ,. 1 4 „: ,,0 -i %,„,,tasl a Ma��\e�oa Od0.\,..t,. .\41144”. ' - ,s - - 9 D . / , , .. 44 ..1,,, 04; \ JR" ,ms\eityt..s,,,,,;,,""'."''''' , i40:,,,..„. ,. li il f:! \ ., ate ' Nii.L. ' ,. JD 1414 ‘, 1111:4::v...., ..0, i ,:'''''.,' :. ,, O /104 5��69� �� az _0 = ..., ' *r .. ...„ .., ..(p . , .0 ,. .._ , tz . a . ._.4.0 ...., w , , . , %�y )04A, a4 NOAH . . ^: �� 1 .1M V1 % yy o N CIY (c0 V1 .vim $ ....r_M O CU O CC d \ �o 47 N ) 0 ! Ocd 4 sd d' m J i:r : N N T �A O f O M G� " ' 10 m ,...,./7 o �O a m Y B of N a a 'o B o a) p (X m v O w .� I1-1 o N m i o `- a) y c a H 1 ; ¢ U o O r' W �..I 0) 740 0 CD N N :C rte' J D H K -� y N rT� L bp .1 iiiimm.r• Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.3.1.2 Remedial Alternatives Analysis and Response Action Memorandum KPC, on behalf of HDOT, recently completed an RAA in cooperation with HDOH, which was reviewed and approved by HDOH in May 2023 following public review and comment. KPC, also on behalf of HDOT, subsequently prepared a RAM in October 2023 specifying(1)how soil remediation would be conducted and (2)the monitoring required(including soil testing) following completion of soil remediation. Both the RAA (KPC 2023a)and the RAM(KPC 2023b)have undergone separate public review processes under HDOH and have been accepted by HDOH; see Appendix B, Remedial Alternatives Analysis (RAA) Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park and Response Action Memorandum(RAM) for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park. The RAA identified the primary source of contamination in the project area as lead-impacted surface and subsurface soils released into the environment from paint used in historical bridge maintenance activities. Based on soil samplings in 2016, 2020, and 2022, the Hilo-side (south) embankment of the HDOT right- of-way contained the highest lead concentrations. See Figure 2-9: 2016,2020,and 2022 Soil Sampling Test Results. The areas shaded red under the bridge include areas characterized as "gross contamination"with lead levels exceeding 1,000 mg/kg. The highest results in the right-of-way were 25,000 mg/kg of total lead (KPC 2023a, 2023b). Based on site observations of cyclical stream sediment transport as discussed with HDOH staff and documented in the RAM, it is unlikely that lead in beach and river sediments pose a human health risk to beachgoers and fishermen. Surface water samples also showed low concentrations of lead all below the reporting limit,indicating that there is no impact to surface water or to groundwater. See Figure 2-9: 2016, 2020, and 2022 Soil Sampling Test Results. Therefore, no soil remediation is proposed in the stream or adjacent wetland. 2.3.1.3 Bioaccumulation Assessment Element Environmental, on behalf of HDOT, also recently also prepared the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation—Biota and Plant Tissue Bioaccufnulation Assessment in June 2023(Element Environmental 2023). This assessment documents the existing lead bioaccumulation conditions in flora and fauna in the project area. The report's findings indicate that both plant and aquatic animal samples in the area exhibited elevated lead levels that exceeded the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) action level for lead of 10 parts per billion(ppb)in food intended for babies. In general,lead concentrations in plant tissues decreased with increased distance from the bridge. Lead concentrations measured in plant tissues sampled upstream of the bridge were an order of magnitude lower than plants collected near the bridge. Lead concentrations in shellfish and prawns exceeded the FDA action level but were an order of magnitude lower than in plant tissues. The report recommended no further sampling of flora or fauna at this time. The report's primary recommendation was to provide signs informing the public of lead levels detected in the plant and fruit at the site.The report also observed that the lead concentrations detected in shellfish samples during this study are likely indicative of background concentrations of lead. Page 2-14 April 2024 , '1111F , ril. .., ,., ., , \ ,, o1p a. 3 ;' rcP. CO s w cs-; Ft- N E \ \\ N nll g 5 I ,,,,.: t� St yam' 0d x co Ia."; '• .,� M/ 6gAvmoo = �\ O' O y r� o CO N . i • • W „ ik 01 \ w p CO t T al CO y Q N CL) �o d 111\1\ a A • oad �s' %4..t, 14 • Ca / .o NO •c0 y • .y N CAI) • tyit 0 I Y N �. i !� 0 co a C Q , 1— O _ N \ o I •. O N S' a Nco� oo , p � Li) E do • Oco Nvi N E m E ip , bqr o o Q O m m $ o - m 'iti N N A T T y E r4 a' c ,3- m / . O a s y co• N ; O O Cca fN e _ O 0 a ' lim 40 N CO CO, Cr y N v ° m o m m m m E 8 ° CO N Lei •� �i Q) C d t— N J J J Q .'l Q 0 „� J O --I co 7175 = : ga0I I I 1 1 i j 0 � � � Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.3.2 Potential Impacts Under the Proposed Action, the soil remediation would remove the highest concentrations of lead contamination in the project area in agreement with federal and state requirements. With soil remediation, these lead levels should decline. Lead testing would be conducted after the conclusion of soil remediation and revegetation to document post-construction lead levels. Following soil remediation and confirmation that lead levels in the remediated areas have declined to safe levels,Hakalau Beach Park would be reopened to the public. The removal of hazardous materials from the project area would reduce future impacts to human health and the environment from exposure, which would be a benefit of the Proposed Action. Contaminated soil and vegetation would be removed and disposed of at a permitted off-site facility.Where elevated levels of lead contamination exist, remediation would involve removal and disposal of contaminated soil and vegetation at a permitted mainland facility. Where lead levels are lower, the contaminated soil would be removed and proposed for disposal at a permitted local facility,the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill, in coordination with the County DEM. HDOT would prepare and submit a solid waste management plan to DEM prior to the disposal of any soil and vegetation. HDOT would also coordinate with the County Department of Parks and Recreation to post signage clearly informing the public of the presence of lead in the readily accessible,flatter areas proposed for remediation, and would also install and maintain signage for less accessible, steeper areas not proposed for remediation. Signage informing the public of the potential hazard would also be installed to deter trespassing and access to areas that are not proposed for remediation; fencing is not proposed around the unremediated areas, which would be on steep slopes and difficult to access. After soil remediation is completed, testing and monitoring of the project site would be conducted in accordance with the RAM. No permanent significant impacts would be expected. During construction, hazardous materials would be encountered in lead-impacted soils while excavating for bridge trestle foundations and found in materials disturbed during bridge rehabilitation, demolition activities, and soil remediation work. The main human exposure pathway is through contact with contaminated soil,but exposure could occur from dust, surface water runoff, and leaching. Exposure could also occur from contact with terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems via fugitive dust from construction activities. The potential exposure to contaminated materials that are disturbed during construction presents a health and safety concern mainly to construction workers. Because access to the area is and would remain restricted until Hakalau Beach Park reopens,human health and safety concerns to the general public are not expected during construction. HDOT and its contractor would be responsible for preparing and implementing a C-EHMP in conformance with the guidelines established by the HDOH HEER office. The purpose of a C-EHMP is for management of identified environmental hazards posed by known or suspected environmental contaminants at a site and to provide clear procedures for how to manage these environmental hazards safely.With the C-EHMP in place and followed,risk to construction workers would be minimal.No further significant short-term impacts would be anticipated. 2.3.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Because soil remediation to address known lead contamination is a primary purpose of this project, lead- specific BMPs would be specified as part of the C-EHMP to be developed in coordination with the subcontractor selected to do this work. The C-EHMP protects workers and the environment from lead exposure, including airborne lead. Additional construction BMPs shall be implemented in accordance with the documented approach, An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii by the FHWA and HDOT Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by HDOT (2021). Furthermore, the 2005 HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control would be followed. With these Page 2-16 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment measures in place,no significant impacts are anticipated.0 After construction is completed,HDOT proposes to conduct monitoring and testing of soil, flora, and fauna in the area on a periodic basis to monitor lead bioaccumulation. 2.4 Historic and Archaeological Resources 2.4.1 Regulatory Context Section 106 of the NHPA requires actions that are federally funded, authorized, or implemented to consider the effect of such actions on any district, site,building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Under NHPA Section 106, the federal agency—in this case, FHWA—is responsible for assessing the effects of the project on all significant historic properties within the area of potential effects (APE). At the State level, Chapter 6E-8 of the HRS places similar responsibilities on State agencies to evaluate their projects. The HRS Chapter 6E-8 review of potential project impacts on historic properties is conducted with the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), a division of the DLNR. Under HRS Chapter 6E-8, the proposing state or local agency—in this case, HDOT—carries the same burden to identify historic properties within the project study area (HAR 13-275-5), assess their significance (HAR 13-275-6), and evaluate the project's impacts (HAR 13-275-7). Hawaii State Statutes define "historic property" as any building, structure, object, district, area, or site, including heiau and underwater sites that are over 50 years old. Although the State law has a broader definition than the NHPA of what is considered a historic property, only those resources that meet the definition of"significant,"as defined by Chapter 13-275-6(b)of the HAR,are protected by HRS 6E-8.This EA refers to those properties that are considered eligible for the NRHP or meet the Significance Criteria (protected under Section 106 and HRS 6E-8) as "significant historic properties" to distinguish them from those that are considered historic because they are over 50 years old. The remainder of this section discusses the impact to historical and archaeological resources in this regulatory context. In this discussion,the term"project area"is used interchangeably with the term"APE." 2.4.2 Existing Conditions This project area located in the traditional ahupuaa of Hakalau Nui and Kamaee is steeped in the history of the sugar plantation era in Hawaii. The Hakalau Sugar Plantation was established in Hakalau Valley in 1878. The plantation's supporting infrastructure in the valley included ditches to carry water, flumes to transport freshly cut cane, and a mill to process sugar.As a result of the sugar industry,much of the project area is a heavily disturbed landscape. The site of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill occupies the southeastern corner of the project area, which was converted into Hakalau Beach Park (currently closed), while other parts of the project area were occupied by supporting infrastructure for the mill including labor camps for mill workers.By the late 19th century,the lands surrounding the project area were planted in sugarcane, and by the early 20th century, a railroad had been built from Hilo to Hakalau and beyond, including the bridge crossing Hakalau Gulch. An Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was prepared for this project by ASM Affiliates. See Appendix C, Archaeological Study. In addition to field investigations, the AIS relied on a review of available information, including NRHP listings, a Hawaii Cultural Resource Information System database search, and other primary and secondary sources to identify five "significant historic properties" (i.e., protected under Section 106 and HRS 6E-8) within the APE. See Figure 2-10: Historic Properties. The following information is modified from the AIS. April 2024 Page 2-17 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.4.2.1 Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070) Site 09070 is the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House located between Hawaii Belt Road and Old Mamalahoa Highway on TMK: 3-2-9-002:039 at 29 2301 Old Mamalahoa Highway, on the Hilo side of the bridge. The house was previously assessed as historically significant for its association with the Hakalau Plantation,for its association with John Munro Ross who managed the Hakalau Plantation from 1905-1946, and for being architecturally significant as an example of a late nineteenth century plantation manager's house in Hawaii. A portion of this property is within the APE,but all buildings in this property are located at least 500 feet from Hakalau Stream Bridge and approximately 20 feet above a sheer cut in the hillside on the makai side of Hawaii Belt Road. 2.4.2.2 Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) (Site 50-10-16-09090) The Hakalau Stream Bridge (State Inventory of Historic Places [SIHP] No. 50101609090) is one of six steel-trestle bridges listed in the NRHP as part of the Multiple Property Documentation Form for "Steel Trestle Bridges in the Hamakua Coast."Hakalau Bridge was determined individually eligible for listing in the NRHP in 2009. Hakalau Stream Bridge was reconstructed in 1953 as a highway bridge as part of a rerouted Hawaii Belt Road. The 775-foot-long bridge spans Hakalau Stream at a height of roughly 180 feet. The steel trestles and truss spans from the original bridge remain intact with minor modifications for seismic upgrading such as bolted connections, which replaced the original riveted connections during the bridge reconstruction in the 1950s.The original railroad bridge trestles were constructed using riveted connections, which are no longer in use today. After the 1946 tsunami, the trestles were rehabilitated/reinforced using bolted connections to emulate the look of rivets. The bridge is considered a rare remaining example of steel girder and trestle construction and was, for many years, the longest span in the state. The bridge also represents the "work of a master."John Mason Young designed the original railroad line and bridges, and William R. Bartels, of the Territorial Highway Department, engineered their conversion from railroad to highway use in the 1950s. Page 2-18 April 2024 ihvDi ,g .� { .fir a -nQu 6 \o\\r v. �\\ ' - ! 1011111.'..„2".„,..._..„. ,„-:- * reb Na 5) SVP , " , ':',. '. 14,, _ od; NOill , It ZE S' to N .st \,,9.0.6. 4, .s.. -(9; 0alo m1;) d • D M 0 N t Oimi N W O LL c o CD N \f M N •Sr v c E E g ,2 L �` K cn bil- v' 61m 8 m d m 'G .i ' g m ' m2 6A \ [d W Na m m = iw N 'a' °v m . A (J) an d (7) `5 xm xj O x° ; m E _ 2 v x °tea x� m of B ° VtA O E N rl G ti � n2 �j XxX� q 3a� nd I .3g i m l 0 8, 'F,“ 0, u m y V] .. N v o x vm:2 lc me am P' m c a > o - N W iir d a �xs com rom m'x wM m 8 ¢ o O N ~ l cd la mao I 1 0 ® 1 ; ' . xQw ¢a Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.4.2.3 Hakalau Sugar Plantation Features (Site 50-10-16-26591) Site 26591 consists of 15 features associated with the former Hakalau Sugar Plantation that are located both above Hakalau Gulch to the east and inside Hakalau Gulch. Six features of the site are present within the current project area but are currently in poor condition: the remnants of the former tramway and stairs (Feature J), the supports for the flume that once crossed Hakalau Stream (Feature K),the foundation of the former Hakalau Mill(Feature L),the access road to the mill site(Feature M),the base of the old smokestack (Feature N), and an old pipe stanchion(Feature 0). See Figure 2-11 through Figure 2-16. Figure 2-11: Site 26591 —Feature J, Stone Stairs T: 77 -'G r 'p A tl 1�,.,''qr ,� 11 'dry.`... it H• .. 'Si� * Ory - F tl � J r• . +x' 01 { ,ter � .ti . ' ,-r, '. '141, , ' v '0'Por" v+"le -. p- ,i - r ,,--__gin .-�, „ �• r:, 1 a' • ,' r, m P_¢ �• " - • • ,y'C'; ry r 6 r �-.;-.y.,- , f4 r 1,....a .- •+�r^� ......::.)., .,4,.:,!., Y' • rr: it pr. x yti %. . 1 •tP{ ,4i k '4,, fes : N ;,:, .,- —,-).firtf.,1;_,-7,..,..1..::... ',-,'-44--ir riiii„,,rzi. . Iri,r.., . a __ . • „...,.....„ __... . _ i . Ari----4. • _, LA , r- , r _ .. '.,, fit � u•. . 'P- t.'. • f -'-ti /'fir r"�a A� � . �^o--"...67' . �� r, " '" T �Y.% ar. r .1k -.,;4-,.-" 4.4-e'' e" rr i * :n t ' '', 4 r 5` 4^ _ t ,,n• r "r• - �' ..... rt ": - 7 - j I qtr r 'ti.. cd - . - x •yw' ` -y' # _ - __ �y r ..� '- Lf .i. 'Yrl.. 40 Stone stairs accessing the southern edge of Hakalau Gulch,view to the northeast. Source:ASM Affiliates 2023a Page 2-20 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-12: Site 26591 —Feature K, Concrete Flume Supports " ' • ` It 'Lf•-•.-.."":-:::.',:.; X.:"'...'=:', '.. :-. \.• .':.", ' \_If ' :'.1.1.1.:,:k '',: 70t-- ',1'',••• •:', •'.*.•,,„0-:.'-' ••,- ,•,••:,. '•'••.,7 •—'4i•.f7•-•-•• ff IIx F "„, ' `n 'Num, n, - t 4, •d,}•YV A', y: �Wit. M1. Site 26591 Feature K,concrete flume supports on the south side of Hakalau Stream.View to the north. Source:ASM Affiliates 2023a Figure 2-13: Site 26591 —Feature L, Concrete Foundation and Seawall i `,, . i.,. . . 4 4 � r 7177 ' +� �i ".t 4t � i . r z '', k •,•., .• tla 1 � , ,N o, h' ( 1 . , s *;'” ,.. "•. fir• '',. ., . , 04,. „....., . „. ,„,,,,,„... .. „..,.. 1 . . . „„., . • .. . . Cr ., , .... LL. .... _ _ ..., .,.. :S F ._ _. • Site 26591 Feature L,concrete foundation and sea wall.View to the northwest. Source:ASM Affiliates 2023a April 2024 Page 2-21 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-14: Site 26591 —Feature L, Remnants of Former Crane ...yam y7 P � roj4 .1 . I;''. ,. •Ll. � ��� F4-' i y� "' "Z"`1 :� ` - / R� - 271 v Ix, 1' k J /r/ t F g r 1 t �c" R -r `7 '....i...07-1-s-- 4 - v{ Z,. ..- •SRL Site 26591 Feature L,remnants of the former crane.View to the west. Source:ASM Affiliates 2023a Figure 2-15: Site 26591 —Feature M, Raised Concrete Ford on Old Mill Access Road �/a a ., f,a�hM_ yw F4 �j!4t . .' 7'i lY b i � lf'y+` iit 'Mfy =';'....',"4,..- ✓ 4 ' '.',',41i,14, ri,1 . . er� ` 3+ ' L1' f :14. nV *if.'7.20P '1 pj .yv . r` •x ' [ice , .yT4 N n • ' +a 10 r,,�' ^� '7' .• '-.1"...,-,.,,p.'"'-' '• x ., ., ,' ,-7;;;,44. � "ti -- ,si 4 . _ Jp ', r. s em, 1* r T # ar 2 Y' tri 4 1 F if 4 r. ' +fit' w .y " '. . � `hyyJ� 1t1� Y t a .. ✓' ` ^ • . � �_A f- ♦ ,.'e .,e7 i � .T- .. ... { -`-- .. y ' i4u y •V", s s• + .;,17'`:µ'a' .---.....•4:1;:4'.:;,''....:"c''.'7.K_ .,,-,- — • 'i`- Site 26591 Feature M,raised concrete ford crossing Hakalau Stream.View to the northwest. Source:ASM Affiliates 2023a Page 2-22 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-16: Site 30187—Old Mamalahoa Highway sr1:11 Y r C -- 4,,,,,,i.:. ,.,4:4-4.,:....-..,:, - Aiiiik:,,,,,;A:1., • ,0jC 1%, rk,4 gy , :+..... j.„ '. N. .9111140 NW*, ' i,w i % ze. pX1c V. q rf • :ip4 rS � R rL� IC „. _ ,;? ri i �., Rei - r%{ -is 11 t. Y•...s.. k tl' Y�f Pr•,::,rlirs . !.. Jo- i M y -w F w � It " ,-° , '..;JP' .i,': fir.. .p. i -- -. , dI 0.d , ° r +�: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.4.3 Potential Impacts Consultation with the SHPD and other Section 106 consulting parties is ongoing. Similarly, the HRS Chapter 6E-8 review process with the SHPD has not yet been completed. The significance evaluations, potential impacts, and treatment recommendations presented below are preliminary findings only. HDOT would provide these findings to SHPD, and SHPD is expected to conduct its HRS Chapter 6E- 8 review responsibilities in conjunction with their Section 106 responsibilities, separate from the requirements of HRS Chapter 343. The anticipated impacts described in this EA are intended to fulfill the impact disclosure requirements of HRS Chapter 343. Of the five identified historic properties within the project area and previously discussed, the Proposed Action is anticipated to result in a Section 106"Adverse Effect,"pursuant to 36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800.5(c) due to the impacts on Site 09090 Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) and an "Effect, with Proposed Mitigation Measures"under HRS Chapter 6E-8 for the State review of the project's impacts to historic properties. No other impacts on historic properties are anticipated. See Table 2-3: Historic Site Significance, Impacts, and Proposed Treatment. Table 2-3: Historic Site Significance, Impacts, and Proposed Treatment Site NRHP HRS 6E Anticipated No. Site Name Period of Use Eligibility Significance Impacts? Proposed Treatment 09070 Hakalau Plantation 1897 to 1974 A, B,C a, b, c No No further work within Manager's House project area 09090 Hakalau Stream 1911 to 1974 A, B,C a, b, c Yes Prepare Section 106 Bridge(State) Memorandum of Agreement to mitigate impacts 26591 Old Hakalau Mill 1880 to 1974 A,C, D a, c,d Indeterminate; No further work within anticipated to project area be minimal 30187 Old Mamalahoa 1930 to 1974 A, D a, d Indeterminate; No further work within Highway unlikely to be project area impacted 14#* Hakalau Stream 1930 to 1974 A,C, D a, c,d No No further work within (T-1) Bridge(County) project area; Architectural recordation if future projects have adverse effects. Source:ASM Affiliates 2023a 2.4.3.1 Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070) A portion of Site 09070 is within the APE, but all buildings in this property are at least 500 feet from Hakalau Stream Bridge and approximately 20 feet above a sheer cut in the hillside on the makai side of Hawaii Belt Road. The bridge rehabilitation and soil remediation work would be conducted only on areas below this property. Therefore, no impacts to the Manager's House property are anticipated. 2.4.3.2 Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) (Site 50-10-16-09090) The Proposed Action would rehabilitate the substructure of the current Hakalau Stream Bridge by replacing the steel bents with concrete bents. This replacement is proposed because the original railroad bridge trestles were constructed using steel riveted technology, which is no longer in use today. After the 1946 tsunami, the trestles were reinforced using a bolted technology to emulate the look of rivets; however, that construction method would be costly if implemented today, because it is a much slower construction process, would require proprietary equipment, and there are only a few qualified contractors who can perform such work. Moreover, the costs of maintaining steel trestles are extremely high compared to Page 2-24 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment maintaining concrete trestles, making the concrete option superior from the standpoint of long-term feasibility and resilience to natural hazards. By replacing the steel bents with concrete bents, the bridge's substructure would be reconstructed but would allow its superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs and maintenance. Historic characteristics of this bridge will be impacted by the project. The replacement of the historic streel trestles with concrete bents would result in loss of character-defining features and a loss of historic integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling. Therefore, this rehabilitation option would not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties,particularly the Standards for Rehabilitation.Because of these proposed changes to Hakalau Stream Bridge,a finding of"Adverse Effect" is anticipated under NHPA Section 106, and a finding of"Effect, with Proposed Mitigation Measures" is also anticipated under HRS Chapter 6E-8 for the State review of the project's impacts to historic properties. It is anticipated that the proposed mitigation measures would adequately mitigate potential adverse impacts on this steel trestle bridge. See Section 2.4.4, Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures. 2.4.3.3 Hakalau Sugar Plantation Features (Site 50-10-16-26591) Some of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill and plantation features associated with Site 26591 could be impacted by the project. These features inside the current project area are all previously disturbed ruins in poor condition. The anticipated depth of disturbance with soil remediation is up to roughly 24 inches with removal of all vegetation, except where there are conflicts with extant historic features, such as portions of Features L and M(the former mill site and its access road). Soil remediation activities would be conducted around these features to avoid disturbing them as much as possible. Upon completion of construction, the site would be returned to preconstruction conditions. Bridge rehabilitation work may affect Feature K (concrete flume supports), because of their proximity to the proposed drilling platforms needed for construction access during bridge rehabilitation. However, because all features of Site 26591 inside the current project area have been adequately recorded in the AIS,this documentation has adequately mitigated any potential adverse effects to historic properties that may occur during construction. See Appendix C, Archaeological Study. Therefore, the project would not result in an adverse effect to the Hakalau Sugar Plantation Features, and no further work is proposed for Site 26591. 2.4.3.4 Old Mamalahoa Highway (Site 50-10-16-30187) Site 30187 Old Mamalahoa Highway will be used to facilitate access to the soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation areas during construction. The anticipated impacts to the site would be related to normal wear and tear caused by the use of the roadway by construction vehicles itself and are considered negligible. Those minor impacts to the road surface would be mitigated by roadway repaving which is already proposed as part of the project. At this time, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. Therefore, no further work or mitigation measures are proposed for Site 30187. In the unlikely event that the cobble rock walls are damaged during the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge (State), they would be repaired in coordination with SHPD.No further work is proposed for Site 30187 at this time. 2.4.3.5 Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) (Site 50-10-16-20000C, Temporary Site 1) The Hakalau Stream Bridge (County)would be used to facilitate access to the soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation areas during construction. Potential minor impacts to the bridge deck would be mitigated by repaving which is already proposed as part of the project, upon completion of soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation work. The project does not propose to conduct other work on this County bridge; therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 2.4.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures FHWA and HDOT will prepare a Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement(MOA)to stipulate to mitigation measures that would adequately mitigate the adverse impacts of the Proposed Action on Hakalau Stream Bridge (Site 09090). The following mitigation measures are anticipated to be documented in the Section 106 MOA, as well as in the HRS Chapter 6E-8 review for Hakalau Stream Bridge: April 2024 Page 2-25 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment • HDOT shall prepare a Historic American Engineering Record(HAER)document with photography for recordation of Hakalau Stream Bridge as mitigation to address the Adverse Effect caused by the alterations to the bridge. The HAER document shall be prepared in accordance with the U.S. Secretary of Interior Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation for Architectural and Engineering Documentation and by a historic preservation professional meeting the U.S. Secretary of Interior Professional Qualifications Standards (36 CFR 61) for History, Architectural History, Architecture, or Historic Architecture. • HDOT shall provide funding not to exceed$350,000 for a documentary film to record and interpret the historical and cultural significance of the Hilo Railroad Company bridges, the 1946 tsunami, and the Hamakua coastline communities. The documentary should be prepared by a qualified production company in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the Tsunami Museum, and other relevant interested parties,as may be necessary. The documentary shall include interviews of recognized engineering experts, historians, and kupuna with knowledge of the subject matter and area. The video documentary shall be publicly distributed as part of educational outreach. With these mitigation measures,which would be stipulated in the Section 106 MOA and HRS Chapter 6E-8 review for Hakalau Stream Bridge, HDOT has determined that the Proposed Action would result in no significant adverse impact on historic properties under HRS Chapter 343. Project construction workers and all other personnel involved in the construction and related activities of the project would be informed of the possibility of inadvertent cultural finds, including human remains. Should any potential historic properties be identified during construction activities, all activities would cease and SHPD would be notified pursuant to HAR §13-280-3. Should human remains be encountered, all earth moving activities in the area would stop,the area would be cordoned off, and the SHPD and local police department would be notified pursuant to HAR§13-300-40.In addition,in the event of an inadvertent discovery of human remains, the completion of a burial treatment plan, in compliance with HAR §13-300 and HRS §6E-43, is recommended. No short-term impacts are anticipated. 2.5 Cultural Resources In March 2024,ASM Affiliates prepared a cultural impact assessment(CIA)for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Soil Remediation Project. See Appendix D, Cultural Impact Assessment. The CIA was prepared pursuant to Act 50 and in accordance with the Office of Environmental Quality Control Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, adopted by the Environmental Council, State of Hawaii, on November 19, 1997 (OEQC 1997, 417). Act 50, which was proposed and passed as House Bill No. 2895 and signed into law by the governor on April 26,2000,specifically acknowledges the State's responsibility to protect native Hawaiian cultural practices. For the CIA, the traditional ahupuaa of Hakalau Nui and Kamaee are considered the study area, while the location of the proposed development activities is referred to as the project area. 2.5.1 Existing Conditions Hakalau Nui and Kamaee are located within the traditional subregion of Hilo called Hilo Paliku, an area known for its steep cliffs, lush vegetation, and extensive plateaus cut by numerous valleys and gulches, including Hakalau Gulch.This subregion has and continues to be admired and honored for its natural beauty as demonstrated by the numerous proverbs and indigenous classification system that refer to the plentifulness and diversities in the region's rains,winds, gulches, and valleys. Many traditional moolelo that make explicit reference to the lands of Hakalau and Kamaee recount the visit made by the deity, Hiiakaikapoliopele and her companion,Wahineomao. This story tells us of Malaeakini, the famed ohia lehua grove and also that Hakalau Bay was an ancient surf spot. The story of Ka-miki, on the other hand, tells that Hakalau was named for the area chiefs, a priest, and a skilled warrior (olohe); Hakalau-lani-a-pii and Hakalau-a-olo were the chiefs; Hakalau-iki was the priest, and Hakalau nui was the expert (olohe) and land administrator (kaula aina) who served under the chief Kolekole. Another moolelo Page 2-26 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment recounts the battle that occurred at Hakalau between the forces of Kahekili of Maui and those of Hawaii Island chief, Kalaniopuu. At the time of the 1848 Mahele Aina, Hakalau Nui Ahupuaa was claimed and awarded to the alii wahine (chiefess), Miriam Kekauonohi. Kamaee was divided into three,possibly four sections with three different alii laying claim. However, each of these alii relinquished their interest as Kamaee, in its entirety, was transferred and incorporated into the inventory of Government Lands. Although there were no kuleana claims awarded within Hakalau or Kamaee, nine Government Land Grants were awarded in Kamaee. The current project area encompasses portions of two of these land grants (Grant No. 1350 to Ioela and Grant No. 1057 to Manuhoa et al.). 2.5.1.1 Forest Resources and Practices The upland forest of Hakalau was used for various purposes. Bird hunters (poe kia mann) harvested the plumage of native birds for crafting royal insignia,while canoe carvers (kalaiwaa)searched for koa(Acacia koa) logs to build canoes. Access to the upland forest was possible through foot trails, some of which followed the boundaries of the ahupuaa.As these practices and resources were limited to the upland region, it is anticipated that the project would not impact the aforementioned resources and practices. 2.5.1.2 Botanical Resources and Horticultural Practices A diversity of botanical resources and horticultural practices in Hakalau were identified. Various cultigens were planted in the region,with the mention of Kapihae Auwai indicating the customary practice of growing taro (kalo) in irrigated terraces (loi). However, there is no evidence of widespread development of loi in Hakalau or Kamaee, suggesting that such practices may have been limited to the river and stream banks rather than the valley floor as seen elsewhere throughout the Hawaiian Islands. 2.5.1.3 Waterways The waterways in Hakalau are significant cultural resources, as demonstrated in the background research. Several rivers and streams in the Hakalau and Kamaee areas were named, including Honohina, Kaulia, Kawelo, Kuamoohua, Hakalau, Kolekole, Waawaa, and Umauma, but only Hakalau Stream is situated within the project area. Given the project area encompasses the lower makai portion of the Hakalau Stream, mitigative measures are further described in the following section. 2.5.1.4 Avian Resources From the consultation process, the noio (Anous minutus) was identified as a valued resource. As specified by the consultant party, the name Hakalau (literally, many perches) may be in reference to the numerous perches along the cliff face created by the noio. Although ASM staff could not confirm if noio are found within the cliffs located in the project area,mitigative measures are provided in the following section. 2.5.1.5 Marine/River Practices and Resources Although the historical background information describing specific marine and river resources is limited, area residents had fishing rights in both the streams and ocean. Several types of oopu (Lentipes concolor) are found in Hakalau Stream. Oopu are migratory and are known to move up and down their river during their lifetime. The CIA also recognized the following marine species: aholehole (Kuhlia sandvicensis), akule and halalu (Selar crumenophthahnus), ama ama (Mugil cephalus), kole (Ctenochaetus strigosus), kumu (Parupeneus porphyreus), moi (Polydactylus sexfzlis), Parrotfish (uhu) or (Scarus dubius) and any recognized synonym, ulua(Caranx ignobilis), oio (Albula glossodonta); opihi (Cella trigosata) and limu. In addition, the cultural historical background information noted that river stones from Hakalau Stream have and continue to be used for imu (underground oven) practices. Also, during the battle between Kalaniopuu and Kahekili's forces, river stones were gathered and used as slingstone. As the project area encompasses portions of Hakalau Stream, which connects to the Pacific Ocean, mitigative measures are detailed in the following section. April 2024 Page 2-27 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.5.1.6 Recreational, Access, and Subsistence Uses Coastal Hakalau was and still is a favored recreational area, namely surfing and fishing. Fishing and gathering of marine resources for subsistence purposes is another cultural practice that was and continues to be carried out in Hakalau. As such,mitigative actions are provided in the following section. 2.5.1.7 Historic-Era Resources (Hakalau Plantation Company, Old Mamalahoa Highway, and Hakalau Stream Bridge) Although large-scale commercial agriculture is not considered a traditional customary practice, the legacy of the Hakalau Plantation Company is a significant part of the area's history. Remnants of this former era can still be found throughout the project area including the foundation of the Hakalau Mill and its associated infrastructure as well as the Hakalau Stream Bridge. As such, mitigative actions are provided in the following section. Even though portions of the Old Mamalahoa Highway would be resurfaced, no cultural impacts are anticipated. 2.5.2 Potential Impacts Because there are no changes to the land use or additional structures proposed, the Proposed Action would not have significant permanent impacts on traditional customary practices and valued cultural, historical, or natural resources identified within the project area. Project construction, however, does have the potential to temporarily affect cultural resources. Implementation of the project may impact botanical resources,horticultural practices, and avian resources, as the removal and clearing of vegetation is required for construction access and as part of the soil remediation. Remediation work close to Hakalau Stream and bent replacement within the stream may impact and waterways, marine and river practices, and resources. General construction activity, involving the use of noisy, heavy equipment, could disrupt recreational access, subsistence practices, disturb avian resources and historic-era resources associated with the Hakalau Plantation Company and the Old Mamalahoa Highway. 2.5.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures To mitigate the potential for adverse impacts to the above-identified practices and resources, the following mitigative actions would be implemented. 2.5.3.1 Botanical Resources and Horticultural Practices As requested by some of the interviewees during the consultation process, efforts would be made to minimize the impacts to these valued plant resources(identified above),as well as to reestablish populations of culturally important plant species after the soil remediation has been completed. In areas where ground disturbance is likely as part of the soil remediation,the replanting of traditionally important plant resources would be incorporated into any landscaping plans.HDOT would consult with community leaders to discuss ways in which the community can assist with potential landscaping/out-planting efforts. 2.5.3.2 Waterways Potential impacts to Hakalau Stream would be mitigated by the appropriate installation of temporary stormwater BMPs during construction. The BMPs would be monitored throughout the course of the project to limit the potential for construction runoff into the stream as required by the NPDES permit. Furthermore, there should be no damming or blocking of any kind to Hakalau Stream to ensure that a continuous flow of the water is maintained throughout construction and that any migrating river species are able to do so without injury. Page 2-28 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.5.3.3 Avian Resources To lessen the potential for impacts to traditionally important avian species, the recommendations of the Biological Survey Report(BSR)prepared for this project would be followed. See Appendix E, Biological Survey Report, and Section 2.6, Biological Resources. In particular, recommendations regarding constraining or limiting construction activities during nesting seasons or other sensitive periods to limit disturbance to any such species would be implemented. 2.5.3.4 Marine/River Practices and Resources Potential impacts to marine/river practices and resources within Hakalau Stream and the nearshore waters of Hakalau Bay would be mitigated by the appropriate installation of construction duration temporary stormwater BMPs.The BMPs would be monitored throughout the course of the project to limit the potential for construction stormwater runoff into the stream and ocean. 2.5.3.5 Recreational, Access, and Subsistence Uses The project would result in beneficial impacts on recreational, access, and subsistence uses of Hakalau Gulch and Hakalau Bay,by allowing for the reopening of the County's Hakalau Beach Park. While public access would likely be limited or restricted during any proposed construction activities, reopening the remediated portions of the beach park would allow for continued recreation, access, and subsistence use of the area, as well as allow the community to resume their prior beautification efforts and cultural and ecological awareness programs. 2.5.3.6 Historic-Era Resources (Hakalau Plantation Company, Old Mamalahoa Highway, and Hakalau Stream Bridge) While the documentation presented in the AIS report for this project is meant to mitigate any potential impacts on the Hakalau Sugar Plantation Features, HDOT would require the contractor to limit impacting that site to the extent possible during ground disturbing activities and to reestablish the access roads to the shoreline after the soil remediation is complete. See Section 2.4, Historic and Archaeological Resources. HDOT would also adhere to any recommendations or requests provided by the SHPD upon their review of the AIS report, and to any mitigation measures that are recommended/requested by the SHPD and other consulting parties as part of the ongoing Section 106 consultation for the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge and other historic properties in the project area. 2.5.3.7 Other Mitigations HDOT proposes to develop educational and interpretive signage for the project area with input and guidance by the community. For example, such signage could highlight the plantation's heritage, the Hawaiian cultural history, and inform the public of the ways in which they can help protect the valued natural resources in the area. Also, because the gathering of natural resources (flora and fauna) continues to be exercised within the project area,HDOT proposes to conduct monitoring and testing of soil,flora,and fauna on a periodic basis to monitor lead bioaccumulation following the completion of construction. 2.6 Biological Resources 2.6.1 Regulatory Context Section 7 of the ESA of 1973 requires federal agencies to consider impacts on endangered or threatened species and critical habitat of such species. For terrestrial species, it requires that federal agencies consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for marine mammals, regarding the effects of any major construction activity on a listed species or species proposed as endangered, or those effects that could result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat (40 CFR 402). HDOT is coordinating with both USFWS and NMFS in fulfillment of Section 7 requirements. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) also protects migratory bird species by making it unlawful to April 2024 Page 2-29 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Envirommental Assessment pursue, hunt, take, capture, possess, sell, purchase, barter, import, export, or transport any migratory bird or any part,nest, egg of any migratory bird without authorization from the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. Specific to the marine environment,the federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act requires federal agencies to consider project impacts to EFH, which are defined as "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning breeding, feeding, and/or growth to maturity," including open water, wetlands, coral reefs, and submerged structures associated with federally managed fish species. The water column and bottom of the Pacific Ocean around the Island of Hawaii are designated as EFH and support various life stages for management unit species(MUS)identified under the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council's Pelagic and Hawaii Archipelago Fishery Ecosystem Plans. The State's counterpart law to the ESA is HRS Chapter 195D, as amended, under which species are similarly protected. Chapter 195D identifies the protection of endangered species as a State responsibility. Projects conducted within the state must coordinate with the DLNR to avoid adverse impacts to species protected by HRS Chapter 195D. This section discusses the potential impact on biological resources in compliance with the requirements for HRS 343. 2.6.2 Existing Conditions At the headwaters of Hakalau Stream on Mauna Kea, several miles mauka of the bridge and well beyond the project area, the stream is associated with natural areas including the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Hilo Forest Reserve, and the Natural Area Reserve System. According to the Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR)Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources Hakalau Stream (Parham et al. 2008a) as a whole is ranked "Outstanding" for aquatic resources and recreational resources and ranked "Substantial" for riparian resources. However, much of the project area is a heavily disturbed landscape that accommodated the plantation,mill, and supporting infrastructure. H.T. Harvey & Associates (HTH), on behalf of HDOT, prepared a BSR focusing on vegetation, birds, mammals, and other federal- and state-protected species to obtain a broader understanding of the approximately 14-acre project area See Appendix E, Biological Survey Report. The following discussion is based on the BSR.A reconnaissance-level survey(fieldwork)was conducted for the BSR in March 2023. Because most of the project area overlaps the deep Hakalau Gulch with steep slopes flanking its north and south sides, which are not accessible by foot, vegetation on the steep slopes of the gulch was surveyed by scanning with binoculars from the gulch bottom as well as from Old Mamalaoha Highway along the southern hillside. Biologists walked only the accessible areas to document the terrestrial vegetation communities, plants, birds, and mammals observed. The data gathered during this fieldwork reflect the environmental conditions at the time of the survey. 2.6.2.1 Flora Due to historical land uses in Hakalau Gulch,the project area is highly disturbed yet heavily vegetated. The vegetation at the project area can be characterized as a lowland wet forest dominated by alien plant species. Ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia), African tulip tree (Spathod2-30trigose2-302-30eata), albizia (Falcataria moluccana), and gunpowder tree(Trema orientalis)are some of the common alien tree species seen on the dense forested hillsides. Blue trumpet vines (Thunbergia laurifolia) and golden pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum) climb the tall trees and also the bridge piers. Sword ferns (Nephrolepis sp.) and guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus) are some of the nonnative ground vegetation in the project area. Additionally,the Hakalau Beach Park property consists of common ornamental and cultivated species such as banana(musa),papaya(Carica papaya),ti(Cordyli2-30trigose2-30osa),kukui(candlenut)or(Aleurites moluccanus), ulu (breadfruit) or (Artocarpus altilis), coconut (Cocos nucifera), and red ginger (Alpinia purpurata). See Figure 2-17: Vegetation Communities. Page 2-30 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment During the March 2023 fieldwork for the BSR,HTH did not observe any rare native Hawaiian plant species that are state or federally listed as threatened, endangered, or candidates for listing, in the project area (including the four species identified in the Information for Planning and Consultation [IPaC] below). A total of 66 plant taxa were found during fieldwork for the BSR, of which three (about 5 percent) are native (indigenous) and 63 (95 percent) are either Polynesian introduced or alien species. As part of ESA Section 7 consultation, HDOT obtained a list of threatened and endangered species that may occur in the project area or may be affected by the project from the USFWs IPaC online system. See Appendix A-2,Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence.Four plants were identified in the IPaC report as federally protected species that may occur in the project area. See Table 2-4: Threatened and Endangered Plant Species That May Occur in Project Area. The IPaC report identified no critical plant habitat in or near the project area. Table 2-4: Threatened and Endangered Plant Species That May Occur in Project Area Observed In Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status* State Status Project Area Plants Alani Melicope zahlbruckerneri Endangered Endangered No Nanu Gardenia remyi Endangered Endangered No No common name fern Deparia kaalaana Endangered Endangered No No common name fern Microlep2-31 trigoseosa var. Endangered Endangered No mauiensis Sources: HTH 2O24a *USFWS 2023a 2.6.2.2 Fauna The USFWs IPaC report identified one terrestrial mammal, seven birds, and one marine animal that are threatened and endangered species that may occur in the project area or may be affected by the project (USFWS 2023a). NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office (PIRO) identified two additional marine animals that are threatened and endangered species that may occur in the project area or may be affected by the project. See Table 2-5: Threatened and Endangered Animal Species That May Occur in Project Area. The Hawaiian hawk(Buteo solitarius)has recently been federally delisted but remains a state-protected species. The USFWS IPaC report showed no critical animal habitat in or near the project area. See Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence.NMFS PIRO identified both marine and terrestrial Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat in this location. During fieldwork for the BSR, HTH did not observe any rare native or indigenous animal or bird species that are state or federally listed as threatened, endangered, or candidates for listing, with the exception of the Hawaiian hawk which was observed flying over the project area outside of the point count timeframes. Point count surveys identified 53 individual birds from nine species. See Appendix E, Biological Survey Report.Although no threatened and endangered species were observed in the project area during the survey, they could occur at the project site. Table 2-5: Threatened and Endangered Animal Species That May Occur in Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Observed in Status* Status** Project Area Terrestrial Mammals Hawaiian Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus semotus Endangered Endangered No April 2024 Page 2-31 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Common Name Scientific Name Federal State Observed in Status* Status** Project Area Birds Band-rumped storm petrel Oceanodroma castro Endangered Endangered No Hawaiian Duck(koloa) Anas wyvilliana Endangered Endangered No Hawaiian Coot Fulica americana alai Endangered Endangered No Hawaiian Goose Branca[=Nesochen]sandvicensis Threatened Endangered No Hawaiian Petrel Pterodroma sandwichensis Endangered Endangered No Hawaiian Stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni Endangered Endangered No Newell's Townsend Puffinus auricularis newelli Threatened Threatened No Shearwater Hawaiian Hawk Buteo solitarius n/a(delisted) Endangered Yes* Marine Animals Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened Threatened No Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment Hawksbill Sea Turtle Eretmochelys imbricata Endangered Endangered No Hawaiian Monk Seal Neomonachus schauinslandi Endangered Endangered No Sources: Table from HTH 2024a *USFWS 2023a;NMFS PIRO 2023 **DLNR 2023 An online reference provided by the DAR called the Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources documents five native species of oopu (a general name for a type of fish) in Hakalau Stream: Oopu alamoo (Lentipes concolor), Oopu nopili(Sicyopterus stimpsoni), Oopu nakea(Awaous guamensis), Oopu naniha(Stenagobius hawaiiensis)and Oopu akupa(Electri sandwicensis).One of these species,Oopu nakea, is typically found in the middle and lower reaches of streams, but all oopu species would traverse the lower reaches of streams as they travel to and from the ocean. Stream channelization or diversions that cut off this critical access to and from the ocean could eliminate or significantly limit native oopu populations, as well as affect the overall health of the stream, estuary, and marine ecosystems. The Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources (Parham et al. 2008a)also identifies other native fish including other gobies,fiagtails and mullet along with introduced guppies and swordtails.Native opae (shrimp), snails, worms, insects, Tahitian prawns (Macrobrachium lar), and crayfish were also identified. The Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources rated the stream to be a relatively high score of 8 out of 10 for "Total Biological Rating," which includes the "Native Species Rating,""Introduced Genera Rating,"and"All Species' Score Rating." 2.6.3 Potential Impacts Although temporary construction duration impacts to the natural environmental is unavoidable with the proposed earthwork, no significant permanent adverse impacts to biological resources are anticipated with the Proposed Action. To the contrary, the proposed soil remediation is anticipated to benefit terrestrial and aquatic organisms in this area by removing the existing lead contamination. If the Proposed Action is not conducted, plants and animals in the project area, including threatened and endangered species that transit or reside in the area, may continue to be exposed to elevated levels of lead. HDOT has been consulting with multiple resource agencies including USFWS, NOAA NMFS, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), DAR and Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW), Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) Coastal Zone Management (CZM), the Commission on Water Resources Management(CWRM),and the County Planning Department to help identify and mitigate any potential impacts to avian and aquatic species as well as to protect stream flow/water quality standards and coastal resources. The following discussion of potential impacts is therefore also based on regulatory coordination with these resource agencies to date. Page 2-32 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.6.3.1 Flora The Proposed Action to install new concrete trestles would disturb vegetated areas on the north and south hillsides of Hakalau Gulch,and the soil remediation work would disturb an estimated 2.4 acres in the flatter areas along the stream. No botanical resources of concern were identified in the project area. See Figure 2-17: Vegetation Communities). Given the history of vegetation disturbance in Hakalau Gulch over the last century and the ongoing disturbance as a recreational area and beach park, it is unlikely that the Proposed Action would result in an adverse impact on a state or federally protected plant species. 2.6.3.2 Fauna The information provided in Section 2.6.3.2.1, Hawaiian Waterbirds, to 2.6.3.2.8, Hawaiian Hawk, was modified from predominantly two sources: the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Biological Survey Report (HTH 2024a) and information provided by resource agency correspondences for this project. See Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence, and Appendix E, Biological Survey Report (HTH 2024), for additional information. 2.6.3.2.1 Hawaiian Waterbirds Even though endangered Hawaiian waterbirds(Hawaiian stilt[Himantopus mexicanus knudseni],Hawaiian coot [Fulica alai], Hawaiian duck [Anas wyvilliana], Hawaiian common gallinule [Gallinula galeata sandvicensis]) and the threatened Hawaiian goose or nene (Branta sandvicensis)were not seen during this survey,these taxa occur on Hawaii Island. There are suitable waterbird habitats, such as open water bodies (e.g., Hakalau Stream and a ditch/wetland parallel to it) and open grassy areas in the southeastern portion of the project area overlapping the County Park as well as in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, it is possible for endangered Hawaiian waterbirds, including nene, to visit the project area. HDOT consulted with USFWS pursuant to ESA Section 7. As a part of that consultation, USFWS provided measures that would be incorporated into the project to avoid and minimize impacts on waterbirds. See Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence). (HTH 2024a) April 2024 Page 2-33 c / 3d,4 _ 4 ( , - .. . - L — \ 40't- '7,..:. ' AH-<\ \ ce-‘,2,.\° cjii, • 64 10' ' V\'644q)24162\V- d 9 V + I . \ \ # .H . \;\\\\'':r''' ., v,. as Nam�N°1°4 ® ;F. :, S M O) O d \ 0 .▪,-43 E m Y � 3 O \ . \ O LL x O vS V•-, a) : % \ d 2 C y v �O�' ^p� in �` O t0 Po;'. U /t O Zi W,/ Cm 1 O Luvo -Li c4 oK is O aQ8 4 4 N T J LL K Q / 4 O Q G `f •0 Q. O O 0 C B Vl<; 0li, ..- M .� > > m o cZ 0 m > o N y c a Imo° « ¢ ¢ o 2 2¢`m ; ¢ UM o Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.6.3.2.2 Seabirds No specific nighttime surveys were conducted to survey for seabirds in the project area. The endangered Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis) and band-rumped-storm-petrel (Oceanodroma Castro); and the threatened Newell's Townsend's shearwater(Puffinus auricularis newelli)identified are known to have a limited breeding distribution on Hawaii Island on the mountains of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa. Movement of these seabirds over land,both inland and seaward, usually occurs nocturnally. These species may traverse the project area at night during the breeding, nesting, and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Both the Hawaiian petrel and the Newell's shearwater are known to be affected by sources of artificial light, which can distract the birds and cause them to become grounded. This phenomenon is referred to as "fallout" and it particularly affects fledglings that are leaving the nest for the first time on their way to sea. The seabird fledging season runs from September 15 to December 15.HDOT consulted with USFWS pursuant to ESA Section 7. As a part of that consultation, USFWS concurred with mitigation measures to be incorporated into the project to avoid and minimize impacts on seabirds. See Appendix A- 2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. (HTH 2024a) 2.6.3.2.3 Other Birds Two nonnative avian species, the northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) and the house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), were seen during the survey and are protected under the MBTA but, they are common on Hawaii Island as well as on other main Hawaiian Islands. Thus,it is unlikely that the Proposed Action would have an adverse impact on the population of this species. (HTH 2024a) 2.6.3.2.4 Hawaiian Hoary Bat Although the Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) was not surveyed for during this reconnaissance-level survey, there are numerous records for this species on Hawaii Island. Hawaiian hoary bats are known to roost in large (typically greater than 15-foot-tall) dense-canopy trees, sometimes at the edges of water bodies, such as streams and lakes.Hawaiian hoary bats may hunt for flying insect prey along roadways, gulches, and open areas and occasionally roost in large, dense-foliage trees such as those in Hakalau Gulch within the project area. In fact, given that numerous trees identified in the project area as potential suitable day roosting habitat and the general abundance of Hawaiian hoary bats reported for Hawaii Island,the possibility that the Hawaiian hoary bat utilize the project area cannot be ruled out.HDOT consulted with USFWS pursuant to ESA Section 7. As a part of that consultation, USFWS provided measures that would be incorporated into the Proposed Action to avoid and minimize impacts on the Hawaiian bat. See Appendix A-2,Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. (HTH 2024a) 2.6.3.2.5 Hawaiian Green Sea Turtle The Hawaiian green sea turtle or honu(Chelonia mydas)is identified as the Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment(DPS) and is listed as threatened. The IPaC database (USFWS 2023a)identifies honu as either known or expected to be in or near the project area. The range of this Central North Pacific DPS includes the entire Hawaiian archipelago where they complete their life cycle feeding in the main Hawaiian Islands and nesting mainly in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Even though no turtles were observed in the project area during this two-day reconnaissance survey, it is possible that honu sometimes visit the eastern most boundary of the project area that overlaps the Pacific Ocean at the mouth of Hakalau Bay and the County Beach Park. However, map guides published by NOAA's Pacific Island Fisheries Science Center do not identify Hakalau Bay as an important basking or nesting site for honu. HDOT consulted with USFWS and NMFS pursuant to ESA Section 7, as well as with DLNR pursuant to HRS Chapter 195D. As a part of that consultation,USFWS,NMFS, and DLNR provided measures that would be incorporated into the project to avoid and minimize impacts on the Hawaiian green sea turtle. See Appendix A-2,Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. (HTH 2024a) April 2024 Page 2-35 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.6.3.2.6 Hawaiian Hawksbill Turtle The endangered hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) are one of the rarest species of marine turtles. Critical habitat has been designated for the species but includes only nesting islands in Puerto Rico. Small numbers of hawksbill sea turtles nest in Hawaii, primarily along the southeastern coast of the Island of Hawaii,with small numbers reported on Maui,Molokai,and Oahu. Their nesting season extends from April through February, with peak egg laying occurring from late July through mid-September. Even though no hawksbill sea turtles were observed in the project area,it is possible that they visit the eastern most boundary of the project area that overlaps the Pacific Ocean at the mouth of Hakalau Bay and the County Beach Park. However,map guides published by NOAA-Pacific Island Fisheries Science Center do not identify Hakalau Bay as an important basking or nesting site for hawksbill sea turtles. HDOT consulted with USFWS and NMFS pursuant to ESA Section 7, as well as with DLNR pursuant to HRS Chapter 195D. As a part of that consultation, DLNR provided measures that would be incorporated into the project to avoid and minimize impacts on the hawksbill turtle. See Appendix A-1,Pre-Draft Environmental Assessment Coordination and Consultation, and Appendix A-2,Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. (HTH 2024a) 2.6.3.2.7 Hawaiian Monk Seal Hawaiian monk seals (Neomonachus schauinslandi) are endemic to the Hawaiian Archipelago. Hawaiian monk seals spend roughly two third of their time in marine waters. Terrestrial habitats are used to haul-out, with preferred haul-out areas that include sandy beaches, sand spits or low shelving rock reefs where they can rest, pup, molt, and have social interactions. Haul-out habitats are generally near adequate foraging habitat; however, virtually all substrates could be used. They are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and were first listed under the ESA as endangered in 1976. Critical habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal was first designated in 1986 and was most recently updated in 2015. In the Main Hawaiian Islands, designated critical habitat exists in marine habitats between the 200-meter depth contour line through the water's edge and 5 meters onto terrestrial environments from the shoreline. The essential features of critical habitat include areas for haul-out, nursery grounds for pupping and nursing, and marine foraging areas. The waters fronting Hakalau Bay are designated as critical habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal. The Project Area is about 600 feet inland from this designated critical habitat. No surveys were specifically conducted for Hawaiian monk seals and no inadvertent sightings of the Hawaiian monk seal were made during this study. However, Hawaiian monk seals have been sighted on the sandy beach area of Hakalau Bay by people frequenting the Hakalau Couty Beach Park. Any potential impacts to Hawaiian monk seal habitat or to individual seals that may visit the beach or rocky shoreline in Hakalau Bay could be avoided and minimized through the use of comprehensive in-water and land based BMPs that would be adopted by the Project. See section 2.6.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures. 2.6.3.2.8 Hawaiian Hawk Only one native wildlife species, the io or Hawaiian hawk(Buteo solitarius), was seen in the project area during fieldwork. The io was on the federal endangered species list for several decades and was delisted in April 2020. Even though the species is no longer federally listed as endangered, the State still considers it an endangered species. Io are known to occur over much of Hawaii Island at all elevations, and occupy a variety of habitat types, including native forest, secondary forest consisting primarily of nonnative plant species, agricultural areas, and pastures. They occur at relatively higher densities in the Hamakua region of Hawaii Island,just south of the project area.Furthermore,the project area falls within identified io breeding range on Hawaii Island. Io are territorial and are known to defend their territory year-round. They have an extended breeding season with egg laying occurring from March to June, nest building starting several weeks before March, and fledging from July to September. Nests may be reused during consecutive breeding season or vacated for a year or more before reuse. Most nesting occurs in native ohia trees (Metrosideros polymorpha), although nesting also occurs in nonnative trees such as eucalyptus (Eucalyptus), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), mango (Mangifera indica), and coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), which occur within the project area. To the extent possible,HDOT would avoid removal of large trees during the io breeding season. If construction activities are required during the breeding season, a Page 2-36 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment preconstruction survey would be conducted. if an active nest is found, HDOT would consult with DLNR to determine the most appropriate course of action and obtain guidance to avoid and minimize potential impacts to this state-protected species. 2.6.3.2.9 Oopu With the proposed construction methods, no significant long-term or adverse impacts to native oopu are anticipated. The Proposed Action does not involve any stream channelization or diversions that may adversely affect native fish populations in Hakalau Stream. Oopu would not be impeded from accessing the ocean during in-stream construction work or after construction. While temporary disturbance of stream habitat would be unavoidable during construction, the work would be limited to an area roughly 30 feet on either side of the existing street trestle footings.The project design would minimize impacts to water quality and restore the stream and wetland to its preexisting condition upon completion of construction. 2.6.3.3 Invasive Species Invasive species are a potential concern particularly during construction because they may be readily transported on construction equipment. Soil and plant material may contain detrimental fungal pathogens (e.g., Rapid Ohia Death [Ceratocystis]), vertebrate and invertebrate pests (e.g., little fire ants [Wasmannia auropunctata], coqui frogs [Eleutherodactylus coqui]) or invasive plant parts (e.g., African Tulip [Spathodea], Octopus Tree [Heptapleurum actinophyllum],Trumpet Tree[Tabebuia],etc.)that could harm our native species and ecosystems. There are several invasive species that occur on Hawaii Island but do not occur on other islands.Precautions would need to be taken during construction to avoid the introduction and spread of invasive species in new locations where they do not yet occur. 2.6.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Because no long-term or significant impact on protected plant or animal species is anticipated with the Proposed Action, and with the incorporation of avoidance and minimization measures during construction into the Proposed Action as identified during the project Section 7 consultation, no significant impacts on protected species are anticipated. See Section 2.6.3, Potential Impacts, above and Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence, for more information about avoidance and minimization measures. For example, if waterbirds are present during construction, all activities within 100 feet(30 meters)would cease and the bird(s)would not be approached. If the project involved night work, temporary construction lighting would be configured to be "dark-sky friendly," in compliance with HRS Chapter 201-8.5. Contractors would be required to fully shield all outdoor lights so bulbs are only visible from below bulb height and only used when necessary. Contractors would also install automatic motion sensor switches and timers on all outdoor lights or turn off lights when no activity is occurring in the lighted area and avoid nighttime construction during the seabird fledging season from September 15 to December 15. If construction activities are required during the Hawaiian hawk breeding season from March to September, a preconstruction survey would be conducted. If an active Hawaiian hawk nest is found, HDOT would consult with DLNR to determine the most appropriate course of action and obtain guidance to avoid and minimize potential impacts to this state-protected species. Because of the potential presence of green sea turtles, hawksbill turtle, and Hawaiian monk seals in the water in the lower reaches of Hakalau Stream, as well as along the coastline, HDOT would require contractors to conduct frequent and regular watch for the presence of these species during construction to avoid direct interaction with these animals. Impacts to marine or aquatic species would be avoided by incorporating BMPs such as deploying full-depth silt curtains and sandbags to contain the work area. Such BMPs and are discussed in detail in An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii by the FHWA, the Hawaii Department of April 2024 Page 2-37 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016), and the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation(2021).Also,the Project's proposed in-water work will be conducted under permits obtained from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Hawaii Department of Health, Clean Water Branch. Additionally,to avoid and minimize the introduction and spread of invasive species during the construction phase, the contractor would implement BMPs to minimize the introduction and spread of invasive species at the project site. These BMPs may include the following: • All construction equipment and vehicles would arrive at the work site for the first time in clean condition and free of excess soil and debris; plants or plant parts, including seeds; insects, including eggs; and reptiles and amphibians, including their eggs. Similarly, all construction equipment and vehicles would be cleaned after use on the project site and before leaving the site. This would be particularly important for equipment movement between the project site and the other islands. • All materials imported to the project site,including gravel, soil,rock,and sand,would be certified weed free. Invasive species found on stockpiled materials would be removed either chemically or mechanically. • Only weed-free seed mixtures would be used for hydroseeding and hydromulching on the project site. A qualified botanist would inspect the seeded areas a minimum of 60 days after the hydroseed/hydromulch is applied. Any species of plant other than those intended to be in the hydroseed/hydromulch should be removed. In particular, plant species that are not known to occur on Hawaii Island and those that are actively being controlled on the island should be removed. • To the extent feasible the project should use native plants for revegetation or landscaping purposes. Potential native plants that are ecologically suitable for landscaping at the project site include species such as koa (Acacia koa), hala (Pandanus tectorius), hapuu (Cibotium menziesii), pilo or hupilo (Coprosma pubens), ieie (Freycinetia arborea), au or pilo (Kadua affinis), kopiko (Psychotria spp.), and kooea (Myrsine spp.). If native plants do not meet landscaping objectives, plants with a minimal risk of becoming invasive may be substituted. Additional information on selecting appropriate plants for landscaping can be obtained from the Plant Pono website(Plant Pono 2024). • Only plants grown on Hawaii Island should be used for landscaping purposes. If locally grown plants are unavailable, then imported plants may be used, but they should be thoroughly inspected or quarantined if necessary to ensure that they are free from invasive pests such as little fire ants and invasive plant seeds and seedlings that could arrive inadvertently. 2.7 Surface Water Resources and Wetlands 2.7.1 Existing Conditions Hakalau Stream is a major perennial stream that drains the Hakalau watershed. According to the Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds (Parham et al. 2008b),the Hakalau watershed encompasses an area of approximately 6,016 acres (about 9.4 square miles), stretching about 9 miles inland from the coast,and flows into Hakalau Bay. The primary tributaries of the watershed are Waawaa and Kamaee Streams, which ultimately join the wide, perennial Hakalau Stream. See Figure 2-18: Hakalau Watershed. The stream enters the project area at its western boundary as a braided system meandering around rocky vegetated islands before flowing into the Pacific Ocean. See Figure 2-19: National Wetland Inventory [NWI] Habitat Types. In the project area, the stream ranges in width from about 100 feet to 170 feet and is not channelized with natural bed and banks, except for the concrete bridge footings and remnants of a plantation area flume. Based on historic photos of the gulch, the stream banks have been known to shift naturally during heavy flows. The mouth of the stream often has a rocky bar that forms a deeper pool in the Page 2-38 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment stream but does not stop the flow to the ocean. This porous coastal bar at the mouth of the stream periodically opens, connecting the stream directly with coastal waters. Because the lower portion of the stream in the project area can be characterized as a combination of both tidal and nontidal waters,the stream in this reach is likely under USACE jurisdiction and would require in-water work permits. In HDOH's most recent report on the State's water quality prepared pursuant to Sections 303(d)and 303(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the 2022 State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, Hakalau Stream is listed as an impaired waterbody. The stream's identified impairments are murky water and excessive nutrient load, which can affect aquatic life. Marine waters associated with Hakalau Stream are not listed as impaired. The USFWS NWI identifies only one aquatic feature, the Hakalau Stream, within the project area. See Figure 2-19: National Wetland Inventory [NWI] Habitat Types. However, in a report prepared by HTH for this project (HTH 2024b), HTH identified a shallow, narrow (approximately 20 feet wide), wetland measuring approximately 0.35 acre on the Hilo side of Hakalau Stream. See Figure 2-20: Wetland Delineation and Waters of the U.S. and Appendix F, Wetland Delineation Technical Report. The wetland runs generally parallel to the stream and then curves toward(but does not meet)Hakalau Stream at both its mauka and makai termini. The wetland partially lies beneath the Hakalau Stream Bridge, between the bridge's Bents 3 and 4. This wetland is anticipated to fit within the definition of"Waters of the U.S." and therefore be under USACE jurisdiction for in-water work permits. 2.7.2 Potential Impacts Although the Proposed Action is not anticipated to result in long-term, adverse impacts to the Hakalau Stream environment and water quality, the project could temporarily affect surface water resources and wetlands during construction. With the implementation of standard stormwater BMPs,these impacts could be minimized or eliminated, as discussed below. 2.7.2.1 Impacts of Soil Remediation Soil remediation including vegetation removal would be conducted in the areas shown in Figure 1-7: Proposed Soil Remediation Areas, in Chapter 1, which includes stream banks and the relatively flat areas on the valley floor including most of the Hakalau Beach Park property. While no soil remediation is proposed in the stream, the likelihood of displaced soils running into the stream are increased during construction. Stormwater BMPs would be implemented during construction, as described below, to minimize or eliminate soils from entering the stream. While similar BMPs would be implemented to protect the wetland as much as possible, disturbance of the wetland is unavoidable as an approximately 0.05-acre portion of the wetland is included in the soil remediation area. HDOT would coordinate with the USACE for this construction activity to minimize any impacts during construction. After completion of soil remediation work, the area would be regraded to resemble preconstruction wetland conditions. As a result,there would be no long-term adverse effect to the functions and values of the wetland. Additionally, because the work would remove soils with elevated levels of lead from the project area,the Proposed Action would result in beneficial impacts to surface water resources in the long term. 2.7.2.2 Impacts of Bridge Rehabilitation Work Construction of the new concrete bridge footings could result in temporary impacts to surface water resources as drilling in multiple discrete locations for the new concrete bridge footings and drilling platforms is necessary. Construction stormwater BMPs and in-stream BMPs would be implemented during construction, as described below that would minimize or eliminate any temporary impacts. No water April 2024 Page 2-39 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment diversions or stream alterations, temporary or permanent, would be required, and streamflow in Hakalau Stream would be maintained at all times. 2.7.2.3 Impacts of Road Resurfacing While no permanent or long-term impacts are anticipated, resurfacing the access road could result in temporary impacts to surface water resources and wetlands due to stormwater runoff during work. Construction stormwater BMPs and in-stream BMPs would be implemented during construction, as described below, that would minimize or eliminate any temporary impacts. No water diversions or stream alterations, temporary or permanent, would be required, and streamflow in Hakalau Stream would be maintained at all times. 2.7.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures HDOT is coordinating with USACE to obtain permits authorizing in-water activities in both Hakalau Stream and the adjacent wetland.At this time,HDOT anticipates that the Proposed Action would be covered under a type of USACE Department of the Army(DA)permit called Nationwide Permits (NWP) and that an Individual DA permit would not be necessary. The DA permit(s)would authorize the permanent dredge and fill activities in Hakalau Stream to install the new bridge trestles and resurface the access road, as well as authorize the disturbance of the wetland during soil remediation activities and temporary in-water activities. While BMPs to minimize turbidity would be implemented per the contractor's means and methods, such construction BMPs to minimize turbidity and other potential surface water quality impacts shall be implemented in accordance with the documented approach, An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii by the FHWA, the Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016), or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2021). In addition, the HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control would be followed. The aforementioned DA permit may specify additional BMPs that would be required during construction to minimize the potential for water quality impacts to the stream. For example, turbidity curtains may be installed upstream and downstream of the bridge rehabilitation work area and the roadway resurfacing work area. Heavy construction equipment such as the drill rig would operate from the drilling platforms and would not enter the Waters of the U.S. Furthermore, as discussed in other sections of this EA, permanent post-construction BMPs, including structural controls (e.g., erosion control matting) and nonstructural controls (e.g., plant establishment), would be implemented to ensure the project area is stabilized after the soil remediation work is completed. With the incorporation of these erosion control measures and BMPs to ensure the project area is stabilized after completion of construction, the Proposed Action is not anticipated to result in significant changes to surface water resources. A blanket CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification(WQC)from HDOH is also anticipated with NWP coverage, meaning that an independent Section 401 WQC from HDOH would not be needed. However, if a WQC is needed, HDOT would continue to coordinate with HDOH during the permitting phase. Page 2-40 April 2024 a) N co I • Q h C`o� N 01 O / t , 3 �' d Ul co LI I. g• r Z H 3 m N. N x \` \ \,... N » 1 rn O \\•.....„,.., \-\\I . 1-6 7 w 4 o 04 N \ "I N N Z a c N A ,A = \ U 'G w z J x o 3 v \ co co x r m N N _ ,d c6 la -41( co by x Q W l in C7 Py s as 3 ," .------' '''''4.-----\• ---:----f\----)----- V,. . 0 �'��� a :-I''''°\---;---""--: I .< �C • ...v ` t ••t t� .y • a y p"','�',�� _ ' ?IX ^ `.. } fir,', j� -' ' V' . ` A I .„ Y A i , OSA =,� +., dq '..\\\, *0 1 ' •r ,,. ., ...E4 , m . . .„ \‘ .,., ri Q � . sem. o 3 0. : .r O A + co Nm AO '� ,:t. ch N 0 S �' t p O $ ' w l24 L4 c � ` , O • oro O O o v w a m0 • N Ci. c's Z c O ' •a E v va �� ` Co- ooNaYvm m B r. c • � tT, O - _ m - > > m m n %ma Www ; u_ 71_ NI CLe 121 :H i ¢ v y .i z i 0.0 z' J Re SIrT co 3 CD a a) m co m cv m - r N y ` coN t 00.0001000 .1114, I" W a *, i II -014 N O O is O 0,1 RI CO N aLILk O , t N + 116 U E o E U u_ `11 a c m r,„ U Y 0 . • a w • r • a 1 U co co a a a Ol..P • ' m • O�6 N m • s 1 40 Ci • O u- _6 GC O M • 6 E o m a cu cA iel VI 1 1 'E Q O N .� d m rr �Wp N W h c, 7:11 75, s. r .N.. O _ 0 j N N G . N L--,3'U N m - O r C y a H a` O`r o n c 3 °o C _ m O N ,-- ca �A J �_ J I 3 N fid, `"' ". z� `� rn 1`' bq C0 7-a •nr v Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment With the proposed BMPs and other anticipated permit requirements that are incorporated into the Proposed Action,no significant impacts to surface water resources including wetlands are anticipated. Therefore, no other avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are proposed for surface water resources. The potential for construction-phase water resource impacts would be associated with erosion and sedimentation generated from the project's land-based earth disturbing activities and stormwater runoff, as well as in-water work to construct new concrete foundations for the new concrete trestles and to remove the existing trestle foundations. 2.7.3.1 In-Water Activities Rehabilitation of the bridge and demolition of existing structures would require equipment in the stream to construct the new concrete bridge trestle footings. Soil remediation work is not anticipated to involve in- stream work but may require equipment in the wetland.If placement of equipment in the stream(i.e.,below the stream or wetland's ordinary high-water line) is needed, BMPs, such as turbidity curtains, would be implemented. In addition, the project's construction BMPs would be implemented in accordance with the documented approach, An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii by the FHWA, the Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016), and the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2021). In addition,the 2005 HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control would be followed. Any in-water work is also subject to federal and state regulatory controls. Section 404 of the CWA regulates the discharge of dredge and fill materials into the waters of the U.S. and Section 10 of the Rivers Harbors Act (RHA) requires authorization for any work affecting navigable waters and tidally influenced waterways. Coordination with the USACE would be conducted for DA permit requirements pursuant to CWA Section 404 and RHA Section 10. When work requires a DA permit, a CWA Section 401 WQC from HDOH may also be required to regulate discharges into the waters of the United States. In addition, a Stream Channel Alteration Permit (SCAP) from the state's CWRM is likely to be required for in-water work. HDOT would submit a Request for Determination (RFD) to CWRM upon completion of this HRS Chapter 343 EA process to initiate the SCAP review. 2.7.3.2 Stormwater from Land-Based Activities Storm water runoff and erosion would be mitigated through the use of construction BMPs that would be established before work begins. Because the soil disturbance of the project area would exceed 1 acre, a NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Associated with Construction Activities would be required from HDOH. During construction, BMPs would be implemented to prevent debris and polluted runoff from reaching Hakalau Stream or other natural waters. In-water construction BMPs would be implemented in accordance with the documented approach, An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii by the FHWA, the Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016), and the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation(2021).In addition,the 2005 HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution,Dust,and Erosion Control would be followed. Page 2-44 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment The following generally accepted BMPs for land-based stormwater impacts would implemented: • Installing perimeter controls and sediment barriers, such as silt fences • Minimizing disturbed areas • Protecting excavated/stockpiled material, including the covering the stockpiles • Installing storm drain inlet and catch basin protection devices • Enforcing proper waste management, including separating recyclable materials In addition, specific measures would be taken to prevent the lead in the soil from entering the stream and the ocean.A C-EHMP would be prepared and implemented to protect both human and environmental health by preventing the spread of lead during construction. 2.8 Parks and Recreational Resources 2.8.1 Existing Conditions Hakalau Beach Park is the only park within the project area. The County acquired the Old Hakalau Sugar Mill property, TMK (3) 2-9-002-080, in 2006 and established the Hakalau Beach Park, which officially opened in 2009. In February 2017,however, the County Department of Parks and Recreation closed public access to the park to address safety concerns related to the scour conditions at the County bridge on Old Mamalahoa Highway leading to the park. The elevated levels of lead in the soil also prompted additional evaluation and analysis. The County subsequently repaired the scour conditions on their concrete bridge in 2018 but soil remediation has not yet been completed and the park is still closed to the public.Public access is currently restricted by a locked gate where the roadway begins to descend into the gulch on the Hilo side. Despite the park closure, however, park visitation and use has continued as visitors reportedly circumvent the locked gate to access the park and stream area. Pedestrian access to the park is also possible via an unrestricted set of steep stairs from Old Mamalahoa Highway at the top of the Hilo side of Hakalau Valley, which leads down to the valley floor approximately 180 feet below. Although the stream itself is not County property,because it is physically contiguous with the beach park, park users also gather and recreate at the stream and on the shoreline, conducting activities such as fishing and other activities similar to the cultural activities described in Section 2.5,Cultural Resources.According to the Hawaii Stream Assessment (State of Hawaii 1990) Hakalau Stream is ranked "Outstanding" for recreational resources. Before the closure of the park in 2017, recreational opportunities there included camping, fishing, swimming,hunting, and scenic views. Hakalau Beach Park elements currently include picnic areas equipped with tables, beach access to rocky shorelines, picturesque vistas, a lush tropical landscape adorned with palm trees and tropical vegetation, a pavilion and a large steel shipping container, an informational sign at the base of the access stairs from Old Mamalahoa Highway, and driving and parking areas delineated by concrete barricades. Because the park is located on the site of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill, the park property additionally contains concrete and steel remnants of these damaged,historic structures, such as the remains of a crane to move sugarcane, concrete foundations and walls of various mill structures, a large pipe stanchion, and a concrete sea wall along the coastline surrounding the mill site. In addition to the paved access road and parking area in the middle of the park property, most of the makai portion of the park surrounding the pavilion is also paved with concrete associated with the sugar mill. A square grassy area fronting the park pavilion appears to be unpaved. April 2024 Page 2-45 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.8.2 Potential Impacts No significant adverse impacts would occur to parks and recreational resources. The project would instead result in a benefit to Hakalau Beach Park and its users. Upon completion of soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation work, HDOT would repave the existing roads in the project area to reestablish public access to Hakalau Beach Park, which would facilitate the reopening of the park by the County. HDOT may opt to post signage in untested or unremediated areas of the park to warn users of possible lead contamination. HDOT would continue to coordinate with the County Department of Parks and Recreation and HDOH to keep park users informed. 2.8.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures The Proposed Action would enable the reopening of Hakalau Beach Park and stream to the public.To keep park users informed of lingering health risks, if any, HDOT would continue to coordinate with the County Department of Parks and Recreation and HDOH about appropriate signage at the park. 2.9 Visual and Aesthetic Resources 2.9.1 Existing Conditions According to the Hawaii County General Plan,the Hakalau Bay/Gulch area is considered a"Natural Beauty Site."While crossing the Hakalau Stream Bridge,travelers on Mamalahoa Highway experience panoramic views of Hakalau Gulch and the ocean on one hand and the Mauna Kea summit on the other hand. The project area located at the base of the gulch is surrounded by natural features including lush vegetation, a natural, unlined stream, and a classic Hawaii Island black sand beach nestled in a sheltered cove. The historic Hakalau Stream Bridge traversing the gulch provides a reminder of old Hawaii. The existing visual setting of this project area can be divided into five significant viewpoints shown in Figure 2-21 through Figure 2-26Figure . Page 2-46 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-21: Viewpoint 1 —View of Hakalau Stream Bridge from Old Mamalahoa Highway , ,). 7 ,• ‘ *" i'$1, 1.7 **. pir, . ‘ . , ,. , M y 1161.° w f j �L ')i. , 1y ' i/1 .. :,4,e 1 " . :.,.,, ifi t , i. -'(-'• V ,� gym, °, ,, `?„ a;, ...►r', . : •y, !tii ..y' .>* `�ir� ./...,,,, ' ,jam S -4 r w,7 '",( r� A�t, # , , 4. .`yam ` .!. II 4", i�!i7 t m t f ;t ` i. 3h,, ''.►v fi t` .gym , f:.' r . r �� is Y a• iJ vi ,,,* A. , r "77......,,, ` a(� • i' i i. .+ " 1 lI r ` r" .f r 4.4`'-�;1[ • • 4 1, well \t . ' ,..I�L,0 h► . r' .t E. R1 :4 , « 1 ��' . ., �l A • t :'•; • — • 1• om. +1,. Y^' 1 -- t.` _ 1 11 ry, i ..�y.. i �,, ^.�x�' may. litio, II 4Ja •�I' •. � ..•vr ATF' K,.�/y 2.9.1.1 Viewpoint 1 Viewpoint 1, perched on the Hilo-side slope of Hakalau Valley along Old Mamalahoa Highway, offers a view of Hakalau Beach Park.It showcases the Hakalau Stream Bridge,spanning Hakalau Stream that winds through the valley floor. Inland on the south side of the valley is a grassy picnic area with tables and lush tropical greenery. Near the shore on the south side of the valley, a concrete seawall separates the Hakalau Stream Bank from the historical remnants of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill. On the other side of the stream lies a classic Hawaii Island black sand beach with a backdrop of lush green foliage. April 2024 Page 2-47 . ''''"-014010. 4.:: ,Jd \ r as k a �• � "d/ ki „coti $5, . ,,,,, , • . k c.„:„. . .: ... P ' , \ , ad v‘` a / 4a °b �Qy \ F 6\ 1 \ \ M • co a� • o_ N •- +4 i-i , , \ • V OIL 3 ! I's r I:000 4.0 rT .\''''°1 'P "m a 3 . m s ' N a I, p N CO 1 - 4 in Fir 'S..,-- ca tkfl 3 U %. OpCDo '71 Q o CO ti Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-23: Viewpoint 2—View of Hakalau Stream Bridge from the Hilo-side shoreline (Looking Mauka) i i fill II_ I ntl : 1. I L r li +1, i . , Il �i ' � Il I! �w7 ' �=67 1 M116771 :Jr' . _ . _p } t! » r Awe a • Al 2.9.1.2 Viewpoint 2 Viewpoint 2 is located in Hakalau Beach Park at the Hilo side of the stream mouth. Looking mauka from this viewpoint,the towering Hakalau Stream Bridge and Hakalau Stream beneath it are prominent features within the valley backdrop.Hakalau Stream navigates through a bed of large volcanic stones as it completes its journey to the ocean here. On the Hilo-side bank of the stream are scattered round volcanic stones and a picnic area adorned with lush tropical greenery and coconut trees. To the Honokaa side of the stream,there is a signature Hawaii Island black sand beach. 2.9.1.3 Viewpoint 3 Viewpoint 3 is on the Old Mill Access Road where it crosses over Hakalau Stream, on the mauka side of Hakalau Stream Bridge. This viewpoint provides a makai perspective. The Hakalau Stream Bridge also takes center stage in this view,stretching across the valley.Hakalau Stream winds its way toward the bridge and the open expanse of the ocean,while enveloped by lush tropical foliage on both sides. April 2024 Page 2-49 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-24: Viewpoint 4—View of Hakalau Gulch from Hawaii Belt Road (Looking Mauka) i r st► A . 4rl ;.f.4 AL1 , R r* i ^ • :} y i, ` S1+/ _" ^- Y r ;". r,,r, - a4r • i" s y 'F* 1 Source:Google Earth 2011 2.9.1.4 Viewpoint 4 Viewpoint 4 is at the Hilo-side terminus of Hakalau Stream Bridge while traveling north toward Honokaa along Hawaii Belt Road. On the makai side, the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean dominates the scene, framed by lush tropical hillsides on either side. To the mauka side, the Hakalau Valley unfolds. Up ahead, Hawaii Belt Road continues its path toward Honokaa. Page 2-50 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Figure 2-25: Viewpoint 5—View of Hakalau Bay from Hawaii Belt Road(Looking Makai) fir.► `I .e 4 v..♦ anT"=+4 ^C`G!"ew R-'adv ' 'siva .t � y - r Source:Google Earth 2011 2.9.1.5 Viewpoint 5 Viewpoint 5 is at the Honoakaa side terminus of Hakalau Stream while traveling south toward Hilo along Hawaii Belt Road. On the mauka side, the verdant view of Hakalau Valley is similar to Viewpoint 4. To the makai side, the expanse of the Pacific Ocean is similar to Viewpoint 4. Up ahead, Hawaii Belt Road continues its path toward Hilo town. 2.9.2 Potential Impacts No significant impacts on views or view planes are anticipated as a part of the project.During construction, views of the valley would be temporarily altered by soil remediation and vegetation clearing.These impacts, however, are only temporary as HDOT's contract would restore the soil and vegetation of the gulch to its preconstruction state. Replacing the steel bents of Hakalau Stream Bridge with more modern concrete bents could have impacts on views of the bridge. However, only viewers inside the gulch would observe this change. Users of the bridge travelling on Hawaii Belt Road would not notice any visual changes going while traveling over the bridge. 2.9.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Although the conversion of the bridge's steel bents to concrete bents are anticipated to result in a permanent adverse change in the appearance of the historic bridge, avoidance, minimization, and mitigation steps are being determined and evaluated as part of the NHPA Section 106 historic property review process. HDOT would comply with any and all mitigation measures that result from the NHPA Section 106 historic property review process so no significant impacts on visual and aesthetic resources are anticipated. April 2024 Page 2-51 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.10 Transportation Infrastructure and Traffic 2.10.1 Existing Conditions In the vicinity of Hakalau Stream Bridge, Hawaii Belt Road is a two-lane, undivided principal arterial providing primary regional and subregional access along the Hamakua Coast. Hakalau Stream Bridge carries Hawaii Belt Road over Hakalau Gulch and also over Old Mamalahoa Highway, which has a grade- separate crossing with Hawaii Belt Road. There are no at-grade intersections on Hawaii Belt Road near the Hakalau Bridge's approaches within the project area.The nearest intersection on Hawaii Belt Road is where Old Mamalahoa Highway and Chin Chuk Road intersect Hawaii Belt Road on the makai and mauka sides, respectively, about 1,800 feet from the bridge's south end. Within the project area, there are two other crossings of the stream: the County's Hakalau Stream Bridge that carries Old Mamalahoa Highway and a concrete stream ford that carries the Old Mill Access Road into Hakalau Beach Park. See Figure 2-27: Roadway Network in the Project Area. At this location, Hawaii Belt Road consists of one travel lane in each direction, and traffic is generally free flowing with a speed limit of 55 miles per hour. Because Hakalau Bridge has many miles leading to it in both directions and because Hawaii Belt Road is generally one lane in each direction with minimal shoulder widths, any unexpected travel disruptions, such as breakdowns or accidents,have the potential to affect the operation of the roadway at and near this location and for miles in either direction. Morning and afternoon peak hours generally occur during weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.to 5:00 p.m. During the AM and PM peak hours, it is anticipated that there are more vehicles on Hawaii Belt Road and slowdowns may occur as vehicles enter and exit Hawaii Belt Road via side access roads and driveways. The portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway on the makai side of Hawaii Belt Road south of Hakalau Stream Bridge is a local road that serves a small primarily residential community as well as being the sole access road to Hakalau Beach Park. As Old Mamalahoa Highway approaches Hakalau Gulch, it turns left and heads downhill to pass under Hawaii Belt Road, and ultimately connects with the Old Mill Access Road that leads to the park. This segment of Old Mamalahoa Highway after the left turn in the road is currently closed to traffic by a gate due to the park closure. On the north side of Hakalau Stream, Old Mamalahoa Highway is closed and inaccessible. There is currently no access to that closed portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway between Old Mill Access Road and where Old Mamalahoa Highway restarts in a rural area mauka of—but not intersecting—Hawaii Belt Road approximately 600 feet north of the bridge. Although there are no existing or proposed designated pedestrian or bicycle facilities leading to Hakalau Stream Bridge,Hakalau Stream Bridge provides a raised, grade-separated 3-foot-wide pedestrian walkway along either side of the bridge. According to the 2003 Bike Plan Hawaii, no bicycle facilities are proposed on Hawaii Belt Road,but two bicycle facilities are proposed on Old Mamalahoa Highway through Hakalau Gulch(HDOT 2003). These proposed bicycle facilities would connect from Waikaumalo north of Hakalau to Kolekole Beach Park south of Hakalau. The alignment of these proposed contiguous bicycle facilities would not utilize Hakalau Stream Bridge on Hawaii Belt Road. 2.10.2 Potential Impacts The Proposed Action seeks to rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure and remediating the lead contamination in the soil surrounding the bridge.No modification of the bridge's deck or superstructure is proposed, and traffic operations on Hawaii Belt Road or Old Mamalahoa Highway would not change. Therefore,the project would not be anticipated to result in a change to the overall operation of any roadway in the project area. The Proposed Action would maintain the existing roadway (roadway alignment, capacity, and 55 mile per hour posted speed limit)and traffic(traffic volumes,directional splits, and vehicle composition) attributes on Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge, and Old Mamalahoa Highway. The project would reopen the Hakalau Beach Park to the public which includes reopening the portion of Old Page 2-52 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Mamalahoa Highway for vehicles to that provides access to the park.HDOT assumes that traffic conditions on Old Mamalahoa Highway with the Proposed Action would be unchanged from pre-2017 traffic closure conditions when the road and park are reopened. Only limited traffic impacts to users of Hakalau Stream Bridge are expected during construction because bridge work would occur incrementally to allow for continued use of the bridge.Full closure of the bridge or highway is not anticipated. There may be occasional 24-hour single-lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the concrete foundations are curing. Nighttime lane closures may require temporary illuminated signs or beacons for safety purposes only; no new streetlights are proposed. During construction of the Proposed Action,traffic would be managed to allow for continued safe operation of Hakalau Stream Bridge, as described in Chapter 1. The project may cause disruptions in normal traffic patterns, but there should be only limited traffic impacts to bridge users. 2.10.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Because the Proposed Action would not change roadway operations along Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge, or Old Mamalahoa Highway, there would be no permanent significant impacts on the roadway network or actions that preclude future plans for system enhancements such as future bike facilities. Therefore, no traffic or transportation network mitigation measures are proposed. During construction, traffic control plans and construction phasing plans would be implemented to minimize potential traffic delays. Lane closures on Hawaii Belt Road may alter traffic patterns, driver behavior, and travel times._Bridge rehabilitation work can occur incrementally on different bridge bents to allow for continuous use of the bridge;no complete bridge closures are anticipated. Truck traffic associated with construction activities would access Hawaii Belt Road and local roads,but these construction vehicles would avoid commuter peak periods and minimize traffic impacts. HDOT would routinely inform the public of planned construction activities and lane closures throughout the construction period. As a result, no significant short-term or temporary operational traffic impacts or public safety concerns are anticipated with the Proposed Action. April 2024 Page 2-53 ,, c ..6 . '3 I 4's ` $ 4 Y 0111"► c 0 Mamalahoa y , o� • -0 � \ „ d in 1 ama P U i �,Na Q o y 0 r • u. O V3� U — r pp • '" E � ., r �` •. � r *tib y6 65 o �� , , 4e, Y • U # \),.0,-,:',A2 N 1. O '�^ m,. �.a �• r.. Gj rn 0 C. o0' 3m . 1101‘ `� a e�aLX ti O ' CI O ��. J U) �•; ct bqr r-" ..q n h coO -G O �NO r4 s 1 o 11 ,� A N N Poa CS", _m w O� 1 mi c A - 0 7 S P 4 rn aW it m 1L N P NI rrTT� I� yxg4°' co p-i Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.11 Natural Hazards and Sea-Level Rise 2.11.1 Existing Conditions Natural hazards that may occur in this area of Hawaii Island include earthquakes, tsunami, hurricanes, flooding, and landslides. Wildfires are less likely in this region compared to other parts of the island, due to relatively high precipitation on the windward side of the island. The project area generally experiences earthquakes at the same rate and proportion as the rest of the island and is not more or less prone to their effect. Annually,the state averages about 100 earthquakes of magnitude 3 or greater, 10 of magnitude 4 or greater, and one of magnitude 5 or greater per year. Typically,people report feeling earthquakes larger than about magnitude 3. Based on the tsunami evacuation zone data prepared by the County and Hawaii Emergency Management Agency,most of the project area falls within the current tsunami evacuation zone. See Figure 2-28:Tsunami Evacuation Zone Map. Hakalau Stream Bridge is elevated well above Hakalau Stream, so vehicular traffic on Hawaii Belt Road and the bridge itself would not be affected in the event of a tsunami,unless the bridge foundations and trestles were undermined. Hurricanes and severe storms,resulting in intense rainfall events and high winds,would have the potential to affect this area similarly to the rest of the county. Similar to other streams in Hawaii, in the event of heavy rainfall,the water level at Hakalau Stream may rise rapidly.However,Hakalau Stream is not located in a regulatory floodway or Special Flood Hazard Area. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the entire project area lies within Zone X, which indicates that the area is outside the 500-year floodplain as currently defined and is of minimal flood hazard. See Figure 2-29: Flood Zone Map. Extreme storm events also contribute to the likelihood of landslides and road closures. In accordance with the findings of the HDOT Asset and Hazard Assessment tool,the entire project area is designated as having a"very high"susceptibility to rockfall and landslides. The contractor would be responsible for determining and implementing mitigation measures to reduce construction risks and enhance safety. Global climate change and sea-level rise (SLR) can exacerbate impacts of these natural hazards on all infrastructure in the state, particularly in coastal areas and areas prone to flooding. Coastal areas are expected to experience more frequent and severe flooding episodes, which can exacerbate the impacts of natural hazard events such as tsunami and hurricanes or other high wind events. Storm surges can penetrate further inland, increasing the area and population that is vulnerable to hurricane and tsunami hazards. Effective July 2019,the State required all new projects undergoing environmental review under the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act (also known as HRS, Chapter 343) to consider whether the project is likely to have an adverse effect or be vulnerable to SLR. To help identify potential coastal flooding extents for events under projected future sea level rise conditions, in 2018,the State developed the web-based State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer(SLR Viewer)to show sea-level rise exposure areas (SLR-XA) in Hawaii with varying assumed depths of SLR. The SLR Viewer was prepared as a companion tool to the 2017 Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission 2021). The SLR Viewer provides map data illustrating future projections of hazard exposure and evaluate vulnerabilities stemming from sea level rise. While other SLR scenarios are presented in the SLR Viewer,any references to the SLR-XA in this EA assumes the 3.2-foot SLR scenario unless otherwise noted. In Hawaii,there is accepted guidance to use 3.2 feet of global mean SLR as a planning target for 2100. Some portions of the project area would experience the impacts of SLR-XA identified on the SLR Viewer. Because this anticipated SLR means that more of Hakalau Valley would be inundated in the future, these inundated areas are assumed to be the future condition for this EA, with or without the Proposed Action. April 2024 Page 2-55 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment The additional inundation area with a 3.2-foot SLR is anticipated to be an expansion of the existing streambed that approximates its current ordinary high-water mark and high tide line and would not significantly encroach upon the County's Hakalau Beach Park or other streamside properties. See Figure 2-30: SLR Exposure Area Map. 2.11.2 Potential Impacts The Proposed Action would not adversely affect the project area's vulnerability to natural hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, flooding, or tsunami. To the contrary, the bridge rehabilitation would strengthen the bridge, making it more resilient to such hazards. The rehabilitated bridge would be designed to meet the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)Load and Resistance Factor Design Bridge Design Specifications,which includes seismic provisions. In the event of flooding or a tsunami, the rehabilitated bridge would provide a safer and more reliable evacuation route for the surrounding areas compared to the aging existing bridge. The Proposed Action itself would not have any bearing on precipitation patterns, frequency and degree of heavy rains, or SLR anticipated with climate change. The Proposed Action would not significantly affect the susceptibility of Hakalau Stream Bridge and the project area to hillside erosion. During construction, there may be increased wildfire ignition sources due to the presence of construction vehicles and workers, but due to the wet conditions typical of the Hamakua Coast, significant impacts from wildfires are unlikely. The proposed soil remediation and lead abatement actions would potentially increase the likelihood of erosion within the affected area. However,temporary BMPs would be implemented during construction to minimize potential soil erosion. Furthermore, post-construction BMPs, including structural controls (e.g., erosion control matting) and nonstructural controls (e.g., plant establishment), would be implemented to ensure the project area is stabilized after the soil remediation work is completed. The project area is not located in a regulatory flood zone; therefore, FEMA No-Rise criteria do not apply to this project, and a flood study is not required for the Proposed Action. Soil Remediation would reduce long-term lead exposure risk to the project area and community in an extreme storm or flooding event. Such events would disturb soil and expose more lead. The Proposed Action to remediate lead-contaminated soil would ensure clean soils, removing the spread of lead in the environment during a storm or flood event. Page 2-56 April 2024 M I4, v.--.4,6c �' Nagasa lik-..-4 c", �i ` 4g _ • Z.. r 4 ,gyp R�}"/ N M MVV � :. in- .,-* ..,, Q E.'tki,,}} , y\ `A\ N r" , *. �� 0� . S� ''''''.4:4' A\ _ k oot \ a 6 .. ' u) r o 4,r oa '''''''''''''6''.°:::'.5..\''''''P'''°''''''°. o i\ ovo 5 I 5 O o a I `,54 a �• N L" N 0� `L O i. i. R �ip'' N m m B a m m Y w B �° V47 O = N m E K -Oe+ �- `o �, , 1 m c w N o x , a V 2 O W y c a` ; ¢ v J ` a N 0 asxQw s ,oma ca �ooP \\ ,,,. , io3 _.......... ,,, , . ., . ..„ • r S,,,,,,. ..., b ,. . ...,. , . ,, .-,,, \ '' ,, , ,„„, , ., . ii.iiiii , , ,.. ..„, •, . . .., \ .,_.,.. da.O:' �.�� gy, 7\\\\ ..... . 7, , SS LA o CA Bp Bio 0I.- E m w, Oi a o e\'R. a a V' cn CO U) CD W n; m o ♦, N 0 W N ♦ O ca o LL c8 L'I Nr E co ca (79 IIu AO -,'i. Nlii T 1 ,v ca y p CV m. r N a x'o ; a U l� w Ni ca W it m 2 O x . ON ca � �� u. .._+ K z.4K yo 76.1 ' 3 * �a�o a _ 4 0* +� y1/42P3 i *► „ 4 * ; I* a aWS7:° - - • 41 .5 '„ PpbSs".. , A� Ci 'Z''.7.1:' my J°6 AV. m j tS / o vt` • ..' °•,,. 6 " - . co t\ as �a73 �a‘ \OS •2?‘".. o in ` = v; , \ CIO N 0 , Y �. N \ � 1 o 14 QOQ +J CD cd II. { , " O o a' a cd ,L7 CLIm t P4 ci) W W1 N \ iI tah rc °s- 1 m N Tiii m T ,p ld¢ ay B �° f.`s � ''''"VI O O 4 u m `o v m i'.O x N m a. O O w \\ #c a H M a ; U cJ . ! N 0a _ K e ` = y xQ w 0 as Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 2.11.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Because the Proposed Action would not adversely affect the project area's vulnerability to natural hazards such as earthquakes,landslides, flooding,or tsunami,no avoidance,minimization,and mitigation measures are proposed other than the BMPs previously discussed. Construction BMPs would be implemented in accordance with the documented approach, An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii, by the FHWA, and Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016), or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2021). In addition, the HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control would be followed. 2.12 Public Services and Utilities 2.12.1 Existing Conditions There are no residences or businesses in the project area.Basic utilities such as electricity and potable water are not available at Hakalau Beach Park and in the undeveloped Hakalau Gulch.Hakalau Beach Park,which is currently closed to the public, does not have restrooms or shower facility accommodations. The Hakalau area is served by essential emergency responders, such as fire, police, and ambulance services, despite its somewhat isolated location. The North Hilo Police Station is located in Hilo, roughly 14 miles from Hakalau, and there are also stations in Laupahoehoe and Honokaa, 10 and 28 miles from Hakalau, respectively, that could serve the Hakalau area. The Hawaii County Fire Department stations are located in Hilo approximately 13 miles and 15 miles away,both of which would serve the Hakalau area. 2.12.2 Potential Impacts No changes to essential public services and utilities are proposed. Early consultation comments indicate that there are no concerns regarding potential impacts to essential emergency services such as police and fire response. The proposed bridge rehabilitation efforts would facilitate safe, long-term access to public services, utilities, and infrastructure for the nearby Hakalau community and all surrounding areas on the Hamakua Coast. 2.12.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Because public facilities,services,and utilities would not be significantly impacted by the Proposed Action, no additional avoidance minimization, and mitigation measures are needed. Construction logistics would be coordinated with public utility providers to avoid or minimize any potential service disruptions. Early consultation comments indicate that there are no concerns regarding potential impacts to essential emergency services such as police and fire response. 2.13 Noise Noise, or sound, is any change in air pressure that the human ear can detect, from barely perceptible to levels that can cause hearing damage. In the human ear,these changes in air pressure are translated to sound. The greater the change in air pressure, the louder the sound. For example, a quiet whisper in the library creates a relatively slight change in the room air pressure, whereas air pressure changes are much greater in the front row of a rock music concert. This section discusses how noise is evaluated (its definition, transmission characteristics, and measurement) and provides typical noise levels for reference. The physical surroundings between the source and the receiver influence the attenuation of point and line sources. For example,interactions of sound waves with the ground often result in slightly higher attenuation (called "ground absorption effects") than the reduction factors given in the preceding paragraph. Other Page 2-60 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment factors affecting the attenuation of sound with distance include existing structures, topography, dense foliage, ground cover, and atmospheric conditions (such as wind,temperature, and relative humidity). 2.13.1 Regulatory Context Under the criteria identified by 23 CFR 772, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction,as well as HDOT's Highway Noise Policy and Abatement Guidelines(HDOT 2016),A"Type I" noise project includes the construction of a highway in a new location or the physical alternation of an existing highway which substantially changes the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes. Only such Type I noise projects are required to complete a quantitative analysis of potential noise impacts by federal regulations. Because the Proposed Action does not meet the definition of a Type I noise project, a noise analysis is not required per 23 CFR §772.5. Therefore, the following discussion of potential noise impacts is only a qualitative assessment of noise resulting from the project. 2.13.2 Existing Conditions Existing and future noise-sensitive land uses and activities located in the vicinity of the project area include residences in Hakalau and Hakalau Beach Park. Old Mamalahoa Highway goes through the small, quiet residential community of Hakalau,which is located primarily on the Hilo side of the bridge. The residences closest to the bridge are located approximately 150 to 200 feet from the bridge on properties resting above Hawaii Belt Road at both the Honokaa and Hilo ends of the bridge. The closed portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway on the Honokaa end of the bridge is aligned around one residential property,but currently carries no traffic. Hakalau Beach Park is located below and adjacent to the Hakalau Stream Bridge.No other noise- sensitive land uses are located within the project area. All residences in the project area are defined as FHWA and HDOT Activity Category B (residential) and the outdoor uses at the beach park are defined as Activity Category C(parks).Category B and Category C activities have an exterior noise abatement criteria (NAC) of Leq(h) 66 A-weighted decibels (dBA). Under HDOT policy, a noise impact occurs when the predicted traffic noise levels approach or exceed the NAC, or when the predicted traffic noise levels substantially exceed the existing noise levels. "Approach" means within 1 dBA less than the NAC, and "substantially exceed the existing noise levels"means an increase of at least 15 dBA. Based on the roadway's posted speed limit in the project area, the off-peak free-flow traffic conditions, and proximity of noise-sensitive land uses, it is reasonable to assume that the existing worst-hour traffic noise levels for noise-sensitive areas near the project are below the HDOT NAC. The existing roadway alignment of Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge, and Old Mamalahoa Highway would remain unchanged for the near future. No foreseeable future actions or developments that could affect noise-sensitive land uses in the area are known. The posted speed limits, anticipated traffic volumes, and vehicle percentages on Hawaii Belt Road and Old Mamalahoa Highway would remain the same as existing conditions. 2.13.3 Potential Impacts No significant impacts to noise levels are anticipated as a result of this project. Consistent with the existing conditions, the Proposed Action would maintain the existing roadway alignment, capacity, and 55-mile- per-hour posted speed limit on Hawaii Belt Road and Hakalau Stream Bridge. The project would not result in any change in traffic volumes, directional split, or vehicle composition on Hawaii Belt Road compared to existing conditions. The primary noise source in the area, traffic from Hawaii Belt Road, would remain similar to existing traffic noise levels with future worst-hour traffic noise levels without the project similar to existing conditions and below the HDOT NAC. April 2024 Page 2-61 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Although the Proposed Action would reopen the Hakalau Beach Park, which would mean reopening the south portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway that provides access to the park,because of the low speeds (25 miles per hour and below), limited vehicular traffic (anticipated to be unchanged from pre-2017 traffic closure conditions), and low vehicular delay within the Hakalau community, any changes in traffic noise in the residential area along Old Mamalahoa Highway and at outdoor areas at the park are not expected to be noticeable. Worst-hour noise levels with the Proposed Action are anticipated to be below the HDOT NAC and not result in a substantial increase over existing conditions. As stated in Chapter 1,the anticipated construction duration is roughly 2.5 years. Construction of the project would involve the use of heavy machinery that could cause temporary noise impacts to adjacent noise- sensitive land uses. The soil remediation work would involve including haul trucks for transportation of soil and other construction materials but are only temporary. The bridge rehabilitation work would involve a variety of heavy construction equipment to construct new trestle towers and removal of the existing trestle towers; the soil remediation work including vegetation removal would require similarly noisy heavy equipment. Noise generated by construction equipment required can reach levels from the mid-70s dBA to the mid-90s dBA at 50 feet. Table 2-6: Construction Equipment Noise Levels presents a range of noise levels for various construction equipment anticipated to be used during construction of the project. Equipment noise levels vary depending on the make and model of the equipment, the operation being performed, the condition of the equipment, and other variables. The noise levels listed below are based on published measurements taken ata distance of 50 feet from the equipment.Because construction equipment noise levels decrease at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance, at 100 feet the noise levels would be about 6 dBA less than the levels shown in the table. Similarly, at 200 feet the noise levels would be approximately 12 dBA less than shown in the table. Intervening structures or topography can act as a noise barrier to further reduce noise levels. Table 2-6: Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Decibels(dBA) Equipment Decibels(dBA) Standard Construction Equipment Light Impact Equipment Truck 75-90 Jack Hammer 81 -98 Saw 72-81 Jumping Jack 81 -97 Light Tower 62-72 Heavy Impact Equipment Cold Planer 79-88 Paving Machine 86-88 Hoe rams 95-106 Roller 63-70 Vibratory Sheetpile driver 90-100 Striping machine 75-86 Auger Drill Rig 84-85 Concrete Truck 75-88 Drill Rig Truck 79-84 Backhoe/Loader 72-83 Compressor 74-87 Generator 71-82 Crane 75-87 Source:USDOT 2006 *Not included in Construction Noise Handbook,Table 9.1. 2.13.4 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Overall, the existing noise environment would not be significantly impacted by the project. Furthermore, the bridge rehabilitation work would be conducted incrementally, as described in Chapter 1. This construction method would minimize the potential for noise disruptions from roadway traffic to the surrounding environment and community. Therefore, no long-term noise mitigation measures are necessary. Page 2-62 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Construction activities would involve heavy machinery and vehicles that at times may exceed the maximum levels allowed by community noise control regulations for daytime within Class C Zoning Districts (agriculturally zoned areas or similar). The HDOH maintains community noise control standards that apply to construction noise (HAR Section 11-46). Construction work would not be allowed to exceed the stipulated noise limits unless a variance is granted by the HDOH. Noise control measures during construction would be required to minimize impacts on existing noise-sensitive land uses. A Community Noise Permit would be obtained for construction activities performed during standard work hours(Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. and Saturday 9:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m., and holidays). A Community Noise Variance would be obtained to restrict noisy equipment to minimize and mitigate potential impacts to the surrounding community during nighttime, weekend, and holiday hours. General abatement measures, including design considerations,source control,and community relations, are recommended as guidelines in developing construction plans that consider the adverse impacts of construction noise for this project. The aforementioned measures can be incorporated into site-specific construction plans to minimize noise impacts to sensitive receivers along the project corridor,and additional noise emission limits could be developed as well. Construction hours would be set in the Community Noise Permit and Community Noise Variance, and noise level criteria could be decided upon and adhered to during construction. 2.14 Air Quality 2.14.1 Existing Conditions As required by the 1977 Clean Air Act and subsequent amendments, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)established National Ambient Air Quality Standards(AAQS)for seven major air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter smaller than 10 microns (PMio), particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns (PM25), sulfur dioxide, and lead. The State has also established its own standards for these pollutants and hydrogen sulfide. The National and State AAQS are periodically reviewed and revised. See Table 2-7: National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards. Based on the latest year of available ambient air monitoring data (2022), the State is in attainment of all National and State AAQS. The HDOH Clean Air Branch has 10 air monitoring stations on the Island of Hawaii, though it does not operate any stationary air monitoring sites near the project location. The closest station to the project area is located in Hilo, approximately 13.5 miles away from the project area. The pollutants/parameters monitored at this location are PM2.5 and sulfur dioxide. No exceedances of the national or state AAQS were recorded during 2020, 2021, or 2022,the most recent three years of available data(HDOH 2021, 2022, 2023). April 2024 Page 2-63 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Table 2-7: National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards Standards Pollutant Hawaii State Federal Primarya(Health) Federal Secondaryb(Welfare) Carbon Monoxide 1 Hour 9 ppm 35 ppm — 8 Hour 4.4 ppm 9 ppm — Nitrogen Dioxide 1 Hour — 100 ppb Annual Mean 0.04 ppm 53 ppb 0.053 ppm PM10 24 Hour 150 pg/m3 150 pg/m3 — Annual(Arithmetic) 50 pg/m3 — — PM2.5 24 Hour — 35 pg/m3 35 pg/m3 Annual(Arithmetic) — 12 pg/m3 15 pg/m3 Ozone 8 Hour Rolling Average 157 pg/m3(0.08 ppm) 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppm Sulfur Dioxide 1 Hour — 75 ppb 3 Hour 0.5 ppm — 1,300 pg/m3(0.5 ppm) 24 Hour Block Average 0.14 ppm — — Annual Average 80 pg/m3(0.03 ppm) — — Lead 3 Months(Arithmetic) 1.5 pg/mad 0.15 pg/m3 0.15 pg/m3 Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 25 ppb — — Source: HDOH 2O23a Notes: a Primary Standards set limits to protect public health,including the health of"sensitive"populations such as asthmatics,children,and the elderly. b Secondary Standards set limits to protect public welfare,including protection against decreased visibility,damage to animals,crops, vegetation,and buildings. c Due to a lack of evidence linking health problems to long-term exposure to coarse particle pollution,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency revoked the annual----standard effective December 17,2006.However,the state still has an annual standard. d The state standard is based on calendar quarter. Key: Ng/m3=micrograms per cubic meter ppm=parts per million ppb=parts per billion PM2.5=particulate matter smaller than 2.5 microns PM10=particulate matter smaller than 10 microns 2.14.2 Potential Impacts The Proposed Action would not change the alignment of Hawaii Belt Road or Hakalau Stream Bridge, add traffic capacity, or result in any meaningful changes in traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speeds, or any other factor that would cause an increase in emissions. The Proposed Action would reopen the portion of Old Mamalahoa Highway that provides access to the park,but due to the low speeds (25 miles per hour and below)and limited vehicular traffic(similar to pre-2017 traffic closure)the increase in emissions compared to existing conditions would be negligible. As such,the Proposed Action is not anticipated to generate any notable air quality impacts or contribute to any air quality concerns during its use and would not cause or exacerbate a violation of the state or national AAQS. As stated in Chapter 1,the anticipated construction duration is roughly 2.5 years. Air quality impacts during construction generally consist of fugitive dust and mobile source emissions from construction equipment Page 2-64 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment (haul trucks for transportation of soil and other construction materials) and are only temporary. These air emissions would occur only during construction activities. 2.14.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures No avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are proposed for any of the alternatives,because no violation of the state or national AAQS is anticipated. Fugitive dust is airborne particulate matter of usually large particle size that is generated by construction vehicles operating around construction sites and from material blown from uncovered haul trucks, stockpiles, and exposed areas. The emission rate for fugitive dust emissions from construction activities is difficult to estimate accurately because its generation varies greatly depending upon the type of soil, the amount and type of dirt-disturbing activity,the moisture content of exposed soil,and wind speed.Airborne, visible fugitive dust generated during construction of the Proposed Action would be controlled at the project site by the contractor in accordance with the provisions of HAR Chapter 11-60.1-33, Fugitive Dust. For example, frequent watering would control fugitive dust at construction sites. In addition,wind screens may be used in areas near residences and commercial districts, as well as limiting the areas of disturbance at any given time. Landscaping would be reestablished as early as possible to limit fugitive dust. To prevent haul trucks from tracking dirt onto paved streets, tire washing, or road cleaning may be appropriate. State regulations further stipulate that open-bodied trucks be covered at all times when in motion if they are transporting wind-erodible materials. Measures to address health and safety concerns associated with potential exposure to airborne lead due to the disturbance of contaminated materials during construction would be addressed by the C-EHMP for this project. 2.15 Social and Economic Conditions 2.15.1 Existing Conditions Old Mamalahoa Highway on the south side of the bridge goes through the small, quiet community of Hakalau. There are no residences or commercial areas within the project area. In the vicinity of Hakalau Stream Bridge,outside the project area,there is a small residential area on the Hilo side of the bridge along Hanamalo Loop and Opihi Point Place and on the Kona-side of the bridge is Lai Nani Oceanfront Estate development, near Umauma Stream. These areas are low density and generally consist of single-family residences. These homes are well above the proposed work areas for both soil remediation and bridge rehabilitation. 2.15.2 Potential Impacts There are no residents or businesses in the project area that would be directly affected by the Proposed Action. Members of the community surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge would all benefit from the Proposed Action, as would all Hawaii Island residents and visitors who wish to visit Hakalau Beach Park, once the soil is remediated and the park is reopened. 2.15.3 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Because the project would not impact any residence or business, no proposed avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures are proposed with respect to socioeconomic conditions. April 2024 Page 2-65 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 2.16 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 2.16.1 Secondary Impacts Secondary impacts,or indirect effects, are effects that are caused by an action and are later in time or farther removed from distance but are still reasonably foreseeable. Such efforts may include growth-inducing impacts and other effects related to changes in land use patterns, population density, or growth rate, and related effects on air, water, and other natural systems. The Proposed Action does not add park infrastructure that may result in secondary impacts on the resident population, land use patterns, public facilities and infrastructure, and the natural environment. Visitation at Hakalau Beach Park may return to pre-2017 levels, but the impacts related to that park visitation have been incorporated into the analysis in this EA. Park usage is not expected to exceed 2017 levels. Construction of the project is expected to generate short-term construction employment for a limited number of workers. It is anticipated that local contractors on Hawaii Island or within the state of Hawaii would likely be used for construction of the project, with some of the soil disposal potentially conducted on the mainland instead of on Hawaii Island. Thus,construction workers would have minimal,if any,effect on the island's residential population or housing demand. The Proposed Action is needed to remediate the soil in Hakalau Valley and restore use of the beach park to the public. The bridge rehabilitation would not result in any change in use of roadway facilities or traffic volume increases. Therefore, no secondary effects of increasing infrastructure demands are anticipated, which may necessitate other off-site improvements and additional use of public funds and resources. 2.16.2 Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts are effects on the environment that result from the incremental impact of a project when added to past, present, and reasonably near future actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. The Proposed Action is a complete, independent project that would not result in commitments for other projects, nor would it result in cumulative, considerable impacts on the environment. No other existing or planned transportation projects are in the immediate vicinity of Hakalau Valley, with the exception of the Hakalau Bridge Bent 8 Repair Project,which is planned by HDOT as a stop-gap measure to keep the bridge operational until the entire bridge substructure can be rehabilitated. The Bent 8 Repair Project would be completed prior to the start of the Proposed Action; therefore, no cumulative impacts, such as traffic impacts, that would result in higher than anticipated traffic congestion during or after construction are anticipated. This Proposed Action at Hakalau Bridge is one of several separate bridge rehabilitation projects proposed for steel bridges on Hawaii Belt Road along the Hamakua Coast. They include four other similar steel- trestle bridges (Kapue Bridge, Paheehee Bridge, Kolekole Bridge in South Hilo district; Nanue Bridge in North Hilo district) and one steel stringer bridge in the town of Hilo, Wailuku Bridge. These other bridges would be rehabilitated with similar materials and retain their historical integrity as steel bridges. Only Hakalau Bridge is proposed to be rehabilitated with concrete instead of steel,because of the advanced steel damage at Hakalau which makes rehabilitation with steel not feasible, as described in Section 1.5, Other Alternatives Considered. Therefore, while multiple bridges along the Hamakua Coast would be rehabilitated in the foreseeable future,the Hakalau Bridge rehabilitation and soil remediation project would not result in adverse cumulative impacts on the combination of historic properties on Hawaii Belt Road. No cumulative impacts that result in significant impacts of public utilities and services such as water and electricity or emergency services are anticipated. No long-term or cumulative adverse impacts on water Page 2-66 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment quality, biological resources, cultural resources, or park resources are anticipated other than what is previously disclosed above. April 2024 Page 2-67 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 3: CONSISTENCY WITH GOVERNMENT PLANS AND POLICIES This section describes state and local government plans and policies that are directly relevant to this project. A brief discussion follows each policy description to illustrate the project's consistency. 3.1 State of Hawaii Plans and Controls 3.1.1 Hawaii State Plan The Hawaii State Plan, which is a long-range comprehensive plan that includes an overall theme, goals, objectives, policies, priority guidelines, and implementation mechanisms. The Hawaii State Plan acts as a roadmap for long-term state development, setting goals, policies, and priorities. It also aids in resource allocation, enhances coordination among federal, state, and county plans and programs, and establishes a systematic approach to integrate major State and County activities. Relevant Hawaii State Plan objectives, and policy are listed below with discussion. 3.1.1.1 Physical environment—scenic, natural beauty, and historic resources (a)Planning for the State's physical environment shall be directed towards achievement of the objective of enhancement of Hawaii's scenic assets,natural beauty, and multi-cultural/historical resources. (b)To achieve the scenic,natural beauty, and historic resources objective,it shall be the policy of this State to: (1)Promote the preservation and restoration of significant natural and historic resources. (4)Protect those special areas, structures, and elements that are an integral and functional part of Hawaii's ethnic and cultural heritage. (5)Encourage the design of developments and activities that complement the natural beauty of the islands. Discussion: One of the purposes of this project is to restore public access to Hakalau Park by remediating the lead contamination. The other purpose is to rehabilitate the historic Hakalau Stream Bridge. While rehabilitation would result in alterations to the historic character of the bridge,the Section 106 MOA should set forth design parameters that the design would adhere to as closely as practicable. 3.1.1.2 Facility Systems—Transportation (a)Planning for the State's facility systems with regard to transportation shall be directed towards the achievement of the following objectives: (1)An integrated multi-modal transportation system that services statewide needs and promotes the efficient, economical, safe, and convenient movement of people and goods. (2)A statewide transportation system that is consistent with and will accommodate planned growth objectives throughout the State. (b)To achieve the transportation objectives,it shall be the policy of this State to: April 2024 Page 3-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment (1)Design, program, and develop a multi-modal system in conformance with desired growth and physical development as stated in this chapter. (6)Encourage transportation systems that serve to accommodate present and future development needs of communities. (10)Encourage the design and development of transportation systems sensitive to the needs of affected communities and the quality of Hawaii's natural environment. Discussion: Rehabilitating the Hakalau Stream Bridge would ensure that its structural integrity can withstand the increasing threat of natural disasters. Should the Hakalau Stream Bridge fail, the transit system would be affected island-wide as Hawaii Belt Road is the only road that provides uninterrupted access along the Hamakua Coast. Impacts to bridge operations would disrupt the efficient, economical, safe, and convenient movement of people and goods. 3.1.1.3 Socio-cultural advancement—health (a)Planning for the State's socio-cultural advancement with regard to health shall be directed towards achievement of the following objectives: (2)Maintenance of sanitary and environmentally healthful conditions in Hawaii's communities. (3)Elimination of health disparities by identifying and addressing social determinants of health. (b)To achieve the health objectives,it shall be the policy of this State to: (6)Improve the State's capabilities in preventing contamination by pesticides and other potentially hazardous substances through increased coordination,education,monitoring,and enforcement. Discussion: By remediating the lead-contaminated soil, a hazardous substance, overall lead levels should decrease in the Hakalau Gulch.Reducing lead levels would promote healthful conditions in Hakalau Gulch. 3.1.1.4 Socio-cultural advancement—leisure (a)Planning for the State's socio-cultural advancement with regard to leisure shall be directed towards the achievement of the objective of the adequate provision of resources to accommodate diverse cultural, artistic, and recreational needs for present and future generations. (b)To achieve the leisure objective,it shall be the policy of this State to: (3)Enhance the enjoyment of recreational experiences through safety and security measures, educational opportunities, and improved facility design and maintenance. (4)Promote the recreational and educational potential of natural resources having scenic, open space, cultural, historical, geological, or biological values while ensuring that their inherent values are preserved. (5)Ensure opportunities for everyone to use and enjoy Hawaii's recreational resources. (10)Assure adequate access to significant natural and cultural resources in public ownership. [L 1978, c 100,pt of§2; am L 1986, c 276, §22] Page 3-2 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Discussion: Once the lead-contaminated soil is remediated and bridge rehabilitation is complete,the County could reopen Hakalau Park to visitors. At the park, visitors would be able to enjoy scenic views, natural areas, and recreational activities, and visit the historic old mill site. 3.1.2 Hawaii Statewide Federal-Aid Highways 2045 Transportation Plan The 2022 Draft Hawaii Statewide Federal-Aid Highways 2045 Transportation Plan(HSTP) establishes the framework to be used in the planning of Hawaii's transportation system (HDOT 2022). The goals and objectives identified in the HSTP provide the keys to the development of an integrated, multimodal transportation system for the safe, efficient, and effective movement of people and goods throughout Hawaii. Relevant goals, objectives and strategies include the following: INFRASTRUCTURE: Provide a high-quality, well-maintained multimodal system. • Maintain the multimodal transportation system in a state of good repair. Manage transportation assets effectively and efficiently. • Modernize transportation infrastructure. Prepare infrastructure to accommodate new technologies. RESILIENCY: Anticipate and adapt to climate change, storms,pandemics, and other disruptions. • Enhance resiliency of transportation systems to the impacts of climate change,public health crises,and other disruptions. Adapt to climate change, storms,pandemics, and other disruptions. Facilitate robust,resilient, and sustainable supply chains and goods movement systems. Improve system resiliency to public health crises. • Improve emergency preparedness, response, and evacuation measures. Anticipate and prepare for system emergencies Discussion: The Proposed Action includes the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge to ensure that highway infrastructure remains in a state of good repair. Additionally, the replacement of the bents would allow the bridge to withstand the impacts of earthquakes, tsunami, and flooding, the likelihood of which would increase with climate change. 3.1.3 Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawaii In conjunction with the development of the HSTP 2035,the HDOT updated the Regional Long-Range Land Transportation Plans for the District of Hawaii using a future horizon year of 2035 and retitled it as the Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plans for the District of Hawaii (HDOT 2014a, 2014b). While the HSTP discussed above has since been updated to reflect a 2045 horizon, the district plans have not yet been updated from the 2035 horizon. Nevertheless, the 2035 Hawaii District report found that Hawaii County prioritized the following transportation goals, such as: • Improve capacity and system efficiency by addressing congestion • Maintain and improve safety for all modes • Expand and increase Hawaii's economic vitality through the efficient movement of people, goods, and services • Preserve and maintain the existing transportation system • Provide modal integration (complete streets) and improve transit service April 2024 Page 3-3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment • Support evacuation and emergency access/egress during incidents The report then identified system preservation and maintenance projects as one of the solutions to the County's transportation meeting the above goals, stating: "Bridges are also important assets and can be critical infrastructures on the island. Multiple subprograms are in place to manage and maintain the island's bridge inventory. Bridge needs can arise when a specific facility is found to be structurally deficient, or when a bridge requires attention through its regular maintenance cycle. When bridge needs are identified, system preservation solutions are addressed through one of the specific subprograms that manage: • Bridge replacement • Rehabilitation • Preventative maintenance • Seismic retrofit" Discussion: The Proposed Action would ensure the continued safe, reliable operation of the transportation system. Additionally,the project would also serve as preventive measures to ensure the bridge's structural integrity in the event of an earthquake or tsunami. 3.1.4 Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan The Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan: Charting a Course for the Decade of Action (2020-2030) (Sustainability Plan), revised June 2021, serves as a guide for the future long-range development of the state (State of Hawaii 2021). The Sustainability Plan promotes the growth and diversification of the state's economy, the protection of the physical environment, the provision of public facilities, and the promotion of and assistance to socio-cultural advancement. Relevant Sustainability Plan goals, objectives, and policy are listed below with discussion and analysis. Sustainable Development Goal 9 Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and foster innovation. This sustainability goal's targets include: • Improving the sustainability and equity of all existing and future infrastructure Discussion: The project includes the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge to ensure that this bridge infrastructure can be sustained into the future. The Proposed Action would not only fortify the bridge supports due to wear,but also ensure the bridge's structural integrity in the event of an earthquake,tsunami, or flood. Sustainable Development Goal 15 Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems,sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. The objective... is to maintain continued thriving ecosystems on land and end all threats to land degradation and biodiversity loss. Targets to achieve this goal address: • Protecting biodiversity by reducing degradation of natural habitats... Page 3-4 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Discussion: The project includes the remediation of the lead-contaminated soil in Hakalau Gulch. Soil remediation is anticipated to reduce the degradation of the gulch ecosystem, thereby potentially protecting biodiversity. 3.2 County of Hawaii Plans 3.2.1 County of Hawaii General Plan 2005 The County General Plan (General Plan) is the policy document for Hawaii Island that guides long-range comprehensive development in a way that fosters healthy community vison and values. The plan examines numerous study areas (economic, energy, environmental quality, flooding and natural hazards, historic sites, natural beauty, natural resources and shoreline, housing,public facilities,public utilities, recreation, transportation, and land use) and sets forth goals,policies, and specific actions within each study area. The General Plan was published in February 2005, and is currently being updated. Relevant Hawaii County General Plan policies are listed below along with discussion and analysis. NATURAL BEAUTY GOALS (a) Protect,preserve, and enhance the quality of areas endowed with natural beauty,including the quality of coastal scenic resources. (b) Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. (c) Maximize opportunities for present and future generations to appreciate and enjoy natural and scenic beauty. POLICIES (a) Increase public pedestrian access opportunities to scenic places and vistas. (b) Develop and establish view plane regulations to preserve and enhance views of scenic or prominent landscapes from specific locations, and coastal aesthetic values. (c) Maintain a continuing program to identify, acquire and develop viewing sites on the island. (d) Access easement to public or private lands that have natural or scenic value shall be provided or acquired for the public. (h) Protect the views of areas endowed with natural beauty by carefully considering the effects of proposed construction during all land use reviews. (i) Do not allow incompatible construction in areas of natural beauty. STANDARDS The following standards provide guidelines for designating sites and vistas of extraordinary natural beauty that shall be protected. (b) Coastline areas of striking contrast, e.g.,Laupahoehoe Point. (c) Vistas of distinctive features. Discussion: Once the lead-contaminated soil is remediated and bridge rehabilitation is complete,the County could reopen Hakalau Park to visitors. At the park,visitors would be able to enjoy scenic views and natural areas. The new bridge bents,though slightly larger,would be constructed in the same place that the existing bents are now, thus preserving mauka and makai views in the gulch. NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES GOALS April 2024 Page 3-5 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment a) Protect and conserve the natural resources from undue exploitation, encroachment, and damage. (b) Provide opportunities for recreational, economic, and educational needs without despoiling or endangering natural resources. (c) Protect and promote the prudent use of Hawaii's unique, fragile, and significant environmental and natural resources. (d) Protect rare or endangered species and habitats native to Hawaii. (e) Protect and effectively manage Hawaii's open space, watersheds, shoreline, and natural areas. (f) Ensure that alterations to existing land forms, vegetation, and construction of structures cause minimum adverse effect to water resources, and scenic and recreational amenities and minimum danger of floods, landslides, erosion, siltation, or failure in the event of an earthquake. POLICIES (c) Maintain the shoreline for recreational, cultural, educational, and/or scientific uses in a manner that is protective of resources and is of the maximum benefit to the general public. (i) Encourage an overall conservation ethic in the use of Hawaii's resources by protecting, preserving, and conserving the critical and significant natural resources of the County of Hawaii. (j) Encourage the protection of watersheds, forest, brush, and grassland from destructive agents and uses. (k) Encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping. (r) Ensure public access is provided to the shoreline,public trails and hunting areas,including free public parking where appropriate. STANDARDS The following shall be considered for the protection and conservation of natural resources. (a) Areas necessary for the protection and propagation of specified endangered native wildlife,and conservation for natural ecosystems of endemic plants, fish, and wildlife. (b) Lands necessary for the preservation of forests,park lands, wilderness, and beach areas. (c) Lands with a general slope of 20 percent or more that provide open space amenities or possess unusual scenic qualities. (f) The Coastal Zone and SMA as defined by statute and in accordance with the adopted objectives and guidelines. Discussion: A portion of the remediation area is located within the SMA. The Proposed Action would reduce the lead contamination creating a safer and healthier environment for flora and fauna in the area. Some construction activity would occur on the slopes of the gulch; however, after work is completed, the slopes would be returned to their original condition. RECREATION GOALS (a) Provide a wide variety of recreational opportunities for the residents and visitors of the County. (b) Maintain the natural beauty of recreation areas. POLICIES (b) Improve existing public facilities for optimum usage. (c) Recreational facilities shall reflect the natural,historic, and cultural character of the area. (1) Public access to the shoreline shall be provided in accordance with an adopted program of the County of Hawaii. Page 3-6 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment (s) Consider alternative sources of funding for recreational facilities. STANDARDS (f)Parks for General Use: • Centered around a major natural asset, such as a sandy beach, a prime forest, or a volcanic feature and includes historic sites whenever feasible. • Designed to accommodate users from throughout the County. • Beach parks provide opportunities for swimming/sunbathing, surfing, camping, fishing, boating, nature study, and other pastimes. Every section of the island should be adequately served. Facilities depend on size and intensity of use but should include restrooms with showers;picnic facilities; a defined tent camping area when allowed; drinking water; adequate parking; pavilions of various sizes; and lifeguard facilities. • Facilities include trails and unimproved roads;designated hunting and fishing areas;designated conservation areas for nature study and other passive activities; and wilderness camp sites. Discussion: The Proposed Action would reopen Hakalau Park, thereby allowing public access to the shoreline and the ruins of the historic Hakalau Sugar Mill. This project is partially funded by the FHWA as well as the state. TRANSPORTATION GOALS (a) Provide a system of roadways for the safe, efficient, and comfortable movement of people and goods. (b) Provide an integrated State and County transportation system so that new major routes will complement and encourage proposed land policies. POLICIES (a) Encourage the programmed improvement of existing roadways by both public and private sectors. (d) Support the development of programs to identify and improve hazardous and substandard sections of roadway and drainage problems. (g) There shall be coordinated planning of federal,state,and county street systems to meet program goals of the other elements such as historic, recreational, environmental quality, and land use. Discussion: The Proposed Action would improve Hakalau Stream Bridge,which carries Hawaii Belt Road, a primary transportation arterial, and would allow the continued safe, efficient, and comfortable movement of people and goods. Additionally, HDOT is coordinating with the FHWA and the County Department of Public Works to ensure that its Proposed Action is aligned with other historic, recreational, environmental quality, and land use considerations at this site, including the historic mill site, beach park recreational opportunities, and shoreline access. 3.2.2 Hamakua Community Development Plan The Hamakua Community Development Plan (County of Hawaii 2018) highlights the values, vision, and community objectives of the Hamakua Community using preliminary policy and recommended actions. Relevant Hamakua Community Development Plan policies and objectives are listed below along with discussion and analysis. SECTION 4: PROTECT AND ENHANCE NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES April 2024 Page 3-7 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment Objective 4: Protect and Enhance Natural and Cultural Resources—Protect and nurture Hamakua's social and cultural diversity and heritage assets, including sacred places, historic sites and buildings, and distinctive plantation towns. Section 4.7.4, Policy 44 — Protect, restore, and enhance the sites, buildings, and objects of significant historical and cultural importance to Hawaii and identify these sites with interpretive signage and/or other appropriate methods. Discussion: The project would remediate the lead-contaminated soils that surround the historic former Hamakua Sugar Mill site. The project would also rehabilitate the steel trestle bridge. HDOT is coordinating with the SHPO to ensure that its remediation and bridge rehabilitation activities with appropriate mitigation measures do not adversely impact any historic structures resources. SECTION 5: STRENGTHEN INFRASTRUCTURE, FACILITIES, AND SERVICES Community Objective 6: Develop and improve critical community infrastructure, including utilities, healthcare, emergency services, affordable housing, educational opportunities,and recreational facilities to keep our ohana safe, strong, and healthy. 3.2.2.1 Section 5.3, Policy 67—Improve/replace substandard bridges in the Hamakua Planning Area Discussion: The project would rehabilitate Hakalau Stream Bridge, which is nearing the end of its useful life because of steel corrosion and scour conditions undermining its foundations. Rehabilitating Hakalau Stream Bridge to address these conditions would continue to provide a safe,reliable,transportation corridor for Hawaii County roadway users. The Hakalau Stream Bridge carries Mamalahoa Highway, which is a primary arterial in the Hawaii County transportation network. The project would also restore public use to the County-owned Hakalau Beach Park, which is a recreational facility currently closed to the public. The project would remediate the soil in the area surrounding Hakalau Beach Park to address the public health hazard posed by the lead contamination. Page 3-8 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 4: COMMENTS AND COORDINATION This chapter summarizes public and agency consultation and coordination activities associated with this project that have been conducted to date. Early consultation and coordination activities included meetings and correspondence with government agencies and the affected communities. 4.1 Early Consultation In preparation for this Draft EA, in November 2022, HDOT sent early consultation letters to 36 parties to request input on environmental concerns, designs and alternatives, community outreach strategies, and identify studies or issues for further study. The private property owners who received these letters were the owner(s) of record as of November 2022. A list of letter recipients follows below. An asterisk(*) appears next to those entities and individuals that responded to the letter. Two asterisks (**)appear next to commentors who were not on the mailing list for the November 2022 early consultation letters but sent in response letters. • Elected Officials o The Honorable Laura Acacio, State Legislature, Senate District 1 o The Honorable Mark M. Nakashima, State Legislature,House District 1 o The Honorable Heather L. Kimball, County Council District 1 • Federal Agencies o U.S. Army Corps of Engineers o U.S. Coast Guard o USGS Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center • State of Hawaii Agencies o Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) o DLNR, Commission on Water Resource Management(CWRM) o DLNR, Historic Preservation Division o DLNR, Hawaii Island Burial Council o DLNR, Land Division* o DLNR, Aha Moku Advisory Committee o DLNR, Engineering Division** o DLNR, Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR)** o DLNR, Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW)** o Department of Hawaiian Home Lands o Office of Hawaiian Affairs o Hawaii Department of Health(HDOH) o HDOH, Clean Water Branch o HDOH, Clean Air Branch o HDOH, Environmental Health Administration o HDOH, Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office o HDOH, Safe Drinking Water Branch o HDOH, Solid and Hazardous Waste Branch* o Department of Agriculture o Department of Business Economic Development&Tourism o Office of Planning and Sustainable Development(OPSD)* o University of Hawaii, Environmental Center and Water Resources Research Center(WRRC)* • County of Hawaii Agencies o Civil Defense Agency April 2024 Page 4-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment o Department of Environmental Management* (DEM) o Department of Parks and Recreation o Department of Planning Cultural Resources Commission Chair o Department of Public Works o Department of Research and Development o Department of Water Supply o Fire Department* o Police Department* o Planning Department • Utilities o Hawaiian Telcom o Hawaiian Electric Company* o Spectrum • Community Groups and Other Interested Parties o National Trust for Historic Preservation o Hakalau Neighborhood Watch o Historic Hawaii Foundation o Hamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee,Dr. Dawn Keeney o Hamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee,Ms. Crystal Kua o Hamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee Ms. Desiree Moana Cruz o Hamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee,Ms. Nicolette Hubbard o Hamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee, Ms. Rhonda Pollard o Hamakua Community Development Plan Action Committee Mr. Robert Nishimoto o Conservation of Biodiversity Program,Pacific Southwest Research Station o University of Hawaii at Hilo, Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Sciences Program • Individuals and private landowners as of November 2022 o Private owner of TMK 2-9-002:023 o Private owner of TMK 2-9-002:025; 3-1-001:002, 004 o Private owner of TMK 2-9-002:039 o Private owner of TMK 2-9-002:064 o Private owner of TMK 2-9-006:021 o Private owner of TMK 3-1-001:001, 003 o Private owner of TMK 3-1-001:005 o Private owner of TMK 3-1-001:006 o JoAnn Kane** By the response deadline, HDOT received 11 early consultation comment letters. See Appendix A-1, Pre- Draft Environmental Assessment Coordination and Consultation. HDOT summarized these comments and indicated where the comment was addressed in this EA. See Table 4-1: Summary of Early Consultation Comments and Responses.2 Page 4-2 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Table 4-1: Summary of Early Consultation Comments and Responses Commentor Comment Response State of Hawaii DLNR Land Provided no objections to the project. N/A Division State of Hawaii DLNR- Provided information and references regarding flood zones and flood See Section Engineering Division hazards. 2.11 State of Hawaii DLNR Division Provided comments regarding habitat and species and avoidance, See Section 2.6 of Aquatic Resources minimization,and mitigation measures for the project to incorporate, as appropriate. State of Hawaii DLNR Division Provided comments regarding habitat and species and avoidance, See Section 2.6 of Forestry and Wildlife minimization,and mitigation measures for the project to incorporate, as appropriate. State of Hawaii DOH Solid and Provided general agency comments regarding the management of See Section 2.3 Hazardous Waste Branch hazardous waste;management of solid waste;and regulation of underground storage tanks,dated November 26, 2018. Clarified the Environmental Center has been discontinued.WRRC no N/A. Remove University of Hawaii,WRRC longer has the capacity to review environmental documents. from EA mailing list. County of Hawaii Department of Comment(s)were focused on lead-contaminated soil and proposed See Section 2.3 Environmental Management treatment,handling,disposal, and other potential project approaches to management of this material. County of Hawaii Fire No comments or concerns expressed. N/A Department County of Hawaii Police No comments or concerns expressed. N/A Department Hawaiian Electric Company No objections to the project.Asked for continued coordination from N/A HDOT as the project progresses. See Chapter 1 Expressed opposition to any bypass road on Old Mamalahoa for project JoAnn Kane(private citizen) Highway through Hakalau Beach Park and related concerns about description.A negative impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood. bypass road is not proposed. 4.2 Draft EA This Draft EA will be announced in The Environmental Notice, initiating the 30-day public comment period. A complete mailing list for the notice of availability of this Draft EA is presented in Appendix A- 1,Pre-Draft Environmental Assessment Coordination and Consultation.Where private property ownership changed after the early consultation letters were sent,the new owner(s) of record around the release of the Draft EA received a notification of the availability of the Draft EA. Copies of the Draft EA were also sent to the Laupahoehoe Public Library, Hilo Public Library, and the State Documents Center. Any comments on this Draft EA will be addressed in the Final EA, which will include HDOT's response letters to Draft EA comments. 4.3 RAA and RAM Public comments on the proposed remedial action described in the Draft RAM were accepted during the 30-day public comment period from June 30 to July 29, 2023. A public notice including the accessibility of the Draft RAM, contact information, and commenting period was published in the Hilo Tribune-Herald on June 30, 2023. The public Fact Sheet and Draft RAM were available to the public through the HDOH HEER office website (http://hawaii.gov/doh/heer) during the public comment period. April 2024 Page 4-3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment Eight individuals identified their preferences via email sent to the HDOH HEER office project manager, Mr. Thomas Gilmore. Six of the eight individuals supported the alternative consistent with the Proposed Action in this EA, and two individuals supported other alternatives. The RAM was finalized in October 2023 based on alternatives identified in the RAA, dated May 2023. See Appendix B,Remedial Alternatives Analysis(RAA)Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park and Response Action Memorandum(RAM) for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park. 4.4 Regulatory Coordination Because the project would involve the use of federal funds through FHWA, the project must comply with certain federal environmental laws and regulations, as well as state regulatory requirements. The following coordination and consultation activities are being conducted to coordinate these compliance efforts. 4.4.1 Federal Coordination The following federal permits and approvals have been or are being obtained to support the Proposed Action. 4.4.1.1 National Environmental Policy Act Categorical Exclusion The NEPA process is required when a federal agency proposes to take a major federal action. These federal actions, which are defined at 40 CFR 1508.1, may be "categorically excluded" (CatEx) from a detailed environmental analysis when the federal action normally does not have a significant effect on the human environment. FHWA has determined that a NEPA CatEx is appropriate for this Proposed Action under 23 CFR 771.117. The CatEx documentation for this project will be completed separately from this HRS Chapter 343 EA and will cite to the additional federal permits and approvals in progress for this Proposed Action. 4.4.1.2 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act The NHPA requires that actions that are federally funded, authorized, or implemented consider the effect of such actions on any district, site,building, structure,or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the NRHP. Such resources are called historic properties. The Section 106 process involves coordination and consultation with the SHPO,and other agencies and organizations that have an interest in or is mandated to protect historic properties. In addition, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation is afforded the opportunity to comment on actions that may adversely affect historic properties. An Archaeological Study was prepared to support the Section 106 consultation. See Appendix C, Archaeological Study). Consultation with the SHPO and other Section 106 consulting parties is ongoing. Because an adverse effect is anticipated under Section 106, FHWA, HDOT, and other consulting parties will develop a Section 106 MOA to stipulate the mitigation measures to address those project impacts in a satisfactory manner. The Section 106 MOA will be completed prior to finalizing the NEPA CatEx. The following consultation and coordination activities were conducted in fulfillment of Section 106. See Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. • Letter dated May 10, 2022, from HDOT on behalf of FHWA to SHPO to initiate Section 106 consultation, consult on the APE, and request information on properties eligible for the NRHP from SHPO. • Letter dated August 9, 2022, from HDOT to Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHO), individuals and families with cultural and lineal ties to the project area, and knowledgeable stakeholders inviting them to participate in Section 106 consultation for the project. Page 4-4 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment • Letter dated September 14, 2022, SHPD comments to HDOT's May 10,2022, initiation letter. • Letter dated September 14,2022, Historic Hawaii Foundation(HHF)comments on HDOT's August 9, 2022, letter. • Letter dated September 28,2022, County of Hawaii Cultural Resources Commission(CRC)comments on HDOT's August 9, 2022, letter. • Letter dated November 21,2023, from HDOT to SHPO acknowledging SHPD's letter dated September 14, 2022, and notifying them of revised APE boundaries. • Letter dated September 26, 2023, from HDOT to HHF in response to HHF's letter dated September 14, 2022. • Letter dated October 18, 2023, from HDOT to CRC in response to CRC's letter dated September 28, 2022. • Letter dated January 4, 2024, from HDOT to NHO, individuals, and families with cultural and lineal ties to the project area, and knowledgeable stakeholders notifying them of revised APE boundaries. It is anticipated that the project will result in an"Adverse Effect"as a result of the impact to Hakalau Stream Bridge. Some minimal impacts may occur to the Old Mamalahoa Highway A Section 106 MOA will be prepared to document mitigation measures that FHWA and HDOT agree to implement. 4.4.1.3 Section 4(I) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 Section 4(f)of the USDOT Act requires that FHWA and other Department of Transportation agencies avoid the use of land from publicly owned parks,recreational areas,wildlife and waterfowl refuges,or public and private historical sites unless the following conditions apply: • There is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative to the use of land; and the action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from such use; or • FHWA determines that the use of the property will have a de minimis impact. There are six Section 4(f)properties in the project area, some of which may be affected by the Proposed Action: one publicly owned park (Hakalau Beach Park) and five historical sites: Hakalau Stream Bridge (State), Hakalau Stream Bridge (County), Old Hakalau Sugar Mill, Old Mamalahoa Highway, and the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House. A Section 4(f) programmatic evaluation must be documented for the anticipated adverse impact to the historic Hakalau Stream Bridge, and a Section 4(f) exception must be documented for the proposed use of a publicly owned park. No other Section 4(f)use is anticipated. HDOT anticipates that FHWA will render an Adverse Effect determination under NHPA Section 106 for Hakalau Stream Bridge (State). A Section 4(f)historic bridges programmatic evaluation form is required when there is a Section 106 Adverse Effect finding involving a historic bridge,to document that there are no feasible and prudent avoidance alternatives to the anticipated adverse impacts on a historic property. The Section 106 consultation has commenced and will culminate in the preparation of a Section 106 MOA. See Section 4.4.1 Federal Coordination. HDOT will also request FHWA's approval of a Section 4(f)temporary occupancy exception for the use of the publicly owned Hakalau Beach Park to conduct soil remediation and construction staging. The following coordination has been conducted with the County Department of Parks and Recreation to document FHWA's decision regarding Section 4(f) uses. See Appendix A-2,Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. April 2024 Page 4-5 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment • August 4, 2023: HDOT preliminary email to County Department of Parks and Recreation to inform them of the project and the intent to conduct Section 4(f) coordination for the proposed use of Hakalau Beach Park. • November 21, 2023: FHWA letter to County Department of Parks and Recreation to request their review and approval of proposed use of Hakalau Beach Park. • December 22, 2023: County Department of Parks and Recreation concurred with FHWA's determination that the Proposed Action meets the criteria for a temporary occupancy exception. After the completion of Section 106 consultation and development of an MOA, HDOT will prepare a historic bridge programmatic evaluation form and officially submit it with the supporting Section 4(f) documentation listed above to request FHWA's approval of the Programmatic Evaluation and 4(f) Exception. 4.4.1.4 Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Section 7 of the ESA requires that federally funded actions not jeopardize any species listed as threatened or endangered, or adversely modify designated critical habitat. The following consultation and coordination activities have been conducted to date with the USFWS and NOAA NMFS pursuant to Section 7. See Appendix A-2, Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence. • USFWS Section? Correspondence o July 21, 2023: USFWS letter generated by the online Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system, which provided a list of threatened and endangered species that may occur in the project area or may be affected by the Proposed Action(Project Code: 2023-0014325). o September 25, 2023: FHWA effect determination letter to USFWS Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (PIFWO) requesting concurrence that the project "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" federally listed species in the project area. o October 3,2023:USFWS PIFWO responded that by incorporating conservation measures, adverse effects to federally listed species are extremely unlikely to occur (discountable) or are not measurable (insignificant). Because impacts from the project would be discountable or insignificant, USFWS concurred that the Proposed Action "may affect but are not likely to adversely affect"the Hawaiian hoary bat,Hawaiian goose,Hawaiian stilt,Hawaiian coot,Hawaiian gallinule,Hawaiian duck,Hawaiian petrel,Hawaii DPS of the band-romped storm petrel,Newell's shearwater, green sea turtle, and four federally listed plant species. The USFWS also requested to be informed of the type of Army Corps permit that the project would be obtaining to comply with CWA, Section 404. • NMFS Section 7 Correspondence o July 18,2023:Letter from HDOT to NOAA NMFS Pacific Island Regional Office(PIRO)(emailed on July 20,2023)requesting a list of threatened and endangered species and critical habitats within the vicinity of the project to enable an appropriate determination for this project under Section 7 of the ESA. o July 20,2023: Email reply from NMFS PIRO noting that the Central North Pacific green sea turtle, hawksbill sea turtle, and the Hawaiian monk seal may be present in the project area. Additionally, both marine and terrestrial Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat are present at this location. If stressors such as turbidity, exposure to contaminants, elevated noise, or exposure to waste move beyond coastal waters (approximately 10-meter depth contour), then pelagic species would also need to be considered. Page 4-6 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment o September 26, 2023: FHWA effect determination letter to NMFS requesting concurrence from NMFS P1RO that the project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the Central North Pacific green sea turtle,hawksbill sea turtle, and the Hawaiian monk seal, and that there would be no destruction or adverse modification to Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat. NMFS has not yet responded to FHWA effect determination letter. 4.4.1.5 Migratory Bird Treaty Act The MBTA implements four international conservation treaties that the U.S. entered into with Canada, Mexico, Japan, and Russia. It is intended to ensure the sustainability of populations of all protected migratory bird species. The MBTA prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the USFWS. As stated in the FHWA effect determination letter to USFWS (dated September 25, 2023), the IPaC list dated July 21, 2023, did not identify any migratory birds of conservation concern pursuant to the MBTA. 4.4.1.6 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act(Essential Fish Habitat) The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act(16 United States Code [USC] 1801), as amended,requires agencies which fund,permit, or undertake activities that may adversely affect EFH to consult with NMFS/PIRO regarding the potential effects of their actions on EFH and respond to NMFS recommendations. EFH are defined as"those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning breeding, feeding, and/or growth to maturity,"including open water, wetlands, coral reefs, and submerged structures associated with federally managed fish species. Actions outside EFH, such as upstream/upslope activities, must also be reviewed. An adverse effect is defined as any impact that reduces quality or quantity of EFH, including direct or indirect physical, chemical, or biological alterations of the waters or substrate and loss of, or injury to, species and their habitat, and other ecosystem components. Coastal waters including the water column and the bottom of the Pacific Ocean around all islands of Hawaii are designated as EFH that support various life stages for MUS identified under the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council's Pelagic and Hawaii Archipelago Fishery Ecosystem Plans. According to NMFS, the MUS and life stages found in these waters include eggs, larvae, juveniles, and adults of Bottomfish, Crustacean, and Pelagic MUS. Specific types of habitats considered as EFH include coral reef,patch reefs, hard substrates, artificial substrates, seagrass beds, soft substrates, lagoons, estuaries, surge zones, deep- slope terraces, and pelagic/open oceans. The potential environmental stressors of concern related to this project include sedimentation and turbidity, and the introduction of chemical contaminants and nutrients. Increased sedimentation and turbidity can cause smothering of benthic species and block sunlight necessary for species that rely on photosynthesis. Heavy metals, which is the main contaminant of concern for this project(lead), are known to bioaccumulate. The following coordination activities were conducted with the NMFS/PIRO regarding EFH consultation: • May 31, 2023: FHWA, on behalf of HDOT,requested EFH consultation with NMFS. • June 30, 2023: NMFS responded in an email suggesting incorporating certain BMPs for the work and inquiring about any coordination with the EPA. If no coordination has occurred with EPA, NMFS suggested that FHWA coordinate with EPA prior to remediation of soils. • July 27, 2023: FHWA confirmed that NMFS's BMP recommendations would be incorporated into the work and that the HDOH HEER office was consulted in preparing the RAM.FHWA's responses further explained that on July 6, 2023, Thomas Gilmore of the HDOH HEER office confirmed in an email to HDOT that EPA allows HDOH to conduct reviews on their behalf, knowing that HDOH's remediation requirements are as stringent, if not more stringent,than those of EPA. April 2024 Page 4-7 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 4.4.1.7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Army Permit The USACE Regulatory Program regulates discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States and structures or work in navigable waters of the United States, under Section 404 of the CWA and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Such in-water activities require a DA permit from the USACE. Section 404 of the CWA regulates discharge of dredge and fill material in the waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Because the project requires in-water work resulting in discharges regulated under Section 404, it requires an NWP that authorizes categories of activities meeting certain permit conditions. Section 401 of the CWA separately directs states to establish WQC programs. In Hawaii, the Section 401 WQC is administered by the HDOH Clean Water Branch. A blanket Section 401 WQC coverage is anticipated with the NWP. RHA requires the Secretary of the Army (via the USACE) to administer a regulatory permit program to protect navigable and tidally influenced waters in the development of harbors and other construction and excavation. Section 10 of the RHA (33 USC Sec. 403) requires authorization from the USACE prior to construction of any structure in or over any navigable water of the U.S. Even if a structure or work on the structure is outside the limits defined for navigable waters of the U.S., a Section 10 permit may still be required if the structure or work affects the course,location,or condition of the water body. It is anticipated that this project will require a Section 10 permit from the USACE. HDOT will coordinate with the USACE to confirm the proposed in-water work is covered by one or more NWPs.Upon review of a project,the USACE issues a verification letter pursuant to the applicable NWP(s). Some activities authorized by NWPs require preparation of a preconstruction notification to the District Engineer to ensure that activities authorized by these NWPs have minimal individual and cumulative adverse impacts on the aquatic environment. 4.4.1.8 U.S. Coast Guard Bridge Permit Exception The U.S. Coast Guard regulates the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of bridges over navigable waterways in the United States. The U.S. Coast Guard regulates work on bridges to ensure waterways remain navigable within reason. Projects intending to modify or construct a bridge over a navigable waterway must apply for a U.S. Coast Guard bridge permit. Any work on a bridge over a tidal waterway in which the waterway is not used or susceptible to use for interstate or foreign commerce and the boats using the waterway are less than 21 feet in length may be subject to exception under 23 USC § 144(c)(2). The project bridge is over a tidal waterway used only by recreational vessels. FHWA, on behalf of HDOT, consulted with the U.S. Coast Guard on May 31, 2023, regarding permit exception. On June 7, 2023, the U.S. Coast Guard expressed concurrence with permit exception under 23 USC § 144(c)(2). 4.4.2 State and Local Coordination In addition to the requirements of HRS Chapter 343 which are fulfilled by this current EA, the following State and local permits and approvals will be obtained for the Proposed Action. 4.4.2.1 Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 6E-8 Similar to NHPA Section 106 described above, HRS Chapter 6E-8 requires State and local agencies to evaluate the impact of their projects on historic properties. The AIS prepared to support the NHPA Section 106 consultation will also be used to support the HRS 6E-8 review. See Appendix C,Archaeological Study. Page 4-8 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment Pursuant to HRS Chapter 6E-8, HDOT will provide its preliminary assessments of potential impacts to archaeological historic properties to SHPD. The anticipated impacts on historic properties described in this EA are preliminary findings intended to fulfill the impact disclosure requirements of HRS Chapter 343. SHPD is expected to conduct its HRS Chapter 6E-8 review responsibilities separate from the requirements of HRS Chapter 343. The HRS Chapter 6E-8 review process with the SHPD has not yet been completed. Therefore, the significance evaluations, potential impacts, and treatment recommendations presented below should be considered as preliminary findings only. SHPD is expected to conduct its HRS Chapter 6E-8 review responsibilities in conjunction with their Section 106 responsibilities, separate from the requirements of HRS Chapter 343. Nonetheless, the anticipated impacts described in this EA are intended to fulfill the impact disclosure requirements of HRS Chapter 343. 4.4.2.2 Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 195D HRS Chapter 195D,the State counterpart law to the federal ESA,provides for the protection of aquatic life, wildlife, or land plant species that are indigenous to Hawaii. The following coordination was conducted with the DLNR in accordance with HRS Chapter 195D: • Letters dated March 3, 2023, (emailed on April 4, 2023) from HDOT to DLNR-DOFAW and DLNR- DAR requesting input under HRS Chapter 195D,regarding threatened and endangered species, critical habitat, and any other input or concerns regarding the Proposed Action. • HDOT received a letter dated March 31, 2023, from DLNR-DAR in response to the letters dated March 3, 2023. DLNR-DAR's response highlights the possibility of Hawaiian monk seals,endangered hawskbill turtles and green sea turtles, entering the project area. Further DLNR-DAR comments address concerns that construction activities do not alter or inhibit the natural hydrology of Hakalau Stream. • HDOT received no response from DLNR-DOFAW in response to the letter dated March 3, 2023. 4.4.2.3 Conservation District The use of Conservation District lands is regulated by HAR Title 13 Chapter 5 and HRS Chapter 183C. These rules and regulations identify land uses that may be allowed by discretionary permit as well as impose fines for violations. The Conservation District has five subzones: Protective, Limited, Resource, General, and Special. The first four subzones are arranged in a hierarchy of environmental sensitivity,ranging from the most environmentally sensitive (Protective) to least sensitive (General). The Special subzones defines a unique land use on a specific site. The Proposed Action would occur within the Limited and Resource Conservation District subzones. In an email, dated, July 27, 2023, OCCL noted that the project will require a Site Plan Approval P-8 (Structures and Land Use) and P-7 (Signs) or an emergency Conservation District Use Application due to the public health hazard created by the lead-contaminated soils. Upon completion of the HRS 343 process, HDOT will commence a Site Plan Approval application. 4.4.2.4 Coastal Zone Management Act In 1972, the U.S. Congress enacted the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) to ensure that federal actions (including activities performed by a nonfederal entity requiring federal permits,licenses, or other form of federal authorization) within or outside the coastal zone that affects any land or water use or natural resource of the coastal zone are carried out in a manner that is consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of approved state management programs. Each federal agency April 2024 Page 4-9 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment carrying out or permitting an activity subject to the Act will provide a consistency determination to the relevant state agency designated under Section 1455(d)(6) of this title at the earliest practicable time. OPSD administers HRS Chapter 205A, the state's CZM law, pursuant to the federal CZMA. Hawaii's coastal zone includes the waters from the shoreline to the makai limit of the State's jurisdiction and all lands excluding those lands designated as forest reserves. As a result, the project is within the CZM area and is subject to consistency with the objectives and policies of the Hawaii CZM Program. The purpose of HRS Chapter 205A is to "provide for the effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development of the Coastal Zone."In addition,in-water work is anticipated for this project. As a result,the USACE is being consulted for an NWP. According to an email from the CZM Program Office dated March 2, 2023, the project is exempted from an individual CZM Consistency Review triggered by the use of federal funds. However, depending on the NWP permit conditions imposed by the USACE to authorize in-water work, a CZM Consistency Review may be performed. 4.4.2.5 Special Management Area and Shoreline Setback In establishing the SMA in 1975, the Hawaii state legislature found that: "it is the state policy to preserve, protect, and where possible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone of Hawaii," and, therefore, that "special controls on developments within an area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent losses of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options, and to ensure that adequate access,by dedication or other means,to public owned or used beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves is provided." (Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 205A,Part II) County authorities administer SMA permits and related shoreline setback provisions. The authority in Hawaii County is the County Planning Department. As the project is located within the SMA, upon completion of the HRS 343 process, HDOT will commence the SMA permit process with the County. A shoreline certification by the state DLNR would be required to support the SMA permit application,which may revise shoreline parcel ownership.An SSV may also be required by the County.HDOT will coordinate with the County Planning Department regarding SMA and SSV requirements. 4.4.2.6 Hawaii Act 50, Cultural Practices Hawaii Act 50 (approved in 2000) sought to"promote and protect cultural beliefs,practices, and resources of Native Hawaiians and other ethnic groups" and requires the proposing agency/applicant under Chapter 343 HRS to consider cultural practices in a CIA. HDOT completed a CIA in compliance with this Act. See Appendix D, Cultural Impact Assessment. 4.4.2.7 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Section 402 of the CWA requires an NPDES permit for point source discharges, including storm water discharges associated with construction activities. The permit is mandatory for construction activities that disturb one or more acres and discharge storm water from the project site to waters of the U.S. The project is expected to require an NPDES permit from HDOH. Page 4-10 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 4.4.2.8 Stream Channel Alteration Permit The Hawaii CWRM requires a SCAP for any work within a stream that may "obstruct, diminish, destroy, modify, or relocate a stream channel; change the direction of flow of water in a stream channel;place any materials or structures in a stream channel; or remove any material or structure from a stream channel." The project is anticipated to require a SCAP because of the proposed in-stream work. HDOT will submit an RFD to CWRM upon completion of this HRS Chapter 343 EA process to initiate the SCAP review. 4.4.2.9 Solid Waste Management Plan The County DEM requires a solid waste management plan be completed for any project that requires the preparation of an EA. A solid waste management plan should describe any waste that may be generated by a project,how waste will be organized on site,means and location of disposal, and any impacts on County- operated waste management facilities. As stated in Chapter 1, HDOT will prepare and submit a solid waste management plan for this project to the County D EM prior to disposal of any soil or vegetation. April 2024 Page 4-11 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 5: ANTICIPATED FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT In accordance with HRS Chapter 343 and HAR 11-200.1-19, HDOT anticipates issuing a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the project. This assessment is based on an evaluation of project impacts in relation to the "Significance Criteria" specified in HAR 11-200.1-13. The Significance Criteria appear below in italics, followed by a discussion of the Proposed Action in relation to the specific criterion. The nature of the project's potential impacts and committed mitigation measures is discussed in detail in Chapter 2 of this EA. 1. Irrevocably commit a natural, cultural, or historic resource — While natural, cultural, and historic resources would be affected by the Proposed Action, the mitigation measures incorporated in the Proposed Action would minimize project impacts to acceptable levels. The Proposed Action in previously disturbed areas would remove roughly 2.4 acres of vegetation and soil to remediate lead- contaminated soils and to reconstruct the substructure of Hakalau Stream Bridge. A biological survey conducted for the project indicates that areas directly affected by the project do not contain plant species of concern or any critical habitat, and appropriate mitigation measures would be in place to avoid and minimize interactions with protected birds and animals that may enter the project area during construction. HDOT has consulted with the USFWS, NMFS, DLNR, and other interested parties, to identify avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to protect species of concern and in-stream resources. With identified mitigation measures, no adverse impacts to stream and coastal resources are anticipated. Regarding historic properties, the project requires rehabilitation of the existing Hakalau Stream Bridge,which is eligible for the NRHP.An"Adverse Effect"under Section 106 and an"effect, with agreed upon mitigation measures" under HRS Chapter 6E-8 is anticipated. However, a Section 106 MOA is being prepared to memorialize mitigation commitments for this impact in consultation with interested stakeholders, therefore, no significant impacts are excepted pursuant to HRS Chapter 343. See Section 2.6, Biological Resources, Section 2.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 2.4, Historic Resources for details. 2. Curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment—The project would not curtail beneficial uses of the environment. On the contrary,the soil remediation portion of the Proposed Action would enhance the health of the existing natural environment for all future users of the project area. The bridge repairs would extend the life of the bridge and improve its long-term resilience to extreme natural hazards would benefit all future users of Hawaii Belt Road and Hakalau Stream Bridge. Future visitors to Hakalau Beach Park and the surrounding areas would regain access to a safer park that has been remediated to remove the existing lead contamination. See Section 2.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 2.8, Parks and Recreational Resources,for details. 3. Conflicts with the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by law —The project is consistent with the environmental goals and objectives of the State,as demonstrated in Chapter 3 Consistency with Government Plans and Policies. 4. Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare, social welfare, and cultural practices of the community or State—The project would not have an adverse effect on the economic or social welfare nor the cultural practices of the community or State.Rather,the project would support the social welfare of the community by providing a more reliable transportation system and allowing Hakalau Beach Park to reopen with a healthier, safer environment after soil remediation is complete. See Section 2.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 2.15, Social and Economic Conditions, for details. April 2024 Page 5-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment 5. Have a substantial adverse effect on public health — The project would not adversely affect public health. On the contrary, the project would improve public health by removing and remediating lead-contaminated soil around the bridge. 6. Involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities — The project would not be expected to cause secondary impacts as it would not change land use or increase roadway capacity.As discussed in Section 2.16.1,Secondary Impacts,visitation at Hakalau Beach Park may return to pre-2017 levels before the park was closed to the public. However, the Proposed Action does not add park infrastructure that may induce development of the area or lead to population growth. Potential secondary effects to the terrestrial and aquatic environments from accidental introduction of sediments, contaminants, construction-related debris, or invasive species would be managed by conservation measures, such as those described in Section 2.6,Biological Resources, and Section 2.7, Surface Water Resources and Wetlands,which intend to minimize the potential for siltation, spills, and contamination. 7. Involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality — The project would not result in a substantial degradation of environmental quality, as demonstrated in Chapter 2. The project would remove existing vegetation and soils to address public health concerns related to the existing lead contamination in the area and also to allow for the replacement of the deteriorating bridge trestles. The project area is previously disturbed by sugar plantation operations,and fieldwork identified no botanical concerns. Although temporary construction duration impacts with the proposed earthwork are unavoidable as discussed in Section 2.6, Biological Resources, the soil remediation portion of the project would result in an overall improvement in environmental quality in Hakalau Valley. 8. Be individually limited hut cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions —As discussed in Section 2.16, Secondary and Cumulative Impacts, the Proposed Action is a complete,independent project and would not result in commitments for other projects, nor would it result in cumulative, considerable impacts on the environment. 9. Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare, threatened, or endangered species or its habitat— The project would not adversely affect any species of concern or associated habitat. See Section 2.6, Biological Resources. No rare, threatened, or endangered species was observed in the project area during a field survey, with the exception of one state listed Hawaiian hawk that transited the area. The Proposed Action is not likely to result in a substantial adverse effect on any plant species that is state or federally listed as threatened or endangered,a candidate species for listing,a rare native plant species, or a native plant species of concern. Appropriate mitigation measures would be in place to avoid and minimize interactions with protected birds and animals that may enter the project area during construction. HDOT has consulted with the USFWS, the NMFS, DLNR, and other interested parties, to identify appropriate avoidance,minimization, and mitigation measures to protect species of concern including native, in-stream fish. Other general avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are also incorporated into the Proposed Action and would be implemented during construction. 10. Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels—The project would not lead to any violations of state or national AAQS. The project would comply with State environmental regulations and standards. For in-water work, BMPs that have been either preapproved or coordinated with regulatory agencies will be used to minimize the potential for water quality impacts to the stream. Although there would be short-term construction noise impacts, overall, no long-term adverse noise impacts are anticipated due to the project. See Section 2.7, Surface Water Resources and Wetlands, Section 2.13,Noise, and Section 2.14,Air Quality. Page 5-2 April 2024 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment 11. Have a substantial adverse effect on or be likely to suffer damage by being located in an environmentally sensitive area such as afloodplain, tsunami zone, sea-level-rise exposure area, beach, erosion prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary,fresh water, or coastal waters—The project area is in the Coastal Zone, Conservation District, SMA, tsunami zone, and the SLR exposure area. However, it is not in a regulatory floodplain. While the Proposed Action is located on the coastline and an estuary, no coastal processes would be affected by the project, and no ecological impacts are anticipated in the stream and estuary, as discussed in Section 2.6, Biological Resources. Also as discussed in Section 2.1,Physical Geography, and Section 2.11,Natural Hazards and Climate Change, the Proposed Action would not affect the susceptibility of Hakalau Stream Bridge and the project area to possible hillside erosion and natural hazards such as tsunami, earthquakes, flooding, and coastal erosion. Instead, the purpose of the project is to strengthen the bridge, making the transportation network more resilient to such hazards. BMPs would be implemented to prevent hillside erosion and stormwater related to the construction of work trestles and access roads to conduct bridge rehabilitation work on the steep hillsides. 12. Have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and view planes, during day or night, identified in county or state plans or studies — The Proposed Action would have minimal impacts on identified views/vistas of the bridge from the beach area, as discussed in Section 2.9, Visual and Aesthetic Resources. Although the conversion of the bridge's steel bents to concrete bents are anticipated to result in an adverse change in the appearance of the historic bridge from the beach area, avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures are being evaluated as part of the historic property review process. Views of the lush vegetation in the valley would be temporarily altered during construction until the replanted vegetation is established. Input from the community and other stakeholders would continue to inform the project's final design to ensure that the appearance of the rehabilitated bridge would be consistent with its geographical, cultural, and historical context. 13. Require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases—The Proposed Action would not result in substantial energy consumption. There may be a short-term increase in energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions during the project's construction; however, when completed, the project would not change traffic patterns and would not increase traffic. No changes to traffic-related energy consumption or greenhouse gases are anticipated. April 2024 Page 5-3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment CHAPTER 6: REFERENCES CONSULTED ASM Affiliates. 2023a.An Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS)for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Project.Prepared by Amy Ketner,Lauren M.U. Kepaa, and Matthew R. Clark. (Draft dated June 2023.) ASM Affiliates. 2023b. Cultural Impact Assessment for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Project.Prepared by Kaui Lopes, Halena Kapuni-Reynolds, and Lokelani Brandt. (Draft dated June 2023.) Big Island Now. 2017. "Update: Cruisin' Hakalau Beach Park with Tita Nui."Updated February 20, 2017. Original February 17, 2017. Accessed December 2023. https://bigislandnow.com/2017/02/17/crusin-hakalau-beach-park-with-tita-nui/. ControlPoint Surveying, Inc. 2022. Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Topographic Survey. March 2022,reprojected August 2023. County of Hawaii. 2005a. General Plan. February 2005, as Amended. County of Hawaii Planning Department. Accessed November 2023.https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan- community-planning/gp/plan. County of Hawaii. 2005b. General Plan:Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map. County of Hawaii Planning Department. Accessed August 2023. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/HiStateGIS::hawaii-county-lupag/about. County of Hawaii. 2018.Hamakua Community Development Plan. Ordinance No. 2018-78. https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/home/showdocument?id=305702&t=638088491805867283. County of Hawaii.Not dated. Tax Record Search Engine and Mapper. County of Hawaii Real Property Tax Office. Accessed January 2024. https://www.hawaiipropertytax.com/. County of Hawaii; City and County of Honolulu; County of Kauai; County of Maui; Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Special Management Areas (SMA)" [Shapefile]. Published February 07, 2014 (2014a). https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/52e57c74fd43425586111060f3fd9b27_21/explore. (Downloaded June 13, 2022). County of Hawaii; City and County of Honolulu; County of Kauai; County of Maui; Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "TMK Parcels for the State of Hawaii" [Attribute Data Only]. Published November 09, 2015. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/l eb5fa03038d49cba930096ea67194e0_5/explore. (Downloaded December 16, 2023). County of Hawaii; City and County of Honolulu; County of Kauai; County of Maui; Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Tsunami Evacuation Zones" [Shapefile]. March 11, 2014 (2014b). https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/db829ab4b 17a44649eadfOdbOf7379ab_2/explore. (Downloaded August 18, 2022). County of Hawaii; Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "County Zoning - County of Hawaii" [Shapefile]. Published February 07, 2014(2014a). https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/e81bcaf8da9a4140a09aa922ef918ea4_2/explore. (Downloaded June 25, 2022). April 2024 Page 6-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Enviromnental Assessment County of Hawaii; Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Hawaii County LUPAG(Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide)" [Shapefile]. Published February 07,2014 (2014b) https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/073ebcf44e0343e5be9c765c65ff39f8_22/explore. (Downloaded September 25, 2023). Element Environmental. 2023.Hakalau Strewn Bridge Rehabilitation—Biota and Plant Tissue Bioaccumulation Assessment. Aiea, Hawaii. Esri. 2023. "Topographic" [basemap]. Scale Not Given. Accessed April 2023. https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=67372ff42cd145319639a99152b15bc3. FEMA(Federal Emergency Management Agency). Not dated. Flood Map Service Center Online Mapper. Last updated January 22, 2024. Accessed October 2023. . FEMA(Federal Emergency Management Agency); Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Coastal Flood Zones with 3.2 feet of Sea Level Rise" [Shapefile]. Published October 02, 2017. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/HiStateGIS::1-coastal-flood-zone-with-3-2-ft-sea-level-rise- hawaii-island/explore. (Downloaded November 14,2023). FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency); Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Flood Hazard Areas (DFIRM)" [Shapefile]. Published March 18,2021. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/HiStateGIS::flood-hazard-areas-dfirm-statewide/explore. (Downloaded September 21, 2023). Giambelluca, Thomas W., Qi Chen, Abby G. Frazier, Jonathan P.Price, Yi-Leng Chen,Pao-Shin Chu, Jon K. Eischeid, and Donna M. Delparte. 2013. "Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai`i."Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94, 3 (2013): 313-316. doi: https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS- D-11-00228.1 Hakalau Kuleana. 2022. Hakalau Our Home. Accessed August 2022. https://www.hakalauhome.com/ Hawaii Invasive Species Council. Not dated. Invasive Species Profiles. Accessed October 2023. https://d1nr.hawaii.gov/hisc/info/invasive-species-profiles/. Hawaii Life: Real Estate Brokers. 2020. "When Sugar Was King—The Heyday of the Hamakua Coast." Hawaii Life. January 1, 2020. Accessed January 30, 2024. https://www.hawaiilife.com/blog/sugar-king-heyday-hamakua-coast/. Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. 2017. Geospatial Data Portal. Accessed 2023. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov Hawaii Tourism Authority. Not dated. The Hawaiian Islands. Hamakua Coast. Accessed August 2022. https://www.gohawaii.com/islands/hawaii-big-island/regions/hamakua-coast HDOA(Hawaii Department of Agriculture); Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii" [Shapefile].Published February 02, 2014. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/HiStateGlS::alish/explore. (Downloaded September 21, 2023). April 2024 Page 6-2 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment HDOD (Hawaii Department of Defense). 2023. Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, Tsunami Evacuation Zones Online Mapper. Accessed October 2023. https://dod.hawaii.gov/hiema/public- resources/tsunami-evacuation-zone/ HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2017. Lead in Hawaiian Soils: Questions and Answers. Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER) Office. January 2017. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2020a. State of Hawaii Annual Summary 2020 Air Quality Data. Hawaii Department of Health Clean Air Branch. December 2021. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2020b. State of Hawaii 2020 Ambient Air Monitoring Network 5- Year Assessment. State of Hawaii, Department of Health, Emergency Management Division, Clean Air Branch. July 2020. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2021. State of Hawaii Annual Summary 2021 Air Quality Data. Hawaii Department of Health Clean Air Branch. December 2022. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2023a. State of Hawaii Annual Summary 2022 Air Quality Data. Hawaii Department of Health Clean Air Branch. September 2023. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2023b. Environmental Health Administration. EHA Connect, Remediation Sites. October 2023. https://ehaconnect.org/. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2023c. Fact Sheet: Lead-Impacted Soil Response Action for Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii. Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER) Office. Accessed November 2023. https://health.hawaii.gov/beer/files/2023/06/HakalauFactSheet20230614.pdf. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2023d. "Hakalau Stream Park."Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER) Office. Accessed November 2023. https://health.hawaii.gov/heer/hakalau-stream-park. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2023e. "Hawaii Department of Health requests public comments on soil remediation plan for lead contamination near Hakalau Stream Bridge and within Hakalau Beach Park."Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER) Office. June 14, 2023. Accessed November 2023. https://health.hawaii.gov/heer/files/2023/06/HakalauBeachParkPublcNotice20230614. HDOH (Hawaii Department of Health). 2023f. Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (HEER)2023. iHEER Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response, Environmental Health Portal. Accessed November 2023. https://eha-cloud.doh.hawaii.gov/iheer#!/site/2285/details/view HDOH (Hawaii, Department of Health). 2022. 2022 State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report: Integrated Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Congress;Pursuant to Chapter 303(d) and Chapter 305(d), Clean Water Act(P.L. 97-117). February 14, 2022. Accessed November 2023. https://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/files/2022/02/IR- 2022-public-comment-update.pdf. HDOT (Hawaii Department of Transportation). 2003. Bike Plan Hawaii: A State of Hawaii Master Plan. Highways Division. Accessed December 2023. April 2024 Page 6-3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment https://highways.hidot.hawaii.gov/stories/s/Bicycle-Planning/v4zn-nbn4#bike-plan- hawai%CA%BBi-2003 HDOT (Hawaii Department of Transportation). October 2021. Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual HDOT (Hawaii Department of Transportation). 2014a.Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawaii. Highways Division. Accessed December 2023. https://hidot.hawaii.gov/highways/tiles/2014/09/Regional-Federal-Aid-Highways-203 5- Transportation-Plan-for-the-District-of-Hawaii Yong1.pdf HDOT (Hawaii Department of Transportation). 2014b. Statewide Federal-Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plan. Highways Division. Accessed December 2023. https://hidot.hawaii.gov/highways/files/2014/09/Statewide-Federal-Aid-Highways-203 5- Transportation-P lan_Yong.pdf HDOT (Hawaii Department of Transportation). 2022. Draft Hawaii Statewide Transportation Plan. November 2022. Accessed March 2024. https://hidot.hawaii.gov/administration/files/2022/12/HawaiiStatewideTransPlan_Draft_compress ed.pdf HDOT (Hawaii Department of Transportation) 2005. Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction, Section 209 Temporary Water pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control. https://hidot.hawaii.gov/highways/files/2013/01/209AWater Pollution Dust and Erosion Co ntrol Print.pdf Hibbard, Don. 2009. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form for"Hakalau Plantation Manager's House."May 12, 2009. Accessed October 2023. https://historichawaii.org/2014/02/14/129-2301-old-mamalahoa-highway-hakalau-plantation- managers-house Historic Hawaii Foundation. 2014. Hakalau Stream Bridge. February 14, 2014. https://historichawaii.org/2014/02/14/hakalau-stream-bridge/. HTH (H.T. Harvey&Associates). 2023a.Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Biological Survey Report. March 2024. HTH (H.T. Harvey&Associates). 2023b.Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Wetland Delineation Technical Report. March 2024. KPC (Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC). 2023a.Remedial Alternatives Analysis Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii.Prepared for Hawaii Department of Transportation and KSF Inc. May 2023. KPC (Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC). 2023b.Response Action Memorandum for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii.Prepared for Hawaii Department of Transportation and KSF Inc. October 2023. April 2024 Page 6-4 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment KSF Inc. 2023. Preliminary Structural Engineering Drawings. Honolulu, Hawaii. Leineweber, Spencer. National Register of Historic Places Registration Form for"Hakalau Stream Bridge."Revised 2009. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA)National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science benthic habitat mapping surveys. Accessed October 2023. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/voyager/. NMFS PIRO (National Marine Fisheries Service—Pacific Island Regional Office). 2023. Personal Communication. Email correspondence to HDOT, July 20, 2023. NPS (National Park Service). 2021. Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. Volcanoes. Last updated February 1, 2021. Accessed October 2023. https://home.nps.gov/havo/learn/nature/volcanoes.htm. Parham, James E., Glenn R. Higashi, Eko K. Lapp,Darrell G.K. Kuamo'o, Robert T.Nishimoto, Skippy Hau, J. Michael Fitzsimons, Dr. Daniel A. Polhemus, and William S. Devick. 2008a. Hakalau, Hawaii (DAR Watershed Code: 82032)in the Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources. State of Hawaii, Division of Aquatic Resources, Department of Land and Natural Sources. Accessed December 2023. https://hawaiiwatershedatlas.com/ha_hilo.html. Parham, James E., Glenn R. Higashi, Eko K. Lapp,Darrell G.K. Kuamo'o, Robert T.Nishimoto, Skippy Hau, J. Michael Fitzsimons, Dr. Daniel A.Polhemus, and William S. Devick. 2008b. Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources. State of Hawaii, Division of Aquatic Resources, Department of Land and Natural Sources. Accessed March 2024. https://hawaiiwatershedatlas.com/. Plant Pono. 2024. Plant Pono Website. Accessed March 2024. https://plantpono.org/. State of Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission. 2021. State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer. Version 1.12.Prepared by the Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System(PacIOOS) for the University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program and the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands. Accessed October 2023. http://hawaiisealevelriseviewer.org. State of Hawaii, DLNR(Department of Land and Natural Resources), CWRM (Commission on Water Resource Management); DLNR(Department of Land and Natural Resources), DAR(Division of Aquatic Resources); USGS (United States Geological Survey); Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Streams" [Shapefile]. Published April 09, 2014. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/HiStateGIS::streams/explore. (Downloaded August 16, 2022). State of Hawaii, DLNR(Department of Land and Natural Resources), CWRM (Commission on Water Resource Management); NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service); Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Watersheds" [Shapefile]. Published April 09, 2014. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/cfe 1 f5708d944a15ada695fc 18f423 a0_8/explore. (Downloaded September 20, 2023). State of Hawaii, DLNR(Department of Land and Natural Resources), DOFAW(Division of Forestry and Wildlife). State Wildlife Action Plan(SWAP) Species Fact Sheets. Accessed November 2023. https://d1nr.hawaii.gov/wildlife/hswap/fact-sheets/ April 2024 Page 6-5 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation. Asset and Hazard Assessment Online Mapper. Accessed October 2023. https://hidot.hawaii.gov/resilience.State of Hawaii, Land Use Commission. State Land Use District Boundary Maps. Accessed October 2023. https://luc.hawaii.gov/ State of Hawaii, Land Use Commission; Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "State Land Use Districts" [Shapefile]. Published February 07,2014. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/HiStateGIS::state- land-use-districts/explore. (Downloaded May 17, 2023). State of Hawaii. 1990.A Preliminary Appraisal of Hawaii's Stream Resources.A Cooperative project. State of Hawaii Commission on Water Resource Management and the National Park Service Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance Program. Prepared by the Hawaii Cooperative Park Service Unit; the Western Region Natural Resources and Research Division and the National Park Service. Report R84. December 1990. https://files.hawaii.gov/d1nr/cwrm/publishedreports/R84_HSA.pdf State of Hawaii. 2018. Hawaii State Plan Update. Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. March 2018.https://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/op/spb/Hawaii_State Plan Update.pdf State of Hawaii. 2021. Hawaii 2050 Sustainability Plan: Charting a Course for the Decade of Action (2020—2030). Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. June 2021. https://hawaii2050.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FINAL-Hawaii-2050-Sustainability- Plan-web-1.pdf State of Hawaii. November 1997. Office of Environmental Quality Control. Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts Adopted by the Environmental Council, State of Hawaii. State of Hawaii. 2022.Various Maps. Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. Accessed August 2022. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/various-maps/ United States Census Bureau. DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates. Accessed August 2022. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ United States Census Bureau. P1: Total Population. Accessed August 2022. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ United States Census Bureau. S1901: Income in the Past 12 Months (In 202 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars). Accessed August 2022. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/ USDA(United States Department of Agriculture),NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). "Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database for Island of Hawaii Area, Hawaii" [Shapefile]. Published June 08, 2020. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. (Downloaded September 23, 2022). United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS) Soil Survey of Islands of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. 2019. United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA). How's My Waterway?, Waterbody Report: Hakalau(Assessment Unit ID: HI8-2-32). Accessed August 2022.https://mywaterway.epa.gov/ April 2024 Page 6-6 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Draft Environmental Assessment University of California,Agriculture and Natural Resources. SoilWeb. Accessed August 2020. https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/gmap/ University of Hawaii System News. "Native waterfall-climbing fish threatened by climate change, human activity." October 27, 2023. Accessed November 2023. https://www.hawaii.edu/news/2023/10/27/native-waterfall-climbing-fish-threatened-by-climate- change-human-activity/ USDOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). April 2016.An Integrated Storm water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii, by the Federal Highway Administration and Hawaii Departmment of Transportation. Practitioners Guide. USDOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2006. Construction Noise Handbook. FHWA-HEP-06-015. USDOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). December 2018. The Stormwater Practitioners Guide. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2023a. IPaC official species list for"Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation."Project Code: 2023-0014325. July 21,2023. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). "Wetlands" [Shapefile]. Published May 01, 2018. https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. (Downloaded May 31, 2023). USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2022. National Water Information System: Web Interface. Hydrological Unit 20010000. Accessed August 2022. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/inventory/ USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2017. Hawaii Volcano Observatory. About Earthquakes in Hawaii. https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/observatories/hvo/about earthquakes.html USGS (United States Geological Survey); Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. "Coastline" [Shapefile]. Published September 05, 2013. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/045b 1 d5147634e23 80566668e04094c6_3/explore. (Downloaded 2023). April 2024 Page 6-7 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX A EARLY CONSULTATION, REGULATORY COORDINATION AND CORRESPONDENCE, AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Appendix A-1 Early Consultation DAVID Y.IGE �•r JADE T.BUTAY GOVERNOR c* �P eg .yr DIRECTOR {{ A Deputy Directors HIGHWAY DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 688A } ROSS M.HIGASHI BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 EDUARDO P.MANGLALLAN CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 • DAVID J.RODRIGUEZ ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 EDWIN H.SNIFFEN HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD HWY-DS 2.9901 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 November 25, 2022 VIA EMAIL: Email address Addressee Address 1 Address 2 City, State Zip Dear Addressee Subject: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 Scoping and Pre-Assessment Consultation Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau, Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii Project No. BR-019-2(075) The Hawaii Department of Transportation, Highways Division(HDOT) in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is proposing the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project, located along Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19)near Hilo on the Island of Hawaii. HDOT is preparing an Environmental Assessment(EA) in compliance with HRS Chapter 343, Hawaii's environmental impact statement law,to evaluate and disclose the project's potential environmental impacts and identify any potential permitting requirements. At this time, we are seeking input on the project, as well as information related to any environmental, social, or economic concerns related to the project or project area. Please refer to the enclosed project location map. b and must also comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. FHWA anticipates preparation of a Categorical Exclusion in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 771.117 of Title 23 (23 CFR 771.117). Project Overview HDOT is proposing this project to bring the bridge into compliance with current safety standards, facilitate safe park use and access, as well as to allow for continued use of this vital transportation link. This project proposes the following improvements: • Remove or remediate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; • Rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and • Upgrade the bridge railings. Addressee HWY-DS 2.9901 November 25, 2022 Page 2 Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park. Although the lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, remediation is needed for the surrounding areas beneath the bridge. Remediation may involve removal or encapsulation of lead contaminated soils or implementation of controls to prevent access to lead contaminated areas. Soil removal activities could disturb up to 24 inches of vegetation and topsoil. A combination of these solutions may be incorporated as an overall solution. The bridge's substructure rehabilitation would be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents (similar to Kolekole Bridge, another historic steel trestle bridge on the Hamakua Coast that has been previously reconstructed with concrete bents). Replacing the steel bents with concrete bents would allow the superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs. The concrete bents would be installed using drilled shafts up to six feet in diameter. Refer to the enclosed figures for an illustration of a typical tower and bent at Hakalau Stream Bridge and a sketch of the proposed design. Bridge railings would be upgraded to meet current safety standards. During construction, a temporary trestle bridge may be used to support the drill rig for the drilled shafts. Best Management Practices will be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. HDOT is reaching out to you as well as other City, State, federal agencies, and the surrounding community to gather project input. We are interested in any information you may have related to the project, including any design concerns, as well as any environmental or social concerns within the project area. Also, we would like to know if you have any recent or upcoming projects planned in the area, or if there are any there are any specific permitting issues or considerations that you would like to bring to our attention. We would appreciate receiving such information in writing within thirty(30) days of the date of this letter. The information will assist us in preparing the Draft EA. If you have any questions or concerns,please contact our Project Manager, Ms. Holly Yuen, at (808) 692-7548, Technical Design Services Section,Design Branch, Highways Division or by email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. The project team looks forward to working with you, and greatly appreciates your participation. Sincerely, /7"7- -"'""61e' HENRY KENNEDY Acting Engineering Program Manager Design Branch, Highways Division Enclosures Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Appendix A-2 Regulatory Coordination and Correspondence Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Section 106 DAVID Y.IGE , NF JADE T.BUTAY GOVERNOR ,,-k. ':-;;;a1, t DIRECTOR -wr t t F e Deputy Directors�iq •tats ' ROSS M.HIGASHI HIGHWAY DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 686A - y+ EDUARDO P.MANGLALLAN BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 + CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 ?,, "�-, �.+• EDWIN H.SNIFFEN ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A „_ HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HWY-DS 2.8083 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 May 10, 2022 VIA HAWAII CULTURAL RESOURCE INFORMATION SYSTEM TO: SUZANNE D. CASE, CHAIRPERSON STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ATTN: ALAN S. DOWNER, Ph.D. ADMINISTRATOR AND DEPUTY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION FROM: KAREN CHUN tt r,ki �- ENGINEERING PROGRAM MANAGER DESIGN BRANCH, HIGHWAYS DIVISION SUBJECT: NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT (NHPA) SECTION 106 INITIATION, REQUEST FOR CONTACT INFORMATION AND AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE) CONCURRENCE HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE REHABILITATION HAKALAU AHUPUAA, HILO MOKU, HAWAII ISLAND FEDERAL-AID PROJECT NO. BR-019-2(075) TAX MAP KEYS (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, 999; (3) 2-9- 002:023, 025, 039, 064, 080, 888, 999; AND (3) 2-9-006:021 On behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), The State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation (HDOT) is initiating consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)under Section 106 of the NHPA of 1966, as amended (2006), for the subject bridge rehabilitation project. In addition, HDOT seeks information that SHPO may have on Native Hawaiian organizations (NHO) and potential consulting parties. Lastly, HDOT requests SHPO's concurrence on the proposed APE,pursuant to Section 106 of the NHPA and Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 800.4(a)(1). This proposed federally funded State project is considered a federal action and undertaking, as defined by 36 CFR Part 800.16(y). Effective May 1, 2016, FHWA issued a Delegation of Authority authorizing the HDOT and local public agencies to conduct NHPA Section 106 consultations with SHPO, NHO, and qualified consulting parties per 36 CFR Part 800.2(c)(4). SUZANNE D. CASE, CHAIRPERSON HWY-DS 2.8083 May 10, 2022 Page 2 The FHWA will remain responsible for all findings and determinations charged to the agency during the Section 106 process. Overview of the Undertaking The proposed bridge work can be divided into 3 major activities: 1)remove,remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3) upgrade bridge railings. Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park(see attached figure). Areas shown in red in the figure will be capped with a concrete layer about 8 to 12 inches in thickness. Prior to placing the concrete cap, all the vegetation will be removed. Approximately 10 to 14 inches of the topsoil will be disturbed. Other marked areas, where lead levels are lower, the soil will be stabilized and left in place. The bridge's substructure rehabilitation will be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents (similar to Kolekole Bridge, another historic steel trestle bridge on the Hamakua Coast that has been previously reconstructed with concrete bents). Concrete bents will replace steel because the steel rivet technology used to initially construct the bridge no longer exists. By replacing the steel bents with concrete bents, the substructure will be reconstructed, but will allow the superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs. Bridge railings will be upgraded to meet current safety standards. Please refer to the figures for an illustration of a typical tower and bent at Hakalau Stream Bridge and a sketch of the proposed design. The concrete bents will be installed using six-foot diameter drilled shafts. A temporary trestle bridge may be used to support the drill rig. The construction duration will be no longer than two years. Primary access to perform this work will be from the access road in the park. There should only be limited traffic impacts to bridge users, as bent replacement can occur incrementally to allow for continued use of the bridge. APE Hakalau Stream Bridge carries Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19) over Hakalau Stream at Milepost 15.3 on the island of Hawaii. The APE (see attached figure) includes locations where construction activities would occur, staging and storage areas, and access. It includes the construction limits and the areas identified for remediation. The APE extends to both ends of the bridge, inland of the bridge, and past the mouth of the stream on the Hilo side of the stream. The APE is approximately 15 acres while the active construction area is approximately 7 acres. Consultations In addition to consulting with SHPO, consultations with NHO currently listed on the United States Department of Interior, Office of Native Hawaiian Relations' NHO List, with an applicable SUZANNE D. CASE, CHAIRPERSON HWY-DS 2.8083 May 10, 2022 Page 3 interest in the APE, has been undertaken at the same time as our consultation with your agency. The following agencies, organizations, individuals are being contacted by formal letter: • State of Hawaii, Department of Land and • Kamehameha Schools Natural Resources (DLNR), SHPD • Kanu 0 Ka Aina Learning Ohana • State of Hawaii, DLNR, SHPD, • Koolau Foundation Hawaii Island Burial Council • Kuaaina Ulu Auamo • State of Hawaii, DLNR, Aha Moku • Kuloloia Lineage—I Ke Kaio Kuloloia Advisory Committee •Na Koa Ikaika Ka Lahui Hawaii • State of Hawaii, Department of Hawaiian •Na Kuauhau 0 Kahiwakaneikopolei Home Lands •Na Kupuna Moku 0 Keawe • State of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian •Nanakuli Housing Corporation Affairs •Nekaifes Ohana • Hawaii County Cultural Resources • Ohana Keaweamahi Commission • Order of Kamehameha I • Association of Hawaiian Civic Clubs • Partners in Development Foundation • Association of Hawaiian Homestead Lands •Paukukalo Hawaiian Homes Community • Au Puni 0 Hawaii Association • Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement • Royal Hawaiian Academy of Traditional • Friends of lolani Palace Arts • George K. Cypher Ohana • The I Mua Group • Hawaiian Civic Club of Hilo • The Makua Group • Hawaiian Community Assets, Inc. • The Mary Kawena Pukui Cultural • Historic Hawaii Foundation Preservation Society • Hui Huliau Inc. The Section 106 notice/advertisement will also be included in The Hawaii Tribune Herald. NHO and Native Hawaiian descendants with ancestral, lineal or cultural ties to cultural and/or historical property knowledge of and/or concerns for, and cultural or religious attachment to the proposed APE will be asked to provide a response within 30 days of notification. In addition, other individuals and organizations with demonstrated legal, economic, or historic preservation interest will also be asked to respond to the Section 106 notice/advertisement. Upon receipt of responses to the initial consultation, additional efforts such as meetings, site visits and conference calls will be conducted as necessary to address the Section 106 requirements. Request for Information Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.3(f) in consultation with SHPO, we are interested if your agency is acquainted with any NHO or Native Hawaiian descendants with ancestral, lineal or cultural ties to cultural and/or historic property knowledge of and/or concerns for, and cultural or religious attachment to the proposed project area, we would appreciate receiving their names and contact information within the 30 days of notification. SUZANNE D. CASE, CHAIRPERSON HWY-DS 2.8083 May 10, 2022 Page 4 Per 36 CFR Section 800.2(a)(4)(c)(5), we request the names of individuals and organizations who have demonstrated their legal, economic, and historic preservation interest to SHPO on the proposed subject undertaking. As the office of record for this undertaking, we also request SHPO provide us with a copy of the correspondence initiated by interested parties who has approached SHPO to request consulting party status for this undertaking. In addition to providing us with information on NHO, we ask for your concurrence on the proposed APE. We would appreciate all responses in writing within 30 days from date of receipt to Ms. Holly Yuen, the HDOT Project Manager, Technical Design Services Section, Design Branch, Highways Division at (808) 692-7548 or by email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. Attachments Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Location Map hJ W E Wr''-E t p i4o4t , Vii, e Photo of Hakalau Bridge and surrounding area from 2021 Inspection Report OM EIS . , � ► wis 1114.744 '.l • _,A1p141 111;4444M View of Bridge from near ocean shore r llt J, �` ". 0 r I iii ff i..,$ ,u rl r " , , Nit kg , or lig ,� 7y(ua ,,,i t iti " 1. ii/ I ,....4 1 ;,....„kill. 04 5: : i. Close up of bents showing steel towers and concrete pedestals I I . .,. :IV' ' .' ' Adf ' e af ,.._,, ,,, _ , , , „.., .. . „, J . t .. P. [N A i rI R M 77 View underneath the bridge -4,,,, „.„Trz 1 4 4 "° *.4 i i • ' �+' • E_r .. r ,4 ,' 1 � � `n .p c J 16 YO 4 ✓r � ,� _ 1 r. * a CST .i ' wi `�+ N. _ Q� 7 7 yr Ln CO �O fir, E rn Ry co .� - x V1 a B E -5 +(R cCO • " ti � �`�� F• o n x .fin ;�i m .A s � S " Eo w S o w Q O _rs ry 6 " w ( r° 7 N 1 * r A Z Fr.l G F," r• iti ni f 11 �*. fes o A• M� \' , v r "' - , r' �. M ,� 4 ,_ 1 rte ._ 1�� 1Y { CM'S y 1 b�F r a M� ,,r o . w.* a .ate a ' .„ • ` " " ,, , , " , � � - n _ L� e 5, x. " / Y F �-y ny 4 ,_, „l lJ LF �y ,,,,,.1,4,,,,0 ,,,,,,,,,, , A\ ' ! 0 xL la c j imp, " ,"4' e $. '3s �� � Cyt r• V!' ;V r r, 1 r.+ mow, PN �.. r= w.: r Bit 6 !lit ter• _ , so 7 ,y 1 f y f. 4 r 1. 4 • ' Y�� r F� �" .. " x" , m � „ i w . M • " k If S.0; � _ wry , i r yM �-f mil W N o , c, 2 w Qz ILQ "' 1 mo' `,N 0 1.- m =Xov Ill k 0 nQQWX O // z Okc(¢ W ° J "c i1z� mg= in p ¢tL `q-c- o ,°--' F /� oY 1 QQ Z ¢ N LL „9-,9 'Mil „9-,9 0 A m N a o 0 0 o oN 0-6 °-6 111111 1 1 1 1 1 1 iI iI I INI 1Q1 1 z 00? ? 091 y z 0 A A Z•0N•400V I • -.--11-6\: nad A 0'0N A0OV I-, -1-Wo o a OA E/'0N 1�a8 I I 1 El'0N lU 9 9 a I I 0Z! ''''-v r' iI 1r , A 01'0N 4u013 r J I I L 7 001 01 roN,<uee J „0-,99 iV III I.. 09 N �` „0-,6b1 > ~v i_ 1 I I ISE_0z o I!IV Web I[I I I IL U VN We8 0 IIII p A Ol roN Web I,I I I... '''''''@ 01'011 Web 0 '� ii E - 2, „0-,891 +I_I't N f m 0 6'ON 4ue8 - -PLI 111 1� 0 6 roN lua8 h ° :a!: A 9 tib Web IT 9 roN1ue9 E 1 11 1 00 4s r „0,111 o -/�/y v 0 ` 1111 ' neleyey O `o o o d V —— m "0-,111 €3 '-- A L 911 Web �`f�.I; IIJ� I I -TIT-4—:.Z Q v1 L'0N lus8 ° 1! L-i o ��ew I. I I�I b J Q J `° o je46 4� o (n o �A 9 9N Wa8 �`I—'I IL JI I1 - 8'11 9'0N 4U0B L. IIS -- TNI-1l--- 8 g ` „0-,1L1 '� o — o ' ' o I b WA b 0 5 roN Wee 1 1 1 1 1 8 b O roN Web 11!g st-A b Vf Wee i}I�LLLJ - b A vN 4/8 m „0-,1L1 N4614 ---J JS_- b n1 r. I�}..0�_I 1 1-I I �j „0-,091 ' a ':I - OZ a2i „'c 3 ,,,,_.VA E rob 4�e8 1 I I I I i.. Ob -c" E roN 4�e8 F}s�' II'� { 09 p A 0'o8 We8 ,.7 08 Z qN 1�8 '.I:' . .i I l o l`TM'° 1 11 o .'- „0-,SZI > Is- _ Ned 4rr T% OZ!al r•L- 7\„0-,E17 VA r C�T , a �. d t A /'0N 1�e8 Ob! 4 roN 4uag I� z V v 081 v I oiti(> a 1 VN 4n9V 1 bN'O/ $ 00? ei- cco ,1111 01 IIII k ..I.I I.,la o 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 pp 0 0 N ,,C, 1I •7 N o 2 1I N O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (W>6021'1Z-60-Z1 31411 EOL MO/313 0014 10145-1101\51X391MHd30103 4Z-0l-Zl\003 ll,\H10&03d-tldh 1fP5 09 HIS MM1MHi2I'490-oo\ONoONO ON\2 'WON 0/1111 0 AM AHI. tl M®RL ]009ALOM cc N W E d Ct o - c ODk O a N Q QEk I--.Wk W COC a '' tiv) g= zI. Q¢ Z 3L.a z 3 m 2v~i� 2 w Q t Q x Q N LL = I I I__ b / N / I ro O a d o i` ro ( (I , 1 m U CO .X 4 0 o d C 4 m W U U Imo' U� m ro cn o N m 4 O U O h (N>WC'12-60-Z1 (ML(Old 0M0313 0114 ZOLOS-8S14SIN39 Ter11 3103 LZ-0l-Zl\OOl ll,\H100-Z3d-d df0]S dl NLS Mnomm-r '090-OZ\ONooNO 00\2 amm axiom • yam. <e Ail xe grey 1008ALON w _ s .. • y ;' ,r m a o . - ,, " CO ae _ ami F a ' c 1r -6! �1 p C6 tz cat p a,rj , U Cl) O COrr` 44 w :.�., rpt '°`e•, 2 E 1 . 1. // / 03 • O Ca o •N • l , • J ,]r! 7b r. M. • - m .- �I .',?/!.+•''' , n .+;,..;...,:' 5 n= wu 8r t .. ^r'S� 4 1.'. S r • '. !I d,/04 rr _ r 1 ,,',.',•:,,,''';'(''..;''.1 1 . C r;' r, •: rb c. ! 1, : • '• t�rs k fG 1v, d :',4.-r•• - Y I ils 4":'.1:•:.,,,:.--.1' �, "m •,. .,,...:,r.,...,.. :••.,,,'s ,,, w a j a' 5.4� i r 0, >4.i I. . J Si 1 .Iq ' - ! • ..jet Q ofCt ...,.:',--,7 r•..: 'tiY 5 y r' W o a_ 0 kq` d Q a x3.2 p r' M =O Co Z O a , oQ 3 Q Q aQJ Q Z 54s .yrs 1 . L �t tea '7 .� r -4:it aro 0r�J z--ill DAVID Y.IGE �� o r „, . JADE T.BUTAY • GOVERNOR 4• —,vso`, DIRECTOR Deputy Directors HIGHWAY DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 688A * ) I ROSS M.HIGASHI BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 \ � / EDUARDO P.MANGLALLAN CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 '. ..�_..�' EDWIN H.SNIFFEN ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HWY-DS 2.8838 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 August 9, 2022 VIA EMAIL: planning@hawaiicounty.gov Ms. Geraldine Bell, Chair Cultural Resources Commission Planning Department- County of Hawaii Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Ms. Bell: Subject: National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Consultation Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau Ahupuaa, Hilo Moku, Hawaii Island Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Tax Map Keys: (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, 999; (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 064, 080, 888, 999; and (3) 2-9-006:021 On behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation (HDOT) would like to invite you to participate in the consultation for the subject bridge rehabilitation project. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (amended 2006) has been initiated with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for the subject project. The proposed federally funded State project is considered a federal action and undertaking, as defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 800.16(y). Effective May 1, 2016, FHWA issued a Delegation of Authority authorizing HDOT and local public agencies to conduct NHPA Section 106 consultations with the SHPO,Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHO), and other consulting parties per 36 CFR, Section 800.2 (c) (4). The FHWA will remain responsible for all findings and determinations charged to the agency during the Section 106 process. Overview of the Undertaking The proposed bridge work can be divided into three (3) major activities: 1)remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3)upgrade bridge railings. Ms. Geraldine Bell, Chair HWY-DS 2.8838 August 9, 2022 Page 2 Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park. Where high levels of lead contamination extend to greater depths, remediation could involve capping the contaminated soil with a concrete layer about 8 to 12 inches thick. The placement of the concrete cap will involve removal of all vegetation and disturbance of approximately 10 to 14 inches of topsoil. Where lead levels are lower or present in high concentrations only at shallower depths, the soil may be removed and disposed of at a permitted facility or stabilized and left in place. The bridge's substructure rehabilitation will be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents, similar to the rehabilitation of Kolekole Bridge, another historic steel trestle bridge on the Hamakua Coast that has been previously reconstructed with concrete bents. Concrete bents will replace steel because the steel rivet technology used to construct the bridge initially no longer exists. By replacing the steel bents with concrete bents, the substructure will be reconstructed but will allow the superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs. The concrete bents will be installed using six-foot diameter drilled shafts. A temporary trestle bridge may be used to support the drill rig. Please refer to the figures for an illustration of a typical tower and bent at Hakalau Stream Bridge as well as a sketch of the proposed design. The bridge will not be widened,but the bridge railings will be upgraded to meet current safety standards. The construction duration will be no longer than two (2) years. Primary access to perform this work will be from the privately owned access roads along the stream bank. There should only be limited traffic impacts to bridge users, as bent replacement can occur incrementally to allow for continued use of the bridge. Lane closures will be required for work on the bridge railings. Consultations Consulting parties during the Section 106 process include the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, SHPO, NHO, and if applicable, local governments and applicants for federal assistance,permits, licenses and other approvals. NHO and/or Hawaiian Descendants NHO and Native Hawaiian descendants with ancestral, lineal or cultural ties to, cultural and/or historical property knowledge of and/or concerns for, and cultural or religious attachment to the proposed Area of Potential Effect(APE) are asked to provide a response to this letter within thirty(30) days of notification. Other Individuals and Organizations Individuals and organizations with legal, economic, or historic preservation interest are requested to respond within thirty(30) days of notification to demonstrate your interest in the proposed undertaking and provide intent to participate in the Section 106 process. Your participation is subject to FHWA approval. Ms. Geraldine Bell, Chair HWY-DS 2.8838 August 9, 2022 Page 3 Request for Comment on the APE We invite you to comment on the proposed APE. Hakalau Stream Bridge carries Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19) over Hakalau Stream at Milepost 15.3 on the island of Hawaii. The APE (see attached figure)includes locations where construction activities would occur, staging and storage areas, and access. It includes the construction limits and the areas identified for remediation. The APE extends to both ends of the bridge, inland of the bridge, and past the mouth of the stream on the Hilo side of the stream. The APE is approximately 15 acres. Identification of Historic Properties within the APE We welcome any information you may have on historical and cultural sites that have been recorded or which you may have knowledge of within the proposed APE. In addition, if you are acquainted with any persons or organization that is knowledgeable about the proposed APE, or any Native Hawaiian descendants with ancestral, lineal or cultural ties to cultural and/or historical property knowledge of and/or concerns for, and cultural or religious attachment to the proposed project area, we would appreciate receiving their names and contact information within thirty(30) days of notification. Conclusion On behalf of FHWA, HDOT by way of this letter is notifying you of the proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project. Should you want to participate in the Section 106 process, we request your written intent. In addition,please include your comments on the proposed APE. We also request any information you may have on the historic and cultural sites that have been recorded within the APE or any other historic or cultural sites nearby about which you may have knowledge. Lastly, should you know of any persons or organizations who may have cultural affiliations to the project area, we would appreciate receiving their names and contact information. We would appreciate all responses in writing within thirty(30) days from date of receipt to Ms. Holly Yuen, HDOT Project Manager, Technical Design Services Section, Design Branch, Highways Division by email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. If you have any questions, please call Ms. Yuen at (808) 692-7548. Sincerely, For KAREN CHUN Engineering Program Manager Design Branch, Highways Division Enclosures Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Location Map W tin._ 717 rw r _ Photo of Hakalau Bridge and surrounding area from 2021 Inspection Report 1 ' f II ifffift 7417411 .10411•11110. MIMEO k, SIPII ITSM lit 01101111111g. View of Bridge from near ocean shore i , 4 IN . ii„ i2.141: ‘-'4,.. i it , IN_ . t T' ; '''4 .•, ) . E yid' 7 >"t 9 Y7 `I • p4 ' v... pYin.. 1„ '"1.' t�,r'"`i - 7 Mk l'O �E, s + fib, s 1E1114 '" W Pin , N d Close up of bents showing steel towers and concrete pedestals . \ J Y '" e, 1 - y� AL..... o' \it "A .. f , ,1 t r )2i '' 7 i 7 ' — , A. (4' ‘14 i 4 1;111‘,..„ C� 1 e _ S tib' ... . .,. __ .u. ex Phi Qr9 '' View underneath the bridge o „ ' �Q 1 w N 2a,6 iio =ggLQ W2k a6^' ?fili Q2 • L,L' t' "A I.... et: *''s L7, `x 3 g 99 IIMI 9,9 „O,6 11111 „0,6 A N m Co N 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 PL § 000 iLrn m ti I 081 11:.::.�:.:r�;::. z° m /<'.:.:,091 °J� I ,o o .,N J ad n,:::. J t r oad o oN av 0 o mss, 0 9 ot£l ON Juag,1, V-11-11p-e- K £1 ON Auag a t 0 9 1 ....,.:.'Ozl ,Ir�,� . t m� is- Zi oN Juag L _ L area" 001 K d!"oN Auag w' o fir.. i s 09 1 id 009 0 0,89 CO 0;6br/ III ob 11"oN Jue9 -'-'-d"-HI,Th-A,l r1 I I ISI X !!'oN Auo9 `111 `3 y oK Ol 'oN,,,,9r�,,, �L... o,m O!'oN Auag -92w . . �E jj m o � m 0;891 �, m `v -Mill ROI r, m m f".. 0 T.ti 6"oN Jua9 N 6 bN duag '- 'or o 11 o m QO aN t36 goN Juag - '� E i J: N g ox duag '� It' e _ meed _ /4� „0-dLi _ Q IOI neleveH AA in 0 111'1-1I cp.t a 0,0 > j o ,,_—__-171111-1-1_,_,___I J ' .LI-4� . U 'o c 3 L'uN Jua9 , Z Q(n _X Z'oN Aloe m CD JaAem ai,, o Vl cl- e�u� v 9'oN Juag .c4TLJFI-� -���III.�I4'a"._9 c?" N X 9'oN Auo9 LL 'L. If �� a� 0,l 01 N ro i t O,1LL S'oN Juag I � L o, H-LOG �! Cr E $E O I o b.ON,090—a 1—,.--- ----4- 41--- J _peg w — •_ yew -1. -�"f W, O.ILL o ae(emo i i OE 0,E91 = o E'oN Juag „4' 1 1 I III -_T.,: . .a X £ 0 9 AuaB a �}, J '09 z'oN Juag -e-rx li'..I J-1-`k'g-8-'. O9 �A z'oN Juag ', '� o o i ` „0-,SZI o N mm 14'IlII II_—...011 1 r� � r„0;Eby �i � 10,1 oN Jaag d F� Ot! V ,Ar ruag ,0 i7 o`a g �d m II1111 �V `L_ E'°:' §-g OU my l'aN Ana'd ...081 l'oN An9v — o �, OOZ i i x,'OHO ti o� 0 0 oo o 0 171717 ii to c, o 0 0 (rra sre,,,.90 .1 rola a,13.3 Ns,e l0 OS sN3a 3,100 zz.90Aovo ioAadoo Zia—aaa anoas ae ars fwd....azo ado oovoaooao ooA.z 3rva oamada ax UIQ _qot WW�W a k_fl i 1 N wO tix ' 21N Q §? O ' _ N vk pp k o w L m aw 3 QT 2,7 ,)3 LL '' mOm ti i a a m miupP_�h a a Q c)k_ — � .rte` ISI �a j ISI a� _ ___ = ! 0 -1 €— _ am-'' _�`''�____— �''r m c'-'4,__c! r, CD • \ sass ___, ___,,_,,,I. ..g..,:____2_,_ ,,,,,, —,—, ,,,,,, ' _.,_..„..::::_—:-- -' , sssas II _ _a_=_- -- 11 A _ ----11A1 - _ II IN TT, (rvd g,,,gg--go :—,a,d aMa,,,3.1c1 X0105-,SH�,dONOS siN3e MOO.-.-90\CND lovurno-z,d-ads arms as ass mc..-v,o>o-o,vomo.o oovz ,rv.Dm.. - e 'A . i , ' "� ,. U 411.,, N2:1:,., a .11' ilt: ,,,t 4 i : • ,; Q ,� 41 7. s. 11 t� o 461 = lb Wr �a J lilllifr AI 0 I iiii ' CL I " ` �.-- L 11 �� de ilit 11 1 ir< = It ` ' 441041, ' 41444' ' r i 11 41111111/ a) 4/ ,� J O 0 uhf' o "lir • o - t '. SUZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.ICE f p p CHAIRPERSON GM,EKNOK OF �-(E . ~'7 yV BOARD Of LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES HAWAII X,.P ,, 19 5 9 :"...-5,;., COMMISSION ON RATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT f t ROBERT K.MASUDA lFIRST DEPUIY ocvynd and fir` CE7'41 M.KALEO MANUEL fra r% r ,.,-,-,7-4:.r DEPUTE DIRECTOR-WAILR Q111,r4 C ` �' BOATIN(AND OCEAN RECREATION �I��i N BUREAU Of CON\LY M'CES ��1 Myf v COMMISSION VATi5N AND C O RCE MAN\D MLNT CONSERVAINON AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT STATE OF HAWAII ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE State �A DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES HISTORICPRESERVAFTON of Ha�+fd ICAl1OOLAW E ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION STATE PARKS KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD.,STE 555 KAPOLEI,HI 96707 September 14,2022 IN REPLY REFER TO: George Abcede Project No.:2022PR00590 Highway Administrator Doc No.: 2209SH07 State of Hawai`i Department of Transportation Archaeology 869 Punchbowl Street,Room 513 Architecture Honolulu,Hawai`i 96813 Email: George.Abcede@hawaii.gov Electronic Transmittal Only,No Hard Copy to Follow Dear George Abcede: SUBJECT: National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)Section 106 Review— Initiation of Consultation and Request for Concurrence with the Area of Potential Effects Hawaii Belt Road,Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Ref.No.HWY-DS 2.8083,Federal Aid Project No.BR-019-2(075) Hakalau Ahupua`a,Hilo District,Island of Hawaii TMK: (3)3-1-001:001,(3)3-1-001:002,(3)3-1-001:003, (3)3-1-001:004,(3)3-1-001:005, (3)3-1-001:006,(3)3-1-001:777,(3)3-1-001:999,(3)2-9-002:023,(3)2-9-002:025, (3)2-9-002:039,(3)2-9-002:064,(3)2-9-002:080,(3)2-9-002:888,(3)2-9-002:999,and (3)2-9-006:021 The State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) received a letter dated May 10, 2022 from the State of Hawai'i Department of Transportation (HDOT) on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to initiate the Section 106 process and to request the State Historic Preservation Officer's(SHPO's) concurrence with the Area of Potential Effects for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project on the island of Hawai`i. The SHPD received this submittal on May 6,2022(HICRIS Submission No. 2022PR00590.001). The proposed HDOT project will receive funding from the FHWA and has been determined a federal undertaking as defined in 36 CFR 800.16(y). The proposed project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. Pursuant to the Programmatic Delegation of Authority (May 2016), the FHWA has delegated Section 106 consultation to HDOT. The project is also subject to historic preservation review under Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) §6E-8. According to HDOT's letter,the proposed bridge work can be divided into 3 major activities: 1)remove,remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge, 2)rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure, and 3) upgrading the bridge railings. Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park. Areas shown in red in the figure accompanying HDOT's letter will be capped with a concrete layer about 8 to 12 inches in thickness.Prior to placing the concrete cap, all the vegetation will be removed. Approximately 10 to 14 inches of the topsoil will be disturbed. Other marked areas, where lead levels are lower, the soil will be stabilized and left in place. The bridge's substructure rehabilitation will be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents. Concrete bents will replace steel because the steel rivet technology used to initially construct the bridge no longer exists. By replacing the steel bents with concrete bents, the substructure will be reconstructed, but will allow the superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs. Bridge railings will be upgraded to meet current safety George Abcede September 14,2022 Page 2 standards. The concrete bents will be installed using six-foot diameter drilled shafts. A temporary trestle bridge may be used to support the drill rig. Primary access to perform tins work will be from the access road in the park. There should only be limited traffic impacts to bridge users,as bent replacement can occur incrementally to allow for continued use of the bridge. Hakalau Stream Bridge carries Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19) over Hakalau Stream at Milepost 15.3 on the island of Hawaii. The HDOT states the Area of Potential Effects (APE) includes locations where construction activities would occur, staging and storage areas, and access. It includes the construction limits and the areas identified for remediation. The APE extends to both ends of the bridge, inland of the bridge, and past the mouth of the stream on the Hilo side of the stream. The APE is approximately 15 acres while the active construction area is approximately 7 acres. Based on the information received, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has no objections to the APE as it is defined. In response to HDOT's request for a contact list of potential consulting parties, the SHPD recommends HDOT refer to the Native Hawaiian Organization Notification List provided by the U.S. Department of the Interior and maintained by the Office of Native Hawaiian Relations. This can be referenced online at: https://www.doi.gov/hawaiian/NHOL. Additionally, SHPD recommends expanding consultation to the National Trust for Historic Preservation by reaching Elizabeth Merritt at emerritt@savingplaces.org. HDOT has requested a copy of correspondence submitted to SHPD by interested parties who have requested consulting party status for this undertaking. To date, SHPD has only received correspondence also submitted to HDOT on September 14,2022 via email from Historic Hawaii Foundation(HHF) (Email Correspondence;Kiersten Faulkner [HHF] to Kate Ramos and Holly Yuen [HDOT]). The SHPD requests a copy of HDOT's response to HHF. The SHPD looks forward to continuing the Section 106 process for the proposed project. The SHPD requests a description of the vegetation that will be removed and the methods that will be implemented, as well as a detailed description of all proposed ground disturbance during the undertaking. Additionally, the SHPD requests more information regarding the temporary trestle bridge which may be used to support the drill rig, such as how it will be constructed,and the dimensions of any ground disturbance required. Please submit all forthcoming information and correspondence related to the subject project to SHPD via HICRIS to Project No. 2022PR00590 using the Project Supplement option. The HDOT and the FHWA are the offices of record for this undertaking. Please maintain a copy of this letter with your environmental review record for this undertaking. Please contact Stephanie Hacker, Historic Preservation Archaeologist IV, at Stephanie.Hacker@hawaii.gov or at (808)692-8046 for matters regarding archaeological resources or this letter. Aloha, Alan S. Downer,PhD Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Holly Yuen,HDOT(Holly.Yuen@hawaii.gov) Meesa Otani,FHWA(Meesa.Otani@dot.gov) HISTORI HAWAI'I FOUNDATION 680 Iwilei Road Suite 690,Honolulu HI 96817• (808) 523-2900•preservation@historichawaii.org•www.historichawaii.org September 14, 2022 Ms. Holly Yuen HDOT Project Manager Design Branch, Highways Division Hawaii Department of Transportation 601 Kamokila Boulevard Kapolei, Hawaii 96707 Via Email: holly.yuen@hawaii.gov RE: National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Consultation Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau Ahupuaa, Hilo Moku, Hawaii Island Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Tax Map Keys: (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, 999; (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 064, 080, 888, 999; and (3) 2-9-006:021 Reference: HWY- DS 2.8838 Dear Ms. Yuen: Thank you for referring the above mentioned project to Historic Hawaii Foundation (HHF) under Section 106 of the National Preservation Act (NHPA). HHF received HDOT's letter of August 9, 2022 opening consultation (received on August 9, 2022 vie email), containing the scope of work and attached exhibits. HHF accepts the invitation to participate in the consultation for the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge and efforts to avoid, minimize and mitigate adverse effects on historic properties. HHF participated in earlier emergency repair discussions in April 2021 and agreed at that time to the proposed scope of repairs subject to stated conditions of"in-kind"work (Refer HHF email August 16, 2021 to James Fu). Historic Hawaii Foundation is a statewide nonprofit organization established in 1974 to encourage the preservation of sites, buildings, structures, objects and districts that are significant to the history of Hawaii. HHF Comments to Hawai'i DOT Section 106 Consultation, re Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation September 14,2022 Page 1 of 3 HHF is a consulting party to the Federal Highway Administration and its state and local partners pursuant to the implementing regulations of the NHPA at 36 Part 800.2(c)(5) as an organization with a demonstrated interest in the undertaking and a concern for the effects on historic properties. Area of Potential Effect HHF agrees with the APE as shown in the exhibit provided in the August 9 consultation letter. Identification of Historic Properties Hakalau Bridge is one of six (6) steel trestle bridges on the Hamakua Coast which are listed on both the Hawai`i and National Registers of Historic Places. According to the Multiple Property listing document: "The Hakalau Stream Bridge is significant under Criteria A, B, and C. Criterion A is applicable for the bridge's association with the Hilo Railroad Company. Criterion B is applicable for the bridge's association with three founders of the Hilo Railroad Company. Criterion C is applicable since the bridge is a representative example of early twentieth-century engineering technology as well as a source for information about early twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction." (p. 8-384) "In 1946, the railroad lines were devastated by a tsunami. Hakalau Stream Bridge and four other bridges were retained and reconstructed when the rest of the steel trestle bridges were disassembled... In 1953, Hakalau Stream Bridge was widened for use as a highway bridge with members from the disassembled railroad bridges. The reconstruction follows the original trestle design, however bolted rather than riveted connections were utilized. A concrete deck, sidewalks and rail were added to facilitate automobile and pedestrian traffic." (p. 8-386. Emphasis added) Due to Hakalau Stream Bridge's eligibility and listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the Secretary of the Interior's (SOI) Standards for Rehabilitation provide the relevant standards: • Standard No. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. • Standard No. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and,where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary,physical, or pictorial evidence. In 2014, FHWA and HDOT issued a historic bridges inventory which describes the significance and eligibility of the Hamakua Coast's steel trestle bridges as "high preservation value." Included in the description is the proposed treatment: "The bridge's original materials must not be obscured by alterations or additions. The quality of the original workmanship must remain apparent,particularly from a technical rather than aesthetic HHF Comments to Hawai'i DOT Section 106 Consultation, re Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation September 14,2022 Page 2 of 3 standpoint,with substantial evidence of the builder's labor and skill. The bridges must retain a high degree of historic feeling and their associations must be apparent to the informed or casual observer" (p. 1-24). Historic Hawai`i Foundation Comments HHF does not agree that the replacement of the historic steel trestle bents with concrete is an appropriate treatment for this high value historic bridge. • The replacement of character-defining features would be an adverse effect. • The proposed replacement of the steel trestles is not consistent with the earlier discussions and agreements in 2021 regarding emergency repairs to several of the steel trestle bridges in advance of more "permanent repairs."The notes in the Project Information issued in November indicate that Section 106 consultation began on October 13, 2021. • The National Register nomination document for the Hakalau Bridge indicates that the reconstruction after the 1949 tsunami utilized "bolted rather than riveted connections." This is not consistent with the current proposed rehabilitation which states that concrete bents will replace the steel trestles because "the steel rivet technology used to construct the bridge initially no longer exists." Please explain. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this undertaking under the National Historic Preservation Act Section 106. Historic Hawai`i Foundation looks forward to continuing consultation to resolve the outstanding issues and avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project. Very truly yours, 146.47tUA-JaitAilivAlkd Kiersten Faulkner Executive Director HHF Comments to Hawai'i DOT Section 106 Consultation, re Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation September 14,2022 Page 3 of 3 Mitchell D.Roth �tv.oF;,' ''�'.�+,; • Geraldine Bell,Chair Mayor �1� i 1,11�'s. Natalie Kurashima,Vice Chair •' . � ���•• Matthew Clark Kilohana Hirano oF•N��� Roberta"Ku`ulei"Keakealani Kealohanuiopuna Kinney Nicole Lui County of Hawail Scott Mahoney PLANNING DEPARTMENT Aaron Spielman CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 September 28, 2022 Ms. Holly Yuen HDOT Project Manager Design Branch, Highways Division Hawai'i Department of Transportation 601 Kamokila Boulevard Kapolei, Hawaii 96707 Via email:holly.yuen@hawaii.gov Dear Ms. Yuen, SUBJECT: National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Consultation Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Federal-Aid Project No.BR-019-2(075) T1VHK(s): (3)3- 1-001: 001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, 999; (3) 2- 9-002: 023,025,039,064, 080, 888, 999; and (3)2- 9-006: 021 Location: Hakalau Ahupua'a,Hilo Moku,Hawaii Island FILE No.: PL-INT-2022-002650 In response to your August 9, 2022,invitation to participate in the consultation for the subject bridge rehabilitation project,the Cultural Resources Commission held a public hearing pursuant to Section 1-7' on September 21,2022. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) of 1966 (amended 2006)has been initiated with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)for the subject project and by way of this letter,the County of Hawaii Cultural Resources Commission is stating intent to participate in the Section 106 process. The Hakalau Stream Bridge is a steel girder and trestle bridge with the total length of 775 feet, a 261-feet height over the stream bed, and a roadway width of 28 feet. The superstructure of the bridge is composed of a concrete deck on steel girders, and the substructure is composed of c.1911 steel railroad trestle supports with masonry(lava-rock)abutments. The Hakalau Stream Bridge is significant for its association with the Hilo Railroad Company and three of its founders. It is also a representative example of early 20th-century engineering technology, as well as a source for information about early 20th-century steel manufacture and construction. This bridge is built over the Hakalau Stream and is listed on the Hawaii Registry of Historic Places, SHPD Historic Site Number 10-16-9090.Noting its Preservation Status: Preservation recommended in AIS, BTP, or Section 106 document, Source: Leineweber 2009. Condition noted as Excellent(no alterations, no erosion, no disturbance). 1 Rules of Practice and Procedure for the Hawaii County Cultural Resources Commission,Rules 1-5 www.cohplanningdept.com Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning(a1),co.hawaii.hi.us Ms. Holly Yuen,HDOT Project Manager Highway Department of Transportation Page 2 September 28, 2022 As pertains to the invitation to comment on the Area of Proposed Effect(APE). • The Cultural Resource Commission recommends revisiting the APE boundary in order to comprehensively address the following natural and cultural resource items of public trust concern. • Hakalau Stream has been identified in the Hawaii Island Stream Assessment as having no dam diversions and the persistence of an estuary at the mouth of the stream; Hakalau Stream is an ungaged stream with high flow and tied to at least one USFWS wildlife refuge; several tributaries also feed into Hakalau Stream. • The APE should capture all downstream effects of lead contamination and any hydrodynamic impacts to stream,wetland or estuarine related resources. Sureties for remediation of chemical contamination should be of utmost concern in furtherance of public trust duties. For example,bioaccumulation of contaminants,including lead, should be investigated and quantified on the natural resources of the area(floral and faunal); especially since gathering of fish, `opihi,fruit,ferns and similar resources continues, a testing and monitoring component should be developed for continuing any contaminant remediation post-construction. Any impact to stream flow, habitat and morphology, or similar impacts to the estuary should be modelled prior to undertaking substructure or other repairs including construction within the streambed or floodway. A flood study including hydrodynamic modelling should also be considered. • The stream is ranked Outstanding for recreational resources. Recreational resource opportunities for Hakalau Stream include camping, fishing, swimming, hunting and scenic views. The APE boundary should capture all such recreational, traditional and customary practices in the area, including gathering and subsistence activities such as fishing,harvesting,traditional and customary rights, ceremony and recreation. • The stream is ranked Outstanding for aquatic resources and ranked Substantial for riparian resources. Water quality information exists. As of last survey, 60%native forest exists and at least three species of threatened and endangered birds exist as well as palustrine wetlands identified by the USFWS and an estuarine system identified by CZM. One or more of the following special areas are associated with the Hakalau Stream: Natural Area Reserve System,plant sanctuary, Recovery Habitat for Waterbirds,private preserves, Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Hilo Forest Reserve, estuary (identified by CZM),wetlands,priority aquatic sites,high quality streams. • At least five different species of`O`opu likely inhabit the stream. Per the Hawaii Stream Assessment, native "indicator" species documented as observed(circa 1980)in HakalauSstream include: `O`opu alamo'o (Lentipes concolor), `O`opu nopili (Sicyopterus stimpsoni)and `O`opu nakea(Awaous guamensis). The latter, `O`opu nakea should be expected to be found in the middle and lower reaches of streams. Areas of slow, deep waters with gravel or fine sediment are key habitat for them. Riffles at stream mouths are critical spawning grounds. A major ecological requirement for'o'opu is the need to pass through a stream mouth at two times during the individual's life. The most important factor for the existence of'o'opu in streams is that access to and from the ocean Ms. Holly Yuen,HDOT Project Manager Highway Department of Transportation Page 3 September 28, 2022 is maintained. Stream channelization or other diversions can eliminate or significantly limit native fish populations within a stream. As pertains to Identification of Historic Properties within the(ultimate)APE. • Hakalau Mill Site is located along the southern side of the mouth of Hakalau Stream on TMK: 3- 2-9-002:080. Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is located on TMK: 3-2-9-002:039 at 29-2301 Old Mamalahoa Highway(SIHP No. 50-10-16-09070); immediately adjacent to the August 9, 2022,proposed Area of Potential Affect(APE). The CRC recommends including this property in the APE or justifying its exclusion in writing. • The Hawaii Stream Assessment included no extent of survey coverage for archaeological resources and little or no information exists to assist prediction of what historic sites might be located in unsurveyed areas of the stream; low survey coverage exists as to historic sites that may be associated with Hakalau Stream. • The Cultural Resources Commission recommends investigation, survey and documentation of pre-contact Hawaiian production systems, pre-colonial indigenous agriculture systems and traditional agriculture such as lo'i kalo and other ancient/historic subsistence, cultural or religious areas/sites within the vicinity of the Hakalau Bridge. Small(er) valleys such as Hakalau may have smaller lo'i and loko'ia sites that were cumulatively representative of resilience, sustainability and religious practices of pre-contact Hawaiians; the riparian and estuarine areas have been important locations for Native Hawaiians since antiquity and contemporary use continues. Additionally, flume and older bridge foundations associated with the plantation era are likely present within the area and should be investigated, surveyed and documented. As pertains to NHO and/or Hawaiian descendants, or other individuals and organizations. • The Cultural Resources Commission recommends contacting Richard A. MacKenzie, wetland/research ecologist and James Akau who perform research in this watershed, Hui Loko and the Hakalau Homeowner Association. The Cultural Resources Commission also recommends a pedestrian survey of sufficient radius, during peak days and times in order to better identify affected persons, cultural practitioners, organizations,properties and resource connected practices within the area. • Complete the analysis outlined in Ka Pa'akai to ensure that proposed uses of land and water resources are pursued in a culturally appropriate way,including the identity and scope of"valued cultural,historical, or natural resources"in the petition area. At this time the CRC is unable to determine the extent to which resources including traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights will be affected or impaired by the proposed action. • The Cultural Resources Commission concurs that Since HDOT is proposing work in the Hakalau Stream in close proximity to nearshore waters, HDOT should consult closely with OPSD-CZM, the Commission on Water Resources Management(CWRM), Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR). and the Division of Forestry and Wildlife(DOFAW)to help mitigate any potential impacts to avian and aquatic species as well as to protect stream flow/water quality standards. Ms. Holly Yuen,HDOT Project Manager Highway Department of Transportation Page 4 September 28, 2022 The Cultural Resources Commission is hopeful that combined efforts will represent a significant and measurable restoration effort for the public trust resources enjoined under this project. Finally,the Commission was not furnished with details as to the bridge railing replacements being upgraded for"safety standards"and therefore could not determine if these upgrade(s)will be sympathetic to the historic nature of the bridge. The CRC requests said information be provided at your earliest convenience. The CRC also concurs with the comments and concerns provided to your office by the Historic Hawaii Foundation in their September 14, 2022, transmittal letter and urges resolving the outstanding issues and avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects on the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project. If you have any questions concerning this matter,please contact Kevin Sullivan at kevin.sullivan@hawaiicounty.gov. Mahalo, Geraldine Bell Cultural Resources Commission Chair Cc: State Historic Preservation Officer Historic Hawaii Foundation KS:klt \\coh01\planning\publicAwpwin6o\Cultural_Resources_Commission -ojects\Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation TMK 31001001,002,003,004, 999\Hakalau Bridge Repairs_CRC Response.docm JOSH GREEN,M.D. EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR .�c O♦;±4 DIRECTOR KE KJA'AINA F ��t�p- ,k KA LUNA HO'OKELE t} Deputy Directors Na Hope Luna Ho'okele ,a - DREANALEE K.KALILI TAMMY L.LEE ROBIN K.SHISHIDO STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU'AINA'0 HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I KA`OIHANA ALAKAU 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET HWY-DS 2.2453 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-5097 November 21, 2023 TO: DAWN N. S. CHANG, CHAIRPERSON AND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ATTENTION: ALAN S. DOWNER, Ph.D.,ADMINISTRATOR AND DEPUTY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION FROM: ROBIN K. SHISHIDO DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION FOR HIGHWAYS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUBJECT: NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT (NHPA) SECTION 106 REQUEST FOR REVISED AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE) CONCURRENCE HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE REHABILITATION HAKALAU AHUPUAA,HILO MOKU, HAWAII ISLAND FEDERAL-AID PROJECT NO. BR-019-2(075) HICRIS PROJECT NO. 2022PR00590 The Hawaii Department of Transportation requests the State Historic Preservation Officer's(SHPO) concurrence on the revised APE pursuant to Section 106 of the NHPA and Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 800.4(a)(1). Revised Area of Potential Effects In the State Historic Preservation Division's letter dated September 14, 2022 (Docket No. 2209SH07),the SHPO had no objections to the APE as it was originally defined. The general shape and extent of the APE remain unchanged,but refinements have been made on the Hilo side of the gulch to include Old Mamalahoa Highway road so that it now encompasses approximately 14.45 acres. As before,the APE includes locations where active construction(including soil remediation)would occur, as well as staging, storage, and construction access. The APE still extends approximately 600 feet mauka and makai of the bridge and approximately 100 feet beyond each abutment along Hawaii Belt Road. The active construction area has not changed. See Attachment 1 for a revised APE map with the active construction area. We would appreciate a written response within 30 days from date of receipt to Holly Yuen via email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. If you have any questions,please contact Holly Yuen, Project Manager at(808) 692-7548 or by email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. Enclosure Q 4 F * o t f {d Q • CD wcj 2 3 f6 C N N ' A/ t M, .�+ N cr {q 8 d Cl 1 C `o Ll o v :.-..i •'' l'i: a •F.,. . fy d µ Y n M �N 1 U uJ - °m f c 1001- �aa ,.', '' ' ',-- dr'Pl.: ''''. ep° ' wr .,4s .7 ,•'`ate " � ttdyy .., p k h \ „h.v, s".� �i 'd kc4' d� L, .. ,.. • ., , , „ , .. ., p. , \ ,,, , „ • . .0„, _0 1. L.?, 4,. c, aas ,lB „,.....f.e.solt u • • • • Oa.,i� � `, d%) � 09 CU • a) 0 U— • 4. 5+0 .. ,,,,, , , „.,.. . lk,• u u 01,8 4- ry .` !O 40,. M M N. JOSH GREEN,M.D. ti o EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR 4*'.. s9',z' ~, . DIRECTOR • 1. ' Deputy Directors DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 688A �'. FORD N.FUCHIGAMI BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 DREANALEE K.KALILI CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 •• " TAMMY L.LEE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 ROBIN K.SHISHIDO HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 STATE OF HAWAII TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN REPLY REFER TO: 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 HWY-DS 2.2285 September 26, 2023 Ms. Kiersten Faulkner Executive Director Historic Hawaii Foundation 680 Iwilei Road, Suite 690 Honolulu,Hawaii 96817 Dear Ms.Faulkner: Subject: National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) Section 106 Response to September 14, 2022 Letter Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau Ahupuaa, Hilo Moku, Hawaii Island Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) The Hawaii Department of Transportation(HDOT) is in receipt of your letter dated September 14,2022, in response HDOT's August 9, 2022 invitation to participate in Section 106 of the NHPA for the subject project. HDOT requested the following information: 1) Your demonstrative interests in the proposed undertaking and provide intent to participate in the Section 106 process that is subject to Federal Highway Administration approval, 2) Comments on the proposed Area of Potential Effect(APE), 3) Information you may have on historical and cultural sites within the designated APE, and 4) Contact information of persons or organizations who may have cultural affiliation to the project area. HDOT also shared its updated description of the undertaking to install concrete bents instead of in-kind steel trestle replacement. In your September 14, 2022 letter, Historic Hawaii Foundation(HHF)provided the following information in response to the above: 1) HHF is a non-profit organization to encourage the preservation of historic sites that are significant to the history of Hawaii, 2) Agrees with the APE, and 3) Identified the Hakalau Bridge as a historic property in the proposed APE. Ms. Kiersten Faulkner HWY-DS 2.2285 September 26,2023 Page 2 HHF did not provide information on other persons or organizations it may know who may have affiliations to the project area. HHF also provided the following additional comments: "...the proposed replacement of the steel trestles is not consistent with the earlier discussions and agreements in 2021 regarding emergency repairs to several of the steel trestle bridges in advance of more `permanent repairs", it does not agree that the replacement of the historic steel trestle bents with concrete is an appropriate treatment for this high value historic bridge, and its opinion that that replacement of character-defining features would be an adverse effect." In response: HDOT acknowledges that there has been a design change. The original railroad bridge trestles were constructed using riveted technology,which is no longer in use today. Any structurally sound trestles that survived the tsunami were modified,redesigned,retrofitted, and reinforced using bolted technology to emulate the look of rivets. The construction method would be costly if implemented since it is a much slower construction process,would require proprietary equipment, and there are only a few qualified contractors who can perform such work. Replacing the existing steel members in-kind would involve intricate construction sequencing, custom-manufactured steel members, and extensive shoring. A major risk associated with this type of work is the unknown structural integrity of the existing steel members due to the advanced state of corrosion. If the existing members were structurally sound, incremental replacement of steel beams could be accomplished by affixing new members to existing members until all members have been replaced. However,in the case of Hakalau Bridge, the deficiencies would not be known until construction has already begun. Degradation conditions can change quickly, and even within the estimated two-year construction duration, continued degradation of the steel members will occur. If temporary support towers are needed to bypass deficient areas,the construction cost and duration would increase significantly. Each temporary support tower would need to be custom-designed per location and would require additional footings for support. The process for design, approval,permitting, and construction(including manufacturing, shipping, and site work)would cost over $12 million per tower (over$60 million for five towers) and further delay the full rehabilitation of the bridge for years, allowing corrosion to accelerate as more and more of the surface becomes exposed to salt spray. Notification of Reduced Area of Potential Effect The project APE has been reduced slightly from approximately 15 acres to approximately 14 acres within the originally defined APE. The general shape and extent of the APE remain unchanged,but refinements have been made to the interior boundaries to better match existing topographic features. As before, the APE includes locations where active construction(including soil remediation)would occur, as well as staging, storage, and construction access roads. The APE extends approximately 600 feet mauka and makai of the bridge and approximately 100 feet beyond each abutment along Hawaii Belt Road. See the enclosed Attachment 1 for a revised APE map. Ms. Kiersten Faulkner HWY-DS 2.2285 September 26,2023 Page 3 Notification of Revised Undertaking Bridge railing upgrades have been removed from the project scope. Encapsulation of lead-contaminated soil is no longer being proposed on this project. In addition, the maximum depth of excavation for removal of contaminated soil has been increased from approximately 14 inches to 24 inches. Soils with lead contamination exceeding acceptable limits (200 milligrams of lead per kilogram of soil) will be remediated to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe to reopen to the public. HDOT proposes to remove all soils for an estimated depth of up to 24 inches and replace it with clean fill. Any associated vegetation will be removed and replaced with new vegetation. Contaminated soil and vegetation will be disposed of at a permitted off-site facility. Continued Consultation If you have any additional questions or comments,please contact Mr. Henry Kennedy, Engineering Program Manager,Design Branch at(808) 692-7550 or email at hemy.kennedy@hawaii.gov. Sincerely, HENRY KENNEDY Engineering Program Manager Design Branch Enclosure JOSH GREEN,M.D. EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR �t i" DIRECTOR � t KE KIA`AINA ♦ • t so• •� KA LUNA HO'OKELE A; , Q; Deputy Directors DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 688A t 4 3' Ka Hope Luna Ho`okele BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 `°p .S.:;.:-. •-� DREANALEE K.KALILI CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 'r., TAMMY L.LEE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A ,.: <.-,;_•. HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 '-..... �• ROBIN K.SHISHIDO HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU'AINA'0 HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I KA`OIHANA ALAKAU 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD HWY-DS 2.2373 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 October 18, 2023 Ms. Geraldine Bell, Chair County of Hawaii Planning Department Cultural Resources Commission Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Ms. Bell: Subject: National Historic Preservation Section 106 Consultation: Approval to Participate and Response to September 28, 2022 Letter Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau Ahupuaa, Hilo Moku, Hawaii Island Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) The Hawaii Department of Transportation(HDOT) is in receipt of your letter dated September 28,2022 in response to HDOT's August 9, 2022 invitation to participate in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) for the subject project. We welcome your participation in the subject's Section 106 process. In your letter,the Cultural Resources Commission(CRC)provided the following comments: Comment 1. The Cultural Resource Commission recommends revisiting the APE boundary in order to comprehensively address the following natural and cultural resource items of public trust concern. Thank you for your suggestion to revisit the APE boundary to address natural and cultural resource items of public trust concern. Please note that the APE is a term specific to Section 106 consultations under the NHPA concerning historic properties,the Federal definition for which is provided in 36 CFR 800.16(d). Refinements have been made to the APE to reflect the revised project description and to match existing topographic features better. We have reduced the APE from the originally defined 15 acres to approximately 14 acres within the original APE. See Attachment 1 for the revised APE map. As before, the APE includes locations where active construction (including soil remediation)would occur, as well as staging, storage, and construction access roads. The APE extends approximately 600 feet mauka to include the Old Mill Access Road crossing mauka of the bridge. It also extends roughly 200 to 500 feet inakai of the edge of the Hawaii Belt Road right-of-way. Ms. Geraldine Bell, Chair HWY-DS 2.2373 October 18, 2023 Page 2 Please note that impacts to recreational,natural, or cultural resources in the project area will be addressed separately in HDOT's Draft Environmental Assessment(EA)which is currently being prepared pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes(HRS) Chapter 343. A copy of your comment letter and this HDOT response letter will also be included in the EA,which will evaluate the project's direct and indirect impacts on natural,recreational,historical, and cultural resources. Comment 2. The Cultural Resource Commission I) recommends including the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House in the APE; 2) notes that the Hawai'i Stream Assessment included no extent of survey coverage for archeological resources; and 3) recommends including an investigating pre-contact Hawaiian production systems,pre-colonial indigenous agricultural system, and traditional agriculture, cultural or religious areas/sites within the vicinity of the bridge. Thank you for this information regarding historic properties and that the Hawaii Stream Assessment included little information. The Hakalau Mill Site and a portion of the site with the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House(TMK: 3-2-9-002:039)is within the APE. HDOT has prepared an Archaeological Inventory Survey(AIS) for the project which identifies historic sites in the Project Area; as well as a Cultural Impact Assessment(CIA) that will look at indigenous cultural practices. Both the AIS and CIA will be included as an Appendix to the EA. Comment 3. CRC recommends 1) contacting additional individuals and organizations, as well as conduct a pedestrian survey to identify additional parties; 2) complete a Ka Paakai Analysis, and 3) consult with additional agencies. Thank you for suggesting these additional potential consulting parties. HDOT will send Section 106 consultation invitation letters to Mr. Richard MacKenzie (United States Forest Service in Hilo), Mr. James Akau, Hui Loko, and the Hakalau Homeowner Association. As stated above, HDOT is preparing the CIA that will be included in the EA. This CIA will include a Ka Paakai analysis. The CIA will also identify additional individuals and organizations potentially affected by this project, so HDOT feels that a pedestrian survey would be duplicative. Please note that Mr. Akau was already interviewed for the CIA. Additionally,HDOT confirms that coordination with the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development—Coastal Zone Management,the Commission on Water and Resource Management,the Division of Aquatic Resources, and the Division of Forestry and Wildlife is either in progress or will be conducted during the Environmental Assessment. Comment 4. The Commission was not furnished with details as to the bridge railing replacements being upgraded for "safety standards"and therefore could not determine if these upgrade(s) will be sympathetic to the historic nature of the bridge. The CRC requests said information be provided at your earliest convenience. HDOT Response 4: Please note that upgrades to the bridge railing have been removed from the project scope. Comment S. The CRC also concurs with the comments and concerns provided to your office by the Historic Hawaii Foundation in their September 14, 2022, transmittal letter and urges resolving the outstanding issues and avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects on the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project. Ms. Geraldine Bell, Chair HWY-DS 2.2373 October 18, 2023 Page 3 HDOT Response 5: HDOT provided a written response addressing Historic Hawaii Foundation's (HHF) concerns in a letter dated September 26, 2023. The CRC will also receive a copy of this response letter to HHF. Notification of Reduced Area of Potential Effect(APE) The project APE has been reduced slightly from approximately 15 acres to approximately 14 acres within the originally defined APE. The general shape and extent of the APE remain unchanged, but refinements have been made to the interior boundaries to better match existing topographic features. As before,the APE includes locations where active construction(including soil remediation) would occur, as well as staging, storage, and construction access roads. The APE extends approximately 600 feet mauka and makai of the bridge and approximately 100 feet beyond each abutment along Hawaii Belt Road. See Attachment 1 for a revised APE map. Notification of Revised Undertaking Bridge railing upgrades have been removed from the project scope. Encapsulation of lead-contaminated soil is no longer being proposed for this project. In addition, the maximum depth of excavation for removal of contaminated soil has been increased from approximately 14 inches to 24 inches. Soils with lead contamination exceeding acceptable limits(200 milligrams of lead per kilogram of soil) will be remediated to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe to reopen to the public. HDOT proposes to remove all soils for an estimated depth of up to 24 inches and replace it with clean fill. Any associated vegetation will be removed and replaced with new vegetation. Contaminated soil and vegetation will be disposed of at a permitted off-site facility. Continued Consultation if you have any additional questions or comments,please contact our Engineering Program Manager, Mr. Henry Kennedy, Design Branch at(808) 692-7550 or email at henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov. Sincerely, p For HENRY KENNEDY Engineering Program Manager Design Branch Enclosures JOSH GREEN,M.D. EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR int Cr M DIRECTOR KE KIA'AINA •A• • •,.\su•. KA LUNA HO'OKELE AQ � . A Deputy Directors DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 688A 4f 4 y9' Na Hope Luna Ho'okele BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 `°p .1.:;.:. DREANALEE K.KALILI CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A TAMMY L.LEE HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 �• -------------------------------------- ROBIN K.SH ISH I DO HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU'AINA'0 HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I KA`OIHANA ALAKAU 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD HWY-DS 2.25498 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 January 4, 2024 Ms. Kiersten Faulkner, Executive Director Historic Hawaii Foundation 680 Iwilei Road, Dole Office Building Tower, Suite 690 Honolulu,Hawaii 96817 Dear Ms.Faulkner: Subject: Revised Area of Potential Effect(APE) Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau Ahupuaa, Hilo Moku, Hawaii Island Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) TMK nos. (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, 999; (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 064, 080, 888, 999; AND (3)2-9-006:021 On behalf of the Federal Highway Administration,the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation would like to notify you of the revised project APE pursuant to Section 106 of the NHPA and Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 800.4(a)(1). Revised Area of Potential Effects The general shape and extent of the APE remain unchanged,but refinements have been made on the Hilo side of the gulch to include Old Mamalahoa Highway road so that it now encompasses approximately 14.45 acres. As before, the APE includes locations where active construction(including soil remediation) would occur, as well as staging, storage, and construction access. The APE still extends approximately 600 feet mauka and makai of the bridge and approximately 100 feet beyond each abutment along Hawaii Belt Road. The active construction area has not changed. See Attachment 1 for a revised APE map with the active construction area. If you have any questions,please contact our Project Manager,Robert Sun, Design Branch,Highways Design Section at(808) 692-7578 or by email at robert.sun@hawaii.gov. Sincerely, HENRY KENNEDY Engineering Program Manager Design Branch Attachment Q 4 F * o t f {d Q • CD wcj 2 3 f6 C N N ' A/ t M, .�+ N cr {q 8 d Cl 1 C `o Ll o v :.-..i •'' l'i: a •F.,. . fy d µ Y n M �N 1 U uJ - °m f c 1001- �aa ,.', '' ' ',-- dr'Pl.: ''''. ep° ' wr .,4s .7 ,•'`ate " � ttdyy .., p k h \ „h.v, s".� �i 'd kc4' d� L, .. ,.. • ., , , „ , .. ., p. , \ ,,, , „ • . .0„, _0 1. L.?, 4,. c, aas ,lB „,.....f.e.solt u • • • • Oa.,i� � `, d%) � 09 CU • a) 0 U— • 4. 5+0 .. ,,,,, , , „.,.. . lk,• u u 01,8 4- ry .` !O 40,. M M N. Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Section 4(f) From:Yuen, Holly Sent: Friday, August 4, 2023 4:32 PM To: Messina, Maurice<Maurice.Messina@hawaiicounty.gov>;James Komata <James.Komata@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov> Subject: RE: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and lead remediation project-4F contacts Good afternoon Maurice and James, The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), is planning the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project. The purpose of the project is to: • Restore full public use to Hakalau Beach Park by removing or remediating lead-contaminated soils in the area surrounding the bridge; • Allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge by rehabilitating the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and • Increase resilience of the bridge to extreme natural events. As Hakalau Beach Park has been closed to the public since 2017 due to lead contamination, HDOT plans to remediate the area surrounding the bridge, including contaminated soils at the park. Previous soil testing has indicated that lead levels in the park are in the medium to high range (200-800 mg/kg). HDOT intends to remove all lead contaminated soil down to a depth of up to 24 inches and dispose of it offsite. Excavated areas will be backfilled with clean soil,and vegetation will be re-established in areas where it currently exists. A secondary use of the park during construction is for storage of material and staging of construction equipment while the bridge substructure is being reconstructed. The bridge's steel support towers are exhibiting signs of severe corrosion, so HDOT plans to reconstruct the substructure with concrete bents. The construction duration for the bridge bent reconstruction and the lead remediation is anticipated to be no longer than two years. Upon completion of the project,the intent is to restore full public access to Hakalau Beach Park, Old Mamalahoa Highway, and the Old Mill Access Road. HDOT plans to submit Section 4(f) exception requests for use of the County park for the two aforementioned purposes under the following exemptions: - Lead abatement under 23 CFR 744.13(g) - Construction staging/Temporary occupancy under 23 CFR 774.13(d)—note: duration of temporary occupancy will be shorter than the anticipated two-year overall project duration The documents are currently in preparation and will be submitted shortly. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions and/or concerns. Thank you, Holly From: Lee, Rob<rob.lee@hawaii.gov> Sent: Monday,July 24, 2023 10:53 AM To: Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov> Cc: Messina, Maurice<Maurice.Messina@hawaiicounty.gov>;James Komata <James.Komata@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and lead remediation project-4F contacts Holly, Please try forwarding your 4F notices/submittals to the County of Hawaii, Dept. of Parks & Recreation Dept. (County P&R). Maurice Messina is the director of the County P&R and James Komata is their project planner/engineer if I have his title correctly? Cool, very knowledgeable, and great guys to work with all the time! Below is their e-mail contacts in which they are cc'd in this e-mail. Maurice.messina@hawaiicountv.gov James.Komata@hawaiicounty.gov Thanks, Rob 2 Hawaii Federal-Aid Division 300 Ala Moana Blvd, Rm 3-229 U.S.Department PO Box 50206 of Transportation November 21, 2023 Honolulu, Hawaii 96850 Federal Highway Phone: (808) 541-2700 Administration FHWA-Hawaii.Intake@dot.gov In Reply Refer To: HDA-HI Mr. Maurice Messina, Director County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 Hilo, HI 96720 Subject: Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act Request for Concurrence with Mitigation and Temporary Occupancy Exception Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Federal-aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Dear Mr. Messina: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), is planning the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project at Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, Milepost 15.3 on the Island of Hawaii. We request your review and approval of the proposed actions which would occur partially on County-owned property at Hakalau Beach Park, TMK(3) 2-9-002:080. Project Overview The purposes of the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project are: • Restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park by removing and remediating lead- contaminated soils in the area surrounding the bridge; • Allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge by rehabilitating the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and • Increase resilience of the bridge to extreme natural events. Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is a steel trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, over Hakalau Stream at a height of roughly 134 feet(41 meters) above mean sea level at the top edges of Hakalau Gulch (see enclosed Attachment 1). The bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge, including Hakalau Beach Park which lies below and adjacent to the bridge. For this reason, Hakalau Beach Park has been closed to the public since 2017. A series of soil samples taken over multiple years determined that the degree of lead contamination in the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge exceeds State of Hawaii acceptable limits. HDOT proposes to remove all soils exceeding 200 2 mg/kg (shown in enclosed Attachment 2) for an estimated depth of up to 24 inches and replace it with clean fill. Any associated vegetation including large trees in this area would also be replaced with new vegetation. Contaminated soil and vegetation would be disposed at a permitted off-site facility. Due to the deterioration of the bridge's steel trestles and scour conditions undermining the foundations of the bridge, rehabilitation of the bridge's substructure requires replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents (enclosed Attachment 3, Project Plans). In-water work would be required as a part of this project, including drilling of shafts in the stream bed. A temporary trestle bridge, which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. It is also anticipated that the Project would be authorized by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under the authority of a Nationwide Permit (NWP). Avoidance and minimization measures required by the permit would be incorporated into project plans. The construction duration would be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. The night time lane closures may require illuminated signs and/or beacons for safety purposes,but the lights would be for road sign visibility and delineation only (i.e., minimal illumination) and should not be visible from the beach. Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act Since the proposed project is federally funded, consideration under Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 is required. Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Act of 1966 stipulates that the FHWA and other USDOT agencies cannot approve the use of land from publicly owned parks, recreational areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or public and private historical sites unless the following conditions apply: • There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of land; and the action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from such use; or • The Administration determines the use of the property will have a de minimis impact. The law, codified in 49 U.S.C. § 303 and 23 U.S.C. § 138, is implemented by the FHWA through regulations in 23 C.F.R. Part 774. Identified Section 4(f) Property The FHWA has evaluated the subject project in relation to the requirements of Section 4(f) and identified Hakalau Beach Park(TMK(3)2-9-002:080) as a publicly owned park and recreation area subject to these requirements. The FHWA understands that Hakalau Beach Park is currently closed for public access because of the soil contamination discussed above. Temporary impacts to approximately 1.3 acres of the 3.18-acre Hakalau Beach Park would occur for construction staging, and approximately 1.1 acres would be required for lead contamination remediation, 3 including the temporary construction staging area. Staging areas would be located in the flat, open areas of the park. No permanent physical features of the park, such as utilities or the beach pavilion, would need to be temporarily or permanently removed. If any signage, picnic tables, or other items are damaged during construction, the project would replace these items in like kind. Project construction actions at Hakalau Beach Park are depicted on Attachment 4 (enclosed). The FHWA is aware that the park property is also home to historic properties related to the former Hakalau Sugar Mill site, which are shown on enclosed Attachment 5. These remnant features would not be affected by the project. The proposed soil remediation activities proposed in the park property would remove and replace soil surrounding these features, and contractors would be instructed to avoid damage to these features. Coordination is on-going with the State Historic Preservation Division and other potential stakeholders to complete the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) Section 106 consultation process for this project. The County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation was also notified of the Section 106 consultation in a letter from HDOT dated August 9, 2022. Any tree or other vegetation removed during construction would be replaced with vegetation approved by the park owner, the County of Hawaii (County). HDOT would coordinate with the County to develop a mutually agreeable revegetation/landscaping plan. During construction, work areas would be demarcated with temporary protective fencing. The following table identifies the affected Section 4(f) property and the corresponding affected area (in acres): Temporary Construction and Mitigation Areas in Section 4(f) Property Tax Map Key Owner Total TMK Affected Area (acres) Area (acres)* (3)2-9-002:080 County of 3.18 acres Mitigation: 1.1 acres for soil removal Hawaii Temporary Occupancy: 1.3 acres for construction staging Total Property Area: 1.3 acres *Source: County of Hawaii Real Property Tax Office website, August 2023. Previous Coordination with Hawaii County HDOT has coordinated with the County multiple times over the years to collaborate on the development of the soil remediation plan and the closure of the County Park. Most recently, specific to the proposed project, HDOT has conducted the following coordination with the County: • As part of the project's Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, HDOT sent a Pre-Assessment Consultation letter dated November 25, 2022 to multiple County of Hawaii departments including the Department of Parks and Recreation. No response was received from the Department of Parks and Recreation. 4 • HDOT sent an email on August 4, 2023, describing the project's Section 4(f) requirements and the upcoming submission of an exception request. No public meetings have been held for this project,but a public meeting would be conducted to solicit comments on the draft EA. Request for Agreement with Temporary Occupancy and Mitigation Activities The FHWA has identified various exceptions to the requirements for a Section 4(f) approval. One such exception, identified in 23 CFR §774.13(d), is temporary occupancies of land that are so minimal as to not constitute a use within the meaning of Section 4(f). To use this exception, the following conditions must be satisfied: 1. Duration of occupancy must be temporary, i.e., less than the time needed for construction of the project, and there should be no change in ownership of the land. The duration of the construction activities for the portion of the Project at the Hakalau Beach Park is temporary, estimated at approximately 22 months, as compared to the scheduled 24 month duration of the entire Project. There would be no change in ownership of the land. 2. Scope of the work must be minor, i.e., both the nature and the magnitude of the changes to the Section 4(f)property are minimal. The proposed construction staging area would temporarily occupy approximately 1.3 acres of the 3.18-acre park. Because this park is officially closed to the public currently, this temporary use is a minor scope of work with no effect on public recreational access. 3. There are no anticipated permanent adverse physical impacts, nor will there be interference with the protected activities, features, or attributes of the property, on either a temporary or permanent basis. There would be no permanent adverse physical impacts to the property. The use of the property as a staging area would facilitate the repairs to the bridge and the soil remediation, so that this park and the public access road can be officially re-opened. The recreational activities,features, and attributes of the property would be maintained or replaced in like kind, so that recreational users can again officially utilize the park once the project has been completed and official use of the park has been restored. 4. The land being used must be fully restored, i.e., the property must be returned to a condition which is at least as good as that which existed prior to the project. All areas disturbed by the Project would be restored to preconstruction conditions or better. No park facilities would be removed for construction staging. Any park items 5 such as signage or picnic tables that are damaged by construction would be replaced with equipment of similar type and function if preferred by the park owner. 5. There must be documented agreement of the official(s) with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resource regarding the above conditions. With this letter, we are seeking your written concurrence that the proposed temporary occupancy meets the above conditions. The FHWA requests concurrence from the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation, as the official with jurisdiction, that the proposed project satisfies the conditions described above and meets the criteria for a temporary occupancy exception under Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act of 1966 for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project. if you concur, please help to facilitate this project by signing the concurrence line below and returning a copy via email to meesa.otani@dot.gov. We would greatly appreciate your assistance by responding within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact Meesa Otani, Environmental Engineer, at (808) 541-2316 or by email at meesa.otani@dot.gov. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely yours, Digitally signed by MEESA L'� f a „ T.OTANI Date:2023.11.21 10:47:38 -10'00' for Richelle M. Takara, P.E. Division Administrator Enclosures cc: Holly Yuen, HDOT Allen Kam, WSP Concurrence The County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation. as owner attii manager of I l,tkal tt Beach Park. concurs that the I fakalau Strum Bridge Rehabilitation Project meets the criteria for a ICIliponuy occupancy exception under Section 4(1) of the 1. 5 Department of iransportiition Act of 1966 for the Hakalau Beach Park s I �l,uit levy \lc54tna ! D to T)irec.tor County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation I - 'F1 a1 111 I�I 11 1 c • U o 0 0 Vk > Q rq H / .� � �� 4a ;rr!', t \A Q13 ' \ '' "" 2 Q_ IT 44,: I\ ' • ...iir 1 % A' r r m r • \' ''' o t 110:417/r '1 o I C co s e {' �,+ Cis nN� rt r� . ,, � co L.L co E . • • 2/,/, ''' • '. ../..• - f3'.`,•,,, . v /' - 1 / xy gv,,' CO I H h Nii !/k4 aag / y , r • w •' • 0 • ai n < ' tC°i o 1, / ..♦`v, ";,v,..,,,...1".:',..'.- ... .. .,_ ,___4, ,. , it:...: . gE {yxtx (y J X J(V 1Ii ;�r , ��,, r F ,.,4111611,.'• t..". a '•1 .i 3e R W,..�, A C Li M co a "„taZ rte. 4 Jl :''ff CZ cc Q i r�1 A , _L � it d 2 �e Li r.. ' i. 94• qr g • .'fir i i ) r N. I! o or t 'i' E w rC ,( 1 �' �� �' �} GO , Jy � 9 l N Oirn Z F auYg ti O w ? Z No ] UP U iQo a r B -P , Occ o i '12 M NZ y� s ' a w M ¢a a li 2LOC) c ZOO aO N �a i a CW e o g Z `) o F9 LL'''- grit £ O AO a o w ¢R a _ joay�r73 ❑ Q ❑ L=,,IR 1 43 , ., 0,,, ,,,,, _ o¢ a ag1boN j fl w Y Nil b E x7. li aby s a g �m en( :i I 4 , x I x jo 1 x x x e _ Y 2113 '1 Y Z O0 0' ° a sCP CE 0 W �6U '\ QQ �2O Q0 �Ads � �n o m Q o d, / o s (PoZ— ) i)C''; Ilan '''',\ 010 2 CC E = O J Q Q Z 11 H ¢ 6y� a Lu o o ~ cn J cn LiJ W ~ U ° � J W LL 0 s 0_ O Q a Ll_ Q -I Z CO H m -3 Oo 0 a dCL W O � Z _ cn O I— Z Q = o _ E 2g Y D �' O H 2 g o o��aa o N >- W Q � / C0 w r, Q 0 0 0- w w 0 = 00 z> _ 0 Z o 2• a O 0 H w . N O g z [ciia U '11-' to� H x x x bz x 3 LVO 3NOHd A9 030VNVW A9 93N9IS3a N ZZOZ 'AON 9988-££61908) H-AMH .0N1' S>1 (Vld CI:V'ZZ-6Z-01 :3WI1101d OM01H5111 1001—OSH 107171 0Z-00—ll7WO 10VLL00-131—b9 010 00100W0-01 090-5\MOONO 00\'z MON ONIM0210 2 „9-,9 II„9-,9 x 0 0 i®■ ” at L d ! ' 0 o ii A LL z °0N 1n9b 6upeag .5,> m--k ° g -Lpo e- -� 11 2 �,, to �° III . 3" 1 = y � w El `0111 400811 ct Q o 111'1 0 Tr -I-La s N dl °0N 4008 I1 N I I1I1 �W LJ-LL r v m !! 9N 4U98 L r r '‘,3-‘.---rt„-,E3, ( Il ,2o or `0N 4008 L .r1 a 1-I ;I TIo I 6 `°N4998 Q LJLL o 9 °0N 4u9g L1tL1 ,,, 3 0 1---M L °0N 4008 -H m i o U 43 o II, I c J g LJ LL_ .2 g 9 °nN 4uag 7 I 'I j, 'I o a {` "m 1 §4, 4-a ;_ -- 0 soN age ( I 114 '1 -- - - - - Qe_ -- _:Z -- b .0N 4008 1-111 1 I'• L 111 } � 'ON 4Nag l.'I' 0 Ct- -I-La E °9N 4uaa -_ II�.I L111 1, III Z ILI2.42 E '° OZI W ¢a yt ti 'o c s '0N 1n9b 6uiaeeg o a LII I I II1 L LI`r E T ' Nr V a-� SII 0.of=,£z-ZL 3.asd ma Ars Nnd MIIDS-asHvI.%0E PZ-z,-.vDO OD\H100-.,,E1 as a-N.11as,o40-0,vNCO.oovz sma DNINN. „,z;1`.‘” O OOZ d ! 'Q • LL N ~ M - - z° .= Zvi.® 09/ -..3E-P, O 1--u., , sg gLj o ��� 'F �:E%\Sfi R- _ Q v H LA. 3 // _________------70_51_ Obl i 4' i ur Q /L7 N h y 0/ °N J°a8 . „-`-'�7 N { 1i b .7i• Q Q o .. l �,� Zl'°N lung 7) •• Ott 1' LI±11•'"7..... '00/ 08 I . r, 09 i • �. i9d 9fi -.::„::.E.-: 0Z II'°N lUag •. ' L�] 6 m m 0/'°N,(09,go-��`. _T-.. --FT_ A-0 Y 0 ro o ...... L -I, _ ib s .°N,°age .. 0 0 o 9. °°N!°ag 0- --F , -0 E U Q �, F s uwea-/lS .� m 4 E c m eleOaH 0 Ooa 2 -0N/uag� ,g am I_� Z Q M 0 o O�eW V ... ... v . .b i O J2/BM ZN 145,1L1 �z, ��,� _.g O-i--.0 ca o —1----+ -- pti N o-rr ,j "...:+4"--r z °0N l°a8 • J , . -rg 2 • E.b Wh� N • —. — r � co ew o JBIeU I_ C o .... ..OZ R . r 1r� o . °N l°a8 o-� .1-0 m o o c c o 0 o� .-09 m m Z 'ON luag .:6-r643.:r \1 .. e �� _..08 8 8 _r 1 ............ a a o ~ h h oN existing � 2 W W Gov't Road rjr 011 ----i1,— -tOZI I sg °N luag h,_.17 'FlIo� 0b! 1 •09/ vIE 08/ /'aN l°9b' ..... 1 iw o ,00Z o 0 ti V 0,e,,'TA-SI.-LO A.10, em°ng,N.ADIOS-,51\131%0e LA-z,-antavo,°t1,°e-,3cl-ae as egdadl-e>o-ogomneNn°°vz 3w,•1 wog., dLLd A v . \ 2 , , , , , \ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , \fi @ \\ ) 1 2\§ e \ • _ , ^ ` ® 4 B -°° � gym& z A i zoN r> \} q (44 j ){ , _ \ i Q ®2/ ✓ \ \ .- \$2 ! : E « =G( = m [ \ 7AN ,_ § i \ } "-',° � ) 7 » N ma> , . , \ /` ) \/ 2. Z\ - \ \ , ( E Q SA > m ma> �]�� -� ez er > N ma> '' - - - - - - - — -'2 \�\ _ q 2 (j \/� 1 } Z rNma>{({ j'� - - - - - - - - B 1 \\\ ] 7 vv vvd \N i >- «ma; \ \� C - i� �' /9 . �R � \ "\ ~ : � :- m m> = : Q- \ § ±a Q > m m«> ; _ - _ - �- �� m 0- 3� « \\ /�Z ; m m«» \ - , . \« » « / \/ , w maf \ - - m - . i \ -9.2 \N 7 r N ma> ]T�- -�- - --,, - ff / \ )z- «ma; \18 ^ : ° ® \ _ 0. \d{ - @ 7 ! m EL/ d. N. De •22 r \ • § T. , § 0 » ; � % , v ! w <J _ \E \\ \\ \ > ~ : / \ 3 { \ \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' ui ,1 \ � ` 2 @ Q ` e^ r \ k\§ 1T, ' : © E@4 � \ 6 ~ 3 \} \ \k( ® )8 : 3 (; § ®2/ § ) k \$/ ! : E o =G� = m [ \ / § / ){ } \ ) t e /) ) / 2 % / E z \\ 6 A ~13 \\ Q \/ \ • \ \ ~ Q \ \ / )� \2 \ t /% \) )) / �G.)- _--- '5'A - - \} y` \ F,-CU _� «« j/ /Q � .»« � ` ��� a« . � . . ` x � >>y» 2 . � \ y \� . �� 2« ^ \ � ?\ . . \ ^^ . .. yy>x.. * . . s>a m _ y « ©\»««©» 2 &© : z ,•:.:::, . z }\ . . � © \ 2%\©«»»««© • A \ ,.: / , w _a ..w ^ z \ \^ ° ^ - � : d«^ \ . _ . . :"...' x. » « : « » 7.y \ /\ m�' . . \ . »» ( /y\ w ©© \®.. ..a»:y/gy> ƒ »\226. \ % . : % ( < ! 2 . ^m : \ 2` �~ ^S` . o y: \ \ , . . am»ex»:'. _ 9»zzy - Es / Lo: �. . , . . . . .. .. /� \( ~~ ��- ^^ »» \ . ' \ . .v»»»: .�v x . ax, . . . : © . q / � ©«»d§\aa/\\\\»/ . y\ �-�_� . : Qa \\ % ® , Ea y\ $66 GJ ._ \\�� ^` �- Q+ \3 I - - ( %/ ) © (» ,:i-C) ® ƒ3 » \\ ( 4 2 ƒ$ \§ )) Ct L /\ \\ e k!®` )`) \ k 9 dot v :1?:': - . R : •17. I,-:- .„.04 0.E , 0 _.:.., --' •'t. c0 114 ' C. .. CN Ihr‘' :,- ai c\I , :.- ,; ?c.11 ..,_. \ H - '' 'l''' - •-, ...,...i. ,I=–0- ‘6"I E '' • ,14'. •:,:e'' ',, 7 2,...A ' .....4.•;' , . c ..';'... •,..A. .. . 2, . „ . - f,; •V , •- ,' •• 11 C co 2 of :: • - V, . - =._ c . , _0 co.0 , _c u . „ , 1— i , ...-”" . aS Ct Z O C Lu >'. . Ct a) 0 06t / - CnIC, = c.) U = W146 -, .. f Ln i_ ._ .. ''' ''' ' '''' '-/ „, .(T3 E g . . . ,, . . ,.., CO CD , , , 1 I,' ' '''54,.'''. U) a) • -'1.'', : I . 1 * - - , ',•:, ,.. '.. '- - - co 0_ co . • ..'2,,1:, - - -* . ,‘ ';'-- ' •,i-,;`''.. ., 4/ -*;-- '-' • ''',- --;"*- " co 2 , , w / . , " co ' - s3,eA't es, m / , . , - ,—--'_ - . li.5, , 1 % >•' _ ., 4 ' .., , . 4' 7 L. / . ' • '4 7'', g :, .5: ' . ., .'''', \'''' t., . '":' ';‘• ', . , ;',s'''' i ,. , ,*'''',..,..f.''',-7 '.''..,,:...•.''. ,....-,., E • / , • .'.''.,-`..' .: :f..'•-•.,' • „, E hi ' , , '. ',i.,, ,, , ,,,...,, -.. . , "*i,,:, %; \''''\ ., . , .., ,, . ..":4. • .:: ' ' . Ai ' , ..„' - ' ''''•",,.'',,,,s ::. , '',.,,,''''''''' . ''':' , ,,, • • ' — 14; '' .' . . •• . , ,,,, ,,.., 0, • -- 4.Fieldwork rYs•----- os on ci 1/4p O i N ,_ o ..-^%.' ti) >• C U cC c G 0 UO 'JO 0 A J �' .y 1 0 0' -n a 11 ,! / rn O v p, c I -- J e M. I ay) t I L- C!� C!] m n C. I 4 Li 1 ■ I\ is il 4,. .,,.. ....,,,,, .. .,..7, . , -„, I , , 4 Y cn I— N Z t^r -t CWC *Y O 12 \ L I i \ Q N ' r 2 p -",:e ` c l Ar, T.) fin. G \ s ,, A rj Q. , A c. v \ cs a' ` U 1 O , \ c7] ‘ N m to 4- 54 AIS for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawai`i Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Soil Remediation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Appendix A-2c Endangered Species Act Section 7 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Endangered Species Act Section 7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • hake- ,6,1; 541Li.111 Il 1 f4; United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE .1404 !" Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard,Box 50088 Honolulu,HI 96850-5000 Phone: (808) 792-9400 Fax: (808) 792-9580 In Reply Refer To: July 21, 2023 Project Code: 2023-0014325 Project Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened and endangered species, as well as designated critical habitat that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and that may be affected by project related actions. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Please contact the Service's Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (PIFWO) at 808-792-9400 if you have any questions regarding your IPaC species list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may adversely affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information.An updated list may be requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological 07/21/2023 2 Evaluation, similar to a Biological Assessment, be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation are described at 50 CFR 402.12. Due to the significant number of listed species found on each island within PIFWO's regulatory jurisdiction, and the difficulty in accurately mapping ranges for species that we have limited information about, your species list may include more species than if you obtained the list directly from a Service biologist. We recommend you use the species links in IPaC to view the life history, habitat descriptions, and recommended avoidance and minimization measures to assist with your initial determination of whether the species or its habitat may occur within your project area. If appropriate habitat is present for a listed species, we recommend surveys be conducted to determine whether the species is also present. If no surveys are conducted, we err on the side of the species, by regulation, and assume the habitat is occupied. Updated avoidance and minimization measures for plants and animals, best management practices for work in or near aquatic environments, and invasive species biosecurity protocols can be found on the PIFWO website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/library. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that a listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http:// www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/index. Non-federal entities can also use the IPaC generated species list to develop Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. We recommend HCP applicants coordinate with the Service early during the HCP development process. For additional information on HCPs, the Habitat Conservation Planning handbook can be found at https:// www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/habitat-conservation-planning-handbook-entire.pdf. Please be aware that wind energy projects should follow the Service's wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds. Listed birds and the Hawaiian hoary bat may also be affected by wind energy development and we recommend development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for those species, as described above. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers can be found at: ■ http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers ■ http://www.towerkill.com ■ http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/comtow We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation actions that benefit threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act in accordance with section 7(a)(1). Please include the Consultation Tracking Number associated with your IPaC species list in any 07/21/2023 request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Please feel free to contact us at PIFWO_admin@fws.gov or 808-792-9400 if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally listed species and federally designated critical habitat. Attachment(s): ■ Official Species List 07/21/2023 1 OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Box 50088 Honolulu, HI 96850-5000 (808) 792-9400 07/21/2023 2 PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code: 2023-0014325 Project Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Type: Bridge - Maintenance Project Description: Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is located at Milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) on the Island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00" N, 155°07'47.00"W. The proposed bridge work can be divided into 3 major activities: 1) remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3) upgrade bridge railings. The construction duration will be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction. Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@19.89939305,-155.12949768013715,14z a.11!. F �. � kalata R:J cr' �f✓ t`G +sem Counties: Hawaii County, Hawaii 07/21/2023 3 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 13 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries', as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. 1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. MAMMALS NAME STATUS Hawaiian Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus semotus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/770 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6477.p df 07/21/2023 4 BIRDS NAME STATUS Band-rumped Storm-petrel Oceanodroma castro Endangered Population:USA(HI) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1226 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.p df Hawaiian (=koloa) Duck Anas wyvilliana Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7712 General project design guidelines: https://i pac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRAI documents/generated/6934.pdf Hawaiian Coot Fulica americana alai Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7233 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.p df Hawaiian Goose Branta (=Nesochen) sandvicensis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1627 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/prof ect!PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/692 5.p df Hawaiian Petrel Pterodroma sandwichensis Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6746 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.pdf Hawaiian Stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2082 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.p df Newell's Townsend's Shearwater Pu f finus auricularis newelli Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2048 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.p df 07/21/2023 5 REPTILES NAME STATUS Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened Population: Central North Pacific DPS No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6929.p df FLOWERING PLANTS NAME STATUS Alani Melicope zahlbruckneri Endangered There is final critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7338 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7060.pdf Nanu Gardenia remyi Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5835 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7051.p df FERNS AND ALLIES NAME STATUS Deparia kaalaana Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:haps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9612 Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4737 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7051.p df CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S)MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. 07/21/2023 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency: Private Entity Name: Malie McClellan Address: 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2400 City: Honolulu State: HI Zip: 96813 Email malie.mcclellan@wsp.com Phone: 8085611324 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION Lead Agency: Federal Highway Administration Name: Meesa Otani Email: meesa.otani@dot.gov Phone: 8085612316 �1 U.S.Department Hawaii Federal-Aid Division 300 Ala Moana Blvd, Rm 3-229 of Transportation Box 50206 Federal Highway September 25, 2023 Honolulu, Hawaii 96850 Administration Phone: (808) 541-2700 FHWA-Hawaii.lntake@dot.gov In Reply Refer To: HDA-HI Earl Campbell, Ph.D. Field Supervisor, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office U.S Fish and Wildlife Service 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Rm 3-122, Box 50088 Honolulu, HI 96850 Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau, Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii Federal-aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Dear Dr. Campbell, The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the State of Hawai'i Department of Transportation (HDOT), is planning the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project at Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, Milepost 15.3 in Hakalau on the Island of Hawaii. Pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the FHWA is requesting concurrence from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) that the proposed project may affect,but is not likely to adversely affect the following federally listed species: the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat or `opeapea(Lasiurus cinereus semotus); Hawaiian Seabirds, including the endangered Hawaiian petrel or `ua`u (Pterodroma sandwichensis), the endangered Hawai`i Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the band-rumped storm-petrel or `ake`ake (Oceanodroma Castro), and threatened Newell's Townsend's shearwater or 'a'o (Puffinus auricularis newelli); Hawaiian Waterbirds, including the endangered Hawaiian coot or 'alae ke`oke`o (Fulica americana alai), endangered Hawaiian stilt or ae`o (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), and endangered Hawaiian (=koloa) duck(Anas wyvilliana); the threatened Hawaiian Goose or nene (Branta sandvicensis); the threatened Green Sea Turtle or honu (Chelonia mydas); flowering plants including the endangered Alani (Melicope zahlbruckneri) and the endangered Nanu (Gardenia remyi); and ferns and allies including the endangered Deparia kaalaana, and the endangered Microlepia strigose var. mauiensis. Description of the Proposed Action The purpose of the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project includes the following: • Restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park by removing or remediating lead-contaminated soils in the area surrounding the bridge; 2 • Allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge by rehabilitating the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and • Increase resilience of the bridge to extreme natural events. Hakalau Stream Bridge is a steel trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, over Hakalau Stream at a height of roughly 134 feet(41 meters) above mean sea level at the top edges of the gulch. The bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge including Hakalau Beach Park which lies below and adjacent to the bridge. Although the lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, Hakalau Beach Park has been closed to the public since 2017 because the area surrounding the bridge is in need of remediation. See enclosed Attachment 1 for a map of the Project Area and enclosed Attachments 2A and 2B for photos of the project site. A series of soil samples taken over multiple years determined that the degree of lead contamination in the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge exceeds State of Hawaii acceptable limits. Lead abatement is needed to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe to reopen to the public. Approximately 2.5 acres are proposed for remediation (areas shown in red and yellow in the enclosed Attachment 3, map of lead remediation areas). According to the Remedial Action Alternative Analysis (RAA)prepared for this project(May 2023), HDOT proposes to remove all soils exceeding 200 mg/kg for an estimated depth of up to 24 inches and replace it with clean fill. Any associated vegetation including large trees in this area would be replaced with new vegetation. Where high levels of lead contamination exist, remediation could involve removal and disposal of contaminated soil at a permitted mainland facility. Where lead levels are lower, the contaminated soil may be removed and disposed of at a permitted local facility. Due to the deterioration of the bridge's steel trestles and scour conditions undermining the foundations of the bridge,rehabilitation of the bridge's substructure requires replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents (See enclosed Attachment 4, Project Plans). In-water work would be required as a part of this Project, including drilling of shafts in the stream bed. A temporary trestle bridge, which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. The construction duration would be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. The night time lane closures may require illuminated signs and/or beacons for safety purposes, but the lights would be for road sign visibility and delineation only (i.e., minimal illumination) and should not be visible from the beach. Coordination with USFWS The following species are included in the USFWS's Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) official species list downloaded on July 21, 2023 (see enclosed Attachment 5). • the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat or `ope`ape`a (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) 3 • Hawaiian waterbirds, including the endangered Hawaiian coot or 'alae ke`oke`o (Fulica americana alai), the endangered Hawaiian stilt or ae`o (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), and endangered Hawaiian (=koloa) duck(Anas wyvilliana); • Hawaiian seabirds, including the endangered Hawaiian petrel or `ua`u (Pterodroma sandwichensis), the endangered Hawai`i Distinct Population Segment(DPS) of the band- rumped storm-petrel or `ake`ake (Oceanodroma Castro), and threatened Newell's Townsend's shearwater or `a`o (Puffinus auricularis newelli); • the threatened Hawaiian goose or nene (Branta sandvicensis); • the threatened Green Sea Turtle or Honu (Chelonia mydas); • Flowering plants including the the endangered Alani (Melicope zahlbruckneri) and the endangered Nanu (Gardenia remyi); and • Ferns and allies including the endangered Deparia kaalaana, and the endangered Microlepia strigose var. mauiensis. According to IPaC, no critical habitat is located within the project area. The IPaC list did not identify any migratory birds of conservation concern, pursuant to the Migratory Bird Species Act (MBTA) at this location. The IPaC list also provided links to general project design guidelines for all wildlife species and most plant species listed above. These guidelines provide an assessment of potential project impacts, along with avoidance, minimization, and conservation measures for these species. Biological Survey Report H.T. Harvey&Associates (HTH)prepared a draft Biological Survey Report(June 2023). In the Biological Survey Report, HTH presented the findings of reconnaissance-level botanical and wildlife (birds and mammals) surveys to document species and biological issues of concern, including the presence of any species that are state or federally listed as threatened or endangered, candidate species for listing, or sensitive habitats. The report also identified the potential impacts of implementing the proposed project and conservation measures that may be considered for inclusion into the planning and design phase, if any listed species, candidate species, or sensitive habitats are found in the biological study area (BSA). Potential Impacts, Avoidance, Minimization, and Conservation Measures for ESA-Listed Species Based on the recommendations in the IPaC project design guidelines and HTH's Biological Survey Report report, the following potential impacts may occur to ESA-listed species. However, with certain avoidance, minimization, and conservation measures in place, also discussed below, these impacts may be avoided and minimized. Hawaiian Hoary Bat Although the Hawaiian hoary bat was not surveyed for during this reconnaissance-level survey, there are numerous records for this species on Hawaii Island. Hawaiian hoary bats may hunt for flying insect prey along roadways, gulches, and open areas and occasionally roost in large, dense-foliage trees (typically greater than 15-foot-tall) such as those in Hakalau Gulch within the 4 BSA. Given that numerous trees identified in the Project Area are potential suitable day roosting habitat and the general abundance of Hawaiian hoary bats reported for Hawaii Island, the possibility that the Hawaiian hoary bat utilizes the Project Area cannot be ruled out. The lead remediation action of this Project requires the removal of several acres of soil and vegetation in Hakalau Gulch that may include large trees. Although the elimination of these trees will likely reduce the number of trees available for bats to roost, the abundance of other tall trees in the region make it unlikely that the Project would result in an adverse effect to bats. To avoid and minimize potential direct impacts to the Hawaiian hoary bat, HDOT commits to the following measures: • Do not disturb,remove, or trim woody plants greater than 15 feet tall during the bat birthing and pup rearing season, June 1 to September 15. • Do not use barbed wire for fencing. Hawaiian Seabirds No specific night-time seabird surveys were conducted in the Project Area, but Hawaiian seabirds may traverse the project area at night during the breeding, nesting, and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Outdoor lighting attracts seabirds and could result in seabird disorientation, fallout, and injury or mortality. Night work is not anticipated during construction, but night time lane closures may require illuminated signs and/or beacons for safety purposes to provide sign visibility and delineation only (i.e., minimal illumination). In the unlikely event that night work is needed, the following measures would be incorporated into the project to avoid or minimize potential impacts to Hawaiian seabirds: • Fully shield all outdoor lights so bulbs are only visible from below bulb height and only used when necessary. • Install automatic motion sensor switches and timers on all outdoor lights or turn off lights when no activity is occurring in the lighted area. • Avoid nighttime construction during the seabird-fledging period(September 15 to December 15). Hawaiian waterbirds Even though endangered Hawaiian waterbirds (Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, Hawaiian duck, and also the Hawaiian common gallinule)were not seen during this survey, these taxa are known to occur on Hawaii Island. The project area has suitable waterbird habitats, such as open water bodies (e.g. Hakalau Stream, ditch). Therefore, it is not out of the realm of possibility to encounter endangered Hawaiian waterbirds in the Project Area. The following measures will be implemented to minimize or avoid any impacts to Hawaiian Waterbirds: • In areas where waterbirds are known to be present,post and enforce reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on-site. • Because water resources are located within or adjacent to the project site and in-water work will be conducted, incorporate the following applicable aquatic BMPs,based on USFWS's "Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments" (April 2022) into the project design. These BMPs are described below under "Additional Best Management Practices." 5 • A biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology will conduct Hawaiian waterbird nest surveys, where appropriate habitat occurs within the vicinity of the proposed project site,prior to project initiation. Surveys will be performed again within 3 days of project initiation and after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). • If a nest or active brood is found: o Contact the USFWS within 48 hours for further guidance. o Establish and maintain a 100-foot buffer around all active nests and/or broods until the chicks/ducklings have fledged. Do not conduct potentially disruptive activities or habitat alteration within this buffer. o Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology present on the project site during all construction or earth moving activities until the chicks/ducklings fledge to ensure that Hawaiian waterbirds and nests are not adversely impacted. Hawaiian goose (Nene) Although nene were not seen during this survey; they are known to occur on Hawaii Island. There is suitable habitat in the project area, such as open grassy areas in the southeastern portion of the Project Area overlapping the County Park. Therefore, it is possible that nene may visit the Project Area. The following measures will be implemented to minimize or avoid any impacts to nene: • Do not approach, feed, or disturb nene. • If nene are observed loafing or foraging within the project area during the breeding season (September through April),have a biologist familiar with nene nesting behavior survey for nests in and around the project area prior to the resumption of any work. Repeat surveys after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). • Cease all work immediately and contact the Service for further guidance if a nest is discovered within a radius of 150 feet of proposed project, or a previously undiscovered nest is found within the 150-foot radius after work begins. • In areas where nene are known to be present,post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on-site. Green Sea Turtle The Hawaiian green sea turtle (or honu) Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment (DPS) is listed as threatened. Even though HTH observed no turtles in the BSA during their two- day reconnaissance survey, it is possible that honu sometimes visit the eastern most boundary of the Project Area that overlaps the Pacific Ocean at the mouth of Hakalau Bay and the County Beach Park. Map guides published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Island Fisheries Science Center (NOAA PIFSC) do not identify Hakalau Bay as an important basking or nesting site for honu. Additionally, no night work is anticipated during construction, and the illuminated signs and/or beacons required for night time lane closures should not be visible from the beach. The following measures will be implemented to minimize or avoid any impacts to honu: 6 • No vehicle use on, or modification of, the beach/dune environment during the sea turtle nesting or hatching season (May through December), or on beaches where sea turtles are known to bask. • Do not remove or destroy native dune vegetation. • Incorporate applicable Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments into the project design. • A biological monitor familiar with sea turtles will conduct a visual survey of the project site to ensure no basking sea turtles are present prior to start of work. o If a basking sea turtle is found within the project area, cease all mechanical or construction activities within 100 feet until the animal voluntarily leaves the area. o Cease all activities between the basking turtle and the ocean. • Remove any project-related debris, trash, or equipment from the beach or dune if not actively being used. • Do not stockpile project-related materials in the intertidal zone, reef flats, or stream channels. As mentioned above, no night work is anticipated; however, should it be required, additional coordination will be conducted with resource agencies to agree upon appropriate conservation measures, including the following: • Avoid nighttime work during the nesting and hatching season, which extends from May through December. • Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project-related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. - If lights can't be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. • Construction activities adjacent to the beach will be required to reduce ambient outdoor lighting such as: - reducing the height of exterior lighting to below 3 feet and pointed downward or away from the beach; and - minimize light intensity to the lowest level feasible and, when possible, include timers and motion sensors. Flora The IPaC lists four plant species that are either known or expected to be on or near the BSA: •M zahlbruckneri is a long-lived perennial tree in the Rutaceae family. It is medium sized, about 30 to 36 feet tall. No individuals are known to occur in the Hakalau Project Area and the closest designated critical habitat for this species is about 20 miles to the south of the Project Area(USFWS 2020). • G. remyi or nanu is a tree species in the Rubiaceae family ranging from 10 to 43 feet in height. Historically, one plant was reported on the private lands of Hakalau Nui (about 15 miles inland of the Project Area) in 1977 and with a few individuals in the Laupahoehoe area. However, all these plants are believed to now be extirpated(USFWS 2022a). No nanu plants have been reported to occur in Hakalau Gulch, and none were seen during the two-day reconnaissance survey for this Project. 7 •D. kaalaana is a small fern in the Athyriaceae family with decumbent (ground creeping) to erect rhizomes and fronds up to 12 inches long. The species is restricted to the rocky banks of perennial streams and wet forest. D. kaalaana historically occurred in the Kaumana and Papaaloa areas on the Big Island, and also on Kauai and Maui. There are no known wild individuals of this species. •M strigosa var. mauiensis or palapalai is a terrestrial fern in the Dennstaedtiaceae family. This is a medium-sized fern with fronds less than 40 inches long. It is known to typically occur in mesic and wet forests from 1,400 to 6,000 feet on the islands of Hawaii, Maui, and Oahu. In the last 5 to10 years, the only population on Hawaii Island was observed in 2004 in the Waiakea and Piihonua areas. During its field survey, HTH did not identify any of these four endangered plant taxa or other rare native plant species in the Project Area. Given the history of vegetation disturbance in Hakalau Gulch over the last century since the sugar plantation times and the ongoing disturbance as a recreational area and beach park, it is unlikely that the proposed Project would result in a substantial adverse effect on any plant species that is state or federally listed as threatened or endangered, a candidate species for listing, a rare native plant species, or a native plant species of concern. The BSA encompasses a highly disturbed area, and all but three plant species found in the BSA—hala, moa, and water primrose— are non-native. Removal of any of these three plant species is not expected to have an adverse effect on species' populations locally or regionally as these native species are known to have a widespread distribution on Hawaii Island and the State. The Project Area also consists of nearly vertical hill slopes that could not be surveyed by foot and were scanned using binoculars. There is a small possibility that an endangered plant species or other rare native plant species occur on the steep wet hillsides of the Project Area. However, because the Project does not propose to disturb the steep slopes, the Project is not likely to adversely affect these federally protected plant species. Therefore, no avoidance, minimization, or conservation measures are specifically proposed for federally-listed plant species. Additional Best Management Practices HDOT will implement the following applicable BMPs including those from the USFWS "Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments" (April 2022): • Construction staff will be informed of the potential presence of threatened and endangered species, including being provided materials to assist in species identification and appropriate actions if a species enters the work area. • Good housekeeping practices and erosion control device(s) will be employed at the job site to prevent debris and soil from leaving the site. • Authorized dredging and filling-related activities that may result in the temporary or permanent loss of aquatic habitats will be designed to avoid indirect, negative impacts to aquatic habitats beyond the planned project area. • Turbidity and siltation from project-related work will be minimized and contained within the project area by silt containment devices and curtailing work during flooding or adverse tidal and weather conditions. These BMPS will be maintained for the life of the construction period until turbidity and siltation within the project area is stabilized. 8 • All project construction-related debris and sediment containment devices will be removed and disposed of at an approved site. • A litter-control plan will be developed and implemented to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. • All project construction-related materials and equipment(i.e., dredges, vessels,backhoes, silt curtains, etc.) to be placed in an aquatic environment will be inspected for pollutants including,but not limited to; marine-fouling organisms, grease, oil, etc., and cleaned to remove pollutants prior to use. Project-related activities will not result in any debris disposal, non-native species introductions, or attraction of non-native pests to the affected or adjacent aquatic or terrestrial habitats. • Invasive species controls will be maintained to ensure that all materials transported from off-site are free of such species. • Project construction-related materials (e.g., fill) will not be stockpiled in, or in close proximity to aquatic habitats and will be protected from erosion (e.g., with filter fabric, etc.) to prevent materials from being carried into waters by wind, rain, or high surf • Fueling of project-related vehicles and equipment will take place away from the aquatic environment. A contingency plan to control petroleum products accidentally spilled during the project will be developed. The plan will be retained on site with the person responsible for compliance with the plan. Absorbent pads and containment booms will be stored on-site to facilitate the clean-up of accidental petroleum releases. • All deliberately exposed soil or under-layer materials used in the project near water will be protected from erosion and stabilized as soon as possible with geotextile, filter fabric or native or non-invasive vegetation matting, hydro-seeding, etc. Request for Concurrence With the implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures described above, the FHWA has determined that the Hawaii Belt Road,Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat or `opeape`a (Lasiurus cinereus semotus); Hawaiian Seabirds, including the endangered Hawaiian petrel or `ua`u (Pterodroma sandwichensis), the endangered Hawai`i Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the band-rumped storm-petrel or `ake`ake (Oceanodroma Castro), and threatened Newell's Townsend's shearwater or `a`o (Puffinus auricularis newelli); Hawaiian Waterbirds, including the endangered Hawaiian coot or 'alae ke`oke`o (Fulica americana alai), endangered Hawaiian stilt or ae`o (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), and endangered Hawaiian (=koloa) duck (Anas wyvilliana); the threatened Hawaiian Goose or nene (Branta sandvicensis); the threatened Green Sea Turtle or honu (Chelonia mydas); flowering plants including the endangered Alani (Melicope zahlbruckneri) and the endangered Nanu (Gardenia remyi); and ferns and allies including the endangered Deparia kaalaana, and the endangered Microlepia strigose var. mauiensis. We request your concurrence with our may affect, but not likely to adversely affect determination. We respectfully request your response within 60 days of receipt of this letter. 9 If you have any questions,please feel free to contact Meesa Otani, Environmental Engineer, at (808) 541-2316 or by email at meesa.otani@dot.gov. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely yours, Digitally signed by MEESA T.OTANI Date:2023.09.25 16:45:16-10'00' for Richelle M. Takara, P.E. Division Administrator Enclosures cc: Holly Yuen, HDOT, HWY-D .9iz- ... C C.) 0 TI'4/ Allia,:aP , ,,•• \\ z 0 . - 1--= LU < C.) 0 I I., „:" • N 2 3 S . i_ , <0; r7 • —) < • , ,, ,, S. .,". ,. CC 55 • , ,..0" _ ... „.. '..,0 ,. ,.,.. . . ., too • ' \ , , .. 'ex , ..,. . . , 41111k . . . . ' i ,, $ . 7' " ' 4 . 5. .. _ ..- .c.----P- = .:t-, . JD_ co -0 -2 ,, co 0 CL • , ''•" ' ....., cn 7) i":.73 (' SI OD co — 'N . , RS , . • . , CZ _Y- C3 I • x, t....40.0 ,";,,i:',..,;• ''?„.V.1 -..*,,w-,.;,,,,,i ,..,'5,-i\'',;t,',--,. „,,,,f,- ,:y • -.„i — , ,,,„-lp,„, , , ,<< ,,,,,,, , P-:I#., ...,,,, ,,,,,,,,,xe ,.. . - ,r4.,,- , Is' - ,c, • ''''P'''• .71 lit '0'F'` ' e- 0 "g re,, -To Mre, iro,, ye ,, . v,,,.,,,,,,. 'I,- ' 4 ''' ' ,R, y• * ' . ; P. ,' "''', '",";,'''''...'''.„i• . i ' ':'t:' ''').i:''''/L!''''.•44, 't Vh.,..V''!"-',-;fi',/;',',,,,,e ,, ,„,„.„,..;ttiA, ,, - .,.. . ,,,,.• '''''• .;''' .,..''';',:e.',: ' V, - , C.° *7;40-k-L41,4;56-...i.- 4 .11C4i. ?'r N. „......„Y,„•;Le '',..../'"„,,,V,. ;We . ,,aa f,,,e, ''.., I z 2 ‘,.!....K170.'7,,;•,'". 44,,.•,'-;."tZ'Atel k,!.ir. f 4. '".•4' .'fr., -",,l't,'' • 'Irk,-,,,2,,...w",•• "-,,,• • .Yr U...,v,:, ..,,i-,••.zu ...p•-,•,-,,:•,,,•'',00,•1;,,,.„, ,A—",e, • i e•••-.-4,,*. ' se' , ••,.*.i , "..fr,o,, -,,r"''' V u < ;.74,11,144T,Jf.A.",01t:7),,,,;;)7V240.'4"..;',,,,94,4,,s,itz; ".`„:`,. ' '^.,",. 4,,,,,t4",.*" • C.- • k4k....2-.°..',","11, 0 ÷-, '..9.$1':Wita''.;;t4 'lirs,41!tr,',,'„91..... .f:'''fit'., ';',.., '''''''' ..''''',146",,,a;1; ''%; ,.:,;i.,,t,„.1'`.•'''' ' C,,',•41.Aikat`"afta. r'z' o ,,,„heit.,',.j,11,42,,,,,47?..,,,.-,1.,, :4 ,,,,,,1,7,49...4,,,,f, letilke--. ,:,:eit, •. ':=•T's...' "' * -- ,------- cp z =, o_ . . , ^-, 4* ATTACHMENT 2A— SITE PHOTOS Excerpted from Archaeological Inventory Survey (ASM Affiliates, June 2023) - ,, Hakalau Stream Bridge crossing Hakalau Gulch (looking inland) Source:Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Archaeological Inventory Survey(ASM Affiliates,June 2023) -t 1-1•11l�rA F - _ '7Er „s. ti,i , _ , ''' ' . 'e",4141. 1:,.' , ligN r.,,, .. .„l,‘ 4e,r ., „...-„, ..,:,- v-..45...i0.4e,i , s t ryr9 It N f MIF / qr iteril "'''''''''',Q.6....,,,,_ -- -_ 4,.it r „ay6 .,C,p,_ ,. I t4,4i4 .. A�F y , T. *.. ;w" '� 1 6 ; ._dr r-- ,, ,. . :, ,sir# 5, �': f w4 -iia ,A,;,; t a Hakalau Stream Bridge Aerial View(looking upstream) Source:Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Archaeological Inventory Survey(ASM Affiliates,June 2023) ATTACHMENT 2B—SITE PHOTOS Excerpted from Biological Survey Report (HT Harvey, June 2023) •9k � . *y,�; t �x; ' F ;^_- t , 0 .., -< +, r u4' a4 k Aiiil Photo 1. Southeastern Slope of Hakalau Bridge BSA with Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland Note: Gunpowder tree (Trema orientalis) and coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) on the ridgeline and creeping smartweed (Persicaria chinensis) smothering slopes. 'i , ,, ,,. . .., ,„ .0,,,,,, ... _ . , _:: . , h' v 4 -, * a m:! .. ''',.2. Yy wCArF �qya . 1 >, . , .nW 4t . '-r-"'. ' '''''."6"- '4' I ' 4fir''ft. - . - • • •-•'- -: , ., • ' '‘ . { h •-•./ '., iF .ti F' \ ` / ) •-- ,n' Photo 2. Small Grove of Polynesian Trees at the Base of the Southeastern Slope Note: Note the kukui (Aleurites moluccanus), and ulu (Artocarpus altilis) trees in the center surrounded by a Guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus) and other mixed alien herbs. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 11 H.T. Harvey& Associates Biological Survey Report June 2023 ATTACHMENT 2B–SITE PHOTOS (continued) Excerpted from Biological Survey Report (HT Harvey, June 2023) It fry ¢, , x ' ,. • r ' ..,,: -,, ;fie L -T' -+ts�"4 • s A 4 %;_ '"' f^ `+.i ", r ed'� ' raY- Photo 3. View of Open Streamside Parkland on the Southern Bank of Hakalau Stream, Viewed from the Northern Bank Note the canopy of coconut palms (Cocos nucifera), hala trees (Pandanus tectorius), and common ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia) with an open, herbaceous understory. ti a F C , . • ry , , .py4 ", Y1 l''''. . ',1: ' i'N.•"2 , , > '.'‘,' ' t )f \ 0,1 r ,s h- 3{T \ \fi '+ . A p''in t. . F. - .. Photo 4. Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland in the Southwestern Portion of the Hakalau Bridge BSA Note: Roadside dominated by Guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus), and paca ferns (Diplazium esculentum). Ridgeline of mixed alien trees. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 12 H.T. Harvey& Associates Biological Survey Report June 2023 a E cr. oa (2 E .o � y. u g a ** 's P 41 -.4'3..----:-,, '' V N p, 5.4J RA S C. s\O. nm 1 `Y JoR'2 8 -8O S R • b . 1. I O Q��kCO co • ' 7=D1 it• , ' ` y 75 f CC M, ° -� 110 • I .^L '3 u) \ co as :',,i'',.,‘'n''' \ • "'-:, T. ':'''r " ',, 1:, .k', 11, aytico t 'r 4t :*%144:1* y,; '%,. .:$.80,, l' M 1 VAS-.7y;(r> y, 4 x� n t; + l't 'fi a ,.;`,: Arlo ti`11 ' o /a Lu \ 1 , � r �7 ' ",I Z p L � r 0. 'gy , r .. '' o , !.*: o m� E 41 Jy � 9 l N Oirn Z F ? a l Z O i L Q N Q OU \ a ' ¢ a= Z r y� Na O 3 a OJ �\ ©1 zL,J 1_ ¢a � OG o U Z ¢ ~ o® ' �, ¢ <0 Oa W OL a ¢z Q z z 1' F LLLLT., ,i A ~ Q a p A , 8 aH o a 3 -,,,ao dg g y+ a o o , _ Fo a¢ a43 , ., j g1owfl 3Y Nil b E x li a bH s ¢ g Akm en( i. I 4 x x x e _ Y 2113 '1 Y Z O0 a CE 0O W �6� e1 Q Adm,s o �n 0 o d - / •.< Z — .7 4',% Ilan '''',\ 010 2 CC p = O J Q Q !H, Q 6y a Lu o o (n J Cn w W ~ U z u_ IA O Q O CC J W LL 0 sa, IA 0_ 0 Q a Ll_ Q _1 Z m H m -3 Oo 0 a dCL W O §' O _ U) O Hz �S Q = 0 � _ 0 � g Y D �' O H 2 o o��aa o N >- W Q � / C w CIC r, Q o 0 0- W w 0 = 00 >z 0 Z o 2 a O U H W0 ti z a U '11-' to� H x x x bz x 3 LVO 3NOHd A9 030VNVIN A9 93N9IS3a N ZZOZ 'AON 9988-££6(808) H-AMH 'ONI` S) (Vld CI:V'ZZ-6Z-01 .11 10, OM01H5111 1001—OSH 107171 0Z-00—ll7WO 10VLL00-131—b9 010 00100W0-01090-0Z\MOONO 00\'z MON ONIM0210 2 „9-,9 II„9-,9 x 0 0 i®■ ” at 4,' E h L,iI�Wk d ! ' zoo iii z °9N 1n9b 6u��eag , m�k L! g /1 , '1' o 111'1 0 ,— / l °9N 49.98 I 1 LJ-LLP. — v P. m ii 9N 4999 L1 L1 '‘,3-‘.---rt„-,.°3, ( Il ,2o or '0N 4u9g L L1 a 1- I;I o I 6 '°N flung Q LJ-LL o 9 °uN 49ag L]tL- a Q ,,, 0 1---M L °9N 49.99 -H m i o U 43 o I-�I, I c J LJ LL_ m g 9 °nN49a97 ,I}, 'I �o , � '{ "m c m 0 soN age ( I 1I l b uN49.99 s:_ ''-'-'-= s -- 1 I'• L 111 } � '9N 4999 ' .'I L" 0 -I-La E °9N 4U99 -_ I,1 ISI IL I '° OZI W ¢a yt Ft aJ 0,-a-3,,,2,-. c a5 '9N 1n9b 6uiaeeg o a i- -Li I I 1 L LI`r E TN' Ir V a SII 0..d of,£z-ZL 3.lo, ma,r3 Nnd l010,,SHvI...zoE 2z-z,-roves,Auloa-Gd-ae as n,..-z,o>o-o,v...Dovz 3rvvN woroma 00 N Y g s 2 d ! 'ca LL N ~ M - - 8 .= Zvi.® 09/ _ P O 1--Lo., 2a o� A Z `°N JN9b" ?... 0A ad ,o 11.1 m N 3 // ________------70_4_ 06/ i 4' i L,,,Q /L7 N h y 0/ °N Ju°8 . „-`-'Tr- N { ti o Q Q a aILL.2rg c5 . OZ/ l �,� Zl'°N loos •• Ott 1: A.15±11•'"7..... :00/ 08 I . Iv_. 09 i • �. r,{ i • ; 09 !l'°N(uag ••. • L�] 6 m m 0/'°N/uag ...GIRL_1' _i 9.. —FL A-0 Y ro o ...... L nJ -I, ib s .°N,uaa1): .. 0 0 8 °oN loos Cj -'-t111.-0-'''' U Q � F � m 4 ° c e/eNe 0 Ooa 2 'oN/uag� ,g am-12 E � ..d Q M • •o O�eW V ... ... v . .6 i o as/eM 6/U �z, ��,� _.g O rt, 9 °N Juag _..o J } o Not— o-rr ,j "...:4"--„ z °0N l998 • J 194j1 . -rg. ..,"2• 8` co ew C o r jr� o . °N lua8 o-� .1-0 m o L._ 06 o c c :Pg. 0 o� '-09 e Z '°N/uag •r� e _..08 8 8 _r I ............ . '.2' o .'4') h oN existing Irk W W Gov't Road rjr oll I 'EN loos ::, 09/ vE 08/ ..... /'uN l°9b' I1 iw o ,00Z o I 0 ti V 0.e,33 3z-,,-Le 3.1°,e em°n3,3 Na,e MI.,.vI e go3 g-z,-3ntavo,°taro°-,3,aa as nv-ggo z,e>o-eet...°°\z gig,govgn dLLd A v . \ 2 , , , , , \ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , \fi @ \\ ) 1 2\§ e \ • _ , ^ ` ® 4 B -°° � gym& z A i zoN r> \} q (44 j ){ , _ \ i Q ®2/ ✓ \ \ .- \$2 ! : E « =G( = m [ \ 7AN ,_ § i \ } "-',° � ) 7 » N ma> , . , \ /` ) \/ 2. Z\ - \ \ , ( E Q SA > m ma> �]�� -� ez er > N ma> '' - - - - - - - — -'2 \�\ _ q 2 (j \/� 1 } Z rNma>{({ j'� - - - - - - - - B 1 \\\ ] 7 vv vvd \N i >- «ma; \ \� C - i� �' /9 . �R � \ "\ ~ : � :- m m> = : Q- \ § ±a Q > m m«> ; _ - _ - �- �� m 0- 3� « \\ /�Z ; m m«» \ - , . \« » « / \/ , w maf \ - - m - . i \ -9.2 \N 7 r N ma> ]T�- -�- - --,, - ff / \ )z- «ma; \18 ^ : ° ® \ _ 0. \d{ - @ 7 ! m EL/ d. N. De •22 r \ • § T. , § 0 » ; � % , v ! w <J _ \E \\ \\ \ > ~ : / \ 3 { \ \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' ui ,1 \ � ` 2 @ Q ` e^ r \ k\§ 1T, ' : © E@4 � \ 6 ~ 3 \} \ \k( ® )8 : 3 (; § ®2/ § ) k \$/ ! : E o =G� = m [ \ / § / ){ } \ ) t e /) ) / 2 % / E z \\ 6 A ~13 \\ Q \/ \ • \ \ ~ Q \ \ / )� \2 \ t /% \) )) / �G.)- _--- '5'A - - \} y` \ F,-CU _� «« j/ /Q � .»« � ` ��� a« . � . . ` x � >>y» 2 . � \ y \� . �� 2« ^ \ � ?\ . . \ ^^ . .. yy>x.. * . . s>a m _ y « ©\»««©» 2 &© : z ,•:.:::, . z }\ . . � © \ 2%\©«»»««© • A \ ,.: / , w _a ..w ^ z \ \^ ° ^ - � : d«^ \ . _ . . :"...' x. » « : « » 7.y \ /\ m�' . . \ . »» ( /y\ w ©© \®.. ..a»:y/gy> ƒ »\226. \ % . : % ( < ! 2 . ^m : \ 2` �~ ^S` . o y: \ \ , . . am»ex»:'. _ 9»zzy - Es / Lo: �. . , . . . . .. .. /� \( ~~ ��- ^^ »» \ . ' \ . .v»»»: .�v x . ax, . . . : © . q / � ©«»d§\aa/\\\\»/ . y\ �-�_� . : Qa \\ % ® , Ea y\ $66 GJ ._ \\�� ^` �- Q+ \3 I - - ( %/ ) © (» ,:i-C) ® ƒ3 » \\ ( 4 2 ƒ$ \§ )) Ct L /\ \\ e k!®` )`) \ k 9 dot v ATTACHMENT 5 United States Department of the Interior VI/7,, •4{ FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE _. Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard,Box 50088 Honolulu,HI 96850-5000 Phone: (808) 792-9400 Fax: (808) 792-9580 In Reply Refer To: July 21, 2023 Project Code: 2023-0014325 Project Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened and endangered species, as well as designated critical habitat that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and that may be affected by project related actions. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Please contact the Service's Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (PIFWO) at 808-792-9400 if you have any questions regarding your IPaC species list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may adversely affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information.An updated list may be requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological 07/21/2023 2 Evaluation, similar to a Biological Assessment, be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation are described at 50 CFR 402.12. Due to the significant number of listed species found on each island within PIFWO's regulatory jurisdiction, and the difficulty in accurately mapping ranges for species that we have limited information about, your species list may include more species than if you obtained the list directly from a Service biologist. We recommend you use the species links in IPaC to view the life history, habitat descriptions, and recommended avoidance and minimization measures to assist with your initial determination of whether the species or its habitat may occur within your project area. If appropriate habitat is present for a listed species, we recommend surveys be conducted to determine whether the species is also present. If no surveys are conducted, we err on the side of the species, by regulation, and assume the habitat is occupied. Updated avoidance and minimization measures for plants and animals, best management practices for work in or near aquatic environments, and invasive species biosecurity protocols can be found on the PIFWO website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/library. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that a listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http:// www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/index. Non-federal entities can also use the IPaC generated species list to develop Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. We recommend HCP applicants coordinate with the Service early during the HCP development process. For additional information on HCPs, the Habitat Conservation Planning handbook can be found at https:// www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/habitat-conservation-planning-handbook-entire.pdf. Please be aware that wind energy projects should follow the Service's wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds. Listed birds and the Hawaiian hoary bat may also be affected by wind energy development and we recommend development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for those species, as described above. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers can be found at: ■ http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers ■ http://www.towerkill.com ■ http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/comtow We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation actions that benefit threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act in accordance with section 7(a)(1). Please include the Consultation Tracking Number associated with your IPaC species list in any 07/21/2023 request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Please feel free to contact us at PIFWO_admin@fws.gov or 808-792-9400 if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally listed species and federally designated critical habitat. Attachment(s): ■ Official Species List 07/21/2023 1 OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Box 50088 Honolulu, HI 96850-5000 (808) 792-9400 07/21/2023 2 PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code: 2023-0014325 Project Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Type: Bridge - Maintenance Project Description: Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is located at Milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) on the Island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00" N, 155°07'47.00"W. The proposed bridge work can be divided into 3 major activities: 1) remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3) upgrade bridge railings. The construction duration will be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction. Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@19.89939305,-155.12949768013715,14z ' h "la" or -\\T , ;.451,`9. . s' w /. Ny b { f # 116, Counties: Hawaii County, Hawaii 07/21/2023 3 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 13 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries', as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. 1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. MAMMALS NAME STATUS Hawaiian Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus semotus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/770 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6477.p df 07/21/2023 4 BIRDS NAME STATUS Band-rumped Storm-petrel Oceanodroma castro Endangered Population:USA(HI) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1226 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.p df Hawaiian (=koloa) Duck Anas wyvilliana Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7712 General project design guidelines: https://i pac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRAI documents/generated/6934.pdf Hawaiian Coot Fulica americana alai Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7233 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.p df Hawaiian Goose Branta (=Nesochen) sandvicensis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1627 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/prof ect!PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/692 5.p df Hawaiian Petrel Pterodroma sandwichensis Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6746 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.pdf Hawaiian Stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2082 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.p df Newell's Townsend's Shearwater Pu f finus auricularis newelli Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2048 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.p df 07/21/2023 5 REPTILES NAME STATUS Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened Population: Central North Pacific DPS No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6929.p df FLOWERING PLANTS NAME STATUS Alani Melicope zahlbruckneri Endangered There is final critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7338 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7060.pdf Nanu Gardenia remyi Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5835 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7051.p df FERNS AND ALLIES NAME STATUS Deparia kaalaana Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:haps://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9612 Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4737 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7051.p df CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S)MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. 07/21/2023 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency: Private Entity Name: Malie McClellan Address: 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2400 City: Honolulu State: HI Zip: 96813 Email malie.mcclellan@wsp.com Phone: 8085611324 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION Lead Agency: Federal Highway Administration Name: Meesa Otani Email: meesa.otani@dot.gov Phone: 8085612316 QC`���I/;rhFF ISH a,R7GYIJPR United States Department of the Interior SERV.CR PSI • ! -.,Q s' FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE , S1411CH 3` V.6 Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard,Room 3-122 Honolulu, Hawai`i 96850 In Reply Refer To: October 3, 2023 2023-0014325-S7-001 Meesa Otani U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Hawai`i Federal-Aid Division 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Rm 3-229 Honolulu, HI 96850 Subject: Informal Consultation Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project, Hakalau, Island of Hawai`i Dear Meesa Otani: Thank you for your letter of September 25, 2023, requesting our concurrence with your determination that the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA)proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project, at Hawai`i Belt Road, Route 19, Milepost 15.3 in Hakalau on the Island of Hawai`i, may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the following federally listed species (there are no areas designated as critical habitat in the area): • The `ope`ape`a or endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinerus semotus) • The nene or threatened Hawaiian goose (Branta sandvicensis) • The ae`o or endangered Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), `alae ke`oke`o or endangered Hawaiian coot (Fulica americana alai), `alae `ula or endangered Hawaiian gallinule (Gallinula galeata sandvicensis), and koloa or endangered Hawaiian duck (Anas wyvilliana), collectively referred to as Hawaiian waterbirds • The `ua`u or endangered Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), `ake`ake or endangered Hawai`i DPS of the band-rumped storm petrel (Oceanodroma castro), and the `a`o or threatened Newell's shearwater (Puffinus auricularis newelli), collectively referred to as Hawaiian seabirds • The threatened green sea turtle or honu (Chelonia mydas) • Alani (Melicope zahlbruckneri) (endangered) • Nanu (Gardenia remyi) (endangered) • Deparia kaalaana (endangered) • Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis (endangered) PACIFIC REGION 1 IDAHO, OREGON', WASHINGTON, AMERICAN SAMOA, GUAM, HAWAII, NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS 'PARTIAL Meesa Otani 2 Proposed Action The purpose of the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project (project) includes the following: • Restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park by removing or remediating lead- contaminated soils in the area surrounding the bridge; • Allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge by rehabilitating the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and • Increase resilience of the bridge to extreme natural events. Hakalau Stream Bridge is a steel trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, over Hakalau Stream at a height of roughly 134 feet (41 meters) above mean sea level at the top edges of the gulch. The bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge including Hakalau Beach Park which lies below and adjacent to the bridge. Although the lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, Hakalau Beach Park has been closed to the public since 2017 because the area surrounding the bridge is in need of remediation. A series of soil samples taken over multiple years determined that the degree of lead contamination in the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge exceeds State of Hawai`i acceptable limits. Lead abatement is needed to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe to reopen to the public. Approximately 2.5 acres are proposed for remediation. According to the Remedial Action Alternative Analysis (RAA) prepared for this project(May 2023), HDOT proposes to remove all soils exceeding 200 mg/kg for an estimated depth of up to 24 inches and replace it with clean fill. Any associated vegetation including large trees in this area would be replaced with new vegetation. Where high levels of lead contamination exist, remediation could involve removal and disposal of contaminated soil at a permitted mainland facility. Where lead levels are lower, the contaminated soil may be removed and disposed of at a permitted local facility. Due to the deterioration of the bridge's steel trestles and scour conditions undermining the foundations of the bridge, rehabilitation of the bridge's substructure requires replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents. In-water work would be required as a part of this Project, including drilling of shafts in the stream bed. A temporary trestle bridge, which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. The construction duration would be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. The nighttime lane closures may require illuminated signs and/or beacons for safety purposes, but the lights would be for road sign visibility and delineation only (i.e., minimal illumination) and should not be visible from the beach. The following best management practices for work in aquatic environments will be incorporated into the project design to minimize the degradation of water quality and minimize the impacts to Meesa Otani 3 fish and wildlife resources including those from the USFWS "Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments" (April 2022): • Construction staff will be informed of the potential presence of threatened and endangered species, including being provided materials to assist in species identification and appropriate actions if a species enters the work area. • Good housekeeping practices and erosion-control device(s) will be employed at the job site to prevent debris and soil from leaving the site. • Dredging and filling in the marine or aquatic environment will be designed to avoid or minimize the loss of special aquatic site habitat (beaches, coral reefs, wetlands, etc.) and the function of such habitat shall be replaced. • Authorized dredging and filling-related activities that may result in the temporary or permanent loss of aquatic habitats will be designed to avoid indirect, negative impacts to aquatic habitats beyond the planned Project Area. • Turbidity and siltation from project-related work will be minimized and contained within the Project Area by silt containment devices and curtailing work during flooding or adverse tidal and weather conditions. These BMPS will be maintained for the life of the construction period until turbidity and siltation within the Project Area is stabilized. • No project-related materials (fill, revetment rock, pipe, etc.) will be stockpiled in the water (intertidal zones, reef flats, stream channels, wetlands, etc.) or on beach habitats. • All project construction-related debris and sediment containment devices will be removed and disposed of at an approved site. • All debris removed from the marine/aquatic environment will be disposed of at an approved upland or ocean dumping site. • A litter-control plan will be developed and implemented to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. • All project construction-related materials and equipment (i.e., dredges, vessels, backhoes, silt curtains, etc.) to be placed in an aquatic environment will be inspected for pollutants including, but not limited to; marine-fouling organisms, grease, oil, etc., and cleaned to remove pollutants prior to use. Project-related activities will not result in any debris disposal, non-native species introductions, or attraction of non-native pests to the affected or adjacent aquatic or terrestrial habitats. • Invasive species controls will be maintained to ensure that all materials transported from off- site are free of such species (see enclosure-Invasive Species Biosecurity Protocols). • Project construction-related materials (e.g., fill) will not be stockpiled in, or in close proximity to aquatic habitats and will be protected from erosion (e.g., with filter fabric, etc.) to prevent materials from being carried into waters by wind, rain, or high surf • Fueling of project-related vehicles and equipment will take place away from the aquatic environment. A contingency plan to control petroleum products accidentally spilled during the project will be developed. The plan will be retained on site with the person responsible for compliance with the plan. Absorbent pads and containment booms will be stored on-site to facilitate the clean-up of accidental petroleum releases. • All deliberately exposed soil or under-layer materials used in the project near water will be protected from erosion and stabilized as soon as possible with geotextile, filter fabric or native or non-invasive vegetation matting, hydro-seeding, etc. • No contamination (trash or debris disposal, non-native species introductions, attraction of nonnative pests, etc.) of adjacent habitats (reef flats, channels, open-ocean, stream channels, Meesa Otani 4 wetlands, beaches, forests, etc.) shall result from project-related activities. This will be accomplished by implementing a litter-control plan and developing a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Plan (https://www.fws.gov/policy/A1750fwl.html) to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. • Any under-layer fills used in the project shall be protected from erosion with stones (or core- loc units) as soon after placement as practicable. • Any soil exposed near water as part of the project shall be protected from erosion after exposure and stabilized as soon as practicable with native or non-invasive vegetation. Biological Survey Report H.T. Harvey& Associates (HTH)prepared a draft Biological Survey Report (June 2023). In the Biological Survey Report, HTH presented the findings of reconnaissance-level botanical and wildlife (birds and mammals) surveys to document species and biological issues of concern, including the presence of any species that are state or federally listed as threatened or endangered, candidate species for listing, or sensitive habitats. The report also identified the potential impacts of implementing the proposed project and conservation measures that may be considered for inclusion into the planning and design phase, if any listed species, candidate species, or sensitive habitats are found in the biological study area (BSA). The results of the survey are outlined under specific species below. Effects to Federally Listed Species Hawaiian Hoary Bat Although surveys did not occur for the Hawaiian hoary bat during the survey, there are numerous records for this species on Hawai`i Island. Hawaiian hoary bats may hunt for flying insect prey along roadways, gulches, and open areas and occasionally roost in large, dense-foliage trees (typically greater than 15-foot-tall) such as those in Hakalau Gulch within the BSA. Given that numerous trees identified in the Project Area are potential suitable day roosting habitat and the abundance of Hawaiian hoary bats reported for Hawai`i Island, we expect that the Hawaiian hoary bat may be present and exposed to project-related activities. The remediation action of this Project requires the removal of several acres of soil and vegetation in Hakalau Gulch that may include large trees. Elimination of these trees will likely reduce the number of trees available for bats to roost. However, the project is unlikely to result in adverse effects to the bats because tall trees and roosting habitat are abundant and the species is not known to be habitat limited. Additionally, the following avoidance and minimization measure will be implemented to protect the Hawaiian hoary bat: • Avoid disturbing, removing, or trimming woody plants greater than 15-ft tall during the bat birthing and pup rearing season, from June 1 to September 15. • Avoid use of barbed wire. If bats are present during construction, we expect human presence and disturbance will cause them to leave the site. We expect that these disturbances be short term and intermittent and would not result in measurable disruptions of their normal behaviors, nor would there be reductions in the reproductive success or fitness of the bats. Therefore, effects of the project on feeding, transiting, and roosting bats are expected to be insignificant. Meesa Otani 5 Because woody plants greater than 15 ft tall would not be removed, pups that are unable to fly are extremely unlikely to be injured or killed. Barbed wire will not be used and it is extremely unlikely that Hawaiian hoary bats are at risk from entanglement with barbed wire. Therefore, effects to the Hawaiian hoary bat from vegetation removal and barbed wire use are discountable. Hawaiian Seabirds No specific night-time seabird surveys were conducted in the Project Area,but Hawaiian seabirds may traverse the Project Area at night during the breeding, nesting, and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Outdoor lighting attracts seabirds and could result in seabird disorientation, fallout, and injury or mortality. Night work is not anticipated during construction, but nighttime lane closures may require illuminated signs and/or beacons for safety purposes to provide sign visibility and delineation only (i.e., minimal illumination). In the unlikely event that night work is needed, the following measures would be incorporated into the project to avoid or minimize potential impacts to Hawaiian seabirds: • Fully shield all outdoor lights so bulbs are only visible from below bulb height and only used when necessary. • Install automatic motion sensor switches and timers on all outdoor lights or turn off lights when no activity is occurring in the lighted area. • Avoid nighttime construction during the seabird-fledging period (September 15 to December 15). The project will implement Service-recommended avoidance and minimization measures to avoid adverse effects to Hawaiian seabirds. Hawaiian seabirds traversing the area at night are unlikely to be measurably disrupted from their normal behaviors. Therefore, effects to Hawaiian seabirds are insignificant. Hawaiian waterbirds Even though endangered Hawaiian waterbirds (Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, Hawaiian duck, and also the Hawaiian common gallinule)were not seen during this survey, these taxa are known to occur on Hawai`i Island. The Project Area has suitable waterbird habitats, such as open water bodies (e.g. Hakalau Stream, ditch). Therefore, it is not out of the realm of possibility to encounter endangered Hawaiian waterbirds in the Project Area. The following measures will be implemented to minimize or avoid any impacts to Hawaiian Waterbirds: • In areas where waterbirds are known to be present,post and enforce reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on-site. • Because water resources are located within or adjacent to the project site and in-water work will be conducted, incorporate the following applicable aquatic BMPs,based on USFWS's "Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments" (April 2022) into the project design. These BMPs are described below under"Additional Best Management Practices." • A biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology will conduct Hawaiian waterbird nest surveys, where appropriate habitat occurs within the vicinity of the proposed project site, prior to project initiation. Surveys will be performed again within 3 days of project initiation and after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). Meesa Otani 6 • If a nest or active brood is found, contact the USFWS within 48 hours for further guidance, establish and maintain a 100-foot buffer around all active nests and/or broods until the chicks/ducklings have fledged, avoid potentially disruptive activities or habitat alteration within this buffer, have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology present on the project site during all construction or earth moving activities until the chicks/ducklings fledge to ensure that Hawaiian waterbirds and nests are not adversely impacted. Based on the proposed project design and implementation of Service-recommended avoidance and minimization measures, Hawaiian waterbird nests, chicks, and fledglings would not be injured or killed, and adults would not be kept from the nests. Hawaiian waterbirds are unlikely to be measurably disrupted from their normal behaviors. Therefore, effects to Hawaiian waterbirds are insignificant. Hawaiian goose (Nene) Although nene were not seen during the survey; they are known to occur on Hawai`i Island. There is suitable habitat in the Project Area, such as open grassy areas in the southeastern portion of the Project Area overlapping the County Park. Therefore, it is possible that nene may visit the Project Area. The following measures will be implemented to minimize or avoid any impacts to nene: • Do not approach, feed, or disturb nene. • If nene are observed loafing or foraging within the Project Area during the breeding season (September through April), have a biologist familiar with nene nesting behavior survey for nests in and around the Project Area prior to the resumption of any work. Repeat surveys after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). • Cease all work immediately and contact the Service for further guidance if a nest is discovered within a radius of 150 feet of proposed project, or a previously undiscovered nest is found within the 150-foot radius after work begins. • In areas where nene are known to be present,post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on-site. Service-recommended avoidance and minimization measures for the nene will be implemented. Because project personel will not interact with nene and a biologist will be on site if nene occur during the breeding season, project personnel are unlikely to step on or crush nests. Additionally, because reduced speed limit signs will be used, nene and their nests are unlikely to be run over and killed by vehicles. Nene present and exposed to any project-related work may temporarily leave the area or be flushed from their nest,but because the project will bring a biologist on site if nene are present during the breeding season to create buffer zones around nests, nene and their nests are unlikely to be measurably disrupted from their normal behaviors. Therefore, effects to the nene are discountable. Green Sea Turtle The Hawaiian green sea turtle (or honu) Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment (DPS) is listed as threatened. Even though HTH observed no turtles in the BSA during their two day reconnaissance survey, it is possible that honu sometimes visit the eastern most boundary of Meesa Otani 7 the Project Area that overlaps the Pacific Ocean at the mouth of Hakalau Bay and the County Beach Park. Map guides published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Island Fisheries Science Center (NOAA PIFSC) do not identify Hakalau Bay as an important basking or nesting site for honu. Additionally, no night work is anticipated during construction, and the illuminated signs and/or beacons required for nighttime lane closures should not be visible from the beach. The following measures will be implemented to minimize or avoid any impacts to honu: • No vehicle use on, or modification of, the beach/dune environment during the sea turtle nesting or hatching season (May through December), or on beaches where sea turtles are known to bask. • Do not remove or destroy native dune vegetation. • Incorporate applicable Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments into the project design. • A biological monitor familiar with sea turtles will conduct a visual survey of the project site to ensure no basking sea turtles are present prior to start of work. o If a basking sea turtle is found within the Project Area, cease all mechanical or construction activities within 100 feet until the animal voluntarily leaves the area. o Cease all activities between the basking turtle and the ocean. • Remove any project-related debris, trash, or equipment from the beach or dune if not actively being used. • Do not stockpile project-related materials in the intertidal zone, reef flats, or stream channels. • As mentioned above, no night work is anticipated; however, should it be required, additional coordination will be conducted with resource agencies to agree upon appropriate conservation measures, including the following: • Avoid nighttime work during the nesting and hatching season, which extends from May through December. o Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project-related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. • If lights can't be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. o Construction activities adjacent to the beach will be required to reduce ambient outdoor lighting such as: • reducing the height of exterior lighting to below 3 feet and pointed downward or away from the beach; and • minimize light intensity to the lowest level feasible and, when possible, include timers and motion sensors. Based on the proposed project design and implementation of Service-recommended avoidance and minimization measures, Hawaiian sea turtle nests, eggs, and hatchlings would not be injured or killed, and adults would not be kept from the nests. Hawaiian sea turtles are unlikely to be measurably disrupted from their normal behaviors. Therefore, effects to Hawaiian sea turtles are insignificant. Flora The IPaC lists four plant species that are either known or expected to be on or near the BSA: Meesa Otani 8 • M zahlbruckneri is a long-lived perennial tree in the Rutaceae family. It is medium sized, about 30 to 36 feet tall. No individuals are known to occur in the Hakalau Project Area and the closest designated critical habitat for this species is about 20 miles to the south of the Project Area. • G. remyi or nanu is a tree species in the Rubiaceae family ranging from 10 to 43 feet in height. Historically, one plant was reported on the private lands of Hakalau Nui (about 15 miles inland of the Project Area) in 1977 and with a few individuals in the Laupahoehoe area. However, all these plants are believed to now be extirpated (USFWS 2022a). No nanu plants have been reported to occur in Hakalau Gulch, and none were seen during the two-day reconnaissance survey for the Project. • D. kaalaana is a small fern in the Athyriaceae family with decumbent (ground creeping) to erect rhizomes and fronds up to 12 inches long. The species is restricted to the rocky banks of perennial streams and wet forest. D. kaalaana historically occurred in the Kaumana and Papa`aloa areas on the Big Island, and also on Kaua`i and Maui. There are no known wild individuals of this species. • M. strigosa var. mauiensis or palapalai is a terrestrial fern in the Dennstaedtiaceae family. This is a medium-sized fern with fronds less than 40 inches long. It is known to typically occur in mesic and wet forests from 1,400 to 6,000 feet on the islands of Hawai`i, Maui, and Oahu. In the last 5 tol0 years, the only population on Hawai`i Island was observed in 2004 in the Waiakea and Pi`ihonua areas. These plants or other rare native plant species were not observed in the surveys that occured in the Project Area. Given the history of vegetation disturbance in Hakalau Gulch over the last century since the sugar plantation times and the ongoing disturbance as a recreational area and beach park, it is unlikely that the proposed Project would result in adverse effects on any plants that are federally listed. The BSA encompasses a highly disturbed area, and all but three plant species found in the BSA—hala(Pandanus tectorius), moa(Psilotum nudum), and water primrose (Ludwigia peploides)— are non-native. Removal of any of these three plant species is not expected to have an adverse effect on species' populations locally or regionally as these native species are known to have a widespread distribution on Hawai`i Island and the State. The Project Area also consists of nearly vertical hill slopes that could not be surveyed by foot and were scanned using binoculars. There is a small possibility that an endangered plant species or other rare native plant species occur on the steep wet hillsides of the Project Area. However, because the Project does not propose to disturb the steep slopes, the Project is not likely to adversely affect these federally protected plant species. Based on the proposed project design and condition of the habitat where work would occur, it is extremely unlikley that there would be adverse effects to federally listed plants, and the effects are considered discountable. Conclusion We have reviewed our data and conducted an analysis of the potential consequences to ESA listed species from your project actions. By incorporating the conservation measures listed above, adverse effects to federally listed species are extremely unlikely to occur (discountable) or are not measurable (insignificant). Because impacts from the proposed project are discountable or insignificant, we concur with your determination that the proposed actions may Meesa Otani 9 affect but are not likely to adversely affect the Hawaiian hoary bat, Hawaiian goose, Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, Hawaiian gallinule, Hawaiian duck, Hawaiian petrel, Hawaii DPS of the band-rumped storm petrel, Newell's Shearwater, green sea turtle and 4 federally listed plant species. There is no designated critical habitat in the Project Area. Please inform us the type of Army Corps permit you are obtaining in order to comply with Clean Water Act, Section 404, under the authorities of which the Service has additional oversight responsibilities. Reinitiation of consultation is required and shall be requested by the Federal agency, where discretionary Federal involvement or control over the action has been retained or is authorized by law and: (1) new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; (2) if the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this letter; or (3) if a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the identified action. We appreciate your efforts to conserve threatened and endangered species. If you have any questions,please contact, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Jay Nelson at jay_nelson@fws.gov. Sincerely, LINDSY Digitally signed by LINDSY ASMAN ASMAN 11ate:0:59 39-10 00 3 Island Team Manager Maui Nui and Hawai`i Island cc: Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office Administrative Staff Enclosure: Invasive Species Biosecurity Protocols Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Endangered Species Act Section 7 National Marine Fisheries Service JOSH GREEN,M.D. 0 „ EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR /�/(/ ''z ~,� DIRECTOR qJ,{J'r ' k Deputy Directors HIGHWAY DESIGN BRANCH,ROOM 688A , 'it_ �% FORD N.FUCHIGAMI BRIDGE DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 611 DREANALEE K.KALILI CADASTRAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 600 TAMMY L.LEE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688A HIGHWAY DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 609 ROBIN K.SHISHIDO HYDRAULIC DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 636 STATE OF HAWAII TECHNICAL DESIGN SECTION,ROOM 688 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN REPLY REFER TO 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 HWY-DS 2.1653 July 18, 2023 Mr. Michael Tosatto Regional Administrator, Pacific Islands Regional Office National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA Inouye Regional Center,NMFS/PIRO 1845 Wasp Boulevard, Building 176 Honolulu, Hawaii 96818 Dear Mr. Tosatto: Subject: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Section 7, Endangered Species Act Informal Consultation Request for Species List The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is proposing the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project, located along Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19) near Hilo on the island of Hawaii. The FHWA is providing funding for these improvements. Therefore, the FHWA requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and other federal requirements including Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act(ESA) of 1973, as amended(Section 7). On behalf of FHWA, HDOT would like to request a list of threatened and endangered species and critical habitats within the vicinity of the project to enable an appropriate determination for this project under Section 7 of the ESA. Letters to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall be transmitted under the HDOT letterhead. All determination letters regarding the findings will be transmitted under the FHWA letterhead. Project Overview Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is located at Milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19) on the island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00"north, 155°07'47.00"west. This steel trestle bridge is 775 feet long with a deck width of roughly 38 feet. Please refer to the enclosed map of the project location and photos of the bridge. Mr. Michael Tosatto HWY-DS 2.1653 July 18, 2023 Page 2 The proposed bridge work can be divided into three major activities: 1)remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3)upgrade bridge railings. Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park. Although the lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, remediation is needed for the surrounding areas beneath the bridge. Remediation may involve removal or encapsulation of lead contaminated soils or implementation of controls to prevent access to lead contaminated areas. Soil removal activities could disturb up to 24 inches of vegetation and topsoil. A combination of these solutions may be incorporated as an over-all solution. The bridge's substructure rehabilitation will be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents. By replacing the steel bents with concrete bents, the substructure will be reconstructed, but will allow the superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs. The concrete bents will be installed using six-foot diameter drilled shafts with concrete caps, some of which will be within the streambed. A temporary trestle bridge, which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Refer to the enclosed figures for an illustration of a typical tower and bent at Hakalau Stream Bridge and a sketch of the proposed design. The bridge will not be widened, but the bridge railings will be upgraded to meet current safety standards. The project area, including the construction staging area and foot access areas, is shown in blue on the Project Area figure. This area will extend beyond the roadway right-of-way area under the bridge and along an existing privately owned access road. Primary access to perform the work on the bridge substructure will be from the access roads along the stream bank. There should be only limited traffic impacts to bridge users, as bent replacement can occur incrementally to allow for continued use of the bridge. Work on the bridge deck will be limited to the bridge railings and will require single lane closures for worker safety. The construction duration will be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. Should night work be required, additional coordination will be conducted with resource agencies to agree upon appropriate conservation measures such as shielding outdoor lighting. Best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. BMPs for in-water and land-based construction will be implemented in accordance with "An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii",by the Federal Highway Administration and Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2008). In-water BMPs may Mr. Michael Tosatto HWY-DS 2.1653 July 18, 2023 Page 3 include deployment of full-depth silt curtains, sand bags with or without a plastic lining, or some other means to contain the work area. Because there is in-water work, HDOT is coordinating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and anticipates obtaining a Nationwide Permit from USACE with a blanket Water Quality Certification from the Department of Health. Species and Habitat Information Request We request that your office provide any pertinent information concerning threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat in the project area. We also request that your office share with us any specific or general concerns you may have regarding the project. Should you have any questions, please contact our Project Manager, Ms. Holly Yuen, at (808) 692-7548 or by email at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov. We look forward to working with you on this needed repair and maintenance project. Sincerely, 776°7 HENRY KENNEDY Engineering Program Manager Highways Design Branch Enclosures From: Yuen, Holly <holly.yuen@hawaii.gov> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2023 3:06 PM To: Uyeda, Pamela K. Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Re: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation; Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) - Section 7, Endangered Species Act Informal Consultation Request for Species List Pam, Please see below. Let me know next steps. Thanks, holly From:Jamie Marchetti- NOAA Federal <jamie.marchetti@noaa.gov> Sent: Thursday,July 20, 2023 2:19 PM To: Hashimoto, Dawn M <dawn.m.hashimoto@hawaii.gov> Cc:Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov>; Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>; Chuck Wheeler- NOAA Federal <chuck.wheeler@noaa.gov>; Ron Dean - NOAA Federal <ron.dean@noaa.gov> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation; Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) -Section 7, Endangered Species Act Informal Consultation Request for Species List Hello, Thank you for reaching out regarding your project. Based on the current location provided, the species that may be present and need to be considered as a part of the action are the Central North Pacific green sea turtle, hawksbill sea turtle, and the Hawaiian monk seal. Additionally, both marine and terrestrial Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat is present at this location. If stressors such as turbidity, exposure to contaminants, elevated noise, or exposure to waste move beyond coastal waters (-10m depth contour), then pelagic species would also need to be considered. For a full list of ESA-listed species in Hawaii, please see: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pacific- islands/endangered-species-conservation/marine-protected-species-hawaiian-islands. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions or concerns. Thanks, Jamie Marchetti On Thu,Jul 20, 2023 at 9:49 AM 'Hashimoto, Dawn M'via_NMFS PIR ESHESA<efhesaconsult@noaa.gov>wrote: Good morning, Please see the attached letter with enclosures regarding the subject project. Thank you, Dawn Hashimoto State of Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Design Branch 2 �1 U.S.Department Hawaii Federal-Aid Division 300 Ala Moana Blvd, Rm 3-229 of Transportation Box 50206 Federal Highway September 26, 2023 Honolulu, Hawaii 96850 Administration Phone: (808) 541-2700 FHWA-Hawaii.Intake@dot.gov In Reply Refer To: HDA-HI Ms. Sarah Malloy Acting Regional Administrator, Pacific Islands Regional Office National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA Inouye Regional Center, NMFS/PIRO 1845 Wasp Boulevard, Building 176 Honolulu, HI 96818 Subject: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Hawaii Belt Road, Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Hakalau, Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii Federal-aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Dear Ms. Malloy: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), is planning the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project (the "Project") at Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, Milepost 15.3 in Hakalau, near Hilo on the Island of Hawaii. Pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act(ESA), the FHWA is requesting concurrence from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service Pacific Island Regional Office (NMFS/PIRO) that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the threatened Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment(DPS) of the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), the endangered hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), the endangered Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus schauinslandi), and that there will be no destruction or adverse modification to Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat that is present at this location. Description of the Proposed Action The purpose of the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project includes the following: • Restore public use to Hakalau Beach Park by removing or remediating lead-contaminated soils in the area surrounding the bridge; • Allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge by rehabilitating the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and • Increase resilience of the bridge to extreme natural events. 2 Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is a steel trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road, Route 19, over Hakalau Stream at a height of roughly 134 feet(41 meters) above mean sea level at the top edges of Hakalau Gulch. The bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge, including Hakalau Beach Park which lies below and adjacent to the bridge. Although the lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, Hakalau Beach Park has been closed to the public since 2017 because the area surrounding the bridge is in need of remediation. A series of soil samples taken over multiple years determined that the degree of lead contamination in the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge exceeds State of Hawaii acceptable limits. See enclosed Attachment 1 for a map of the Project Area and enclosed Attachments 2A and 2B for photos of the project site. A series of soil samples taken over multiple years determined that the degree of lead contamination in the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge exceeds State of Hawaii acceptable limits. Lead abatement is needed to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe to reopen to the public. Approximately 2.5 acres are proposed for remediation (areas shown in red and yellow in the enclosed Attachment 3, map of lead remediation areas). According to the Remedial Action Alternative Analysis (RAA)prepared for this project(May 2023), HDOT proposes to remove all soils exceeding 200 mg/kg for an estimated depth of up to 24 inches and replace it with clean fill. Any associated vegetation including large trees in this area would be replaced with new vegetation. Where high levels of lead contamination exist, remediation could involve removal and disposal of contaminated soil at a permitted mainland facility. Where lead levels are lower, the contaminated soil may be removed and disposed of at a permitted local facility. Due to the deterioration of the bridge's steel trestles and scour conditions undermining the foundations of the bridge, rehabilitation of the bridge's substructure requires replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents (See enclosed Attachment 4, Project Plans). In-water work would be required as a part of this Project, including drilling of shafts in the stream bed. A temporary trestle bridge, which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. It is also anticipated that the Project would be authorized by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under the authority of a Nationwide Permit(NWP). Avoidance and minimization measures required by the permit would be incorporated into project plans. The construction duration would be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. The night time lane closures may require illuminated signs and/or beacons for safety purposes, but the lights would be for road sign visibility and delineation only (i.e., minimal illumination) and should not be visible from the beach. Coordination with NMFS HDOT submitted a Request for Species List(HWY-DS 2.1653 dated July 18, 2023)to NMFS via email on July 20, 2023. HDOT received email correspondence from Jamie Marchetti of NMFS PIRO on July 20, 2023. A copy of this email is enclosed(Attachment 5). NMFS PIRO's 3 email stated that the species that may be present and need to be considered as a part of the proposed action at Hakalau Stream Bridge are the threatened Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the Green Sea Turtle (Chelonia mydas), the endangered Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), and the Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus schauinslandi). Additionally, both marine and terrestrial Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat is present at this location. NMFS PIRO also stated that if stressors such as turbidity, exposure to contaminants, elevated noise, or exposure to waste move beyond coastal waters (approximately the 10 meter depth contour), then pelagic species would also need to be considered. NMFS PIRO also provided the website for a full list of ESA-listed marine species in Hawaii under NOAA jurisdiction. Potential Impacts and Avoidance, Minimization Measures for ESA-listed Marine Species FHWA has reviewed the full list of ESA-listed marine species under NOAA jurisdiction. Although no turtles or monk seals were observed during a two-day reconnaissance survey conducted for this project in March 2023, FHWA has determined that the Central North Pacific DPS of the green sea turtle, hawksbill turtle, and the Hawaiian monk seal may occur in the Project Area. FHWA has also determined that given the nature of the work proposed on land and within Hakalau Stream, no other ESA-listed marine species is likely to be present or need to be considered for this project. Furthermore,no pelagic species need to be considered, as potential stressors such as turbidity, exposure to contaminants, elevated noise, or exposure to waste is not anticipated to move beyond coastal waters with the proper implementation of construction BMPs. The project does not include any activities in the sandy beach area of Hakalau Stream or Bay; no dune vegetation is proposed to be removed. Because the proposed action does not impact a coastal beach, the proposed Project is not anticipated to lead to the loss of any turtle or monk seal habitat. The proposed action involves in-water work around the foundations of the bridge in Hakalau Stream; while this in-water work area is located near the coastline, it is not in marine waters. To avoid and minimize potential impacts to the Central North Pacific green sea turtle, hawksbill turtle, and the Hawaiian monk seal, the HDOT will implement the following measures during construction: • Contractors will be required to keep constant vigilance for the presence of ESA-listed marine species during all aspects of the permitted action. A responsible party, i.e., permittee/site manager/project supervisor, will designate a competent observer to search/monitor work sites and the areas adjacent to the authorized work area for ESA- listed marine species. • Prior to the start of work near the beach, a biological monitor familiar with sea turtles and Hawaiian monk seals will conduct a daily visual survey of the project area, including prior to resumption of work following any break of more than one-half hour. • All work will be postponed or halted when ESA-listed marine species are within 50 meters of the proposed work, and work will begin/resume only after the animals have voluntarily departed the area. If listed species are noticed in the area after work has 4 already begun, that work may continue only if, in the best judgement of the project supervisor, there is no way for the activity to adversely affect the animal(s). • Turbidity and sediment from project-related work will be minimized and contained within the project area through the appropriate use of effective sediment containment devices and the curtailment of work during adverse tidal and weather conditions. All silt fences, curtains, and other structures will be installed properly and maintained for the life of the construction period until the impact area is permanently stabilized, self-sustaining, and/or turbidity levels, elevated due to construction, return to ambient levels. • Vehicle use on, or modification of, the beach/dune environment during the sea turtle nesting or hatching season (May through December), or on beaches where sea turtles or monk seals are known to bask will be prohibited. • Native dune vegetation will not be removed or destroyed. • Any project-related debris, trash, or equipment from the beach or dune will be removed if not actively being used. • Project-related personnel will NOT attempt to disturb, touch, ride, feed, or otherwise intentionally interact with any protected species. • All objects lowered to the bottom in an aquatic setting will be lowered in a controlled manner. Additional applicable BMPs for work in aquatic environments will be incorporated into the project design, as discussed further below. Additional BMPs and Avoidance and Minimization Measures In addition, non-species-specific BMPs will be implemented, including the following: • BMPs for in-water and land-based construction will be implemented in accordance with "An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii", by the Federal Highway Administration and Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2008). In-water BMPs may include deployment of full-depth silt curtains, sand bags with or without a plastic lining, or some other means to contain the work area. Because there is in-water work, HDOT is coordinating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and anticipates obtaining a Nationwide Permit(NWP) from USACE with a blanket Water Quality Certification from the State of Hawaii Department of Health. • Construction staff will be fully briefed on the potential presence of threatened and endangered species, including being provided materials to assist in species identification and appropriate actions if a species enters the work area. • Good housekeeping practices and erosion-control device(s) shall be employed at the job site to prevent debris and soil from leaving the site. o The project manager or heavy equipment operators will perform daily pre-work equipment inspections for leaks. All heavy equipment operations will be postponed or halted should a leak be detected and will not proceed until the leak is repaired and the equipment cleaned. Appropriate materials to contain and clean potential spills will be stored at the worksite and be readily available. 5 o Project-related materials and equipment placed in the water will be free of pollutants. o The contractor will prevent litter/trash from the construction site from entering the water. o Fueling of land-based vehicles and equipment will take place away from the water,preferably over an impervious surface. A contingency plan to control petroleum products accidentally spilled during the project will be developed. The plan will be retained on site with the person responsible for compliance with the plan. Absorbent pads and containment booms will be stored on-site to facilitate the clean-up of accidental petroleum releases. o Stockpiling, storage, and equipment staging will utilize appropriate BMPs to reduce the potential surface runoff from entering aquatic habitats. No stockpiling or storage will be placed in the intertidal zone, reef flats, stream channels, or river channels. Any heavy equipment placed in water will be temporary and use the appropriate BMPs. o A litter-control plan will be developed and implemented to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. o Invasive species controls will be maintained to ensure that all materials transported from off-site are free of such species. o All deliberately exposed soil will be protected from erosion and stabilized as soon as possible with geotextile, filter fabric or native or non-invasive vegetation matting, hydro-seeding, etc. Again,no night work is anticipated during construction. The illuminated signs and/or beacons required for night time lane closures should be minimal and not be visible from the beach. However, should night work be required, additional coordination will be conducted with resource agencies to agree upon appropriate conservation measures, including the following: • Avoid nighttime work during the turtle nesting and hatching season. • Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project-related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. o If lights cannot be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. • Construction activities adjacent to the beach will be required to reduce ambient outdoor lighting such as: o reducing the height of exterior lighting to below 3 feet and pointed downward or away from the beach; and o minimize light intensity to the lowest level feasible and, when possible, include timers and motion sensors. Request for Concurrence With the implementation of the avoidance, minimization, and conservation measures described above, the FHWA has determined that the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project may affect,but is not likely to adversely affect the threatened Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment(DPS) of the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), the endangered hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), the endangered Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus 6 schauinslandi), and that there will be no destruction or adverse modification to Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat that is present at this location We request your concurrence with our may affect, but not likely to adversely affect determination. We respectfully request your response within 60 days of receipt of this letter. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact Meesa Otani, Environmental Engineer, at (808) 541-2316 or by email at meesa.otani@dot.gov. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely yours, Digitally signed by MEESA T.OTANI Date:2023.09.26 12:07:26-10'00' for Richelle M. Takara, P.E. Division Administrator Enclosures cc: Holly Yuen, HDOT, HWY-D , • . ' ... C C.) 0 41.1 78Z' , I< (1, 0 12 -- S''.•= ' ''', —A ±- , • ' • a—I z 1_ „9. z • . , , . i— LIJ < C.) 0 I 6 • N ,..;-' - 1,1' - . _I 0 ,,• I— S , ort cl (7 '" . . '41 Li J 1— = ,, —) <. ,, ,, , ,, •..• . •'n • ,- , - • S • ,... _ .., „.. ,,i .. ,..• , ,. . too ' .. k : . , .. , , . , . , . , .... .4. , . . . ,.•:. , \ -. , i ,, • .4:1 " 4 '.. .7 ' At.. . . 5. , . .------- - ,- - .. - .:4-..,--. _in as _c -o w ,, - ca 0 CL ' - a) OD a.) a SI co - ,. '' '„:4',/,/ • . ' - . / '''' . — _. - ,. , . .. , ,N . , co , .,, . . • , co - co I , ,";,i',!...,;,,.°1•1,Attl, x, - . ., '.-,..#04r,‘..,,;,,,,:1,:;,,,,a,"5:..i';!k,',,,..„.02;',, ...7 • -,„.+,.— ,-,.„„,r,,,,.- , , ,,i- ,,,.,,,e, , P-:.1.,...,.. 4.„0,, sr...,....g ... . . .,,,...... , Is, . 4,.. '• ''('''',•' /11 tilt '0 P''' ' e- ;"g 4, ,47•0'1%4 *Or A c, ' '. ,,,,,.,,,,,,, .I,- 4','`''''' ' ,R• y• ' ' I ,.., ,:',;`.-'1,•.:,`;rL,..,'''',"'4, 't , (T3 *7;410k-L141.;;,11.4,ei..i, .4 ..").1i7f4i..4.0'4' N-. ..„....Y',..T.Le ''',.....1.•leVw. ;We . '4,r,'f•-,..e, ''.,', I z 2 '---!.---wo.--,,,,,,,-,-- IA,•..,--,...Pq-Azok,it. f 4,- '',4' .I..* .4,1,t,'' • "11K,,,,.'t,,2 yr..";'..'.''''''',' • .i Utr;:, 4,i--^.4"%4- ,42.=.-;,^4.,,..,::'10,0,,A.,A ,r A"',,e, . % e...ii,..*. ' se' , '•..,.i'...i c.''.1.3P', -,.r''''... V < ;.74,41,144',';:jf.A.",0,1',:';),,,,;.)7V;Wh.'4:.;444,,,4'..s.,itz:`,.. ".'..i.-: ' '''.,", 4,..:',4",,.•`!. " • r•-• • 4',4;....2-.°..,',1 ou ÷-. Itaf:t:Wia'';;'''P'41sirs4'4V1!tr,'o,•501.;...i;0.;4:•f:':''-ifIk".,. '':...!;,'-':'...:'',1.46"g;:,i; ''%; ',;,;i..,t,..1'`.^'''' ' ••,,'?4,-,.. .A.,--iti rj: o -,.,„heo);JA-114,2i,;47.?..-:'-,-;;;, ..'4.-",.,1-.7'49...4.).-1.,111,„1-ke---. ,;',:eit, •- -:4,7`...-' "' * -- r---.--- cp ,i,,,,„,,,,s,....s 0,, ^',V40.f4V-":-.%:::0 74 1`;.,..'-:.,4:-.;•.--;'' ----rw -:'' s . o o_ • . ATTACHMENT 2A— SITE PHOTOS Excerpted from Archaeological Inventory Survey (ASM Affiliates, June 2023) - . , ,, Hakalau Stream Bridge crossing Hakalau Gulch (looking inland) Source:Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Archaeological Inventory Survey(ASM Affiliates,June 2023) , ,, _r F , Cr r a. v._"4h. 4 r- - 4 , 4a � , r . 1 af 11 � r � ' , ?. ' • " I li, fir^, 'S ! �. 4 7 t At. t Hakalau Stream Bridge Aerial View(looking upstream) Source:Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Archaeological Inventory Survey(ASM Affiliates,June 2023) ATTACHMENT 2B—SITE PHOTOS Excerpted from Biological Survey Report (HT Harvey, June 2023) <t ,. J.. • 4K_ t .1 � ` - \ te -atifir Ail Photo 1. Southeastern Slope of Hakalau Bridge BSA with Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland Note: Gunpowder tree (Trema orientalis) and coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) on the ridgeline and creeping smartweed (Persicaria chinensis) smothering slopes. lif .1.y- **=:',!*'• '' ,-, .4., c :,.'lic'..iii otet/TV • A3P, N4Cr � b+ : , Photo 2. Small Grove of Polynesian Trees at the Base of the Southeastern Slope Note: Note the kukui (Aleurites moluccanus), and ulu (Artocarpus altilis) trees in the center surrounded by a Guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus) and other mixed alien herbs. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 11 H.T. Harvey& Associates Biological Survey Report June 2023 ATTACHMENT 2B-SITE PHOTOS (continued) Excerpted from Biological Survey Report (HT Harvey, June 2023) tf :r .4iR• �. es{ f; Yom', , •,,,t , *+ L ` ''' r.a;''' 3y , m ccis t oq, , i 1 ,•,,,,, .„jai' •"$11a ➢-'r R., P fl1 s .' ' a- ., �l , ;P{ ' r apt..Vn ",A 1 _ j ,'4:'.4 4 i it . $ t' - '9 ti - 6r , h f4 " 7. 'k -s . ` nvyr , r. J. Photo 3. View of Open Streamside Parkland on the Southern Bank of Hakalau Stream, Viewed from the Northern Bank Note the canopy of coconut palms (Cocos nucifera), hala trees (Pandanus tectorius), and common ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia) with an open, herbaceous understory. <.\ A'. . 41-. 4 `� air 9 t • �.� �s • , • N .w4 -tom. y k - - Yr , r , .. ate Fly - • I 'rP�`• "dd i- a "; ` r ;/,r: -f^ Photo 4. Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland in the Southwestern Portion of the Hakalau Bridge BSA Note: Roadside dominated by Guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus), and paca ferns (Diplazium esculentum). Ridgeline of mixed alien trees. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 12 H.T. Harvey& Associates Biological Survey Report June 2023 a E cr. oa (2 E .o ...„...11.- y. u g a ** 's P 41 -.4'3..----:-., '' V N p, 5.4J RA S C. s\O. nm 1 JoR �O S R • b . 1. I O • 75 t in , r CIC3 co Q��k it• , y rel W, ° -�,e,0,0 °a/ J C • c , • I o u) \ co as .',':',.,‘'n''' \ • "'-:, T. ':'''r " ',, 1:, .k', 11, aytico t 'r 4t :*%144:1* y,; '%,. .:$.80,, l' M )VAS-.7y;(r> y, 4 x� n t; �'r .-,F 1� w, ' yf, E + l't 'fi a ,,,�,, �rijit) .. ti`11 ' o /a Lu + r 'gy , r • .. '' o , !.*: o m� E 41 Jy � 9 l N Oirn Z F ? a l Z O i L Q N Q OU \ a ' ¢ a= Z r y� Na O 3 a OJ �\ ©1 zL,J 1_ ¢a � OG o U Z ¢ ~ o® ' �, ¢ <0 Oa W OL a ¢z Q z z 1' F LLLLT., ,i A ~ Q a p A , 8 aH o a 3 -,,,ao dg g y+ a o o , _ Fo a¢ a43 , ., j g1owfl 3Y Nil b E x li a bH s ¢ g Akm en( i. I 4 x x x e _ Y 2113 '1 Y Z O0 a CE 0O W �6� e1 Q Adm,s o �n 0 o d - / •.< Z — .7 4',% Ilan '''',\ 010 2 CC p = O J Q Q !H, Q 6y a Lu o o (n J Cn w W ~ U z u_ IA O Q O CC J W LL 0 sa, IA 0_ 0 Q a Ll_ Q _1 Z m H m -3 Oo 0 a dCL W O §' O _ U) O Hz �S Q = 0 � _ 0 � g Y D �' O H 2 o o��aa o N >- W Q � / C w CIC r, Q o 0 0- W w 0 = 00 >z 0 Z o 2 a O U H W0 ti z a U '11-' to� H x x x bz x 3 LVO 3NOHd A9 030VNVIN A9 93N9IS3a N ZZOZ 'AON 9988-££6(808) H-AMH 'ONI` S) (Vld CI:V'ZZ-6Z-01 .11 10, OM01H5111 1001—OSH 107171 0Z-00—ll7WO 10VLL00-131—b9 010 00100W0-01090-0Z\MOONO 00\'z MON ONIM0210 2 „9-,9 II„9-,9 x 0 0 i®■ ” at 4,' E h L,iI�Wk d ! ' zoo iii z °9N 1n9b 6u��eag , m�k L! g /1 , '1' o 111'1 0 ,— / l °9N 49.98 I 1 LJ-LLP. — v P. m ii 9N 4999 L1 L1 '‘,3-‘.---rt„-,.°3, ( Il ,2o or '0N 4u9g L L1 a 1- I;I o I 6 '°N flung Q LJ-LL o 9 °uN 49ag L]tL- a Q ,,, 0 1---M L °9N 49.99 -H m i o U 43 o I-�I, I c J LJ LL_ m g 9 °nN49a97 ,I}, 'I �o , � '{ "m c m 0 soN age ( I 1I l b uN49.99 s:_ ''-'-'-= s -- 1 I'• L 111 } � '9N 4999 ' .'I L" 0 -I-La E °9N 4U99 -_ I,1 ISI IL I '° OZI W ¢a yt Ft aJ 0,-a-3,,,2,-. c a5 '9N 1n9b 6uiaeeg o a i- -Li I I 1 L LI`r E TN' Ir V a SII 0..d of,£z-ZL 3.lo, ma,r3 Nnd l010,,SHvI...zoE 2z-z,-roves,Auloa-Gd-ae as n,..-z,o>o-o,v...Dovz 3rvvN woroma 00 N Y g s 2 d ! 'ca LL N ~ M - - 8 .= Zvi.® 09/ _ P O 1--Lo., 2a o� A Z `°N JN9b" ?... 0A ad ,o 11.1 m N 3 // ________------70_4_ 06/ i 4' i L,,,Q /L7 N h y 0/ °N Ju°8 . „-`-'Tr- N { ti o Q Q a aILL.2rg c5 . OZ/ l �,� Zl'°N loos •• Ott 1: A.15±11•'"7..... :00/ 08 I . Iv_. 09 i • �. r,{ i • ; 09 !l'°N(uag ••. • L�] 6 m m 0/'°N/uag ...GIRL_1' _i 9.. —FL A-0 Y ro o ...... L nJ -I, ib s .°N,uaa1): .. 0 0 8 °oN loos Cj -'-t111.-0-'''' U Q � F � m 4 ° c e/eNe 0 Ooa 2 'oN/uag� ,g am-12 E � ..d Q M • •o O�eW V ... ... v . .6 i o as/eM 6/U �z, ��,� _.g O rt, 9 °N Juag _..o J } o Not— o-rr ,j "...:4"--„ z °0N l998 • J 194j1 . -rg. ..,"2• 8` co ew C o r jr� o . °N lua8 o-� .1-0 m o L._ 06 o c c :Pg. 0 o� '-09 e Z '°N/uag •r� e _..08 8 8 _r I ............ . '.2' o .'4') h oN existing Irk W W Gov't Road rjr oll I 'EN loos ::, 09/ vE 08/ ..... /'uN l°9b' I1 iw o ,00Z o I 0 ti V 0.e,33 3z-,,-Le 3.1°,e em°n3,3 Na,e MI.,.vI e go3 g-z,-3ntavo,°taro°-,3,aa as nv-ggo z,e>o-eet...°°\z gig,govgn dLLd A v . \ 2 , , , , , \ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , \fi @ \\ ) 1 2\§ e \ • _ , ^ ` ® 4 B -°° � gym& z A i zoN r> \} q (44 j ){ , _ \ i Q ®2/ ✓ \ \ .- \$2 ! : E « =G( = m [ \ 7AN ,_ § i \ } "-',° � ) 7 » N ma> , . , \ /` ) \/ 2. Z\ - \ \ , ( E Q SA > m ma> �]�� -� ez er > N ma> '' - - - - - - - — -'2 \�\ _ q 2 (j \/� 1 } Z rNma>{({ j'� - - - - - - - - B 1 \\\ ] 7 vv vvd \N i >- «ma; \ \� C - i� �' /9 . �R � \ "\ ~ : � :- m m> = : Q- \ § ±a Q > m m«> ; _ - _ - �- �� m 0- 3� « \\ /�Z ; m m«» \ - , . \« » « / \/ , w maf \ - - m - . i \ -9.2 \N 7 r N ma> ]T�- -�- - --,, - ff / \ )z- «ma; \18 ^ : ° ® \ _ 0. \d{ - @ 7 ! m EL/ d. N. De •22 r \ • § T. , § 0 » ; � % , v ! w <J _ \E \\ \\ \ > ~ : / \ 3 { \ \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' \ ' ui ,1 \ � ` 2 @ Q ` e^ r \ k\§ 1T, ' : © E@4 � \ 6 ~ 3 \} \ \k( ® )8 : 3 (; § ®2/ § ) k \$/ ! : E o =G� = m [ \ / § / ){ } \ ) t e /) ) / 2 % / E z \\ 6 A ~13 \\ Q \/ \ • \ \ ~ Q \ \ / )� \2 \ t /% \) )) / �G.)- _--- '5'A - - \} y` \ F,-CU _� «« j/ /Q � .»« � ` ��� a« . � . . ` x � >>y» 2 . � \ y \� . �� 2« ^ \ � ?\ . . \ ^^ . .. yy>x.. * . . s>a m _ y « ©\»««©» 2 &© : z ,•:.:::, . z }\ . . � © \ 2%\©«»»««© • A \ ,.: / , w _a ..w ^ z \ \^ ° ^ - � : d«^ \ . _ . . :"...' x. » « : « » 7.y \ /\ m�' . . \ . »» ( /y\ w ©© \®.. ..a»:y/gy> ƒ »\226. \ % . : % ( < ! 2 . ^m : \ 2` �~ ^S` . o y: \ \ , . . am»ex»:'. _ 9»zzy - Es / Lo: �. . , . . . . .. .. /� \( ~~ ��- ^^ »» \ . ' \ . .v»»»: .�v x . ax, . . . : © . q / � ©«»d§\aa/\\\\»/ . y\ �-�_� . : Qa \\ % ® , Ea y\ $66 GJ ._ \\�� ^` �- Q+ \3 I - - ( %/ ) © (» ,:i-C) ® ƒ3 » \\ ( 4 2 ƒ$ \§ )) Ct L /\ \\ e k!®` )`) \ k 9 dot v Attachment 5 - July 20, 2023, email from NMFS PIRO From:Jamie Marchetti - NOAA Federal <jamie.marchetti@noaa.gov> Sent: Thursday,July 20, 2023 2:19 PM To: Hashimoto, Dawn M <dawn.m.hashimoto@hawaii.gov> Cc:Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov>; Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>; Chuck Wheeler- NOAA Federal <chuck.wheeler@noaa.gov>; Ron Dean - NOAA Federal <ron.dean@noaa.gov> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation; Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) -Section 7, Endangered Species Act Informal Consultation Request for Species List Hello, Thank you for reaching out regarding your project. Based on the current location provided, the species that may be present and need to be considered as a part of the action are the Central North Pacific green sea turtle, hawksbill sea turtle, and the Hawaiian monk seal. Additionally, both marine and terrestrial Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat is present at this location. If stressors such as turbidity, exposure to contaminants, elevated noise, or exposure to waste move beyond coastal waters (-10m depth contour), then pelagic species would also need to be considered. For a full list of ESA-listed species in Hawaii, please see: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pacific- islands/endangered-species-conservation/marine-protected-species-hawaiian-islands. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions or concerns. Thanks, Jamie Marchetti On Thu,Jul 20, 2023 at 9:49 AM 'Hashimoto, Dawn M'via_NMFS PIR ESHESA<efhesaconsult@noaa.gov>wrote: Good morning, Please see the attached letter with enclosures regarding the subject project. 1 Thank you, Dawn Hashimoto State of Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Design Branch 2 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Essential Fish Habitat) From: Otani, Meesa (FHWA) Sent: Thursday,July 27, 2023 5:37 PM To: Richard Hall - NOAA Federal <richard.hall@noaa.gov> Cc:Yuen, Holly<Holly.Yuen@hawaii.gov>; Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>;Takiue, Harry H <harry.h.takiue@hawaii.gov>; Shelton, Gregory(FHWA)<gregory.shelton@dot.gov>; Sean Hanser- NOAA Federal <sean.hanser@noaa.gov>; Gerry Davis<gerry.davis@noaa.gov>; Malia Chow- NOAA Federal <malia.chow@noaa.gov>; David Delaney- NOAA Federal <david.delanev@noaa.gov> Subject: RE: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge - EFH Letter Hi Richard, Sorry, I forgot to include the attachments. Please let me know if you need additional information. Thanks! Meesa From: Otani, Meesa (FHWA) Sent: Thursday,July 27, 2023 5:35 PM To: 'Richard Hall - NOAA Federal' <richard.hall@noaa.gov> Cc:Yuen, Holly<Holly.Yuen@hawaii.gov>; Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>;Takiue, Harry H <harry.h.takiue@hawaii.gov>; Shelton, Gregory(FHWA)<gregory.shelton@dot.gov>; Sean Hanser- NOAA Federal <sean.hanser@noaa.gov>; Gerry Davis<gerry.davis@noaa.gov>; Malia Chow- NOAA Federal <malia.chow@noaa.gov>; David Delaney- NOAA Federal <david.delanev@noaa.gov> Subject: RE: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge - EFH Letter Hi Richard, Thank you for your email from June 30, 2023 regarding the Hakalau Stream Bridge project. PIRO offered specific conservation recommendations.The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) accepts the conservation recommendations made by PIRO and proposes to implement the following Best Management Practices (BMPs)to minimize and reduce impacts to water quality under NMFS jurisdiction and avoid potential adverse effects to EFH during construction: • Work shall be conducted during the dry season (May through October) when possible. Work shall be suspended during periods of heavy rain or when storms are forecasted. • All debris and vegetative undergrowth shall be removed from the project site and disposed of at an appropriate upland location. • All materials used to divert stream flow during construction shall be removed from the project area when work is completed. 1 • All equipment shall be inspected prior to the beginning of work each day to ensure the equipment is in good working condition, and there are no contaminant leaks (e.g., oil,fuel). Work shall be stopped if leaks occur, and equipment shall not be used until all necessary repairs are made and equipment is cleaned. Equipment shall be stored in appropriate staging areas designed to be preventative in terms of containing unexpected spills when equipment is not in use or during fueling. In addition,the project's Construction BMPs shall be implemented in accordance with the documented approach, "An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii", by the Federal Highway Administration and Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2008). In addition,the HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control will be followed. PIRO's email also expressed concerns regarding what steps the FHWA will take to remediate the presence of lead in the soil and whether FHWA has coordinated with the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) regarding the project's lead removal plan.To develop the lead removal plan, HDOT prepared a Remedial Alternatives Analysis (RAA) report dated May 2023, in coordination with the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) Office,which is the primary regulator for work of this nature in Hawaii.The report evaluated the data collected and the associated human health and/or environmental hazards and provided a detailed analysis of the remedial alternatives being considered for the project. The RAA report stated that the preferred alternative—the removal of all soil that exceeded 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill—was selected because it offered overall protection of human health and the environment in the short and long term. The RAA report was approved by the HDOH HEER Office on May 23, 2023 (Letter 201713-TG). On July 6, 2023,Thomas Gilmore of the HDOH HEER Office confirmed in an email to HDOT that EPA allows HDOH to conduct reviews on their behalf, knowing that HDOH's remediation requirements are as stringent, if not more stringent than those of EPA. Copies of this letter and email from HDOH HEER are attached. Based on the implementation of the proposed BMPs and minimization measures, as well as the coordination conducted with HDOH for lead removal and remediation, the FHWA believes there will be no more than minimal adverse effects to EFH and managed species. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you! From: Richard Hall - NOAA Federal <richard.hall@noaa.gov> Sent: Friday,June 30, 2023 9:17 AM To: FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro<FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro@dot.gov> Cc:Yuen, Holly<Holly.Yuen@hawaii.gov>; Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>;Takiue, Harry H <harry.h.takiue@hawaii.gov>; Shelton, Gregory(FHWA)<gregory.shelton@dot.gov>; Sean Hanser- NOAA Federal <sean.hanser@noaa.gov>; Gerry Davis<gerry.davis@noaa.gov>; Malia Chow- NOAA Federal <malia.chow@noaa.gov>; David Delaney- NOAA Federal <david.delaney@noaa.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge- EFH Letter This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Rezantes, On May 31, 2023, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Pacific Islands Regional Office (PIRO) received a request for essential fish habitat consultation (EFH) from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the proposed Hakalau 2 Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project on the island of Hawaii, which will be conducted in cooperation with the Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT). After reviewing the consultation documents,we have determined that there may be adverse effects to EFH. We are providing conservation recommendations under the EFH provisions within Section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Adherence to these conservation recommendations would help ensure that these unaddressed adverse effects are avoided and minimized. Project Description The proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge rehabilitation work consists of three major activities: 1) remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3) upgrade bridge railings. Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil beneath the structure and extends into Hakalau Beach Park. Remediation may involve removal or encapsulation of lead contaminated soils or implementation of controls to prevent access to lead contaminated areas. Soil removal activities could disturb up to two feet of vegetation and topsoil.The bridge's substructure rehabilitation will be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents. The concrete bents will be installed using six-foot diameter drilled shafts with concrete caps,some of which will be within the streambed.A temporary trestle bridge,which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Bridge railings will be upgraded to meet current safety standards.The equipment that will be required for actions to be undertaken will include a backhoe, excavator, crane, concrete pump truck, and drill rig. The construction is expected to take up to two years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. Essential Fish Habitat The marine water column from the surface to a depth of 3,280.8 feet (1,000 meters) from the shoreline to the outer boundary of the EEZ(200 nautical miles), and the seafloor from the shoreline out to a depth of 2,296.6 feet(700 meters) around each of the Hawaiian Islands, have been designated as EFH. As such, the water column and bottom of the Pacific Ocean around the island of Hawaii are designated as EFH,and support various life stages for the management unit species (MUS) identified under the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council's Pelagic and Hawaii Archipelago Fishery Ecosystem Plans. The MUS and life stages found in these waters include eggs, larvae,juveniles, and adults of Bottomfish, Crustacean, and Pelagic MUS. Specific types of habitats considered as EFH include coral reef, patch reefs, hard substrates, artificial substrates, seagrass beds, soft substrates, lagoons,estuaries, surge zones, deep-slope terraces, and pelagic/open oceans. Baseline Environment In referencing the NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science benthic habitat mapping surveys(Battista et al. 2007; see https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/voyager/), shows that the marine environment near the stream mouth is rock/boulder substrate with 90—100%turf algae covering. Stressors The potential environmental stressors of concern related to this project include sedimentation and turbidity, and introduction of chemical contaminants. The broad adverse effects to EFH due to the proposed activities are described below. Sedimentation and Turbidity 3 Increased sedimentation and turbidity can cause smothering of benthic species and block sunlight necessary for species that rely on photosynthesis. For corals, sedimentation has been shown to reduce species diversity, change growth patterns, and reduce growth and survival (Rogers 1990). Coral reef organisms are easily smothered by sediment(Golbuu et al. 2003), and minimal rates of sediment can affect multiple life stages of coral. For fish, sedimentation is less likely to cause significant impacts because of their mobility, but some effects are still possible. Fish may be displaced from their normal home range which could result in negative intra-and interspecies interactions and impact fitness, leading to lower reproductive success and a lower ability to find prey or avoid predators (Kjelland et al. 2015). Introduction of Nutrients and Chemical Contaminants In general,the impacts from contaminants in the marine environment is dependent on how long the chemical components persist and their tendency to bio-accumulate in the food web(van Dam et al. 2011). Some pollutants are environmentally persistent and can take years or even decades to biodegrade (Minton 2017). Increases in nutrients, pollutants and contaminants to the marine environment can reduce fitness and cause mortality of exposed organisms. Increase of land- based runoffs and discharges can subject benthic communities to adverse exposures and potential degradation of condition. Heavy metals,which is the contaminant of concern for this project(lead), are known to bioaccumulate and can undergo food chain magnification and cause trophic effects (Baby et al. 2010). When they are present in the substrate they can be spread in dissolved and particulate form and made bio-available by activities such as dredging, excavation, and stirring soft sediment (Goossens and Zwolsman 1996). When not properly maintained, equipment could release contaminants(oil, fuel, etc.) into the marine environment. FHWA-proposed Best Management Practices(BMPs) The following measures have been incorporated into the overall design and construction methods for the proposed action to minimize and reduce impacts to water quality under NMFS jurisdiction: For all project related construction, BMPs shall be implemented in accordance to the documented approach, "An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii", by the Federal Highway Administration and Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2008). In addition, the HDOT Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction Section 209 Temporary Water Pollution, Dust, and Erosion Control will be followed. In addition, in the documents submitted for the consultation, the FHWA provided a thorough list of BMPs which will be incorporated into the overall design and construction methods for the proposed action to minimize and reduce impacts to water quality under NMFS jurisdiction. Adherence to those BMPs during the proposed activities will be effective in addressing many of NMFS concerns about potential adverse effects. Conservation Recommendations PIRO offers the following conservation recommendations to the FHWA pursuant to 50 CFR 600.920 so that potential adverse effects from the proposed project activities are avoided and minimized. Conservation Recommendation 1: Conduct work during the dry season when possible; stop work during storms or heavy rains. Conservation Recommendation 2: All debris and vegetative undergrowth should be removed from the project site and disposed of at an appropriate upland location. Conservation Recommendation 3: All materials used to divert stream flow during construction must be entirely removed from the project area when work is completed. 4 Conservation Recommendation 4: Inspect all equipment prior to beginning work each day to ensure the equipment is in good working condition,and there are no contaminant(e.g.,oil,fuel)leaks.Work must be stopped until leaks are repaired and equipment is cleaned. Equipment should always be stored in appropriate staging areas designed to be preventative in terms of containing unexpected spills when equipment is not in use or during fueling. While the conservation recommendations above address most of NMFS'concerns with the project methods,we also have concerns about what steps the FHWA will take to remediate the presence of lead in the soil. as this was not specifically explained in the documents submitted. We would like to know if the FHWA has coordinated the methods for lead removal with the Environmental Protection Agency, and if you did, if you can share the particular steps that would be undertaken to accomplish that. If coordination with the EPA has not taken place, NMFS suggests that the FHWA should consider undertaking that step prior to beginning the project. Conclusion PIRO appreciates the coordination that the FHWA has provided on this consultation. We have provided EFH conservation recommendations that, when implemented, will ensure that many potential adverse effects to EFH are avoided and minimized. Please be advised that regulations (Section 305(b)(4)(B)) to implement the EFH provisions of the Magnuson- Stevens Act require that Federal activities agencies provide a written response to this letter within 30 days of its receipt. A preliminary response is acceptable if more time is needed.The final response must include a description of measures to be required to avoid, mitigate, or offset the adverse effects of the proposed activities. If the response is inconsistent with our EFH conservation recommendations, an explanation of the reason for not implementing the recommendations must be provided at least 10 days prior to final approval of the activities. We are committed to providing continued cooperation and subject matter technical expertise if needed to the FHWA to help your office achieve the project goals and sufficiently comply with the EFH provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Thank you for coordinating on this proposed project. Feel free to contact me 808-725-5018 or at richard.hall@noaa.gov with any questions or comments. Referencesa Baby,J.,J. S. Raj, E. T. Biby, P. Sankarganesh, M. V.Jeevitha, S. U. Ajisha, S. S. Raja n. 2010.Toxic effect of heavy metals on aquatic environment. International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences, 4(4):939-952. Battista, T., B. Costa, and S. Anderson. 2007. Shallow-water benthic habitats of the main eight Hawaiian Islands. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 61, Biogeography Branch. Silver Spring, MD. Golbuu Y, S. Victor, E. Wolanski, and R. H. Richmond. 2003. Trapping of fine sediment in a semi-enclosed bay, Palau, Micronesia. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 57(5):941-949. Goossens, H. and J. J. Zwolsman. 1996. An evaluation of the behaviour of pollutants during dredging activities. Terra et aqua, 62:20-28. Kjelland, M. E., C. M. Woodley, T. M. Swannack, and D. L. Smith. 2015. A review of the potential effects of suspended sediment on fishes: potential dredging-related physiological, behavioral,and transgenerational implications. Environ.Syst. Decis. 35:334-50. Minton, D. 2017. Non-fishing effects that may adversely affect essential fish habitat in the Pacific Islands Region. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Final Report for contract AB-133F-15-CQ-0014. 5 Rogers, C. S. 1990. Responses of coral reefs and reef organisms to sedimentation. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 62: 185-202. van Dam J.W., Negri A. P., Uthicke S., and Mueller J. F. 2011.Chemical pollution on coral reefs. Ecological impacts of toxic chemicals. p. 187-211 On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 2:39 PM 'FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro'via_NMFS PIR ESHESA <efhesaconsult@noaa.gov>wrote: Aloha, Please see the attached: • BR-019-2(075) Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehab_EFH Consultation FHWA Letter.pdf • BR-019-2(075) Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehab_EFH Consultation FHWA Letter Attachments.pdf Please let me know if you have any questions. Mahalo, Kaha'a Rezantes Construction Program Manager Programs and Project DeliveryTeam Federal Highway Administration Hawaii Division Office Richard Hall Fishery Policy Analyst, Pacific Islands Regional Office NOAA Fisheries I U.S. Department of Commerce Office: (808) 725-5018 www.fisheries.noaa.gov 6 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 195D JOSH GREEN,M.D. ag o EDWIN H.SNIFFEN GOVERNOR 4P .1.19 7 DIRECTOR �t DeputyDirectors DREANALEEK..KAKALILI 4 y.f-i TAMMY L.LEE ROBIN K.SHISHIDO JAMES KUNANE TOKIOKA STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET HWY-DS 2.0942 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-5097 March 3, 2023 TO: DAWN CHANG, CHAIRPERSON DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ATTENTION: BRIAN NEILSON ADMINISTRATOR DIVISION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES FROM: HENRY KENNEDY 7Va7K ENGINEERING PROGRAM MANAGER HIGHWAYS DESIGN BRANCH SUBJECT: HAWAII REVISED STATUTES (HRS) CHAPTER 195D COORDINATION HAWAII BELT ROAD, HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE REHABILITATION FEDERAL-AID PROJECT NO. BR-019-2(075) The Hawaii Department of Transportation, Highways (HDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is proposing the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation project, located along Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) near Hilo on the island of Hawaii. HDOT requests your office's input on the proposed project related to HRS Chapter 195D resources. Specifically, we are interested in: (a) threatened and endangered species that may be present in or pass through the project area; (b) the presence of identified critical habitat for any species in the area; and (c) any other input or concerns you have regarding the proposed project. FHWA is providing funding for these improvements. Because federal funding is involved, federal-level reviews and coordination such as those required by Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, are also being conducted with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). DAWN CHANG, CHAIRPERSON HWY-DS 2.0942 March 3, 2023 Page 2 Overview of the Proposed Project Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is located at Milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road(Route 19) on the island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00"North, 155°07'47.00"West. The bridge is 775 feet long with a deck width of roughly 38 feet. Refer to the enclosed map of the project location and photos of the bridge. The proposed bridge work can be divided into three (3)major activities: l)remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2)rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3)upgrade bridge railings. Hakalau Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park. Although the lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, remediation is needed for the surrounding areas beneath the bridge. Remediation may involve removal or encapsulation of lead contaminated soils or implementation of controls to prevent access to lead contaminated areas. Soil removal activities could disturb up to 24 inches of vegetation and topsoil. A combination of these solutions may be incorporated as an over-all solution. The bridge's substructure rehabilitation will be performed by replacing bridge steel bents with concrete bents. By replacing the steel bents with concrete bents, the substructure will be reconstructed, but will allow the superstructure to remain largely intact with minimal repairs. The concrete bents will be installed using six-foot diameter drilled shafts with concrete caps, some of which will be within the streambed. A temporary trestle bridge, which may also require in-water foundations, may be used to support the drill rig. Refer to the figures for an illustration of a typical tower and bent at Hakalau Stream Bridge as well as a sketch of the proposed design. The bridge will not be widened, but the bridge railings will be upgraded to meet current safety standards. The project area, including the construction staging area and foot access areas, is shown in blue on the Project Area figure. This area will extend beyond the roadway right-of-way area under the bridge and along an existing privately owned access road. Primary access to perform the work on the bridge substructure will be from the access roads along the stream bank. There should be only limited traffic impacts to bridge users, as bent replacement can occur incrementally to allow for continued use of the bridge. Work on the bridge deck will be limited to the bridge railings and will require single lane closures for worker safety. The construction duration will be no longer than two (2)years. No night work is anticipated during construction; however, there may be 24-hour lane closures on the bridge to reduce vibrations and/or loads while the foundations are curing. Should night work be required, additional coordination will be conducted with resource agencies to agree upon appropriate conservation measures such as shielding outdoor lighting. DAWN CHANG, CHAIRPERSON HWY-DS 2.0942 March 3, 2023 Page 3 Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented during construction to minimize the potential for impacts to water quality. BMPs for in-water and land-based construction will be implemented in accordance with, "An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation BMPs for Use in the State of Hawaii", by the Federal Highway Administration and Hawaii Department of Transportation Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction BMPs Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2008). In-water BMPs may include deployment of full-depth silt curtains, sandbags with or without a plastic lining, or some other means to contain the work area. Because there is in-water work, HDOT is coordinating with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and anticipates obtaining a Nationwide Permit from USACE with a blanket Water Quality Certification from the Department of Health. Existing Environment in Project Area The area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge is largely undeveloped. As explained above, the soil around the bridge is contaminated with lead. Hakalau Beach Park is makai of the bridge on the Hilo (southern) side of the stream. The bridge is approximately 300 feet from the opening of Hakalau Stream into the ocean. According to NOAA's designated critical habitat for the Hawaiian Monk Seal (HMS), the bridge is approximately 600 feet from its critical habitat boundary. There appears to be no other critical habitat for federally-listed species on or adjacent to the project area. Although the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory indicates an area mapped as a "freshwater pond" roughly 200 feet downstream of the bridge (see attached wetlands map), given our understanding of site conditions, we assume that the stream in this reach is tidal. Please see enclosed figures for the location of the bridge in relation to the freshwater pond and HMS habitat. Your Requested Input To assist us in our assessment, we request that your office provide pertinent information or concerns regarding the likely impact of this project on species protected by HRS Chapter 195D. We also request that your office share with us any specific or general concerns you may have regarding the project. We would appreciate all responses in writing within thirty (30) days from date of receipt to Ms. Holly Yuen, Project Manager, at holly.yuen@hawaii.gov or by U.S. Postal Service to Hawaii Department of Transportation, Highways, 601 Kamokila Boulevard, Room 688, Kapolei, Hawaii 96707. Please include the reference letter number noted above on your response. Enclosures Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Location Map I°J W C 41,„Apot • N T d .11 Y • � tlCdl Photo of Hakalau Bridge and surrounding area from 2021 Inspection Report 4l ;10-W {i tr q 1i 101111W1146 i ll''''' ' V6 . i J.�wnm• FLA 1 Imo.- ..�....� • View of Bridge from near ocean shore Y ,411111 , . "S'N .,o4: • 1., .4,,ith3; ito. v [}JAL y, i d :o.i.,!.. ,,,,i's\)„,,,,I,,":.'-'1,. ',.: 7., ::„ :p.frel,,t. ..„'",74'..c,,,,,;1..„,,, .,,'‘Iii -.:'-';', -';',:'".1.\):1' 111 '' 1 )t h LSe1 1N nr 1:I)..• Y * J � � ` 'h iI# S � P !. ,� i. . o: ti' t r p���' Y ',p LI' � ry Close up of bents showing steel towers and concrete pedestals Pr 's i,44` '- ,..ec '"-,,, il Yip )0^ , i w ` /. q j n° 7 5 . s , View underneath the bridge 2 „9-,9 II„9-,9 x 0 0 i®■ ” at 4,' E h L,iI�Wk d ! ' zoo iii z °9N 1n9b 6u��eag , m�k L! g /1 , '1' o 111'1 0 ,— / l °9N 49.98 I 1 LJ-LLP. — v P. m ii 9N 4999 L1 L1 '‘,3-‘.---rt„-,.°3, ( Il ,2o or '0N 4u9g L L1 a 1- I;I o I 6 '°N flung Q LJ-LL o 9 °uN 49ag L]tL- a Q ,,, 0 1---M L °9N 49.99 -H m i o U 43 o I-�I, I c J LJ LL_ m g 9 °nN49a97 ,I}, 'I �o , � '{ "m c m 0 soN age ( I 1I l b uN49.99 s:_ ''-'-'-= s -- 1 I'• L 111 } � '9N 4999 ' .'I L" 0 -I-La E °9N 4U99 -_ I,1 ISI IL I '° OZI W ¢a yt Ft aJ 0,-a-3,,,2,-. c a5 '9N 1n9b 6uiaeeg o a i- -Li I I 1 L LI`r E TN' Ir V a SII 0..d of,£z-ZL 3.lo, ma,r3 Nnd l010,,SHvI...zoE 2z-z,-roves,Auloa-Gd-ae as n,..-z,o>o-o,v...Dovz 3rvvN woroma � ` 2 @ Q ` e^ r \ k\§ 1T, ' : © E@4 � \ 6 ~ 3 \} \ \k( ® )8 : 3 (; § ®2/ § ) k \$/ ! : E o =G� = m [ \ / § / ){ } \ ) t e /) ) / 2 % / E z \\ 6 A ~13 \\ Q \/ \ • \ \ ~ Q \ \ / )� \2 \ t /% \) )) / �G.)- _--- '5'A - - \} y` \ F,-CU _� «« j/ /Q � .»« � ` ��� a« . � . . ` x � >>y» 2 . � \ y \� . �� 2« ^ \ � ?\ . . \ ^^ . .. yy>x.. * . . s>a m _ y « ©\»««©» 2 &© : z ,•:.:::, . z }\ . . � © \ 2%\©«»»««© • A \ ,.: / , w _a ..w ^ z \ \^ ° ^ - � : d«^ \ . _ . . :"...' x. » « : « » 7.y \ /\ m�' . . \ . »» ( /y\ w ©© \®.. ..a»:y/gy> ƒ »\226. \ % . : % ( < ! 2 . ^m : \ 2` �~ ^S` . o y: \ \ , . . am»ex»:'. _ 9»zzy - Es / Lo: �. . , . . . . .. .. /� \( ~~ ��- ^^ »» \ . ' \ . .v»»»: .�v x . ax, . . . : © . q / � ©«»d§\aa/\\\\»/ . y\ �-�_� . : Qa \\ % ® , Ea y\ $66 GJ ._ \\�� ^` �- Q+ \3 I - - ( %/ ) © (» ,:i-C) ® ƒ3 » \\ ( 4 2 ƒ$ \§ )) Ct L /\ \\ e k!®` )`) \ k 9 dot v • • • • • r'F �9y x. ri . I ‘'' .,‘ ' ,1 vci S. '''''''''''''' -I'''' ''' ,.'.410'4144:',,,,,"4:4 k" ,,',,,,k, il • r I.,. ,. ii,* l4. '.. 4,0 ' a " 7 it •�G ,,,,,, 44. trm cels p" �� , w"' - r r � r "illtfitili 41' � ,. "mak r . . M t ,. „,,,,,,, '•”' .a)°_, mE t''''' '4,010fr, ' 11 a ` • y, Ta , * 1 0 y ryA ^� � ry � � q• ' S I .." • ot 444. 'libI 4111111r a) T o LI \ CL r o ., •, „.".rte N ,10,,,,,,,r) o o w ilLiff o - z -41111111111( t \ J L^, W . (S —0 1 C ,. Q co C) C) , C C L L it (6 (6 —0 ».- 2 2 c C C N (6 co N Q C C co a) V ti -C •C N u) 7 7 In N 2 co (n - d c LU LU LL O' 1 A i52 1 P w , r. !!!! V. !,!'!"!,t1,!!" .„ ''''''' r. rd ' ', . 'i !''''''''*! 13 ' le*" !. , * ' a L dui, .I CI) i ;: :°7 # it, a� T�. ,u , ti '' i� " t , 41111( ;' ''''' ' .. , ' '' l ' n roa �r' e a cs IJ—O co 1 ` '_ OVC ` t. • % j i ..... ' 'II'''. IN, - ''') 11 - , , ., , . . ., ., .„ O c' N Illi '.5 O r I O JOSH GREEN,M.D. O v DAWN N.S.CHANG GOVERNOR I KE KIAAINA K . ...... �E CHAIRPERSON ;';� 9 5 9 e •.. BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES SYLVIA LUKE M. COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR KA HOPE KIA'AINA r , .r xMANAGEMENT �� I FIRST DEPUTY l d ar��l !'•;� �'-,' M.KALEO MANUEL DEPUTY DIRECTOR-WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES a COMMISSION{ti STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU'AINA'0 HAWAII ON WATER RESOURCE a DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS Lem CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES RESOURCES DIVISION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT 1151 PUNCHBOWL STREET, ROOM 330 FORESTRY ENGINEERING HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813 KAHOOLAWE ISLANDRRESE PRESERVATION Date: 03/31/23STALAPARKS PARKS DAR #AR6351 MEMORANDUM TO: Brian J. Neilson DAR Administrator FROM: Troy Sakihara , Aquatic Biologist Environmental Review, HRS Chapter 195D Coordination, Hawaii Belt Road, SUBJECT: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Federal-Aid Project No. BR-019-2(075) Request Submitted by: Henry Kennedy, Engineering Program Manager Hakalau Stream Bridge, Route 19, Hawaii Belt Road,Hawaii Island Location of Project: Brief Description of Project: The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), Highways, in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is proposing a Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project on Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) in the Hilo district on Hawaii Island. The proposed project activities include removing, remediating or encapsulating lead contaminated soils around the bridge, rehabilitating the bridge's deteriorating substructure, and upgrading bridge railings. In-water work is proposed near the mouth of Hakalau Stream and approximately 600 feet from a critical habitat boundary for the Hawaiian Monk Seal as designated by NOAA. Construction of new concrete bents will require some six-foot diameter drill shafts with concrete caps to be within the streambed. Comments: ❑ No Comments IE Comments Attached Thank you for providing DAR the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. Should there be any changes to the project plan, DAR requests the opportunity to review and comment on those changes. Apr 3,2023 Comments Approved: Date: Brian J. Neilson DAR Administrator DAR# AR6351 Brief Description of Project A temporary trestle bridge may require in-water foundations to support the drill rig. The project is anticipated to take no longer than two years to complete. No night work is expected. However, should night work be required, additional conservation measures and coordination with resource agencies will be conducted (e.g., shielding outdoor lighting). Best Management Practices (BMP) are to be implemented throughout construction to minimize potenital impacts to water quality. In-water and land-based construction BMPs will be in accordance with "An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a Summary of Clear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii" by the FHWA and HDOT Practitioners Guide (2016) or the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the HDOT (2008). In-water BMPs may include deployment of full-depth silt curtains, sandbags with or without plastic lining, or other methods to contain the work area. In addition, in-water work will be in coordination with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and HDOT expects to obtain a Nationwide Permit from USACE and a blanket Water Quality Certification from the Department of Health. The US Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory indicates an existing freshwater pond approximately 200 feet downstream of the Hakalau Bridge. However, it is assumed to be tidal and estuarine based on site conditions. DAR# AR6351 Comments Comments in regards to Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 195D resources: Considering the proximity of critical habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal to the project area, as designated by NOAA Fisheries, and the continually changing and fluctuating physical profile of Hakalau stream mouth, it is important to recognize the possibility of Hawaiian monk seals entering the stream mouth and lower reach of Hakalau stream, and within the project area under the bridge beyond the designated critical habitat boundaries. As it has been stated, the "freshwater pond" indicated by the US Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory is regularly influenced by tides with frequent open connection to the ocean, which is considered estuarine habitat by DAR. Observations of Hawaiian monk seals occupying this area have been reported in the past. Further, endangered hawksbill turtles and green sea turtles may also enter the stream mouth and the indicated "freshwater pond" during high tides or when there is open connection to the ocean. Frequent and regular watch, particularly during planned in-water work or activities along the stream bank, should therefore be maintained for the possible presence of any of these species to avoid direct interaction or impacts to such, especially as they can be inconspicuous. General comments: Hakalau stream experiences continuous physical changes in habitat due to natural fluctuations in environmental conditions and weather, and may occasionally be closed off to the ocean at the mouth. However, regular connectivity of stream and marine habitat is critical to the survival of native species and the health of the stream, estuarine and marine ecosystems. In particular, all native freshwater stream animals in Hawaii depend on an oceanic larval stage and recruit back into the streams as developed larvae and fry. The successful transition through these life stages depends on stream connectivity to the ocean. While not anticipated by what is proposed, the DAR would still like to ensure that construction activities do not alter or inhibit the natural hydrology of Hakalau Stream, which is known to harbor all of Hawaii's native freshwater stream animals. Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX B HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPROVAL CORRESPONDENCE; REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS (RAA) REPORT FOR LEAD IMPACTED SOIL AT HAKALAU BEACH PARK AND RESPONSE ACTION MEMORANDUM (RAM) FOR LEAD IMPACTED SOIL AT HAKALAU BEACH PARK From: Gilmore, Thomas <thomas.gilmore@doh.hawaii.gov> Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2023 4:24 PM To: Yuen, Holly Subject: Hakalau Attachments: 201713 TG DOT-H Hakalau Stream Bridge Remedial Alternative Report V3 Final Concurrence.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Aloha Holly, attached is a letter of approval for the Remedial Alternatives Study. There is a public comment period that is ongoing currently for the solution that DOT-H has chosen. I am willing to talk with any parties involved (EPA, NMFS etc.). THE DOH HEER office is the primary regulator for work of this nature going forward. We are independent of EPA and our limits are as strict if not stricter than EPA cleanup guidelines. Please contact me with any questions you might have. Thomas Gilmore I Remedial Project Manager Department of Health I Hazrd Evaluation & Emergency Response Office 1582 Kamehameha Ave Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 586-4353 1 vrR JOSH GREEN,M.D. KENNETH S.FINK,MD,MGA,MPH GOVERNOR OF HAWAII' .'1 r KE KIA'AINA 0 KA MOKU'AINA'0 HAM! J, !}', DIRECTOR KALUNA OF HEALTH KA UNA HO'OKELE STATE OF HAWAI'I DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH In reply,pFile:ereferta: KA`OIHANA OLAKINO 201713-TG P.0.BOX 3378 HONOLULU,HI 96801-3378 May 23, 2023 Mr. Harry Takiue Department of Transportation- Highways 50 Makaala Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Sent Via e-mail to: harry.h.takiue(a»hawaii.gov Facility/Site: Hakalau Stream Bridge iHEER site id 2285 Subject: Review of Remedial Alternatives Analysis Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii Final May 2023 Report Dear Mr. Takiue: The Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) Office has received and reviewed the Remedial Alternatives Analysis Report for Lead Impacted Soil at Hakalau Beach Park dated May 2023 and approves the report with no comments. Should you have any questions concerning the above, please contact Thomas Gilmore of the HEER Office at Thomas.gilmore@doh.hawaii.gov or (808) 586-4353. Sincerely, Thomas Gilmore Remedial Project Manager Site Discovery, Assessment, and Remediation Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office e-cc: Mr. Scott Moncrief, KPC, LLC. From: Yuen, Holly <holly.yuen@hawaii.gov> Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2023 5:20 PM To: Uyeda, Pamela K. Cc: Kennedy, Henry; Kam,Allen; Gary Iwamoto Subject: RE: [External] Hakalau Stream Bridge - EFH Letter Attachments: Hakalau Pam, I talked to DOH/HEER and they have reviewed and approved the lead removal report from Kealamahi. They also confirmed that EPA allows DOH to review on their behalf knowing that DOH's requirements are more stringent. Please see attached DOH email. Please prepare a written response for NMFS. Thanks, holly From: Uyeda, Pamela K. <Pamela.Uyeda@wsp.com> Sent:Tuesday,June 27, 2023 12:49 PM To:Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov>; Gary Iwamoto<Garyl@ksfinc.us> Cc: Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>;Allen Kam <allen.kam@wsp.com> Subject: RE: [External] Hakalau Stream Bridge- EFH Letter Holly, Do you need any additional information from Gary? I'll let you work this out with him since WSP is not overseeing Kealamahi's work. Thanks, Pam From: Gary Iwamoto<Garyl@ksfinc.us> Sent:Tuesday,June 27, 2023 10:58 AM To: Uyeda, Pamela K.<Pamela.Uyeda@wsp.com> Cc:Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov>; Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov>; Kam,Allen <Allen.Kam@wsp.com> Subject: Re: [External] Hakalau Stream Bridge - EFH Letter Pam, No, not specifically. The DOH has people from EPA on staff and do their own "EPA Review". It is similar to what Caltrans does with the FHWA review. Thanks, 1 Gary Sent from my iPhone On Jun 27, 2023, at 10:42 AM, Uyeda, Pamela K. <Pamela.Uyeda@wsp.com>wrote: Gary, Was EPA consulted during the development of the lead remediation plan? Thanks, Pam From:Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov> Sent:Tuesday,June 27, 2023 10:30 AM To: Uyeda, Pamela K.<Pamela.Uyeda@wsp.com> Cc: Kennedy, Henry<henry.kennedy@hawaii.gov> Subject: FW: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge - EFH Letter Pam, Please see question below from NMFS re lead remediation. Thanks, holly From: Kasamoto, Kevin <kevin.kasamoto@hawaii.gov> Sent: Friday,June 23, 2023 3:49 PM To: FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro<FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro@dot.gov>; Yuen, Holly<holly.yuen@hawaii.gov> Cc: Rezantes, Kahaa (FHWA) <Kahaa.Rezantes@dot.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge- EFH Letter Hi Meesa, I think this is Holly's portion of the project. I have cc'd her in this email. Thanks. From: Otani, Meesa (FHWA) <meesa.otani@dot.gov>on behalf of FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro<FHWA- Hawaii.Enviro@dot.gov> Sent: Friday,June 23, 2023 2:44 PM To: Kasamoto, Kevin <kevin.kasamoto@hawaii.gov> Cc: Rezantes, Kahaa (FHWA) <Kahaa.Rezantes@dot.gov> Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge- EFH Letter Hi Kevin, Do you have a response for the below concern from NMFS? Thanks! Meesa 2 From: Richard Hall - NOAA Federal <richard.hall@noaa.gov> Sent: Friday,June 23, 2023 1:09 PM To: FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro<FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro@dot.gov>; Rezantes, Kahaa (FHWA) <Kahaa.Rezantes@dot.gov> Cc:Sean Hanser- NOAA Federal <sean.hanser@noaa.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Hakalau Stream Bridge- EFH Letter This email originated from outside of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Rezantes, NMFS is trying to finalize our EFH response for the Hakalau Stream Bridge consultation. The next level reviewer of our response wanted to ask you to respond to a concern he raised. I copied his remarks from the email he sent, can you provide a response?Thanks for your attention to this request for additional information. I have a little concern over the fact that they are remediating the presence of lead in the sediment around the bridge. I didn't see them talk about engaging with the EPA to correctly come up with a plan to remove this contaminant. On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 2:39 PM 'FHWA-Hawaii.Enviro'via_NMFS PIR ESHESA <efhesaconsult@noaa.gov>wrote: Aloha, Please see the attached: 1. BR-019-2(075)Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehab_EFH Consultation FHWA Letter.pdf 2. BR-019-2(075)Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehab_EFH Consultation FHWA Letter Attachments.pdf Please let me know if you have any questions. Mahalo, Kaha'a Rezantes Construction Program Manager Programs and Project DeliveryTeam Federal Highway Administration Hawaii Division Office Richard Hall Fishery Policy Analyst, Pacific Islands Regional Office NOAA Fisheries I U.S. Department of Commerce 3 Office: (808) 725-5018 www.fisheries.noaa.gov NOTICE:This communication and any attachments("this message")may contain information which is privileged,confidential,proprietary or otherwise subject to restricted disclosure under applicable law.This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s).Any unauthorized use,disclosure,viewing,copying,alteration,dissemination or distribution of,or reliance on,this message is strictly prohibited.If you have received this message in error,or you are not an authorized or intended recipient,please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message,delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies. 4 ', ,•.1/4 , ; •:" ,Y ...., , / , ,,„ 1 l' , •,7: - " '•'; i , . m , :1/4,'' ' -'• ---'-.'-'-' ,:. ''.., •,',' .7.""re.'':" " '''''Ir.ii,': ,,, ""' : 'INro-' •'. -."' ,'',,,"r" ,FA,' -1.7! ',, ',,. .' , ..,, ,,.7 • 4 , „ir 4.•*"''''''.' • . „ ,.., 1 I„ • 1 ,..,„-.^.----- . , - . .. - l',! N., ...„ 1,3 ' ::,,,,...0, ,1. . ' ) •''"... ' i i°'I ' '' 1 '111 ' ' • " ' - -7' ; - • , .... . . . '• • ' ,-'.:,m i1,1 . .,..- . • - :' - ,- •114,-,-,",to- 1'"„ ' I )0, ,.. ,,, • ''..• '' ' ,'- 1 -— .% ! I ., ,c1 •.' .' ....!. . N - ..„ ,-. '-'; . ,. , , 1 i ... , . 1 , 1 i) '1/41tr- ' 4 ' . ,-4••'' •":_..., . - i•,•,;., dtr.T.- , •• ..., I • t , . I ••• I.: i , • ,„. ,, .1 '..4.,,,4 _ , '''''cir r,,, ' A,,, • ' - ,:...'°"..-1),.li ,r._ ,‘,. , 11 ," , , .. ,. A., .,.., , V'„17,-,:11. • i ",,,, ..:111.-. . .,,,•' ,,'".. 1 i ' i I .,,,..:;. ',..#0 ,., , . • ' :':II.' la 1.'": I„ 7 .' . .. : :1 ' Cie,. , +will#Lr'-' ''. ' ' ° , °,' ," • : , r , “ , , t ' .,'4,. : .....,-- If •,' .7.% ""',4: . 1 , ", , k 0 ,1. \.\\,, . , . , ., . ,.. 11 , . 104-,,,,',•!,•,‘,„ ,...,1 ,.,..4,... ,t' . 4 i a ,,-,r k ' • I . a' :' .. ..",. .1,,,,,,,o,_ ',-., ilk, -11/4*1/4„,,,'10,!,' : ii.,,,' -&., ', .:,', • ,7,,,,.4 ;' I,',,sil,, 1/4 1 „,, ...„, — 0 ,'''' " ' '‘'.?"• . .• - '' ,• ,. .' 0 0 FIN i ', .:-'•• •-' , , , ...--,.--..,„.!„ " ,' ii."-,-41' li ••ii •:#4, •••of •• c „.... . , REMEDIAL ALTE or• ' ...„, „... _.,... • 4404- - ANALYSIS REPORT FOR L IMPACTED SOIL AT HALALAU BEACH PARK, . HAKALAU, HAWAII _ lb.. Hawaii State Department of Transportation IOW Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Alternatives Analysis This page was intentionally left blank. REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT For LEAD IMPACTED SOIL AT HAKALAU BEACH PARK, HAKALAU, HAWAII Prepared For: Hawaii State Department of Transportation Prepared For: KSF Inc. 615 Piikoi Street, Ste 300 Honolulu, Hawaii 96734 Prepared By: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC. 111 Hekili Street, Ste A601 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 October 2022 Updated April 2023 Final May 2023 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Alternatives Analysis This page was intentionally left blank. Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Alternatives Analysis Table of Contents 1 Introduction and Purpose 1 1.1 Purpose 1 2 Background 3 2.1 Site Description 3 2.2 Climate 3 2.3 Soils/Geology 3 2.4 Surface Water 3 2.5 Groundwater 3 2.6 Historic Land Use 4 2.7 Current/Future Land Use 5 3 Magnitude and Extent of Contamination 6 3.1 X-Ray Fluorescence: HDOH 2016 6 3.2 Paint and Soil Sampling: ESI 2016 7 3.3 Soil Sampling: EQI February and November 2020 7 3.4 Soil Sampling: KPC Spring 2022 (April 18-20 and May 10-12) 8 3.4.1 Sediment Sampling from Stream Bank 8 3.4.2 Delineation Sampling North and South Stream Bank Benches Results 9 3.4.3 Groundwater Sampling Results 9 3.4.4 Surface Water Sampling Results 10 4 Environmental Hazard Evaluations 21 4.1 Chemicals of Potential Concern 21 4.2 Exposure Setting 21 4.3 Potential Human/Ecological Receptors 22 4.4 Exposure Pathway Analysis 22 4.4.1 Direct Contact Pathways 22 4.4.2 Air Exposure Pathways 23 4.4.3 Surface Runoff and Sediment Exposure Pathway 24 4.4.4 Groundwater Exposure Pathway 24 4.5 Environmental Hazard Evaluation Summary 26 4.5.1 COPC Sources and Release Mechanisms 26 4.5.2 Pathways and Exposure Routes 26 4.5.3 Potential Receptors Current and Future Land Use 26 4.5.4 Complete Exposure Pathways 26 4.5.5 Potentially Complete Exposure Pathways 26 4.5.6 Exposure to Lead Leaching 27 5 Establishing Alternatives 29 5.1 Potential ARARs and TBC Criteria 29 5.1.1 Potential Chemical-Specific ARARs and TBCs 29 5.1.2 Potential Location-Specific ARARs and TBCs 29 5.1.3 Potential Action-Specific ARARs and TBCs 30 5.2 Remedial Action Objectives 30 5.3 General Response Actions 30 6 Detailed Analysis of Alternatives 31 i Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Alternatives Analysis 6.1 Alternative 1: Recycle or Reuse 31 6.2 Alternative 2: Destruction or Detoxification 31 6.3 Alternative 3: Separation,concentration,or volume reduction 31 6.4 Alternative 4: Immobilization of Hazardous Substances 31 6.5 Alternative 5: On-site or off-site disposal, isolation,or containment 33 6.5.1 Alternative 5a: On-site isolation and containment 35 6.5.2 Alternative 5b: Removal of all soil that exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill 36 6.5.3 Alternative 5c: Removal of soil which exceeds 800 mg/kg for lead, containment, and replacement with clean fill. Soil cap for soil which exceeds 200 mg/kg but is below 800 mg/kg 40 6.6 Institutional Controls or Long-Term Monitoring 42 6.6.1 Alternatives 6a: No Action 42 6.6.2 Alternatives 6b: Institutional and Engineering Controls 42 7 Comparative Analysis of Remedial Alternatives 44 7.1 Overall Protectiveness 44 7.2 Compliance with ARARs 48 7.3 Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility,and Volume through Treatment 48 7.4 Long-Term and Short-Term Effectiveness 52 7.5 Implementability 52 7.6 Estimated Costs 53 8 Preferred Alternative 56 9 References 58 ii Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Alternatives Analysis FIGURES Figure 1-1: Site Location and Tax Map Key Parcels: Hakalau Beach Park 2 Figure 2-1: Hakalau sugar mill and town 4 Figure 2-2: Aftermath of 1946 Tsunami. Facing South. 5 Figure 3-1: 2016 and 2020 DU and Sample Results Hakalau 15 Figure 6-1: Alternative 5a or 5b, Removal 200+ mg/kg and Capped Soil Areas 38 Figure 6-2: Removal of Soil Over 800 mg/kg, Cap 200 mg/kg 41 TABLES Table 1-1: TMK and Landowner 2 Table 3-1: 2016, 2020, and 2022 Combined Soil Sample Results 11 Table 3-2: Hakalau Beach Park Southern Bank 19 Table 4-1: Conceptual Site Exposure Model 28 Table 6-1: HDOT and Privately Owned Parcels which exceed 800 mg/kg 34 Table 6-2: Hawaii County and Privately Owned Parcels 34 Table 6-3: Alternative 5a: No Removal, Cap Only, Cubic Yards 35 Table 6-4: DUs which Failed TCLP (2016) and Require Mainland Disposal 36 Table 6-5: Alternative 5b, Soil Removal 200+ mg/kg, Clean Fill, Cubic yards 37 Table 6-6: Alternative 5c— Soil Removal 800+ mg/kg, Clean Fill Cubic Yards 40 Table 7-1: Alternatives Analysis - Protectiveness 46 Table 7-2: Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, and Volume through Treatment Comparison 50 Table 7-3: Cost Comparison 54 Table 8-1: Evaluation of Cleanup Alternatives: Hakalau RAA 56 APPENDICES Appendix A: Laboratory Analytical Reports Appendix B: Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure Batch Test Leaching Method Results Appendix C: Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) and To- Be Considered (TBC) Criteria Appendix D: Remedial Alternative Cost Comparison Appendix E: Treatability Study iii Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Alternatives Analysis LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ARARs Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements bgs below ground surface c-EHMP Project-specific Construction Environmental Hazard Management Plan COC Contaminant of Concern COPC Contaminants of Potential Concern CSM Conceptual site model CY Cubic yard(s) DU Decision Unit EAL Environmental Action Level EHMP Environmental Hazard Management Plan EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency HDOH State of Hawaii Department of Health HDOH TGM State of Hawaii Department of Health Technical Guidance Manual HDOT State of Hawaii Department of Transportation HEER Hazardous Evaluation and Emergency Response Kd Desorption coefficient (SPLP test results) LBP Lead-Based Paint mg/kg Milligram per kilogram RAA Remedial Alternatives Analysis RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RSL Regional Screening Levels SCP State Contingency Plan SPLP Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure TBC to-be-considered TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TMK Tax Map Key USDA NRCS United States Department of Agriculture National Resource Conservation Service- USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency iv Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 1 Introduction and Purpose The site is located at Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii on the Hamakua Coast approximately 14 miles north of Hilo HI. The site is used as a public park for general recreation, swimming, surfing, and fishing (Figure 1-1). The site includes the Hawaii County Tax Map Key (TMK) (3) 2-9-002 Parcel 080, which is owned by the County of Hawaii. The State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) owns an easement under the Hakalau Bridge that extends out ten feet on either side of the bridge which is TMK (3) 2-9-002 Parcel 999. The access road transits across two privately owned triangular parcels which straddle the stream. Table 1-1 lists the TMKs and landowners of the properties in this project. The park and surrounding area are located below the Hakalau Stream Bridge. This steel girder and trestle bridge lie 250+ feet above the park area. The bridge was originally constructed in 1911, and lead-based paints (LBPs) were frequently applied to the structure throughout the 20th Century (Historic Hawaii 2022). Lead-based paint flaked off and may have been spilled during application. The lead paint was removed from the bridge in 2000, but the area below the bridge now has lead-impacted soil. 1 .1 Purpose Lead-impacted soil has been documented at Hakalau Beach Park with potential impacts on human health. Several site investigations were conducted in 2016, 2020, and 2022 to identify and delineate the extent of lead-impacted soil within Decision Units (DUs) at the site. Triple phosphate treatment was also tested in 2022. This report evaluates existing data and associated human health and/or environmental hazards and provides an analysis of potential remedial alternatives at the site. 1 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Figure 1-1: Site Location and Tax Map Key Parcels: Hakalau Beach Park lo�rir: �1 9h .1130 rn D ,. ., / \ Kalaoa Hilo � °' Holualoa " 4+nz3 1777 Hawaii $ tir s z 331001003 Haws vel ti .44 . 329002888 H tr cT.ail !, +'~ �. / r 7 H kaIau)BeachPark / .. ... ';s 33100100 3 M1 9 // 331 UO LUG2141 42900 331701004 °* r7;:ild77' 7 • 329006021 .00602 -329006008 329002025 329006020 it 6007 1°µ Tax Parcels '"- 329002023 ' 3 19 % Oft, County of Hawaii Parcel s:'"" Oh HDOT ROW Parcel m 329002064 ..‘.% 320060 8 R Source:Esri,DlgltalGlohe,G -,E" r Istat Geographies,CNES(Alrbus DS, Table 1-1: TMK and Landowner TMK Landowner 329002080 County of Hawaii 329002999 State of Hawaii Department of Transportation 331001002 Maria and Steven Wolf 331001001 Marian Land Company 329002025 Maria and Steven Wolf 2 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 2 Background 2.1 Site Description The site is located in a steep gulch and is bisected by the wide and rocky Hakalau Stream which opens to the Pacific Ocean. A paved road descends into Hakalau Gulch and crosses Hakalau Stream via a stabilized channel crossing and becomes gravel/dirt/rock. The southern embankment includes the County of Hawaii Park parcel. This parcel is open and grassy, with a concrete-floor pavilion, and the partial walls from the former Hakalau Sugar Mill. Another dirt/rock road serves the northern embankment. The area under the Bridge is rocky with tall grasses. 2.2 Climate The site is located on the Hamakua Coast of Hawaii Island on the windward side of the island. This area experiences higher than average rainfall than most of Hawaii. The average annual rainfall for the site is approximately 138 inches. March is the wettest month with over 15 inches of rainfall and June is the driest with approximately 8 inches (Giambelluca et al 2013). Temperatures have minimal variances with an average low of 65 to 70 degrees Fahrenheit and average highs of 79 to 84 degrees Fahrenheit (NOAA 2019). 2.3 Soils/Geology The site is located adjacent to the Hakalau Stream mouth. Soils are identified by the United States Department of Agriculture National Resource Conservation Service (USDA NRCS) as Hilo Rock Outcrop, consisting of hydrous silty clay loam on the surface (USDA NRCS 2019). This soil consists of lava flows broken into a base of river cobble. The stream banks experience frequent erosion during storms and heavy rains. 2.4 Surface Water Hakalau Stream bisects the site. This is a 29 mile long, wide freshwater perennial stream with a braided channel. It is part of a nine square mile watershed. The stream is not channelized and the banks shift during heavy flows. The mouth of the stream often has a rocky bar which forms a deeper pool in the stream but does not stop the flow to the ocean. A former seawall is angled on the southern edge, but it is now undermined and surrounded by cobbles. Hakalau County Park attained the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) water quality parameters for enterococci in 2022 (HDOH 2022). 2.5 Groundwater The site is located below the Underground Injection Line according to the HDOH Safe Drinking Water Branch (HDOH SDWB 2019). Groundwater is not a source of drinking water. The site is primarily at sea level to approximately 10 feet above mean sea level. 3 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 2.6 Historic Land Use The parcels targeted for remedial action alternatives are below Hawaii Belt Road in the Honomu-Kahua ahupua'a. Figure 2-1: Hakalau sugar mill and town. Railroad bridge with train, flume system. . -. r..„ t •... f' hr, 4 .y: fi-., i x..., 'Y Y°. $ �i,� µ 'F /" L ilitr / K fl .2.- u w M � i ^ w . � em' u l f � s r, _ __S ~ Source: Hakalau Home 2022 The site itself had been agricultural. In 1881 the Hakalau Sugar Mill was built at the southern embankment. Hakalau Gulch Camp (worker housing) on the northern embankment (Marian Land Parcel) is visible on topographic maps by 1915 and in 1925 photos. The current bridge was previously a railroad bridge that was constructed in 1911. It is identified by the State Historic Preservation Office as SHPD Historic Site Number 10- 16-9090 (Historic Hawaii 2022). The bridge had multiple layers of lead-based paint applied to the metal structure throughout the 20th century. The associated plantation flume ran parallel to the bridge, and it's possible that this metal support structure also was a contributing source of lead-based paint (Figure 2-1). The mill, railroad, flume, and the Hakalau Gulch Camp were destroyed in the 1946 tsunami (Figure 2-2). The mill reopened the following year, but the housing was not reconstructed. The railroad was converted to a highway in the 1950s, and the flume was not rebuilt. The company merged, and the mill remained in operation until 1974 (Hakalau 4 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Home 2022). The main structure was demolished by 1979, but the foundation outline still appears on topo maps until 1992. The seawall and portions of the former plantation structure remain on-site today. Figure 2-2: Aftermath of 1946 Tsunami. Facing South. Seawall still present on-site. v. • • • so ,. n 'Y • Irit rs 1 �i + 4014 • - . Source: Hakalau Home 2022 2.7 Current/Future Land Use The site is currently a public County of Hawaii-managed park, which is used for general recreation, surfing, and fishing (Figure 1-1). The site is anticipated to remain a public park. 5 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 3 Magnitude and Extent of Contamination Previous site investigations on bridges along the Hamakua Coast identified that lead- based paint flakes and arsenic could be a concern in the HDOT Highways right of way below the bridges. Multi-increment soil sample investigations in 2016 identified lead-impacted soils in 15 of the 19 DUs at the site. One DU was paved and not sampled. Only four DUs met the HDOH Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Branch (HEER) Unrestricted Land Use (residential land use) Environmental Action Levels (EALs) for total lead (HDOH revised Fall 2017). Follow-up sampling in 2020 and 2022 expanded the DU areas and included additional depth profiles. See Table 3-1 for 2016, 2020, and 2022 combined soil sample results at Hakalau Beach Park. The sampling confirmed that the southern embankment HDOT ROW contained the highest lead concentration sample results. The area under the Hakalau bridge had lead concentrations that exceeded the gross contamination levels (<1,000 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg]) in soil beginning from surface soil to a depth of 12-inches below ground surface (bgs). The highest results in the ROW were 25,000 mg/kg of total lead. Ultimately every DU in the HDOT ROW exceeded both the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for unrestricted land use and the construction/trench worker action level of 800 mg/kg of total lead. Levels that exceed the construction trench worker EAL require a Construction EHMP while working on the site and may require additional PPE and monitoring equipment. The areas of exceedance were not confined to the ROW. Lead-impacted soil was found in the adjacent properties (Figure 3-1), primarily upstream on the southern embankment. In total approximately 6,000 sq. feet on the Northern Embankment and approximately 43,000 sq. feet on the southern embankment both the unrestricted land used EAL and the 800 mg/kg lead EAL for Construction/Trench Workers. Impacts decreased at greater distances from the bridge. Total lead remained between 200 mg/kg and 800 mg/kg even 80 to 100 feet from the bridge in the northern embankment. Lead- impacted soils were found approximately 225 ft from the bridge on the southern embankment. The County of Hawaii park area DUs were between 200 mg/kg and 800 mg/kg within the primary park area. No DUs exceeded 800 mg/kg. Lead-impacted soils covered an area of approximately 43,000 sq ft of the parcel (the majority of the park space). Some DU depth profiles in the County of Hawaii parcel met the HDOH Tier I EALs for unrestricted land use. 3.1 X-Ray Fluorescence: HDOH 2016 In 2016, the HEER Office performed a surface soil site investigation to evaluate the impacts of LBP and sugar plantation activities at the site. HDOH used an X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzer to screen for lead, arsenic, and mercury in a single composite soil sample. This single-exposure DU was located directly below Hakalau 6 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Bridge and represented the most probable location of the lead-impacted soil. Thirty (30) increments of soil were collected from the top 2 to 3 inches of soil within this DU. The DU was approximately 120-feet long by 30-feet wide. Sixteen (16)XRF measurements were taken from the combined incremental soil samples and averaged. The average lead concentration was 196 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg] and the average arsenic concentration was less than 8.7 mg/kg. Mercury was not detected in any of the XRF measurements (HDOH, 2016). 3.2 Paint and Soil Sampling: ESI 2016 Due to high levels of LBP found at other locations on the Hamakua Coast, ESI tested paint chips that were found on the bridge footings and steel girders (ESI, 2016). Greyish- black paint chips were collected from the base of four (4) of the steel girders. Lead concentrations ranging from 89 to 510 mg/kg and arsenic concentrations ranging from 61 to 110 mg/kg were found. Red and black paint chips on the rocks beneath the bridge were also tested, and lead was detected in the red paint at 11 ,000 mg/kg, and in the black paint at 2,700 mg/kg. Arsenic was detected in the red paint at 130 mg/kg and was not detected in the black paint (ESI, 2017a). Additional multi-incremental soil samples were collected from nine DUs in Spring 2016 and twelve more DUs in Fall 2016 (Table 1-1) at depths of 0 to 3 inches bgs and 3 to 6 inches bgs. The 2016 soil sample results found exceedances for lead, with results as high as 25,000 mg/kg directly below the bridge. Nine DUs exceeded the HDOH Construction/Trench Worker Direct Exposure EAL of 800 mg/kg for lead, and eight exceeded the HDOH Gross Contamination EAL of 1000 mg/kg for lead. As a result of the high lead exceedances, soil from seven DUs was analyzed by the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) (KPC 2022). TCLP is a soil sample extraction method for the assessment of the toxicity of heavy metals or other compounds in contaminated soil media. The method incorporates an extraction fluid with a pH that simulates the acidic conditions that soil if it were disposed of in a permitted landfill. If TCLP is detected at concentrations that exceed the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste criteria (in the case of lead it is 5 mg/L), the material is classified as hazardous waste and must be disposed of in the continental United States as there are currently not any landfills in Hawaii that can accept this type of waste. TCLP analysis results for three of the DUs exceeded the RCRA listed hazardous waste criterium of 5 mg/L (DU-1B, 11A, and 21A) Figure 1-1. All of these are located on the southern embankment, under the middle girder (KPC 2022). However, it is estimated that DU2 could also fail TCLP based on the high total lead concentrations. 3.3 Soil Sampling: EQI February and November 2020 In 2020, DUs were added to identify the extent of lead-impacted soil. DU depths were extended to 12 inches bgs unless refusal occurred. 7 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Due to the number of DUs, DUs with similar 2016 sample results (above 200 mg/kg and above 800 mg/kg) were consolidated into larger DUs. Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 summarized data from all sampling events and include the former DU and revised DU numbers. Data summary tables and laboratory reports are presented in Appendix A. As presented in Table 3-1, the southern bank bench of the HDOT ROW under the Hakalau Bridge exhibited the highest lead concentration sample results even to depths of 12 inches bgs. Sample results for total exceeded the gross contamination levels (<1,000 mg/kg). In general, the concentration of lead dropped as depth increased, but not at all of the DUs. The DUs upstream of the HDOT ROW on the southern embankment saw an increase in total lead concentrations (Table 3-1). Additional sampling also found that soil under the northern embankment, under the girder exceeded the HDOH Construction/Trench Worker EAL for 800 mg/kg for lead. 3.4 Soil Sampling: KPC Spring 2022 (April 18-20 and May 10-12) Concerns about the extent of impacts along both banks of the stream valley floor, shoreline, and the leachability of lead-impacted areas transferring to groundwater and surface water were addressed in the 2022 sampling. The purpose of the 2022 sampling was to determine where soil at the site no longer exceeded the unrestricted land use EAL of 200 mg/kg for lead. Sampling had been planned for 2021, however, it was delayed due to COVID and right of entry documentation to access private land areas in the vicinity of the project area. Surface and subsurface soil samples were collected along the northern bank as well as upstream at the southern embankment. As shown in Figure 3-1 and Table 3-1 the vertical and horizontal extent of the lead-impacted soil had not been established further upstream and downstream of the bridge on the northern stream bank nor upstream of the bridge on the southern stream bank 3.4.1 Sediment Sampling from Stream Bank During this mobilization, sediment sampling had been proposed along both sides of the stream bank (KPC, 2022). When KPC arrived to perform the first of two sampling events in April 2022, extensive scouring, associated with a heavy rain event days preceding the sampling had removed all fine sediment associated with the planned sediment DUs and only large cobble and boulder-sized material remained on the banks. As a result of the high stream discharge rate following the rain event, the vast majority of the sediment formerly along the banks of either side of the stream mouth had been transported out into Hakalau Bay. KPC discussed this event with Mr. Thomas Gilmore (HDOH HEER Remedial Project Manager) who visited the site on April 18, 2022, while KPC was conducting sampling on the northern bank of the Hakalau Stream. Mr. Gilmore concurred that sampling for sediment was not practicable since there was longer fine sediment available to sample in the four planned DU locations on either side of the stream. 8 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives KPC returned approximately one month later on May 10, 2022, to complete the sampling activities and observed that the sediment in the planned sediment sampling DUs still had not fully returned to its former position. Coarse cobble and boulder-sized sediment made up the bulk of the stream shoreline in these areas, while the gravel-sized sediment was still in the littoral region of the bay and was only beginning the regress into the mouth of the stream. Based on the April and May 2022 observations it was apparent that the fine sediment is displaced from the mouth of the stream into Hakalau Bay following high rainfall events, then constant wave action winnows the fine sediment particles out of the slug of new sediment entering the bay and slowly pushes the remaining courser sediment back in the mouth of the stream over days/weeks. The rate that sediment returns into the mouth of the stream depends on the wave conditions and a large portion of the fine sediment formerly in the estuary likely remains offshore and the vast majority of the material originally transported into the bay is redeposited is medium to coarse gravel and cobble sized material. This cyclical process is repeated perhaps a couple of times per year on the scale that we observed, and several times per year on a smaller scale that acts to continuously winnow out the fine sediment (including fine lead particles in the sediment) from the mouth of the stream. Based on these observations it is unlikely that there is a complete exposure pathway to human receptors (beachgoers, fishermen) posed by lead in the beach and river sediments. 3.4.2 Delineation Sampling North and South Stream Bank Benches Results As shown in Figure 3-1 the vertical and horizontal extent of the lead-impacted soil had not been established on the upstream and downstream sides of the bridge on the northern stream bank and in the upstream direction of the southern stream bank. The purpose of the 2022 sampling events was to identify the limits of the contamination "hot zone" to the point where concentrations of total lead in soil fall below the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg). The results showed a drop-off in total lead concentrations approximately 225 feet upstream along the southern stream bench and 125 feet along the northern stream bench. The goal was to identify the limits of contamination, where soil met HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use (Figure 3-2). In the 2022 sampling event, no DU exceeded 800 mg/kg of total lead. Three DUs exceeded the HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use (Table 1-2). 3.4.3 Groundwater Sampling Results The plans to collect a groundwater sample from within the highly contaminated zone represented by DUs 32 and 33 using an auger and a gas-powered direct push rig were abandoned based on the observation of the sub-surface cross-section of the southern stream bank adjacent to these DUs. On May 10, 2022, a steep stream bank resulted from high volumes of water scouring the southern bank exposed a 4-foot cross-section that exhibited that a thin veneer of a coarse gravel layer mixed with sand and silt extend from 9 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives the surface to about 8-12 inches below the upper surface layer. This unit was underlain by rounded large cobble to small boulder-sized rock unit from the base of the described upper layer to the base of the stream bank cross-section where it was covered by other course sediments that made up the rest of the stream bank sediment. This type of geologic unit would not allow a boring to be installed using the available drilling methods and in lieu of the temporary monitoring well, an additional surface water sample collected from the slow meandering stream that passes through the southern side of the steam where the DUs with the highest lead concentrations were found this portion of the stream bench was conducted as a proxy to evaluate the potential soil groundwater leaching effects. This is described in greater detail below. 3.4.4 Surface Water Sampling Results In accordance with the Final SAP, Addendum samples were collected from surface water at two locations from the small stream flowing along the base of the southern embankment that supports the access road down the side of Hakalau Valley (KPC, 2022). An additional location was added at the approximate midpoint where the stream passes through the highly contaminated zone (DUs 32 and 33). DU sample from the stream was conducted following the HEER Technical Guidance Manual (HDOH TGM)and the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-54 (HDOH, 2014). This tributary stream has a width of approximately 6 feet and a depth of approximately 3 feet and runs parallel to the southern wall of the valley, then cuts north and discharges into the Hakalau stream, close to the public beach area. Because this stream passes through the most contaminated areas identified, a sample was planned to be collected in the SAP where the stream turns north and discharged into the main course of Hakalau stream just before where an open concrete dip stream crossing is present in the access roadway connecting to the park, As described above, this point was selected to assess the potential that lead in the soil may be leaching into the surface water as it passes through this highly contaminated zone as described above. These surface water DUs and presented as 202249, 202250, and 202251 in Figure 3-2. A total of three (3) surface water samples were collected and tested for total lead concentration (mg/L). Concentrations of lead in the water samples were all below the laboratory method reporting limit. Results indicate that there is likely no impact on the surface water body via lead mobilizing from soil to groundwater and groundwater then discharging to surface water. This is supported by the results of the Batch Test Leaching Model (HDOH, 2007), presented in Section 4.4.4 of this document, which concluded that the mobility of lead in the soil was very low based on the result of the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) results of the ISM samples collected from the DUs with the highest concentration of lead (DUs 32 and 33). 10 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Table 3-1: 2016, 2020, and 2022 Combined Soil Sample Results at Hakalau Beach Park MENEE Lead results below HDOH Tier 1 EAL Unrestricted Land Use(200 mg/kg) Lead results above HDOH Tier 1 EAL Unrestricted Land Use (200 mg/kg), but below Construction/Trench Worker Scenario(800 mg/kg) Lead results above HDOH Tier 1 EAL above Construction/Trench Worker Scenario (800 mg/kg), but below gross contamination (1,000 mg/kg) Lead results above gross contamination (1,000 mg/kg) 2020/2022 2016 Previous Sample Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner DU DU Sample ID Date (in) Results m•/k• Description 1 DU-1 2016 0-3 25,000 1 DU-1D 2016 0-3 23,700 Area around the bents 4 and 5 1 DU-1T 2016 0-3 23,600 under the bridge HDOT 1 DU-1B 2016 3-6 7,880 on the south side 32/33 1 DU-1B 2020 6-12 3,250*; 3,360*; stream. 2,960* 2 DU-2 2016 0-3 10,200 Between the 2 DU-2B 2016 3-6 9,480 road and HDOT 32/33 2 DU-2B 2020 6-12 3,250*; 3,360*; stream around 2,960* bent 6 3 DU-3a 2016 0-6 69.4 Southern stream HDOT bank 4a DU-4a 2016 0-6 3.81 Northern stream HDOT bank. Observed 4a DU-9+ 2016 0-6 2.8 scour in 4a DU-10+ 2016 0-6 2.52 Feb. 2020 4b DU-4b 2016 6-18 2.99 5 DU-5 2016 0-3 3,730 Northern stream bank. Areas HDOT 34 5 DU-5 2020 0-6 221* around the bridge 34 5 DU-5 2020 6-12 918* bents. Northern bank: 34 6 DU-6 2016 0-3 282 Access road HDOT between Bents 9-10 7 DU-7 2016 0-3 2,530 7 DU-7B 2016 3-6 MOM= Road on S. Embankment, HDOT between Bents 5 33 7 DU-7B 2020 6-12 3,538* and 6. 8 DU-8 2016 0-3 1,850 Vegetated area 32 8 DU-8 2020 3-6 13,500* on S. 8B 8 DU-8 2020 3-6 2,680** embankment Wolf Property 32 8 DU-8 2020 6-12 7,510* south of the 8B 12+ Refusal access road to park area. 11 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 2020/2022 2016 Previous Sample Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner DU DU Sample ID Date (in) Results(mg/kg) Description 11 DU-11A 2016 0-3 8,820 11 DU-11B 2016 3-6 Refusal Narrow DU south HDOT 32/33 11 DU-11B 6-12 r 3,538*; 7510* of DU1 12 DU-12A 2016 0-3 1,410 12 DU-23A 2016 0-3 1,040 Grassy area, 12 DU-24A 2016 0-3 likely used by Marian Land DU-12A/B, Co. 12 12 24A/B 2016 4-6 738** public. 12 DU-12B 2016 3-6 773 13 DU-13A 2016 0-3 357 Grassy area, likely used by Marian Land 13 DU-13B 2016 3-6 372 public. Co. 14 DU-14A 2016 0-3 57 Driveway area, acceptable for Marian Land 14 DU-14B 2016 3-6 93.4 public use Co. 15 DU-15A 2016 N/A Paved %%% % Marian Land - Paved drainage Co. 15 DU-15B 2016 N/A Paved swale. 16 DU-16A 2016 0-3 339 Park area. 16 DU-16B 2016 3-6 348 Heavy use by County of 37 16 DU-16B 6-12 368* public. Hawaii 17 DU-17A 2016 0-3 232 17 DU-17B 2016 3-6 161 Grassy area County of south of park. Hawaii 37 17 DU-17B 2020 6-12 368* 18 DU-18A 2016 0-3 104 Grassy Park 18 DU-18B 2016 3-6 226 area at mouth County of of Hakalau Hawaii 38 18 DU-18B 2020 6-12 764* stream. 19 DU-19A 2016 0-3 28.4 Grassy strip west of DU 18. County of 19 DU-19B 2016 3-6 14.1 Acceptable for Hawaii public. 20 DU-20A 2016 0-3 760 20 DU-20B 2016 3-6 570 Vegetated 20 20 DU-20A and 2020 3-6 1,640** area west of Wolf Property DU20B DU-8. 20 6+ Refusal 21 DU-21A 2016 0-3 5,080 Directly below 21 DU-21B 2016 3-6 2,720 bridge south HDOT ROW 32 21 DU-21B 2020 6-12 3,538*; 7510* bank. 22 DU-22A 2016 0-3 3,830 Wolf Property: 32 22 DU-22B 2016/2020 3-6 2,870; 13,500* Area between HDOT/Wolf driveway and Property 32 22 DU-22B 6-12 7,510* stream. 12 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 2020/2022 2016 Previous Sample Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner DU DU Sample ID Date (in) Results(mg/kg) Description APotential high use. 26 2020 0-3 I 1,320** Southern bank 3+ Refusal upstream of Wolf Property 6-18 DU22 27 2020 0-3 1,680** Southern bank 27 3+ Refusal upstream of Wolf Property DU26 Northern bank: 34 2020 0-6 221* renumbered from DU35 in 2020 HDOT 34 2020 6-12 SAP 202239 2022 0-6 490 Northern bank: Marian Land adjacent to bridge Co. 202239 2022 6-12 737 downstream Northern bank: Marian Land 202240 2022 0-6 131 downstream from Co DU 39 202241 2022 0-6 386 Northern bank: Majority Wolf adjacent to ROW Property 202241 2022 6-12 360 upstream 202242a 2022 0-6 99 Northern bank: Wolf Property upstream of 41. 202242b 2022 0-6 76.8 Northern bank: Wolf Property (arithmetic mean) upstream of 42A. 202243 2022 0-6 146 Southern bank: Wolf Property streambank 202244 2022 0-6 402 Southern bank: across from 43. Wolf Property 202244 2022 6-12 339 202245 2022 0-6 83.7(arithmetic Southern bank: Wolf Property mean) upstream of 44 Notes DU9 and DU10 are replicates of DU4. *=2020 sampling event—February **=2020 sampling event-November 13 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives This page was intentionally left blank. 14 c. co # 0, • - Ti-, A ; : g E T. G1 a o 0 -J �, r. waS • w OD 5"• m m g rn ti.-1 r. + ` E • • rnO rtx = a % oE oE er--. ' w m $ m , : t}s 'O • Ly n. M " fO M � 40 r 1 K Q W LE Qy1�� fi ''r ' , Y7c H N o o :� .2F� T Nx Z N U co •I,,,, -II " bi uw�py�`, , r Nt 73 R a,,.. �L' r t/� [Is o ° , CD Ce �'M0.1 ... g • • - , Y l i� ! i P '••' i i�ti ,y wI ,u E rj� • i � ✓ �' �� as 4CL 1.j.„ A , .a ay. C SL 03 M .ta‘� :o ��RI , •°`° co CO 0o C0 V X7`7 1e' a COr . ii. r� — . k el,.„,, ; ..... ..,. .. r• • FFr • C • • Nt I w. ,ay. • .Q'• .,it;•I �' t .,i M. '' E- ' 4, ^ U E 'CZ't5 amIFL .' .e v, Q yy y{”' LU COm U N N co 2 0 CO Q) r Q N a) C Y N Q a � L U o U CO n (a N E co co NI r , �' • • 4 0 cP ' � . I1R y1" I a ' EM1 ! I 3 U1 ck J �, W 3 R1=1 Cy Ili , ei ,LI, 1.,,, [---, 0 R \ 141(04....„ ,...„0...„4,.,, rte. '- AFm Cl) Pe( , . r - X15 CI — X a O .;, No IIS v: x rf, t . w, , • . N r g _ r„ ...77.' '011 ' v, , . , ,1 "v t- -,I .., _ ,..,.,..,„. *# ' ' yy�,�yy -F ',..:,,.....° ' `4.4e7 ", 'e T5 . 40 ,,,,, . i , . Is 4.- , . , R. 4., - • — ,�yt Y E (6 N N N co 2 -Q CD 0 z 00 Q) r z 03 03 Q N a) C Y N Q a � L U (QU U CO n (a N E f0 CD Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Table 3-2: Hakalau Beach Park Southern Bank Results above 800 mg/kg for Lead Lead results above HDOH Tier 1 EAL Unrestricted Land Use(200 mg/kg), but below Construction/Trench Worker Scenario(800 mg/kg) Lead results above HDOH Tier 1 EAL above Construction/Trench Worker Scenario(800 mg/kg), but below gross contamination (1,000 mg/kg) Lead results above gross contamination (1,000 mg/kg) NA Not sampled Previous Lead 2020/2022 Depth Current Use DU 2016 DU (in) Results Description Owner (mg/kg) HDOT ROW DUs DU-1 0-3 25,000 DU-1D 0-3 23,700 1 DU-1T 0-3 23,600 Area around the HDOT DU-1 B 3-6 7,880 bents 4 and 5 32/33 DU-1B 6-12 3,250*; 3,360*; 2,960* DU-2 0-3 10,200 DU-2B 3-6 9,480 Between the 2 road and stream HDOT 32/33 DU-2B 6-12 3,250*; 3,360*; around bent 6 2,960* DU-7 0-3 2,530 Road on South 7 DU-7B 3-6 Refusal stream bank, HDOT 33 DU-7B 6-12 3,538* between Bents 5 and 6. DU-11A 0-3 8,820 11 DU-11B 3-6 Refusal Narrow DU HDOT 32/33 DU-11B 6-12 3,538*; 7510* south of DU1 DU-21A 0-3 5,080 Directly below 21 DU-21 B 3-6 2,720 bridge south HDOT ROW 32 DU-21B 6-12 3,538*; 7510* bank. 22 DU-22A 0-3 3,830 Wolf Property: 32 DU-22B 3-6 2,870; 13,500* Area between driveway and HDOT/Wolf 32 DU-22B 6-12 7,510* stream. Potential Property high use. PRIVATELY OWNED PARCELS DUs DU-8 0-3 Vegetated area 32 DU-8 3-6 On southern 8B 8 DU-8 3-6 stream bank Wolf Property 32 DU-8 6-12 south of the p y 8B 12+ Refusal access road to park area. 19 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Previous Lead 2020/2022 Depth Current Use DU 2016 DU (in) Results Description Owner (mg/kg) DU-12A 0-3 1,410 12 DU-23A 0-3 1,040 Grassy area, Marian Land likely used by Co. DU-24A 0-3 public. DU-20A 0-3 760 DU-20B 3-6 570 20 DU-20A Vegetated area 20 and 3-6 1,640** west of DU-8. Wolf Property DU20B 20 6+ Refusal DU-22A 0-3Wolf Property: 32 DU-22B 3-6 2,870; 13,500* Area between HDOT/Wolf 22 driveway and 32 DU-22B 6-12 7,510* stream. Potential Property high use. 26 0-3 1,320** Southern stream 3+ Refusal bank upstream Wolf Property PAM 6-18 of DU22 27 0-3 1,680** Southern bank 27 3+ Refusal upstream of Wolf Property DU26 "DU10 consists of a sample,duplicate,and triplicate.For the purposes of this table,the highest total lead sample result is identified. 2016/2017/2019:Year Sampled 20 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 4 Environmental Hazard Evaluations 4.1 Chemicals of Potential Concern Lead paint was used for decades on the Hakalau Bridge and may have been used on the Hakalau Plantation Flume (destroyed in 1946). Other bridges in the Hamakua Coast have also been identified as sources of lead-based paint which have flaked off and been deposited below the structure on the valley floor. Initial studies performed at Hakalau Beach Park assessed lead, arsenic, and mercury as chemicals of potential concern (COPC). Sampling identified lead as the chemical of concern (COC). Lead-based paints were used as a corrosion-inhibiting coating on the Hakalau Bridge for decades until removed in 2000. During previous analyses, lead was found to exceed the HDOH Tier 1 EALs for construction/trench worker direct exposure scenario of 800 mg/kg for lead within multiple DUs (Table 3-2) for a total area of approximately 46,550 sq. ft. Approximately 103,390 sq. ft. were found to be above the HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg). Lead is persistent in the environment and accumulates in soils and sediments through deposition. Once absorbed into the body, lead may be stored for long periods in mineralizing tissue (e.g., teeth, bones, etc.). The stored lead may be released again into the bloodstream, especially in times of calcium stress (e.g., pregnancy, lactation, osteoporosis, etc.) or calcium deficiency. Depending on the level of exposure, lead can adversely affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproduction and developmental systems, and the cardiovascular system. Lead exposure also affects the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood. The lead effects most commonly encountered in current populations are neurological in children and cardiovascular effects (e.g., high blood pressure, heart disease, etc.) in adults. Infants and young children are especially sensitive to even low levels of lead, which may contribute to behavioral problems, learning deficits, and lowered IQ. Ecosystems near point sources of lead demonstrate a wide range of adverse effects including losses in biodiversity, changes in community composition, decreased growth and reproductive rates in plants and animals, and neurological effects in vertebrates. 4.2 Exposure Setting Hakalau Beach Park is a public County of Hawaii Park. However, some portions of private parcels (TMKs) adjacent to the County and HDOT-owned parcels have been used as defacto extensions of the parking area as they are readily accessible to park users but are not owned by the County of Hawaii. 21 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives The park was closed in 2017 due to concerns about lead-impacted soil and previously served as a park, fishing area, and general recreation site. 4.3 Potential Human/Ecological Receptors A conceptual site model (CSM) provides a framework regarding potential sources of contamination, types of contaminants, contaminated media, exposure and migration pathways, and receptors. The CSM (Table 4-1) was used in the preparation of the Remedial Alternatives Analysis (RAA). Based on the results of the document review, the following are identified as potential human receptors: • On-site construction workers — including personnel involved in repair or construction/ trenching during future site activities; and • On-site landscapers/site workers— personnel who may maintain landscaped areas and may mow, weed whack, and perform general site maintenance (trash pickup, re-seeding, shrub trimming). • General Public/Site Users — Including individuals of all ages, who may camp, recreate, or otherwise use the park setting and may potentially dig, touch, drive, lie, or be exposed to lead-impacted soil or dust. • Ecological Receptors — including native and non-native birds, and mammals that may nest, loaf, hunt, or transit across the site (AECOS, 2019). 4.4 Exposure Pathway Analysis Direct exposure to lead-impacted soil is a potential exposure pathway to human receptors at the site via the following pathways: • Direct Contact: Incidental ingestion or dermal contact with soil; • Air: Inhalation of fugitive dust; • Surface Runoff and Sediment Exposure: Contaminants bourn by water or revealed by erosion; and • Groundwater Exposure: Contaminants leaching from soil or impacting flowing groundwater. 4.4.1 Direct Contact Pathways Direct contact with soil may result in incidental oral ingestion and/or dermal absorption of lead. Dermal absorption is not considered a pathway at the site, as lead at the site is not organic. Direct contact exposure may occur for the following groups: • Construction/Trench Workers and Landscaping/Site Workers: may experience direct contact with lead-impacted soils during trenching, construction, and landscaping activities. The HDOH construction/trench worker exposure scenarios are set equal to assumptions used in the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) (USEPA 2016) for consistency with screening levels for occupational exposure assumptions. The exposure rate reflects projects that may require the same workers returning frequently to the same site 22 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives (construction workers in utility trenches). The HDOH TGM uses a total exposure duration of seven years for both carcinogens and noncarcinogens. An exposure frequency of 20 days (4 weeks) per year for 7 years yields a total of 140 days total exposure. Construction workers may receive 140 days (roughly 6 months) of exposure in a single year and never visit the site again. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) evaluates lead exposure by using blood- lead modeling, such as the Integrated Exposure-Uptake Biokinetic Model which recommends that soil lead levels less than 400 mg/kg are generally safe for residential use (HDOH 2017). • General Public: The primary concern is that on a regular basis, some people may unintentionally swallow very small amounts of contaminated soil, especially young children who are unaware of the hazards and may be exposed to contaminated soil through normal play activities. Lead enters the body through normal hand-to- mouth activity. Also, residual dirt on plants grown in lead-contaminated soil and on hands after digging or outside work may contribute to lead exposure through accidental ingestion of soil particles. Direct contact with lead-impacted soil is a concern as 20% to 70% of ingested lead is absorbed. • Ecological Receptors: Ecological receptors including birds, mammals, and aquatic species may come into contact with the impacted soil through walking, loafing, digging, or directly in sediments. 4.4.2 Air Exposure Pathways Inhalation of lead dust is another route of exposure, and almost all inhaled lead is absorbed into the body (ATSDR 2005). Lead particles can be absorbed from fugitive dust particles. The generation of fugitive dust may occur through disturbance of affected soil; such as wind or construction activities. Dust particles may be inhaled, may settle on human skin and be ingested (hand to mouth), and/or may settle on vegetation ingested by humans. Construction/Trench Workers and Landscaping/Site Workers: may inhale fugitive dust during normal construction, landscaping, or maintenance activities. Total lead results in the HDOT ROW exceed 1,000 mg/kg for lead. This level is above the construction/trench worker scenario of 800 mg/kg and only trained personnel familiar with risks associated with exposure to lead should be allowed to conduct activities such as trenching, grading, and drilling operations. If the soil in these areas is disturbed, site workers would potentially require respirators based on air monitoring results. • General Public: may inhale dust while camping, driving, digging (children), sitting/lying, or crawling (children). • Ecological receptors: Ecological receptors including birds, mammals, and aquatic species may come into contact with the dust through walking, loafing, nesting, or digging. 23 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 4.4.3 Surface Runoff and Sediment Exposure Pathway Surface runoff is part of the current conceptual exposure site model. Upstream and ROW DUs along the southern embankment had exceedances of the gross contamination EAL of 1,000 mg/kg. These include the 2016 DU 22 and 2a and the 2020 DU27. Likely, the shoreline itself does not have exceedances as the soils have been scoured. The exposed shoreline area did not have enough soil to sample. In 2016 the shoreline results were below the HDOH Tier 1 EALs of 200 mg/kg. The stream banks shift during storms. If extensive flooding, scouring, or high waves (tsunami or hurricane) causes extensive erosion of surface soil from the impacted DUs they may migrate to Hakalau Stream. Sediment may accumulate in the adjacent marine environment and be available for contact with various receptors. Recreational users of the marine environment (swimmers, surfers, fishermen) may come into direct contact with sediment and be exposed through oral ingestion and/or dermal absorption. Ecological receptors may live directly in the impacted sediment and may be exposed to COC through feeding within the sediment. As a secondary transport mechanism, COC may bioaccumulate in ecological receptors (i.e., fish, shellfish), then ingested by human receptors. 4.4.4 Groundwater Exposure Pathway To assess the potential environmental/groundwater leaching pathway, the SPLP analysis was conducted on a soil sample collected from DU32 and DU 33, and the SPLP value was 4.32 mg/L and the method reporting limit (MRL) is 0.03 mg/L (Appendix B). The SPLP assists in the determination of the mobility of both organic and inorganic analytes present in liquids, solids, and wastes. The results of the SPLP test are used to determine the Desorption Partitioning Coefficient (Kd), which is important to understanding how mobile the lead in the soil is and whether it poses a potential risk to ecological receptors in the vicinity of the park (e.g., vertebrate and invertebrate organisms). EPA Method 1312 SPLP West extraction procedure was used on the Hakalau soil samples from DU32 and DU33. West refers to the pH of the extraction fluid that is made by adding 60/40 weight percent of sulfuric and nitric acids to reagent water until the pH is 5.00 +1- 0.05 used to determine the leachability of a site that is west of the Mississippi River. This method's pH is higher than the EPA methods extraction fluid for sites east of the Mississippi River (4.20 +/- 0.05). The result of the SPLP was inputted in the Batch Test Leaching Model (HDOH, 2007), and used to determine the relative mobility of lead in the soil. The Batch Test Leaching Model uses a combination of SPLP results and the total lead concentration in the sample to calculate a desorption coefficient (Kd). The calculated desorption coefficient is greater than 20 (Kd>20), so the contaminant is considered not significantly mobile and is unlikely to pose a leaching hazard to groundwater. If it was less than 20, then an estimated concentration in groundwater should be calculated and compared to the HDOH Tier 1 EAL The Kd value calculated by this model for the soil sample was 2,500, which is much greater than Kd 20 (Appendix B). 24 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives This result demonstrates that the lead present in the soil is strongly bound to the soil and is considered immobile (soil is weathered volcanic alluvial sediments including gravel, sand, and clay). Thus, there is a low likelihood that the lead concentrations in the soil at the park pose a risk to ecological receptors (e.g., aquatic organisms) as a result of lead leaching from the soil into rainwater and sediments or impacting the groundwater as it flows toward the stream and ocean that form the northern and eastern perimeter of the park. 25 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 4.5 Environmental Hazard Evaluation Summary The exposure pathway analysis described in the previous section identifies various exposure pathways (direct and indirect) where lead-impacted soil may pose a risk to human and ecological receptors. The conceptual site exposure model provides a graphical comparison of release mechanism, pathways, and exposure routes to potential current and future receptors at the Site (Table 4-1). 4.5.1 COPC Sources and Release Mechanisms The primary source of the COPC at Hakalau Beach Park is lead-impacted surface and subsurface soil from lead released into the environment from lead-based paint used in historical bridge maintenance activities. Lead-impacted soil present at the site has been shown to exist at concentrations above the HDOH Tier EALs for gross contamination (1000 mg/kg). Total concentrations vary across the site and include portions that are at or below HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use. The secondary release mechanism, besides direct contact with soil, includes dust, surface water runoff, and leaching. 4.5.2 Pathways and Exposure Routes Lead poses a hazard to potential receptors through direct exposure to contaminated media through pathways including surface soil, subsurface soil, ambient air, surface water and sediments, and groundwater. These pathways potentially expose receptors to lead via inhalation, ingestion, or dermal adsorption. 4.5.3 Potential Receptors Current and Future Land Use The main human exposure scenarios identified under current land use as a County Beach Park are the general public, maintenance workers, and construction works. Since the park's land use is restricted due to its location and ownership, it is not likely to change, and future land use includes these same human exposure scenarios. This is also true for avian and aquatic receptors. 4.5.4 Complete Exposure Pathways Complete exposure pathways exist for all receptor scenarios exposed to surface and subsurface soil at this site under current and future conditions. Exposure to dust is a complete pathway to on-site maintenance and construction workers when the current grass cover is disturbed and there is potential for inhalation of dust under dry windy conditions when activities such as land mowing and excavation occur. 4.5.5 Potentially Complete Exposure Pathways Potentially complete pathways to the general public, terrestrial and aquatic ecological receptors exist via direct exposure to fugitive dust if the grass cover was not maintained or a construction excavation project was conducted at the park and dust controls were not implemented correctly. This potential exposure route could be controlled using proper materials management practices and could limit this exposure pathway. Currently, there is no complete pathway to any receptors via surface water runoff, but again, future construction activities could potentially complete this pathway if not conducted with care. Additionally, if there were a natural disaster such as a tsunami that could scour away the 26 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives current stream bank and redistribute lead-impacted soils in the current park in valley floor sediment and runoff could be a completed exposure pathway. 4.5.6 Exposure to Lead Leaching There has not been an identified complete pathway to current and future receptors via leaching in subsurface soil or groundwater. A batch test leachability model based on SPLP analyses from soil collected from the DUs with the highest documented throughout the aggregated sampling events demonstrated that the absorption coefficient is high enough to prevent contaminant mobilization from the soil to groundwater (Appendix B). This is also in part supported by the results of surface water sampling conducted in May of 2022 from a small slow-flowing stream that borders the southern valley escarpment that meanders through and around the most heavily lead-impacted areas. Three surface water DUs were sampled from this stream (DUs 202249, 202250, and 202251, See Figure 3-2)from locations; 1) prior to passing through most impacted areas (DU 202249), 2) at the point which was adjacent to the areas where highest soil concentrations have been identified (DU 202251), and the final point just downstream of the areas of greatest lead concentrations (just before draining into the mouth of Hakalau stream and Hakalau Bay) (DU 202250). 27 Aquatic Ecological CO N X X X X O O O a) 2 D Terrestrial Ecological -° X XXXO O 0 - - — — — CO J U) 2 General Public/ X X X X 0 0 O — — — — — o = On-site Landscape or Construction Workers X X X X X 0 O — — — — — rI a) Aquatic Ecological a) X XXXO O 0 - - — — — o D Terrestrial Ecological X X X X 0 0 O — — — — — ca J General Public X X X X 0 0 - - — - -- On-sitee Landscape or 0 Construction Workers X X X X X 0 O — — — — — .) V 0 2 a) C _ C _ C C _ C _ C _ C i O (6 0 c0 .0 O Ct O ) O (6 O w E ) E w E u, E w E r6 o Exposure Route °' °' °' °' °' Q p o t o -E g o g o g o C c o = L E i NL y ,Q N O U Q c0 a) a) co co = a)0 ca C cr) _ 0- Pathway = 13 0 tea) a) o E o a) C u) . < � C 2 C� a) 4- U O 01 co a) aE a) I al 0) O a) CD Cl) o C , a) Secondary Release o o = a) C 0 c .c R Mechanism 0 O ct a) c a I— ' J a) a) O I Q a) Secondary Sources J a- a= a) �E w w o a) (4 O Primary Release Mechanism Co _ a a) ( 'ca m m z U Q."" OO U 00 m t a C U4; L 0 a— � c m Q Primary Sources x .`° -0 vi 0 mm 0 .Q) Z _ 0 J Z Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 5 Establishing Alternatives Under amended Section 121(d) of CERCLA, remedial actions for hazardous substance cleanup must attain or waive federal environmental potentially applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs), or more stringent state environmental ARARs, upon completion of the remedial action (EPA 2019). ARARs include only federal and state environmental or facility-citing laws/regulations and do not include occupational safety or worker protection requirements. Compliance with OSHA standards is required by 40 C.F.R. 300.150 and therefore the CERCLA requirement for compliance with or waiver of ARARs does not apply to OSHA standards (EPA 2019). In addition to ARARs, non-promulgated criteria, advisories, guidance, or policies referred to as to-be-considered criteria (TBC) information may also apply to the conditions found at a site. Unlike ARARs, identification of and compliance with TBC information is not mandatory or legally binding; however, where TBC information is used as a cleanup level, its use for this purpose should be explained and justified. See Appendix C for a table for ARARs and TBC criteria for remedial alternatives considered for Hakalau Beach Park. The alternatives evaluated to meet the ARARs and compliance may require consultation with State and Federal Agencies. 5.1 Potential ARARs and TBC Criteria 5.1.1 Potential Chemical-Specific ARARs and TBCs Chemical-specific ARARs include those environmental laws and regulations that regulate the release to the environment of materials with certain chemical or physical characteristics or that contain specified chemical compounds. These requirements generally set health- or risk-based concentration limits or discharge limits for specific hazardous substances by media. In this instance, the chemical of concern is lead. This contaminant is identified in the EPA RSLs specifically and identified as acceptable for park users at 400 mg/kg in soil. The RSLs are defined as TBCs as they are not promulgated. 5.1.2 Potential Location-Specific ARARs and TBCs Location-specific ARARs govern activities in certain environmentally sensitive areas. These requirements are triggered by the specific location and the proposed activity at the site. The site is a public park. The EPA RSLs currently allow for 400 mg/kg of total lead at pre-schools and parks. Under the HRS 128D, the HDOH Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response (HEER) office have provided guidance that recommended a stricter standard of 200 mg/kg for unrestricted land use and active park space. The RSLs and EALs are not promulgated. The site is also less than 150 meters from the water and within the Coastal Zone Management Special Management Area. It is below the Hawaii-designated underground 29 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives injection control line and is not a source of drinking water. It is not located in a designated critical habitat or a designated wetland. 5.1.3 Potential Action-Specific ARARs and TBCs Action-specific ARARs generally set performance, design, or other similar action- specified controls or restrictions on particular kinds of response activities. For example, action-specific ARARs may include restrictions that define acceptable treatment and disposal procedures for hazardous substances under 40 CFR Part 261 and 262. The EPA regulatory limit for lead is 5 mg/L. DUs at the site have been identified as exceeding this limit and would be classified as hazardous waste. DUI, DU11, and DU21 failed TCLP at different depth profiles, (0 to 3-inches bgs), and near-surface soil (3 to 6-inches bgs). It is possible that DU2, which was not tested at the time, could also fail TCLP due to its high total lead concentrations. "In addition, any soil with total lead concentrations somewhere between 1410 mg/kg (DU-12A, TCLP lead of 1.3 mg/L) and 5080 mg/kg (approximate range of total lead concentration 1500 - 5000 mg/kg) may likely have TCLP lead results greater than 5 mg/L, and thus be classified as hazardous waste based on the 2016 results" (KPC 2022). There are no approved waste disposal sites in Hawaii authorized to accept this waste. This type of waste is sent off island for disposal. 5.2 Remedial Action Objectives The Remedial Action Objectives for Hakalau as identified by the site owners and as recommended by the state guidance is to remove the direct contact pathway to human receptors (park goers and site workers) and ecological receptors to lead-impacted soil which exceeds concentrations of 200 mg/kg. 5.3 General Response Actions Actions may include restricting access, fencing, administrative/institutional controls, reducing contact with lead-impacted soil through physical barriers, or removing the source of contamination. 30 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 6 Detailed Analysis of Alternatives The HDOH TGM (Section 16.2.2.2) and the Hawaii State Contingency Plan (SCP) [HAR 11-451-8(c)] (HAR 1995) identify a hierarchy of remedial response actions in this descending order: 1. Recycle or reuse 2. Destruction or detoxification 3. Separation, concentration, or volume reduction 4. Immobilization of hazardous substances 5. On-site or off-site disposal, isolation, or containment 6. Institutional controls or long-term monitoring. 6.1 Alternative 1 : Recycle or Reuse The contaminant of concern is dispersed lead-paint flakes. The lead paint material is not dense enough to be separated from the soil in order to be recycled or reused. This alternative is not suitable to remove the contaminant from the site or reduce potential exposure pathways. 6.2 Alternative 2: Destruction or Detoxification The lead at the site is also not organic, corrosive, or explosive and is relatively immobile. This alternative is not suitable to remove the contaminant from the site or reduce potential exposure pathways. 6.3 Alternative 3: Separation, concentration, or volume reduction Under this alternative, contaminated material may be completely or partially separated from material that is not contaminated, or contamination may be reduced in a large volume of material by concentrating the contaminant in a smaller volume. Soil particle size separation is conducted to reduce contaminated soil volume. Soils at Hakalau and lead paint flakes are not suitable for volume reduction in this form and contamination would not be reduced significantly. 6.4 Alternative 4: Immobilization of Hazardous Substances Portions of the site exceed gross contamination and fail TCLP. The soil in some DUs (approximately 8,390 sq ft) would be classified as hazardous waste if removed for disposal. This soil cannot be disposed of in Hawaii as there are no facilities that are permitted to accept hazardous waste. Reducing bioavailability by stabilizing the lead with a strong buffering agent application was tested to reduce the concentration which could allow for disposal in the state (e.g., through the application of triple superphosphate (TSP) as an amendment to the soil). This would be in conjunction with soil excavation and removal and would not be used for in-situ stabilization. Treated soil would be hauled to RCRA subpart D permitted landfill (e.g., West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill). TSP is a commercially available soil fertilizer that can also be used to reduce the mobility of lead in the soil. Phosphate is a compound made up of phosphorous (P) and oxygen 31 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives (0) and phosphorous atoms that act as an anion that binds readily to lead cations. TSP can also be combined with different ions to impact solubility under acidic conditions. It is most commonly used as fertilizer produced from phosphate rock and phosphoric acid and is technically known as calcium dihydrogen phosphate and as monocalcium phosphate, [Ca (H2PO4)2.H2O]. Treatability studies for in situ lead stabilization that used phosphate- based binders found a significant reduction in the bioavailable lead in soil when it was amended with TSP (Hettiarachchi et al. 2001 and Gene 2008). TSP can also be combined with different ions to impact solubility under acidic conditions. Based on the high concentrations of lead in soil at the Hakalau site, TSP was not considered as a potential in situ stabilization remedial alternative approach. Instead, TSP is evaluated in this alternative and was considered as an amendment to be added to the contaminated soil after it is excavated to reduce the toxicity through immobilization/stabilization of the soil to allow it to be disposed of at an on-island landfill. This is a variation of the scenarios that are evaluated under Alternative 5. As part of the remedial alternative evaluation, in May of 2022, KPC collected a bulk sample using ISM from the most heavily impacted areas below the bridge on the southern side of the Hakalau stream from DUs 32 and 33 which had been documented in previous investigations as having the highest total lead concentrations in the project area (DUs 32 and 33 were composed of the consolidated DUs 1, 2, 11, and 21). The methodology and results of this treatability study are presented in Appendix E. The study concluded that TSP was effective at reducing the toxicity of lead in the areas where the highest total lead was present. The total lead concentrations from ISM soil samples collected from DU32 and DU33 were 11,400 mg/kg and had a respective TCLP result of 25.6 mg/I, which is well above the RCRA toxicity characteristic for lead of 5.0 mg/L. However, if TSP is added to an aliquot from this same ISM from DU32 and DU33 at a concentration of just 5% of the total soil mass, the TCLP results were shown to reduce concentrations below the laboratories method reporting limit (or in other words non- detectable dissolved lead). This was achieved without any additional pH buffering additives and demonstrated that immobilization/stabilization using TSP is highly effective and has ratios that are economically feasible. As a component of the bench test treatability study in addition to evaluation of the effectiveness of immobilizing lead by adding TSP as an amendment, KPC also evaluated the effectiveness of adding Portland Cement as a way to stabilize the lead. The concept was that if Portland Cement could both buffer the soil to reduce the mobility of the lead and create a material that could consolidate the lead soil as long-term management to reduce disposal costs (e.g., construct an onsite encapsulation cell). Portland Cement was added to the impacted soil at a typical mass ratio for making concrete (1:3). Samples of the soil were weighed, and Portland Cement was mixed with the soil, no other sand or gravel was added and because the soil already had a high moisture content, water was not added to the mix. After the mix was cured, samples were pulverized and submitted to Eurofins for analysis. TCLP analysis on this final material also showed that Portland cement is able to reduce the TCLP result to below the laboratory reporting limit without the addition of TSP Appendix E. 32 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 6.5 Alternative 5: On-site or off-site disposal, isolation, or containment This method offers a good option to prevent the general public from coming into contact with lead-impacted soils. There are three scenarios evaluated in the RAA that are considered effective presumptive remedies for addressing lead-impacted sites by the USEPA. Generally, if lead-impacted soil remains on-site it will be encapsulated and direct exposure to park users is prevented, however, site maintenance workers/construction workers may come into contact with it in the future. An Environmental Hazard Management Plan (EHMP) will need to be maintained and updated when future work activities are planned in areas where encapsulated contaminated soil is present. A project-specific construction EHMP (C-EHMP) will need to be prepared for each future repair and construction activities need to plan for managing lead-impacted soil to be protective of all potentially exposed receptors for the duration of the project. Alternatively, if lead-impacted soil is removed in its entirety from the site as a remedial approach then all potential exposure risk is removed and no EHMP is required for the long term. This alternative presents the remedial alternatives that reduce or remove contamination from direct contact with receptors at the site. Due to the overlapping rounds of sampling and DUs that have occurred between the period 2016 and 2022, Tables 6-1 and 6-2 identify the total area of the exceedances broken down by landowner, location, and DU. 33 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Table 6-1: HDOT and Privately Owned Parcels which exceed 800 mg/kg Stream Area Perimeter Total Side Owner(Description) Lead (sq ft) (ft) DUs (sq ft) North HDOT(ROW) 800+ mg/kg 5885 313 5,6,34 South HDOT(ROW 800+ mg/kg 5510 331 1,2,7,33, 22 (partial) Streamside) South HDOT(ROW 800+ mg/kg 3026 285 7,32,33, Roadway) South HDOT(ROW 800+ mg/kg 10805 421 1,7,11, 21,32,33 Upslope) South Wolf Property 800+ mg/kg 5219 308 22,27 (Streamside) South Wolf Property 800+ mg/kg 1817 248 Not sampled, likely (Roadway) 800 mg/kg + South Wolf Property 800+ mg/kg 10382 404 8,20,26 (Upslope) Marian Land Co South (downstream of 800+ mg/kg 3907 345 12, portion 13 bridge) Total HDOT Area 800+mg/kg 25,226 Total Privately Owned Parcel 21,325 Total Area 800+mg/kg 46,551 Table 6-2: Hawaii County and Privately Owned Parcels which exceed 200 mg/kg and are below 800 mg/kg * Stream Owner Lead Area Perimeter DUs* Total Side (sq ft) (ft) (sq ft) North Wolf Property 200+ mg/kg 5847 310 202241 (upstream) North Marian Land Co 200+ mg/kg 4100 267 202239 (downstreami) North Side:Between 200-800 mg/kg 9947 South County of Hawaii 200+ mg/kg 36017 875 16, 17,18,37,38 36017 South Wolf Property 200+ mg/kg 9035 374 202244 9035 upslope South Marian Land Co 200+ mg/kg 1355 161 13 1355 South Side: Between 200-800 mg/kg 46407 Total Area 200-800 mg/kg 56354 *All HDOT DUs exceed 800 mg/kg 34 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 6.5.1 Alternative 5a: On-site isolation and containment HDOH and EPA-acceptable mitigation measures include soil encapsulation. During soil encapsulation, DUs that exceed HDOH unrestricted land use EALs (200 mg/kg) for lead would first be covered with orange mirafi (geotextile) or black geotextile material with caution tape laid at intervals to produce a visible barrier between the clean and impacted soils. Visual confirmation will be conducted to ensure that all targeted soil is covered (Figure 6-1, Table 6-3). • Clean fill would be brought in and overlaid across the impacted site at a depth of either 18 or 24 inches and grass would be maintained to prevent potential exposure. Additional cubic yards of clean soil would also be needed for drainage and grading. An exposure assessment conducted at nearby Kolekole Beach Park in 2017 for park maintenance workers demonstrated the grass cover on the impacted soil areas effectively prevented a complete exposure pathway while performing maintenance activities (e.g., lawn mowing). The results of this assessment also demonstrated that grass cover was protective of park user exposure scenarios as long as there were restrictions on activities that could render the grass cover ineffective (e.g., digging, driving fence posts, etc.). This may be suitable for the County of Hawaii Park Parcels but may not be adequate for the HDOT ROW due to high COPC levels. This option leaves the lead-impacted soil on site (including areas of Gross Contamination) and an EHMP would still be needed. Batch Test Leachability analysis demonstrated that lead is immobile and unlikely to affect groundwater and surface water. Workers within the DOT ROW would need respirators when performing maintenance tasks where they are digging/trenching in soil. Table 6-3: Alternative 5a: No Removal, Cap Only, Cubic Yards Cubic Yards Ownership Sq Ft Clean fill 18" Clean fill (24") Grass Cap Grass Cap County of Hawaii 200-800 mg/kg 36017 2001 2667 HDOT ROW (North) 800+ mg/kg 5885 327 436 HDOT ROW (South) 800+ mg/kg 19341 1075 1433 Private Parcels (North) 200 - 800 9947 553 737 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 200 — 800 10390 577 770 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 800+ mg/kg 21325 1185 1580 Total 102905 5718 7623 Annual operation and maintenance costs are not typically high for this alternative; however, the location could be impacted by erosion due to heavy rains and storms. The 35 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives hard cap and soil cover option may be undermined during large storms. If this occurs, additional soil or hard cap repairs may be needed. If evidence of erosion impacts the mirafi layer, there is a potential that impacted soil may be spread over areas currently identified as "lower risk" and additional sampling could be required. It is vital that this cap is maintained to protect park users. An annual inspection of this cap will be required per the EHMP and will be documented and submitted to HDOH. Areas, where this would be impracticable (steep slopes, areas of intense vegetation/trees on the southern embankment), would be fenced and signs would be maintained to restrict access. 6.5.2 Alternative 5b: Removal of all soil that exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill DUs which pass TCLP and exceed HDOH Tier I unrestricted land use EALs for lead (200 mg/kg) will be excavated (Figure 6-1), hauled to West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill and replaced with clean fill at a design fill depth of 24 inches. DUs in the County of Hawaii parcel meet this standard. Other locations, particularly the DOT ROW area and some private parcels, do not meet this standard and may require disposal off-island (Table 6- 4). Initial costs would be high as soil which is classified as hazardous waste could not be disposed of at facilities in Hawaii. DU1, DU2, DU11, and DU21 failed TCLP at different depth profiles, (0 to 3-inches bgs), and near-surface soil (3 to 6-inches bgs). This is approximately 8,390 sq ft. It is possible that DU2, which was not tested at the time, could also fail TCLP due to its high total lead concentrations. DU2 is approximately 2,444 sq ft but both 0.25-inch depth layers are likely to fail TCLP so at least 0.5 feet would be removed and would require off-island disposal. Table 6-4: DUs which Failed TCLP (2016) and Require Mainland Disposal DU Owner sq. ft Depth* CY Total Lead TCLP mg/kg DU-1B HDOT 5847 3— 6 inches 54.14 7880 26.2 DU-11 HDOT 1228 0— 3 inches 11.37 8820 31.8 DU-21 HDOT 1315 0— 3 inches 12.18 5080 14.2 DU-2A HDOT 2444 0— 3 inches 22.63 10200 Fails TCLP* DU-28 HDOT 2444 3— 6 inches 22.63 9480 Fails TCLP* Total 13258 122.94* Soil Excavation,and Off-Site Disposal of all soil which exceeds the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for unrestricted land use for lead(200 mg/kg) Replace contaminated soil with clean fill. Note=DUs 2A and 2B are assumed to fail TCCP based on total lead concentrations *As a conservative measure assume that an entire 0.5 will be removed from each of these DUs total of 246 cubic yards(123 CY x 2=246 CY). Confirmation sampling will be conducted to ensure that all targeted soil is removed from each DU. All DUs would be excavated in 6-inch lifts until confirmation samples indicated 36 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives that soil concentrations were below the HDOH EAL for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg). Approximately 103,000 sq ft of soil would need to be removed to various depths. For this alternative, we used an estimated depth of 12 inches. The depth may be less on a site- wide average (Table 6-5). Clean fill would then be brought in and overlaid across the impacted site at a depth of 18- 24 inches to relevel the site for use and allow for revegetation, drainage, and grading. Additional cubic yards of clean soil may also be needed for drainage and grading. An archaeological consultation and monitoring would be required during the excavation. The lead-impacted soil would be removed, therefore an EHMP will not be needed. Once removal is completed, soil onsite would not require an EHMP. The primary maintenance item would be cutting grass and addressing any erosional issues to the grass cover over the new layer of imported soil. Table 6-5: Alternative 5b, Soil Removal 200+ mg/kg, Clean Fill, Cubic yards Ownership Sq Ft DU ID Remove soil Clean fill Clean fill (12" estimate) that 18" (CY) 24" (CY) exceeds 200 mg/kg (CY) County of Hawaii 36017 16, 17,18,37,38 1334 2001 2667 200-800 milk. HDOT ROW (North) 5885 5,6,34 218 327 436 800+ mg/kg HDOT ROW (South) 19341 1,2,7, 11, 21, 716 1075 1433 800+ milk. 22, 32, 33 Private Parcels 9947 202241, 368 553 737 (North) 200— 800 202239 mg/kg Private Parcels 10390 13, 202244 385 577 770 (South) 200—800 milk. Private Parcels 21325 8, 12, 13, 790 1185 1580 South 800+ m./k. 22,27, 26 Total 102905 3811 5718 7623 37 M N oN _• . o CO i I' '' < zn ,Ipµ} - r.., E ° !,* a 0 'I . j 01 0 o+'9'A rn E o0 , ''.' ,' ''''',. ';.t.r\ \,.. i.:: co . . .4c3i . '' " ai: ... .., >c7 1 • 0 0 2 q, r.4 I A E 7�' p S Q Oi O 7 441 7 co 1% L r ?I E ru cc cc o Qo ."L \ ,.. ,, ,-11, . , ..,▪ E T' d0 '."ot ''' t *:,' ril> il•i '; ra▪ g ''' L° v' -n - � r, tit � a I- '^z 3 :P. '^ E ;i • a \ . r. 5 aNs µ 4 , Ca 1�d 1 i * c d. t �arf'✓ �n s ca .. , \ -- *A,,i_oe.'.:''' , o .. M . W in . 1' * hact 0, ..lr , b. . R y 1 1 Q , y6►VQ n S " . _ 40 CD ., i ,,- 1 */, ' p,1 ',' . : t.„ 1. .�' '.QBµ '. a. rµ,� -*.- 'iy ' ' • Tom.{ E S ki 7,2 auT r o - +. ,s ,, _,t.� IP cc U 6 s' '� iILA Y E N N 2K N N N CO -Q z 0) z • Q) R) CO U) N CU C UV) ) J CU C Y � (0 Q d C L C U'. a) U N CO N-0 N Y E (0 Q) SK Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 6.5.3 Alternative 5c: Removal of soil which exceeds 800 mg/kg for lead, containment, and replacement with clean fill. Soil cap for soil which exceeds 200 mg/kg but is below 800 mg/kg. DUs within the HDOT ROW and privately owned parcel exceed the HDOH EALs for the construction/trench worker exposure for lead (800 mg/kg). This is approximately 46,551 sq ft (Figure 6-2, Table 6-6). Soil from these DUs will be removed. Confirmation sampling will be conducted to ensure that all targeted soil is removed. The soil will be replaced with clean fill at an estimated fill depth of 24 inches. DUs which exceed the HDOH EALs for unrestricted land use for lead (200 mg/kg) would first be covered with orange mirafi (geotextile) or black geotextile with caution tape laid at intervals to produce a visible barrier between the clean and impacted soils. Clean fill would then be brought in and overlaid across these DUs at a depth of 18- 24 inches and grass will be maintained to prevent potential exposure. Additional cubic yards of clean soil may also be needed for drainage and grading. An EHMP for the remaining lead- impacted soil on site would still be needed. Table 6-6: Alternative 5c — Soil Removal 800+ mg/kg, Clean Fill Cubic Yards Cubic Yards Remove soil (12" Ownership Sq Ft estimate) that Clean fill 18" Clean fill (24") exceeds 800 mg/kg County of Hawaii 36017 2001 2667 200-800 mg/kg HDOT ROW (North) -6111 800+ mg/kg 4 5885 218 327 436 HDOT ROW (South) 19341 716 1075 1433 800+ mg/kg Private Parcels (North) 200—800 9947 553 737 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 200—800 10390 577 770 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 800+ 21325 790 1185 1580 mg/kg Total 102905 1724 5718 7623 Archaeological consultation and monitoring would be required during the excavation period (approximately five weeks). A portion of the lead-impacted soil would remain on- site, therefore an EHMP will be needed. 40 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Initial costs would be high as soil which is classified as hazardous waste could not be disposed of at facilities in Hawaii and be required to be disposed of in the mainland United States. DUI, DU11, and DU21 failed TCLP at different depth profiles, (0 to 3-inches bgs), and near-surface soil (3 to 6-inches bgs). This is approximately 8,390 sq ft. DU 2 is also likely to fail the TCLP threshold and has been included for removal as lead concentrations in this DU range between 9480 — 10,200 mg/kg. DU2 is approximately 2,444 sq ft. (See Table 6-4). Annual operation and maintenance costs are not expected to be high for this alternative and would fit in with the park's current budget. An annual inspection of the cap will be required per the EHMP and will be documented and submitted to HDOH. The primary maintenance item would be cutting grass and addressing any erosional issues to the grass cover over the new layer of imported soil. Figure 6-2: Removal of Soil Over 800 mg/kg, Cap 200 mg/kg mea w R .J' '^C,� ^' • `, �''''.z. � "R - ' li.,\;,*:os-1!\'' ..‘r.,s I:, . . < a r . ery. " r � • � � t 31001001 -, .:•,. 1 S `,�.^ i :9 ' - ` : . Parke -'4 /./0 .� ?.'. �2022,5� 37 !►^ ',+'4.Y, f"t y v `i`ji $7 fir, 7 4 '17 , '' 4011t— } f. .,,. a „sits 40 ` ^�� � ii Private and HDOT ROW:Over 800 mg/kg y `' . s µ �. • ,,.^`' ®County of Hawaii Area:200 mg/kg — ". ': Tax Parcels:INK IDs .`L. 4 � ; Previous DUs:Lead Sample Results Above SOD mg/kg �! 0 Decision Units Hakalau 2016 ',7"z 'at,-:. r '.'� ,".. Previous DUs:Lead Sample Results Between 200-800 mg/kg e:-.- 2022 Sampling:Between 200-800 mg/kg ri,HERE,Garrniti,,,, ' " -j, • ." '. ~^r 0."•R. . • O Surface water 41 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 6.6 Institutional Controls or Long-Term Monitoring This option removes harm to the public but does not remove or reduce the impacts from the site. This option also removes the use value from the site. 6.6.1 Alternatives 6a: No Action Under the no-action, no remediation activities will be performed. The park will remain closed indefinitely. The costs associated with this alternative were evaluated however, there are likely to be unforeseen costs such as security issues associated with trespassing and other unwanted activity. Based on the concentrations of lead on the Hakalau Valley floor, if left unmitigated, lead-impacted soil poses an unacceptable risk to current and future park users and maintenance workers via a direct pathway to highly contaminated soil media. Lead is persistent in the environment and will not decay in the soil over time. To prevent the public from exposure to areas that are grossly contaminated with lead the county could permanently close Hakalau Park down and restrict public use. Social acceptance of having a popular park permanently inaccessible to the public would be unlikely to be accepted and supported. This alternative does not meet the needs of the residents of Hawaii nor the County of Hawaii Parks Department and is the lowest-ranked remedial alternative under the HDOH TGM and Hawaii SCP. 6.6.2 Alternatives 6b: Institutional and Engineering Controls Under the no-action institutional controls alternative, no remediation activities will be performed. The park will would reopen and all areas where lead has been documented to exist in concentrations greater than 200 mg/kg for lead would either be allowed to overgrow with vegetation preventing the public from direct exposure to the soil. A site- specific Environmental Hazard Management Plan (EHMP) would need to be prepared that would outline the areas where various lead concentrations are on the site to facilitate awareness about the risks to current and future maintenance workers. Maintenance (mowing with a mower or line trimmer) would only be conducted where concentrations were below commercial/industrial EALs. To prevent unintentional exposure a healthy grass cover would be maintained, and any bare soil areas would be seeded and covered with jute netting to prevent direct exposure. Signage warning park users of the hazards and some fencing would be installed to prevent access to the areas where contamination exceeds the HDOH HEER Office EALs for construction/industrial land use (and grossly contaminated areas)(Figure 6-3). The costs associated with this alternative were not evaluated however, there are likely to be unforeseen costs such as security issues associated with trespassing and other unwanted activity. Periodic inspections of the grass surface for exposed soil areas of erosion would be required and will need to be documented in annual reports. Site workers may be required to wear respirators due to the high levels of lead in some areas. The EHMP would need to be updated periodically and the effectiveness of this alternative would be reviewed every 5 years. This alternative assumes four updates per 30-year period to accommodate park maintenance and use changes. 42 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives This alternative may meet the needs of the residents of Hawaii and the County of Hawaii Parks Department however, leaving lead in place on public and private land may not be socially acceptable and the public may reject this remedial alternative under the HDOH TGM and Hawaii SCP. Figure 6-3: Fencing all areas that exceed 800 mg/kg, soil cap for County of Hawaii Parcels 1x..17' � , . .. tef . �.�-♦ "t I A ♦ t' a3 � 3100100Y - 38 18 �,?. jfie kalau Leo 9k* Y` 2022a1 ,w :ea 11 Park ` �-. a� � ,: •• • 20225 "`""�-r v; ? w; R D -r- •• . ♦ 2250/ ' 'r . • • fSc3` 4 •s' • }+ ♦ • • 9 ' .',•.. 1, , 4 •4,*• nn ;. A♦ • V • 4 t11/1- .. w' **II • ®County a Hawaii Area:200 mg/kg • \ •,Proposed Fencing s, ♦ dr • ' Tax Parcels: TMK IDs s -. 4L-Previous DUs:Lead Sample Results Above 800 mg/kg ` • O DeciskDecisionUnits Hakalau 201k6 '°- A ,'4'" : ' .. ! T`^Previous DUs:Lead Sample Results Between 200-800 mg/kg .,''''. . - i `` ,•, 4' -� -. 2022 Sampling:Between 200-800 mg/kg Esti,HERE,varmu1,y.• Y . '�\s. .," -... ) ir. i-i,Water 43 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 7 Comparative Analysis of Remedial Alternatives 7.1 Overall Protectiveness The first three identified alternatives do not meet the overall protectiveness requirements as these alternatives would not remove, limit, or reduce the potential lead exposure pathways for receptors. Alternative 4 could potentially be used in conjunction with other remedial actions to reduce disposal costs. • Alternative 1: The lead paint material is not dense enough to be separated from the soil in order to be recycled or reused. • Alternative 2: The lead at the site is also not organic, corrosive, or explosive and is relatively immobile. • Alternative 3: Soils at Hakalau and lead paint flakes are not suitable for volume reduction in this form and would not be reduced significantly. • Alternative 4: The Bench Test Treatability study (Appendix E) has demonstrated that immobilization via treatment with TSP to reduce the mobility of lead has been shown to be feasible. This alternative combined with either 5b or 5c to reduce the quantity of lead-impacted soil that would need to be disposed of at mainland US facilities would increase the protectiveness both locally if it able to be treated and accepted for disposal at the WHSL facility. A permit to treat hazardous waste in Hakalau Valley would be required to conduct this alternative. Unfortunately, the uncertainties in the timeline that would be needed to complete the permitting and in obtaining public acceptance of the treatment process make this alternative an unknown. This alternative also has additional costs associated with treatment (industrial machinery for mixing TSP or Portland Cement into the lead-impacted soil, grading, managing stormwater controls on site). The application of this alternative would be in conjunction with soil excavation and removal and would not be used for in-situ stabilization. Alternatives 5a, 5b, 5c, 6a, and 6b, presented in Table 7-1 and summarized below vary in protectiveness. The following assumptions are made. • The public obeys signage and restricted areas. • Site workers (Landscapers) have frequent exposure to surface soil. Site workers primarily handle vegetation and do not excavate below the surface (0 to 3 inches). • Construction/Trench Workers dig below surface soil (6+ inches bgs) and handle soil. • Ecological receptors primarily nest, dig, loaf, or lie on the surface of the soil. • The site remains vegetated, as consistent rainfall in the area typically ensures vegetation growth. • Construction/Trench Workers and Landscapers do not enter the river/interact with sediment in the water. 44 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives Remedial Alternatives for Hakalau include the County of Hawaii parcels and the HDOT ROW. The remedial actions are addressed on a parcel and location basis due to the differences in site use and disparity in total lead results of the remedial actions. 45 co NI \ \ I -0 ) 7 7 7 = Of ` c 2 § ° G § § $ G § % o o . / z 2 ¥ 2 » » » f ¥ » » - 2 2 a / / • § 1 I 1 ) ) 8 tzWW < 5 7� o a) 7 7 7 . = E m o m m m 2 m m m y 0 0 y k 2 / a) . z a) a) a) \ f / / >- \ \ 2 2 . \ i / £ % % I kI I < _ _ _ 2 \ \ k \ ) I ) / / 2 2 - \ \ t - \ / 222 § E ¥ y § § CD / _ g I \ e R \ ( ( ) o) § 7 / / \ 2 % § 7 = — m = ° E % o D o % 0 o \ = 0 0 0 0 CD \ E\ I / \ \ \ ) f % 2 ƒ \ 2 $ Z Z E \ 2 Z Z Z o CL \ S2d / 5 \\ � \ / -\ o = _ _ _ = 2 { — En % 22 / / _i > / / / I I / ° t 0 = e e o = = 32 Z 0 = 2 = 2 C 2 § S $ o % 0 o % % g a o ¥ Co ( / � j � ƒ � 7 - \ k \ \ E \ \ ) 0 \ 0 0 0 0 \ 0 0 0 0 0 \ 0 0 0 0 C E \ 2 71= Z o Z Z Z Z o Z Z Z Z o Z Z Z Z 603 ƒ3I £ e= ) ) 37 ` o -_ ` 2 « kk ) E (a a) \ »\ - E E a co E S -0 - § 0 2 J = © _ _ ) = 7 ° 7 7 ° 7 ° = 7 = 2 \ / E \/ \ § \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ o 2 0 0 \ 0 0 0 0 a g g E a _ » _ — m = — _ - 2 $ Z Z / 2 Z Z Z ff3 = § £ I J � � ƒ O O- J J = s = - u in / E { % e ) \ ) \ £ £ £ $ $ @ o ° j / 0 7 3 9 07 3 2 7 03 7 7 / % Eb e o # # # # # # # # o C # / / / % o o o o o o o o f o _ ffJ / E E E I I E E E I I = � a w o c o — in | \ aom2 Ik r E E ®\ \ S ® 2 � E � a3r � ± ZEA / E/ ® 5 ° _ 5 ° c 5 ° _ — m — m E_ m j\ \ \ 2 \ \ \ \ �� & \ \ \ \ �� . \ 0 > 0 �� : g oD = o = \ (- a � ? C 70 § 2 66 \ 2 \ § / / % \ 2 \ § / / % \ 2 2m E OH e � = ± Ioem �= ± Ioem �= ± 2m N N N co (13 0 -Ir N- N N CU C V) U) J CU C Y � (0 Q d C L C (QU N CO Cu N Y E N N SK Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 7.2 Compliance with ARARs All of the alternatives shall meet the requirements of the ARARs and will use TBC as guidance (EPA RSLs, HDOH EALs). The actions are compatible with standard excavation and/or earth-moving activities and waste disposal in Hawaii. Depending on the chosen alternative, the site work plan will identify methods to prevent, mitigate, and respond to the conservation of cultural and ecological resources ARARs. ARARs evaluation is presented in Appendix C. 7.3 Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, and Volume through Treatment The degree to which the remedial alternative reduces toxicity, mobility, and reduction of volume is achieved, including how the treatment is used to address the COC at the site is presented below (Table 7-2). Factors considered, as appropriate, include the following: • The number of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants that will be destroyed, treated, or recycled; • The degree of the expected reduction in toxicity, mobility, or volume of the waste due to treatment; and • The degree to which the treatment is irreversible. Alternative 5a - On-site isolation and containment would not remove the volume of contamination, but it would reduce the mobility through a soil cap. This cap is potentially vulnerable to scouring from flooding. The toxicity would not be reduced but the potential for the public and landscapers/site workers to encounter it would be reduced. Treatment under this alternative may not protect against future seismic or climatic events (e.g., tsunami, flooding, or sea-level rise) Table 7-2). Alternative 5b— Removal of all soil that exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill offers the greatest reduction in toxicity, mobility, and volume as the entire contaminated source will be removed from the site resulting in a volume reduction of 4,057 cubic yards (CY) of lead impacted soil. Treatment under this alternative is permanent. Alternative 5c - Removal of all soil which exceeds the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for commercial/industrial land use for lead (800 mg/kg), containment, and replacement with clean fill offers a reduction in toxicity. Mobility will be reduced through the soil cap, but the soil cap could be scoured during extensive flooding. The overall volume of lead-impacted soil would be reduced by 1,970 CY. Treatment under this alternative may not protect against future seismic or climatic events (e.g., tsunami, flooding, or sea-level rise) (Table 7-2). Alternatives 6a and 6b reduce the potential toxicity for the general public as they no longer will be allowed to access the site or will not be able to access the areas where the concentrations of lead are present. There is no change in toxicity for landscapers/site workers and construction/trench workers who may need to maintain the site or work within 48 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives the areas that still have high concentrations of lead. There is no change in mobility or reduction of contaminant volume under these options (Table 7- 2). 49 co o ca al C >, o = / 25 , E / % § , 7 = o e m 7 • a) 5 = 2 « ° E n - ' c Ca a) c o neo c 0)/ 2 Ta o •E S / % ( 5 % f E = o@ •6 0 � ok� � • C) ' >.• c Q •\� \ > C / C a)a) Z C L. b Z C 0 ° o f � � / \ ) \ / / /2t � / \ / W \ •- \ x 5).-E § < : 2 ) / ( .- E - g E \ E ± •x y G 3 7 ) 2 t / _ _ § LLJ 0_ I- o & Poo ± 2 o E § > 0 o C.) 2 = � \ 5 = 5 ) \ a a) c2 � o)= o m c = C E ? / % 0 6 — _ CO o § .E o = E = CO 0 ƒ Q30 � � / � t \ � yako � k c® 2 0 $ _ _ _ \ .§ ) < zc o --c-- ) Z \ \ § / CO0 g @ 7 0 2 / '2 >,\ / _ o y % co c » w — - 5 _ = � E@ 2 / 2 3 2 2 2 \ _ % y E E 7 / m a) O ® _ _ 0 ® /y k f G 3 f 73 ) 3 \ f m R f 2 = . © LL i- E & EE ) S / £ 2Sk/ 2 > Z > a) E - - k2 _o o — / �2 / a = / \ _ E= a) ( / ¢ 01 - 0) § / S 2 E / k ƒ ƒ E ( 2 o x o = _ _ -5-.< I c F --OCI 00 7 a \ 2 � = e� � C o � � � \ / k / .// E $ / \ E 2 d 0 2 k/ 7 > ƒ / P \ 5 — \ 7 .- 7 7 / ¢ - � � • E E •- 0 % 2 / ? 7 . +:'c • _ _ � — E / \ � / k \ \ k \ � 2 ,C o m o = = 0 5 E 7.0 g 2 - 0/ s \ & f7 e — ems E _ Et [ k � \ / � \ � 0c 2 \ \ R m02 > 20 CeN _ ) ® = o N" 0 . ° £ 2 E 2 % \ \ q \% % 7ƒ •- - ƒ g f E E \ o E o 7 $ 7 � \ 7 / > I— \ f Cl- _ % 11 § 7 ° ° _ E •o •• -- C \ 2eoE = o � = E _ § o > my = o a) oo_ Ec $ z § " .gE / °C = • U \ m § .2 .E O \ SER x � \ _ E 0 ( ? / \ \ § _ _ a) . E t 00 _ •- 2 c o E = 2 § ƒ } 0 \ 0 k § f PE ) ° ® o 1- E 0.% P E R P 2 .@ £ ) > Z o \/ \ ( =a co N N 2 O (1) 4) (B a) a) Ca C Y N (0 Q d C L U U63 a) N CO co N Y E (6 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 7.4 Long-Term and Short-Term Effectiveness Alternative 5a: Offers short-term effectiveness. The park reopens without soil removal disposal costs. Site work is still needed in terms of applying mirafi, soil, and re- vegetation/stabilization of the site. The park is located in an area that can experience torrential rains and associated flooding, increasing the potential for long-term exposure risks. The site will need to be maintained to ensure that the containment soil cap is not breached. Alternative 5b: Repairs to the site will take longer, and the park will not open as quickly as under scenario 5a. This alternative has long-term effectiveness. Sitework will include scraping soil, disposing of soils (off-island), laying clean soil, and stabilization. All work will be completed, and additional work is not anticipated. The source should be removed from direct contact for all users. An EHMP will not be needed for the affected area of the park under this alternative. Construction and Landscaping crews would not require additional PPE while working in these DUs after soil removal. Other sources of lead may be present in the park, and areas outside of the DUs may need soil testing. Alternative 5c: Repairs to the site will offer long-term effectiveness. Site work will take as long as alternative 5a but less than 5b and will require additional materials (mirafi). Soil disposal costs and soil disposal work will remain high. Sitework will include scraping soil, disposing of soils (off-island), applying mirafi, laying clean fill, and stabilization. An EHMP will also be required as lead-impacted soil will remain on-site in the parking area. The removal of soils with total lead greater than 800 mg/kg will mean that construction/trench workers will not require additional PPE while working on the site. Lead-impacted soil may be present in the upper steep gulch slopes and could migrate to the park area below. Institutional controls under 6a and 6b offer short-term effectiveness. The lead-impacted source is removed from public contact, but the material remains and will need to be managed by site workers and potentially by construction/trench workers. Ecological receptors will still access the site and be exposed. The site will need to be protected from erosion and washouts. Surface soil may wash into areas used by the general public and into Hakalau Stream and the Pacific Ocean. EHMPs will be needed, and any site work will need to refer to recommendations in the EHMP. 7.5 Implementability Alternative 5a is implementable using equipment and supplies from Hawaii County or shipped to Hawaii County. This alternative will require excavators, work crews, clean fill (from Hawaii County), and EHMP document production. Alternatives 5b and 5c are implementable using equipment and supplies from Hawaii County or shipped to Hawaii County. However, both alternatives require off-island disposal costs and shipping. Immobilization using TSP or Portland Cement could be used to eliminate the need for offsite disposal but the uncertainty in the time need to gain regulatory and public acceptance pose a risk to using this approach. These alternatives will require excavators, work crews, topsoil, and clean fill (from Hawaii County), and alternative 5c will require EHMP document production. The source of the topsoil and 52 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives clean fill will need to be documented that the source is free of chemical and biological contamination (e.g., chlordane, little fire ants, etc.). Alternative 6a will be the easiest to implement. This alternative requires fencing installation and EHMP document production. This alternative will require the County of Hawaii to maintain an EHMP and conduct periodic inspections of the engineering controls (e.g., monthly inspections) reports documenting the results of the inspection (e.g., annual reports). 7.6 Estimated Costs A complete cost table of the alternatives is found in Appendix D. A summary table is found below in Table 7-3. All alternatives are assumed to have the same costs for the planning component including project management, permitting, and public meeting support. This cost is estimated at $44,818 and is included in all alternative costs. For alternatives that consider a soil cap, the thickness of the soil cap can vary from 18 to 24 inches depending on HDOH requirements. This can have an impact on total costs which are summarized in the table below. 53 CO N N 220 = gni 22E � > ƒ > c To o •- _ al co = o o k\ 0)-- / / k k k k 7 q \ 7 y � ) = I [ m 2 co ° \ § / f t _ = .c 'LC m CO /\ \ 2 \ tip LI ± 4Q 0 2 7 / \ e E _ •_ co ƒ > 2 ƒ / ) $ 0 o 0 0 0 q Co $ 0 0 E Lt y ¥ 2 2 2 2 = f 2 ' g7 7 m $ m e77 m • c .$ E § c.- _ J W W < 0 ■ 0 E / ) a) 0_ _ co / c 0 ° -0, 0 _ U) U) U) v) u) u) \ d o ƒ \ � ) & \ / a) a) a) a) / O. \ k 0 E § ' [ f E 3 7 � / 2 )00 q § m m _ @ e / d \ Eo2 O % ■ k / \ / \ m \ -• \ / . Co d co \ Z \ \ \ Z 0 co CO ER E ._ _ E ƒ $ E@ / 2 — o = E -a' ao = 2 LC) U) q n 0 2 . c ° 00 f 0 0 ) / \ } 0 G ° S U) S co o 7 C) = o .g u) E » » 2 » » » c Co C) C) O \ 3 � � co ® = CO ,- d4 ( .— • .20 O � m m a) \ - » 6 = _ » 0 > \ $ _ § _ _ = E o 0 L2 o \ — C CO a co \ C = CO C 5 f )\ o $ / / f &•\ 0 0-.-,..,, c % e m e m a)\ Ez 2 - U) 0 00 \ E/ / / C - / 3_ 'E E Q co _ E _ _ » _ 'E .- .- o .- o ! _ 2 — 2 E .§ = m E % .g = E 7 .§ 7 .g 2 m\ CO i $ / ƒ \ \ oE oOO / \ O / 0 7m T f0 2 RI -Q O LI) (1) -Ir > C Y � (0 Q d C L C 8t a)'. N CO as CD N Y E Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 8 Preferred Alternative The five remedial alternatives are compared the to nine evaluation criteria previously in Section 7 presented qualitatively in a summary comparison in Table 8-1. Table 8-1: Evaluation of Cleanup Alternatives: Hakalau RAA Alternatives Evaluation Criteria 5a 5b 5c 6a 6b On-site Removal of all soil Removal of all Institulional and Institutional and isolation which exceeds soil which exceeds Engineering Engineering and 200 mg/kg for lead 600 mg/kg for Controls: Controls:Partial containment and replacement lead,containment, No Action Reopening: with clean fill and replacement Restricted Area with clean fill 1.Overall protection of human health and the environment. Q • d 0 0 2.Compliance with applicable or relevant and appropriate 0 Q 0 0 requirements. 3.Long-term effectiveness and 0 0 permanence. 4.Reductionmr of h beat mobility,or � 0 volume through treatment 5.Short-term effectiveness. i i • • • 6.Implementability. 0 0 0 i i 7.Cost. $2.310M S7.585M $5.309M $0.167R1 SO.271M 8.State regulator acceptance. Q • Q 0 0 9.Community acceptance. Q * Q Q Q °satisfies the criterion to a low degree or does not satisfy the criterion in a timely manner. ()satisfies criterion to a moderate degree in a timely manner. 411/satisfies criterion to a high degree in a timely manner. satisfies criterion to a high degree preferred alternative. Alternative 5b fully satisfies 7 out of 9 of the evaluation criteria to a high degree, while alternatives 6a and 6b satisfy only 2 out of 9 evaluation criteria to a high degree, and 5a and 5c only satisfy 1 out of 9 criteria to the highest degree. While alternative 6b, Institutional and Engineering controls may receive state and community acceptance as an interim action to allow public access to the park under restricted use requirements on an interim basis it did not address overall protection to human health and the environment, long-term effectiveness and permanence, or the reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment. The remaining alternatives met the evaluation of regulator and public acceptance criteria either equally or at a lower level than alternative 6b. Alternatives 5a and 5c, while having price points in the range of alternative 5b, they ranked low relative to alternative 5b at satisfying the other 7 evaluation criteria. Based on all the evaluation criteria the preferred alternative is 5b: Removal of All Soil that Exceeds 200 mg/kg for Lead and Replacement with Clean Fill. This alternative is recommended because it will achieve substantial risk reduction, removes the source of 56 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives contamination, eliminates the need for an EHMP, and removes lead-impacted soil or sediment from becoming exposed during flooding/erosion in the future. This alternative is cost-effective since it offers a permanent reduction of toxicity, mobility, and completely reduces the volume of contamination at the site. It provides the most long-term effectiveness, and the park will not need additional controls. Moreover, the park can be opened for use by the public, site workers, and construction/trench workers with no additional monitoring or maintenance stipulations. 57 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives 9 References AECOS. 2019. Avian Habitat Survey Kapue Stream, Hamakua District, Hawaii. Feb. County of Hawaii. 2015. Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. Office of Planning. http://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/. Giambelluca, T.W., Q. Chen, A.G. Frazier, J.P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and D.M. Delparte. 2013. Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 94, 313-316, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1. Gene, Fabian. 2008. Treatability Study Report for In SITU lead Immobilization Using Phosphate-Based Binders. U. S. Army Environmental Command Aberdeen Proving Ground. Hakalau Home. 2022. 1946 Tsunami. https://www.hakalauhome.com/1946- tsunami.html. Accessed August 2022. Hettiarachchi GM, Pierzynski GM, Ransom MD. In situ stabilization of soil lead using phosphorus. J Environ Qual. 2001 Jul-Aug;30(4):1214-21. doi:10.2134/jeg2001.3041214x. PMID: 11476498. Historic Hawaii. 2022. Hakalau Stream Bridge. https://historichawaii.org/2014/02/14/hakalau-stream-bridge/. Accessed August 2022. Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). 2008. Technical Guidance Manual for the Implementation of the Hawaii State Contingency Plan, State of Hawaii Department of Health Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office, Interim Final-November 12, 2008. . 2011. Technical Guidance Manual Notes: Decision Unit and Multi-Increment Sample Investigations. HDOH, Environmental Management Division. March. . 2012a. Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, Volume 1: User's Guide, Hawai'i Edition, Fall 2011. Hawaii Department of Health, Environmental Management Division. Fall 2011 (Revised Fall 2017). . 2012b. Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, Volume 2: Background Documentation for the Development of Tier 1 Environmental Action Levels, Appendices 2-9. Fall 2011. Prepared by: Hawaii Department of Health, Environmental Management Division. Fall 2011 (Revised Fall 2017). 58 Hakalau Beach Park May 2023 Remedial Action Alternatives . 2012c. EAL Surfer. Prepared by: Hawai'i Department of Health, Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response. Fall 2011 (Revised Fall 2017). . 2022. STATE OF HAWAII WATER QUALITY MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT REPORT: Integrated Report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Congress Pursuant to §303(d) and §305(b), Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117). Hawaii Department of Health. April 6. . 2019. Safe Drinking Water Branch. Underground Injection Control. https://health.hawaii.gov/sdwb/underground-injection-control-program/. Accessed October 2019. KPC. 2022. Final SAP for Additional Lead Delineation Environmental Site Assessment and Treatability Study Workplan at Hakalau Beach Park. Hakalau HI. February. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2019. Hamakua Coast. Accessed Oct 2019. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov. United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1996. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846. 3rd ed. Final Update III. Washington. GPO. November. . 2000. Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process (EPA QA/G-4). EPA/600/R-96/055. Washington, D.C., August. . 2003. Guidance for Obtaining Representative Laboratory Analytical Subsamples from Particulate Laboratory Samples. October 27. . 2019. Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARS). https://www.epa.gov/superfund/appl icable-or-relevant-and-appropriate-requ irements- arars. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2019. Papaaloa, HI Quad. HTMC, 1992 ed. USGS Topoviewer Accessed 2022. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/19.8861/-155.1273. 59 This page was intentionally left blank. APPENDIX A: LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS This page was intentionally left blank. APPENDIX A-1 : 2022 SAMPLING RESULTS SUMMARY TABLES AND LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS This page was intentionally left blank. Cal p a (0•- j (.® kco ) e & ( X ° 4> °(> -CV) a c .o n ) Je a g§ 9g§a a O 01 ) ƒ J $ \ a • CNI(N1 O oI+ N N }§ ) j a a CO co j (1® 7 LO LA N ) z 5, § R a \ Nf> ill 0 j (/� a) in ƒ 2 J ) / e 22_oak ° - E / & « ) QCD I N'-- ) 2: © { 3)w 88 ,_ . E : Cl• - 2 6,°-g _ \ , k 0 / c2 .9-P W ) - 2 \� I () ( \ 3 / ! ! : f 7 2 _ e ; 3Br - _ E -C \) { # 3f k 2 ) § § | N % \ } \/ \ ) / - m C> w : § _ - °: = ! co ce - \ \ k {\ ( � \ \ - « 3 & ) ) ) \ \ ) $ o ( � A N ( k T.S222 ! } 2 ! ® {/ ! « . a ` . . '5 '(r, ! 3 [{ m E - - ! \ f\ /§ \! CO z Et ! / )/ § . W : 4f Ce 2 .2 a s §a § a ; ®- � 0 k ) \ \\ � \)� § � @ ) - , 7 - ±zE b \ \ 5,_ _ � ) a ) § 7Ie : 7m = � 0l : f : r �; � C0 t] ! ! £ &( # \2) » a3 2m } s ; zC , C ; C):! { ! > = 4 Jat6 . S " \ . . - £ ; a \ / a � � \/ ) ! ) 777 , ) \! Cls i _ ; " : ® Coco ) o ] \ 5. Lii 5. 5050 \ \ } )k § \ ` ! J ;6 . , 12 LU 2 ( _ _ 2 ) ° f ) § k (\ \ \ f )) / ) \) k0, :) \ co 01 0 )\ U , � / 0 / r -7 of (i) &4 ! ° :) § �\ \ � � 2 (o ~ a ;\ 2 E E r - AZ' fa0. § _ 22 r§ • § \ - Wj /\ / k }J � t a keE w Cl z \ ] re E LO CD CD )/ o , , $ 0 /( / { _ n e — c _ 2 7 : - J - k { / {{ � ; D m } I I {{ §f= }� f IID _« !I£ � ) - � z.z§u fl xi } a . _ & o \ / (01 ^ © o / & J / § c 7 \ � \ co J a 2 = / \ \ \ 2 $ 0 0 = a 3 » 5 g g E ms / % V = a m = & c \ \ Cl 2 3 a o D▪ 0 \ » @ e Y /p ® C. 7 I a , _ 2 \ cD 0 ^ $ _ \ o \ » co c 0 Y 2 J V _ a -3 _ $ \ 0 o 0 2 / j 9 $ 0 / o / u) c m I N. W v a a O. } e ; -J o o _ I.= r=1„, g = 0 0 c � c E R 0 m 2 - 0 0 � k $ 0 Ei Cr - b Ci = ® ® J 13 U) a d E E / \ E ■ E _ ci) a ; ) I \ \ ) ra \\ 3 CO % % « \ � 7 7 / / } / u \ \ @ _ : _ - Ta13 m CO . \ } � « ./ % / * - ri c2 2 3 m { ) ) � To C 0 _ o) ) \ \ f 5 = = 32/ w S ) ) RasU ] E o or) \2 / j / \ƒ / } A \ i— CD co c = —I2 ® -} & { / -5 q § � _co i \ (/ j oe : o IIn / a N- \\\� \ _I CN cc \» 2 a ( \\(.0 0 _�§� ) \ / &e cc I- ' a j /\\ 1/1 0 '� § f / /$ cc a \% S ° - S See Ie°ztft co = - cc a) a \e/ E D c <9 ` O //}® 0 2 \ 1 4 2 ¥ « Ja - 7 § k\ { 2g _ _ ; _ = o ® / r® a/ 5 \ k 2 E . k ° � � co \ k \ \) \77 \ �� ) � k \ ° 1 2E $ � « E / k}}}7 - / a >/m ® � / C 2 71 a) co 0 c5 / 5r) co8 • k ) / c P \\P )\ \ R Jo > % &\ $ § ± ra � � 2 \ §= _t , - - < 00 20 - o / § - N g { \ E28g § / -_ - ( . m " , E �/ ~} \{ ' / \ Ca e «j \jj/ \/ ` \ 0 W TE 7,r, , = w k « ce 2 - - k\ \\ kf�\ E F \ i ° � - E0 = `= >C2f{ \i 2 0 co y ) _ ± \ «\ ({ ({ \{ .DO \ \ § « I \2 / � � � LY/\}5/\\\ ! 7 / CO cJ < j )) )) \) )\){\ _ « 2 w ce #lE2 =2z2 .5#a: ) = 0 2 „ r- \ \Jƒƒ / CO I \ � ] / \/ // aOEO \ , = e u rof i n s Calscience ANALYTICAL REPORT Eurofins Calscience LLC 7440 Lincoln Way Garden Grove, CA 92841 Tel: (714)895-5494 Laboratory Job ID: 570-21843-2 Client Project/Site: DOT - Hakalau Lead Assessment EnviroQuest, Inc. 98-029 Hekaha Street Suite 21 Aiea, Hawaii 96701 Attn: Randy Takemoto Authorized for release by: 3/19/2020 12:00:49 PM Terri Chang, Project Manager I (714)895-5494 terrichang@eurofinsus.com The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC and 2009 TNI requirements for accredited parameters,exceptions are noted in this report. This report may not be reproduced except in full, and with written approval from the laboratory.For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or telephone number listed on this page. This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory.Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten signature. Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s)as received by the laboratory. Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Laboratory Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Table of Contents Cover Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Definitions/Glossary 3 Case Narrative 4 Detection Summary 5 Client Sample Results 6 QC Sample Results 8 QC Association Summary 10 Lab Chronicle 12 Certification Summary 14 Method Summary 15 Sample Summary 16 Chain of Custody 17 Receipt Checklists 18 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 2 of 18 3/19/2020 Definitions/Glossary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Qualifiers Metals Qualifier Qualifier Description Fl MS and/or MSD recovery exceeds control limits. Glossary Abbreviation These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report. Listed under the"D"column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis %R Percent Recovery CFL Contains Free Liquid CNF Contains No Free Liquid DER Duplicate Error Ratio(normalized absolute difference) Dil Fac Dilution Factor DL Detection Limit(DoD/DOE) DL, RA, RE,IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis,Re-extraction,or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample DLC Decision Level Concentration(Radiochemistry) EDL Estimated Detection Limit(Dioxin) LOD Limit of Detection(DoD/DOE) LOQ Limit of Quantitation(DoD/DOE) MDA Minimum Detectable Activity(Radiochemistry) MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration(Radiochemistry) MDL Method Detection Limit ML Minimum Level(Dioxin) NC Not Calculated ND Not Detected at the reporting limit(or MDL or EDL if shown) PQL Practical Quantitation Limit QC Quality Control RER Relative Error Ratio(Radiochemistry) RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit(Radiochemistry) RPD Relative Percent Difference,a measure of the relative difference between two points TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor(Dioxin) TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient(Dioxin) Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 3 of 18 3/19/2020 Case Narrative Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Job ID: 570-21843-2 Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience LLC Narrative Job Narrative 570-21843-2 Comments No additional comments. Receipt The samples were received on 2/26/2020 9:50 AM;the samples arrived in good condition, properly preserved and,where required, on ice. The temperature of the cooler at receipt was 18.5°C. Metals Method 6010B: The matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate(MS/MSD)recoveries for preparation batch 570-57161 and 570-57611 and analytical batch 570-57596 were outside control limits. Sample matrix interference and/or non-homogeneity are suspected because the associated laboratory control sample(LCS)recovery was within acceptance limits. Method 6010B: The matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate(MS/MSD)recoveries for preparation batch 570-57225 and 570-58135 and analytical batch 570-58259 were outside control limits. Sample matrix interference and/or non-homogeneity are suspected because the associated laboratory control sample(LCS)recovery was within acceptance limits. No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page. Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 4 of 18 3/19/2020 Detection Summary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HKDU32-0-6-021720 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-1 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HKDU32-6-12-021720 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-2 No Detections. 111 Client Sample ID: HKDU33-6-12-021820C Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-5 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 4.62 0.500 mg/L 1 6010B TCLP Client Sample ID: HKDU34-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-7 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HKDU38-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-9 No Detections. This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results. Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 5 of 18 3/19/2020 Client Sample Results Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - TCLP Client Sample ID: HKDU33-6-12-021820C Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-5 Date Collected: 02/18/20 14:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 4.62 0.500 mg/L 03/16/20 14:00 03/17/20 11:57 1 6 Client Sample ID: HKDU34-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-7 Date Collected: 02/19/20 10:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/16/20 14:00 03/17/20 11:54 1 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 6 of 18 3/19/2020 Client Sample Results Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - SPLP West Client Sample ID: HKDU32-0-6-021720 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-1 Date Collected: 02/17/20 15:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/18/20 16:00 03/19/20 00:14 1 6 Client Sample ID: HKDU32-6-12-021720 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-2 Date Collected: 02/17/20 15:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/18/20 16:00 03/19/20 00:11 1 Client Sample ID: HKDU33-6-12-021820C Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-5 Date Collected: 02/18/20 14:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/18/20 16:00 03/19/20 00:17 1 Client Sample ID: HKDU34-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-7 Date Collected: 02/19/20 10:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND F1 0.500 mg/L 03/18/20 16:00 03/19/20 00:00 1 Client Sample ID: HKDU38-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-9 Date Collected: 02/19/20 16:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/18/20 16:00 03/19/20 00:08 1 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 7 of 18 3/19/2020 QC Sample Results Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: LB 570-57161/1-C Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 57596 Prep Batch: 57611 LB LB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/16/20 14:00 03/16/20 19:55 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-57161/2-C Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 57596 Prep Batch: 57611 Spike LCS LCS %Rec. Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 5.00 4.242 mg/L 85 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-57161/3-C Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 57596 Prep Batch: 57611 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec. RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 5.00 4.372 mg/L 87 80-120 3 20 Lab Sample ID: 570-23384-B-1-I MS Client Sample ID: Matrix Spike Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 57596 Prep Batch: 57611 Sample Sample Spike MS MS %Rec. Analyte Result Qualifier Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead ND Fl 5.00 4.025 F1 mg/L 78 84-120 Lab Sample ID: 570-23384-B-1-J MSD Client Sample ID: Matrix Spike Duplicate Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 57596 Prep Batch: 57611 Sample Sample Spike MSD MSD %Rec. RPD Analyte Result Qualifier Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead ND Fl 5.00 4.193 Fl mg/L 81 84-120 4 7 Lab Sample ID: LB2 570-57225/1-B Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 58259 Prep Batch: 58135 LB2 LB2 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 03/18/20 16:00 03/18/20 23:36 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-57225/2-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 58259 Prep Batch: 58135 Spike LCS LCS %Rec. Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 5.00 4.260 mg/L 85 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-57225/3-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 58259 Prep Batch: 58135 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec. RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 5.00 4.407 mg/L 88 80-120 3 20 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 8 of 18 3/19/2020 QC Sample Results Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-7 MS Client Sample ID: HKDU34-6-12-021920 Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 58259 Prep Batch: 58135 Sample Sample Spike MS MS %Rec. Analyte Result Qualifier Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead ND Fl 5.00 4.158 F1 mg/L 83 84-120 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-7 MSD Client Sample ID: HKDU34-6-12-021920 El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 58259 Prep Batch: 58135 Sample Sample Spike MSD MSD %Rec. RPD Analyte Result Qualifier Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead ND F1 5.00 4.085 F1 mg/L 82 84.120 2 7 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 9 of 18 3/19/2020 QC Association Summary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Metals Leach Batch: 57161 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C TCLP Solid 1311 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 TCLP Solid 1311 LB 570-57161/1-C Method Blank TCLP Solid 1311 LCS 570-57161/2-C Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 1311 LCSD 570-57161/3-C Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 1311 570-23384-B-1-I MS Matrix Spike TCLP Solid 1311 570-23384-B-1-J MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate TCLP Solid 1311 Leach Batch: 57225 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-21843-1 HKDU32-0-6-021720 SPLP West Solid 1312 570-21843-2 HKDU32-6-12-021720 SPLP West Solid 1312 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C SPLP West Solid 1312 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 1312 570-21843-9 HKDU38-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 1312 LB2 570-57225/1-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 1312 LCS 570-57225/2-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 1312 LCSD 570-57225/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 1312 570-21843-7 MS HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 1312 570-21843-7 MSD HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 1312 Analysis Batch: 57596 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch LB 570-57161/1-C Method Blank TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 LCS 570-57161/2-C Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 LCSD 570-57161/3-C Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 570-23384-B-1-I MS Matrix Spike TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 570-23384-B-1-J MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 Prep Batch: 57611 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 LB 570-57161/1-C Method Blank TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 LCS 570-57161/2-C Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 LCSD 570-57161/3-C Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 570-23384-B-1-I MS Matrix Spike TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 570-23384-B-1-J MSD Matrix Spike Duplicate TCLP Solid 3010A 57161 Analysis Batch: 57805 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 TCLP Solid 6010B 57611 Prep Batch: 58135 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-21843-1 HKDU32-0-6-021720 SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 570-21843-2 HKDU32-6-12-021720 SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 570-21843-9 HKDU38-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 10 of 18 3/19/2020 QC Association Summary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Metals (Continued) Prep Batch: 58135 (Continued) Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch LB2 570-57225/1-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 LCS 570-57225/2-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 LCSD 570-57225/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 570-21843-7 MS HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 570-21843-7 MSD HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 3010A 57225 Analysis Batch: 58259 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 8 570-21843-1 HKDU32-0-6-021720 SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 570-21843-2 HKDU32-6-12-021720 SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 570-21843-9 HKDU38-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 LB2 570-57225/1-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 LCS 570-57225/2-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 LCSD 570-57225/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 570-21843-7 MS HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 570-21843-7 MSD HKDU34-6-12-021920 SPLP West Solid 6010B 58135 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 11 of 18 3/19/2020 Lab Chronicle Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HKDU32-0-6-021720 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-1 Date Collected: 02/17/20 15:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 100.08 g 2000 mL 57225 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 SPLP West Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 58135 03/18/20 16:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 58259 03/19/20 00:14 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKDU32-6-12-021720 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-2 Date Collected: 02/17/20 15:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 9 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 100.03 g 2000 mL 57225 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 SPLP West Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 58135 03/18/20 16:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 58259 03/19/20 00:11 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKDU33-6-12-021820C Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-5 Date Collected: 02/18/20 14:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 100.11 g 2000 mL 57225 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 SPLP West Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 58135 03/18/20 16:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 58259 03/19/20 00:17 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 TCLP Leach 1311 100.04 g 2000 mL 57161 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 57611 03/16/20 14:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 57805 03/17/20 11:57 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKDU34-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-7 Date Collected: 02/19/20 10:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 100.05 g 2000 mL 57225 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 SPLP West Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 58135 03/18/20 16:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 58259 03/19/20 00:00 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 TCLP Leach 1311 99.87 g 2000 mL 57161 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 57611 03/16/20 14:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 57805 03/17/20 11:54 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 12 of 18 3/19/2020 Lab Chronicle Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HKDU38-6-12-021920 Lab Sample ID: 570-21843-9 Date Collected: 02/19/20 16:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 02/26/20 09:50 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 100.07 g 2000 mL 57225 03/13/20 19:00 SUJ5 ECL 3 SPLP West Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 58135 03/18/20 16:00 SUJ5 ECL 1 SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 58259 03/19/20 00:08 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Laboratory References: ECL 1 =Eurofins Calscience LLC Lincoln,7440 Lincoln Way,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 ECL 3=Eurofins Calscience LLC Knott, 11380 Knott Street,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 9 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 13 of 18 3/19/2020 Accreditation/Certification Summary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience LLC All accreditations/certifications held by this laboratory are listed. Not all accreditations/certifications are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date California Los Angeles County Sanitation 10109 09-29-20 Districts California SCAQMD LAP 17LA0919 11-30-20 California State 2944 09-29-20 Guam State 20-003R 10-31-20 Nevada State CA00111 07-31-20 Oregon NELAP CA300001 01-29-21 USDA US Federal Programs P330-20-00034 02-10-23 Washington State C916-18 10-11-20 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 14 of 18 3/19/2020 Method Summary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Method Method Description Protocol Laboratory 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 ECL 1 1311 TCLP Extraction SW846 ECL 3 1312 SPLP Extraction SW846 ECL 3 3010A Preparation, Total Metals SW846 ECL 1 Protocol References: SW846="Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods",Third Edition,November 1986 And Its Updates. Laboratory References: ECL 1 =Eurofins Calscience LLC Lincoln,7440 Lincoln Way,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 ECL 3=Eurofins Calscience LLC Knott, 11380 Knott Street,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 �1 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 15 of 18 3/19/2020 Sample Summary Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job ID: 570-21843-2 Project/Site: DOT- Hakalau Lead Assessment Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received Asset ID 570-21843-1 HKDU32-0-6-021720 Solid 02/17/20 15:00 02/26/20 09:50 570-21843-2 HKDU32-6-12-021720 Solid 02/17/20 15:00 02/26/20 09:50 570-21843-5 HKDU33-6-12-021820C Solid 02/18/20 14:00 02/26/20 09:50 570-21843-7 HKDU34-6-12-021920 Solid 02/19/20 10:30 02/26/20 09:50 570-21843-9 HKDU38-6-12-021920 Solid 02/19/20 16:30 02/26/20 09:50 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 16 of 18 3/19/2020 sJeuiewo3 jo# 1 I _ a) a) Ce) cr) _ C N c. CO CD T.'. N c w E CV wo a) m •a) 3 0 ado: Li O 0_.c a_—1 U o_ Iw- — - . 2 3 as (n J aa) L � �I T N w J -�.� o ._P_ d 0 ov _ 3 aa)ia) 3 _1 Q U w d a) Z .c CL o m _ 0 r H Q "O _ l . -- N J (n CD To Q ^ Oc13 0 J to m a O 0 To Y fI a ~ N0 CC N Q 0 0 di a)I 0 ( Z cc O W I w I Z F— C N U = ik f- �V/�� a) N W a O a Z Z a —1 I Z ILli U w Z ~ W U0 Q Q Z Q O fY O Q IF- O 1- O w J z IL > 1-- U J w Oi Lw Z 0 Q ::_� 2 ij ,... (>75.1 * * * * * * * a, * < < U �, �� x x x x x x x x x Qm co.T O a ^ w • W LL. m !- N W W N Zc F;_-.) U U) a :4 w W a) = o) 0) o) o) o`. o) 0) oD 0) •o (j N (lS (6 (0 as CO c6 co (0 cc tr W _0 J] .0 .0 J0 JD J0 ��, 0_ 0 1 , rnEo w V) co co co w w U1 (n 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 W o W w = x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 E O O 0 0 0 CO CO CO c0 P. ( ( y t) !) V O O N O a N Q o Q U L N N N N N N c� y U N a (0 (0 1— (O <- ,- a) N a) , , , a) ,o„- g o) 00000000 .00 '5 u O m j O N N N N O N N N c N c d y N o r r a) co 00 � co 0) 0) ) .N Q \t ;c N N N N N N N N j(0 co 0 N N O O O O N O O O jc. (� r -" co U) (O c I- a) O N N N N 9 N N N [ `i�! CO coco N o U o O 0 E w E O u? u? u? (4 0 ui u? "V 2 Ia O O (n N N CO CO CO "t N- 00 Co o (0 00 ) CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO 00 ° 000000 0 Z ct Z W Z Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Z W 0 0 0 W 11111111 = Eitu w U OQ i w 0 N C ) v n, II (o N- oo o) .- N CO 'I u) (0 N- GO 0) a w Y CC RdyL 17 Ui. 18 3/19/2020 Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: EnviroQuest, Inc. Job Number: 570-21843-2 Login Number: 21843 List Source: Eurofins Calscience List Number: 1 Creator:Andujo,Italy Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey N/A meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. False Thermal preservation not required. Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? True There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. True Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 18 of 18 3/19/2020 • El %N; eurofins Environment Testing America ANALYTICAL REPORT Eurofins Calscience LLC 7440 Lincoln Way ,01 Garden Grove, CA 92841 �� Tel: (714)895-5494 -.401111."11' Laboratory Job ID: 570-44279- Client Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC 103 South Kalaheo Avenue Kailua, Hawaii 96734-2933 1 "` Attn: Scott Moncrief <e-g- aitl Authorized for release by: 12/7/2020 1:39:51 PM Terri Chang, Project Manager I (714)895-5494 Terri.Chang@eurofinset.com LINKS ........... Review your project results through Total Access 1 r� Have a Question? Ask /The The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC, 2009 TNI, and 2016 TNI requirements for / accredited parameters,exceptions are noted in this report. This report may not be reproduced Ex a rt I except in full,and with written approval from the laboratory. For questions please contact the IMO Project Manager at the e-mail address or telephone number listed on this page. 1/44 This report has been electronically signed and authorized by the signatory.Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten signature. Visit us at: www.eurofnsu5.comlEnv Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s)as received by the laboratory. Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Laboratory Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Table of Contents Cover Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Definitions/Glossary 3 Case Narrative 4 Detection Summary 5 Client Sample Results 6 QC Sample Results 7 QC Association Summary 8 Lab Chronicle 9 Certification Summary 11 Method Summary 12 Sample Summary 13 Chain of Custody 14 Receipt Checklists 15 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 2 of 15 12/7/2020 Definitions/Glossary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Qualifiers Metals Qualifier Qualifier Description B Compound was found in the blank and sample. Glossary Abbreviation These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report. c Listed under the"D"column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis %R Percent Recovery CFL Contains Free Liquid CFU Colony Forming Unit CNF Contains No Free Liquid DER Duplicate Error Ratio(normalized absolute difference) Dil Fac Dilution Factor DL Detection Limit(DoD/DOE) DL, RA, RE,IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis,Re-extraction,or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample DLC Decision Level Concentration(Radiochemistry) EDL Estimated Detection Limit(Dioxin) LOD Limit of Detection(DoD/DOE) LOQ Limit of Quantitation(DoD/DOE) MCL EPA recommended"Maximum Contaminant Level" MDA Minimum Detectable Activity(Radiochemistry) MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration(Radiochemistry) MDL Method Detection Limit ML Minimum Level(Dioxin) MPN Most Probable Number MQL Method Quantitation Limit NC Not Calculated ND Not Detected at the reporting limit(or MDL or EDL if shown) NEG Negative/Absent POS Positive/Present PQL Practical Quantitation Limit PRES Presumptive QC Quality Control RER Relative Error Ratio(Radiochemistry) RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit(Radiochemistry) RPD Relative Percent Difference,a measure of the relative difference between two points TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor(Dioxin) TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient(Dioxin) TNTC Too Numerous To Count Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 3 of 15 12/7/2020 Case Narrative Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Job ID: 570-44279-1 Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience LLC Narrative Job Narrative 570-44279-1 Comments No additional comments. Receipt The samples were received on 11/19/2020 10:00 AM;the samples arrived in good condition,and where required, properly preserved and on ice. The temperature of the cooler at receipt was 4.9°C. Receipt Exceptions The Chain-of-Custody(COC)was incomplete as received and/or improperly completed. No relinquished time listed. Metals Method 6010B: The method blank for preparation batch 570-113495 and analytical batch 570-113944 contained Lead above the reporting limit(RL). Associated sample(s)were not re-extracted and/or re-analyzed because results were greater than 10X the value found in the method blank. Method 6010B: The following samples were diluted due to the presence of Iron which interferes with Lead: HKL_DU27_0-3_20201116 (570-44279-1), HKL_DU8B_3-6_20201116(570-44279-2), HKL_DU20_3-6_20201116(570-44279-3), HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 (570-44279-4)and HKL_DU26_0-3_20201117 (570-44279-5). Elevated reporting limits(RLs)are provided. No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page. Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 4 of 15 12/7/2020 Detection Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HKL_DU27_0-3_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-1 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 1680 5.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: HKL_DU8B_3-6_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-2 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 2680 5.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: HKL_DU20_3-6_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-3 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 1640 5.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-4 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 738 5.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: HKL_DU26_0-3_20201117 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-5 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 1320 B 5.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results. Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 5 of 15 12/7/2020 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Client Sample ID: HKL_DU27_0-3_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-1 Date Collected: 11/16/20 10:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 1680 5.00 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 10:05 10 6 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU8B_3-6_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-2 Date Collected: 11/16/20 11:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 2680 5.00 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 10:06 10 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU20_3-6_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-3 Date Collected: 11/16/20 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 1640 5.00 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 10:08 10 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-4 Date Collected: 11/17/20 08:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 738 5.00 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 10:10 10 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU26_0-3_20201117 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-5 Date Collected: 11/17/20 10:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 1320 B 5.00 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 10:03 10 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 6 of 15 12/7/2020 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: MB 570-113491/1-A Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 113944 Prep Batch: 113491 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 09:34 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-113491/2-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 113944 Prep Batch: 113491 Spike LCS LCS %Rec. Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 25.1 24.66 mg/Kg 98 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-113491/3-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 113944 Prep Batch: 113491 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec. RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 24.9 25.00 mg/Kg 100 80-120 1 20 Lab Sample ID: MB 570-113495/1-A Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 113944 Prep Batch: 113495 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 0.6430 0.505 mg/Kg 12/02/20 18:00 12/04/20 09:56 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-113495/2-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 113944 Prep Batch: 113495 Spike LCS LCS %Rec. Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 25.0 25.23 mg/Kg 101 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-113495/3-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 113944 Prep Batch: 113495 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec. RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 24.6 24.55 mg/Kg 100 80-120 3 20 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 7 of 15 12/7/2020 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Metals ISM Prep Batch: 111774 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-44279-1 HKL_DU27_0-3_20201116 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-44279-2 HKL_DU8B_3-6_20201116 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-44279-3 HKL_DU20_3-6_20201116 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-44279-4 HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-44279-5 HKL_DU26_0-3_20201117 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Prep Batch: 113491 8 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-44279-1 HKL DU27 0-3 20201116 Total/NA Solid 3050B 111774 570-44279-2 HKL_DU8B_3-6_20201116 Total/NA Solid 3050B 111774 570-44279-3 HKL_DU20_3-6_20201116 Total/NA Solid 3050B 111774 570-44279-4 HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 Total/NA Solid 3050B 111774 MB 570-113491/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 3050B LCS 570-113491/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 3050B LCSD 570-113491/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 3050B Prep Batch: 113495 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-44279-5 HKL DU26 0-3 20201117 Total/NA Solid 3050B 111774 MB 570-113495/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 3050B LCS 570-113495/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 3050B LCSD 570-113495/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 3050B Analysis Batch: 113944 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-44279-1 HKL DU27 0-3 20201116 Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 570-44279-2 HKL DU8B 3-6 20201116 Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 570-44279-3 HKL DU20 3-6 20201116 Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 570-44279-4 HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 570-44279-5 HKL_DU26_0-3_20201117 Total/NA Solid 6010B 113495 MB 570-113491/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 MB 570-113495/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 6010B 113495 LCS 570-113491/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 LCS 570-113495/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 6010B 113495 LCSD 570-113491/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 6010B 113491 LCSD 570-113495/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 6010B 113495 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 8 of 15 12/7/2020 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HKL_DU27_0-3_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-1 Date Collected: 11/16/20 10:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 111774 11/19/20 16:00 C4LT ECL 3 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 113491 12/02/20 18:00 SP7J ECL 1 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 113944 12/04/20 10:05 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU8B_3-6_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-2 Date Collected: 11/16/20 11:00 Matrix: Solid 9 Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 111774 11/19/20 16:00 C4LT ECL 3 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 113491 12/02/20 18:00 SP7J ECL 1 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 113944 12/04/20 10:06 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU20_3-6_20201116 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-3 Date Collected: 11/16/20 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 111774 11/19/20 16:00 C4LT ECL 3 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 113491 12/02/20 18:00 SP7J ECL 1 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 113944 12/04/20 10:08 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU12_4-6_20201117 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-4 Date Collected: 11/17/20 08:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 111774 11/19/20 16:00 C4LT ECL 3 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 113491 12/02/20 18:00 SP7J ECL 1 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 113944 12/04/20 10:10 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Client Sample ID: HKL_DU26_0-3_20201117 Lab Sample ID: 570-44279-5 Date Collected: 11/17/20 10:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 11/19/20 10:00 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 111774 11/19/20 16:00 C4LT ECL 3 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 113495 12/02/20 18:00 SP7J ECL 1 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 113944 12/04/20 10:03 ULPF ECL 1 Instrument ID: ICP8 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 9 of 15 12/7/2020 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Laboratory References: ECL 1 =Eurofins Calscience LLC Lincoln,7440 Lincoln Way,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 ECL 3=Eurofins Calscience LLC Knott, 11380 Knott Street,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 10 of 15 12/7/2020 Accreditation/Certification Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience LLC All accreditations/certifications held by this laboratory are listed. Not all accreditations/certifications are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date California Los Angeles County Sanitation 10109 09-30-21 Districts California State 2944 09-30-21 Nevada State CA00111 07-31-21 Oregon NELAP CA300001 01-29-21 USDA US Federal Programs P330-20-00034 02-10-23 Washington State C916-18 10-11-21 10 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 11 of 15 12/7/2020 Method Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Method Method Description Protocol Laboratory 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 ECL 1 3050B Preparation, Metals SW846 ECL 1 Increment,Prep ISM-Dry,Disaggregate,Sieve,Split, EPA ECL 3 Protocol References: EPA=US Environmental Protection Agency SW846="Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods",Third Edition, November 1986 And Its Updates. Laboratory References: ECL 1 =Eurofins Calscience LLC Lincoln,7440 Lincoln Way,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 ECL 3=Eurofins Calscience LLC Knott, 11380 Knott Street,Garden Grove,CA 92841,TEL(714)895-5494 �1 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 12 of 15 12/7/2020 Sample Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-44279-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Beach Park Supplimental Lead Assessment Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received Asset ID 570-44279-1 HKL DU27 0 3 20201116 Solid 11/16/20 10:00 11/19/20 10:00 570-44279-2 HKL DU8B 3 6 20201116 Solid 11/16/20 11:00 11/19/20 10:00 570-44279-3 HKL DU20 3-6 20201116 Solid 11/16/20 13:30 11/19/20 10:00 570-44279-4 HKL DU12 4-6 20201117 Solid 11/17/20 08:30 11/19/20 10:00 570-44279-5 HKL DU26 0-3 20201117 Solid 11/17/20 10:00 11/19/20 10:00 Eurofins Calscience LLC Page 13 of 15 12/7/2020 O N O 0 N cc (� 0 a Ut, . cc o cn dadlw x x x 00 o . CI c Peal elolE E E O .N 0 x x 0 0 F _ L L6- rc CJ D O a m 9'8lZ 0 661E 0 961E 0(In)�0 U c o w XL4UOZO9❑XL4L/OLO9 0 SlelaW ZZ1 N 0 a 0 co Z W WIS OLZ8❑OLZS❑SHt/d % -:-- a , Q cn o v Q m m h \ a = J (2808)580d o o o U z - < S9 (1809)SaP!a4S0d C % I- 0 W - (OLZ9)SDOAS d 1-- c W -75 N O S aJo0 8JJ0l 0 alo0 u3❑(mg)daJd Co — \ N L. W O CeB (0929)Saleua6Ax0 J Y L (o9z8)Sion ^`1ll J L m Ti_ �a 0 0928 0 281W/X318 . z a 0. T w Hdl -0 . faa CO O •. d w ci a "CU 17173-90❑9E0-90❑Hdl \ U - w a E • 0 03 o c p OL1o❑(P)Hdl❑ o a � r w m p o 0 0 U d = a 08D❑(6)Hdl❑ .m 0) a •crPaJall!d PlaH 2 2 2 a r c c c (a N. 0 rn m CL LO Oi PaAJOS@Jd in in cC ,r'--N PanJasaJdu0 m a > >_ _ a Q •5 N ❑ cr Z Z u- < ,_-1 c 2 U u @ X Eo va~i CO cc rn CI) y rn co 2 co In C O a) ❑ ] W O O O O O a) U o o co ,. o - @ c o cn m o U v `,b' E 2 2 z 0 N a Q� O z r a m an '' ® 2 `_� ❑ 0 0 0 o O •U U N W N N N N N U) C N -g 1- CO CO CO N t` . 0 2 '- 2 O , a., 0 o w 00 d _ oo v O 5 ❑ Oa T N 40 p F tCO CO ✓ U O . E cr q2O 04 ON 01 ONO Cm N' NI I COI I w N W a 01 0[TLya _c m ❑ c? W WW 0 0 : a co N cs,' m0I NI INIQ cn m Or E noo0oon nL w ° N w } p ° N U Or O = ❑Q W cc f � I I J JJ J -J 2 2 2 2 2 Lc vmv>. Cl...) c y oN j No W J z Y p 2 W J w 0 w w eit)® J Ucr 0 o m o , w is ❑ a • • 2aS .� - c O c 0 V a U ❑ 0f Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-44279-1 Login Number: 44279 List Source: Eurofins Calscience List Number: 1 Creator: Ramos, Maribel Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey N/A meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. False Refer to Job Narrative for details. Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? True There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. True Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 15 of 15 12/7/2020 E ,*. eurofins • Environment Testing America ANALYTICAL REPORT Eurofins Ca!science 2841 Dow Avenue, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 Tel: (714)895-5494 Laboratory Job ID: 570-97597-2 Client Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment For: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC 111 Hekili Street " n Ste. A601 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 Attn: Scott Moncrief Authorized for release by: 7/15/2022 3:28:22 PM Terri Chang, Project Manager I (657)210-6295 Tern.Chanc„�T LINKS Review your project results through • EOL Have a Question? Ask The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC,2009 TNI,and 2016 TNI 4/The requirements for accredited parameters,exceptions are noted in this report.This report may not be reproduced except in full,and with written approval from the Ex e r*k laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or teleIRO phone number listed on this page. This report has been electronically signed and authorized by thesignatory.Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten Visit us at: signature. www.eurofinsus.com/Env Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s)as received by the laboratory. Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Laboratory Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Table of Contents Cover Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Definitions/Glossary 3 Case Narrative 4 Detection Summary 5 Client Sample Results 6 QC Sample Results 7 QC Association Summary 8 Lab Chronicle 9 Certification Summary 10 Method Summary 11 Sample Summary 12 Chain of Custody 13 Receipt Checklists 18 Eurofins Calscience Page 2 of 18 7/15/2022 Definitions/Glossary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Glossary Abbreviation These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report. ❑ Listed under the"D"column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis %R Percent Recovery CFL Contains Free Liquid CFU Colony Forming Unit CNF Contains No Free Liquid DER Duplicate Error Ratio(normalized absolute difference) Dil Fac Dilution Factor DL Detection Limit(DoD/DOE) DL, RA, RE,IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis,Re-extraction,or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample DLC Decision Level Concentration(Radiochemistry) EDL Estimated Detection Limit(Dioxin) LOD Limit of Detection(DoD/DOE) LOQ Limit of Quantitation(DoD/DOE) MCL EPA recommended"Maximum Contaminant Level" MDA Minimum Detectable Activity(Radiochemistry) MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration(Radiochemistry) MDL Method Detection Limit ML Minimum Level(Dioxin) MPN Most Probable Number MQL Method Quantitation Limit NC Not Calculated ND Not Detected at the reporting limit(or MDL or EDL if shown) NEG Negative/Absent POS Positive/Present PQL Practical Quantitation Limit PRES Presumptive QC Quality Control RER Relative Error Ratio(Radiochemistry) RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit(Radiochemistry) RPD Relative Percent Difference,a measure of the relative difference between two points TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor(Dioxin) TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient(Dioxin) TNTC Too Numerous To Count Eurofins Calscience Page 3 of 18 7/15/2022 Case Narrative Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Job ID: 570-97597-2 Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience Narrative Job Narrative 570-97597-2 Comments No additional comments. Receipt The samples were received on 5/26/2022 10:35 AM. Unless otherwise noted below,the samples arrived in good condition, and where required, properly preserved and on ice. The temperature of the cooler at receipt was 23.6°C. Metals No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page. Eurofins Calscience Page 4 of 18 7/15/2022 Detection Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Client Sample ID: DU39_6-12_202239 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-10 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 737 4.00 mg/Kg 5 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: DU41_6-12_202241 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-12 111 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 360 4.00 mg/Kg 5 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: DU44_6-12_202244 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-14 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 339 4.00 mg/Kg 5 6010B Total/NA This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results. Eurofins Calscience Page 5 of 18 7/15/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Client Sample ID: DU39_6-12_202239 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-10 Date Collected: 05/11/22 16:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 737 4.00 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 14:40 5 6 Client Sample ID: DU41_6-12_202241 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-12 Date Collected: 05/12/22 09:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 360 4.00 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 14:43 5 Client Sample ID: DU44_6-12_202244 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-14 Date Collected: 05/11/22 13:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 339 4.00 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 14:45 5 Eurofins Calscience Page 6 of 18 7/15/2022 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: MB 570-248997/1-A Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 249306 Prep Batch: 248997 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.812 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 13:57 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-248997/2-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 249306 Prep Batch: 248997 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 51.0 53.16 mg/Kg 104 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-248997/3-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 249306 Prep Batch: 248997 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 50.8 51.88 mg/Kg 102 80-120 2 20 Eurofins Calscience Page 7 of 18 7/15/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Metals ISM Prep Batch: 246211 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-97597-10 DU39_6-12_202239 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-97597-12 DU41_6-12_202241 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-97597-14 DU44_6-12_202244 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Prep Batch: 248997 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-97597-10 DU39_6-12_202239 Total/NA Solid 3050B 246211 570-97597-12 DU41_6-12_202241 Total/NA Solid 3050B 246211 8 570-97597-14 DU44_6-12_202244 Total/NA Solid 3050B 246211 MB 570-248997/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 3050B LCS 570-248997/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 3050B LCSD 570-248997/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 3050B Analysis Batch: 249306 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-97597-10 DU39 6-12 202239 Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 570-97597-12 DU41 6-12 202241 Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 570-97597-14 DU44 6-12 202244 Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 MB 570-248997/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 LCS 570-248997/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 LCSD 570-248997/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 Eurofins Calscience Page 8 of 18 7/15/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Client Sample ID: DU39_6-12_202239 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-10 Date Collected: 05/11/22 16:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 246211 06/30/22 11:19 KZX6 ECL 4 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 248997 07/13/22 19:45 CS5Z ECL 4 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 5 249306 07/14/22 14:40 K1 UV ECL 4 Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: DU41_6-12_202241 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-12 Date Collected: 05/12/22 09:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 9 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 246211 06/30/22 11:19 KZX6 ECL 4 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 248997 07/13/22 19:45 CS5Z ECL 4 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 5 249306 07/14/22 14:43 K1 UV ECL 4 Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: DU44_6-12_202244 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-14 Date Collected: 05/11/22 13:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 246211 06/30/22 11:19 KZX6 ECL 4 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 248997 07/13/22 19:45 CS5Z ECL 4 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 5 249306 07/14/22 14:45 K1 UV ECL 4 Instrument ID: ICP10 Laboratory References: ECL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 Eurofins Calscience Page 9 of 18 7/15/2022 Accreditation/Certification Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date Oregon NELAP 4175 01-31-23 Eurofins Calscience Page 10 of 18 7/15/2022 Method Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Method Method Description Protocol Laboratory 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 ECL 4 3050B Preparation, Metals SW846 ECL 4 Increment,Prep ISM-Dry,Disaggregate,Sieve,Split, EPA ECL 4 Protocol References: EPA=US Environmental Protection Agency SW846="Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods",Third Edition, November 1986 And Its Updates. Laboratory References: ECL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 �1 Eurofins Calscience Page 11 of 18 7/15/2022 Sample Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received 570-97597-10 DU39_6-12_202239 Solid 05/11/22 16:00 05/26/22 10:35 570-97597-12 DU41_6-12_202241 Solid 05/12/22 09:40 05/26/22 10:35 570-97597-14 DU44 6-12 202244 Solid 05/11/22 13:00 05/26/22 10:35 Page 12 of 18 Eurofins CIpg22 S—Q o 6-N N 6— > O cc U W N IX o N ai ai p av 1 X X X X X X X X X X F F. F Oc(11 p o a 981Z0661,L0961L0(IA)JO o 9 V a w Y XLbL/OZO9 0 XLhL/01.09 0 slelaW ZZ,I. O o YIli WISOLZ8❑OLZ8❑sHVd Z J 0 a) Q Q (2808)s80d o 0 0 Z I Q c (1908)sapiogsad U p 0 a 0 WL Y (0228)SODA r c 0 a 2 W c aJoQ 8.1.101❑woo u3 0(9E09)daid D 4= MI ° (0928)saleua6)(x0 2, (0928)SOOA aSw c 2 m ❑09Z8❑381W/X318 D a) z c d E Hdl Eil Z N U H N z hi'O-90 0 920-90 0 Hal_ Lc) Q 0 . -a a CO H OHO❑(p)Hdl❑ N Z Y w p O O w co 0 m m m 0 o I a 02:190(6)Hdt 0 Q 0 c co palallid Plaid 2 2 5 a) 0 c C c 0)1 0)co 0 pan)asa)d U) in N N. N 00 n M U 1- (0 IX o pan)asa)dun X X X X X X X X X X Q > > > arci 0 Z mCC a) a) cc 1 ¢ a �Z S' 0 F- 200 r a 00 _ — x N E N O CC E W U) O K -J -J J J J U LU ee W W W -J -J 0 I- >- NI 4 O O O O O Q Q Q O O N U) 00 0 N E w op in OI aa)i C o ❑ 0 2 2 2 2 2 y 0 Ca 0 IL ao 2 2 L vI)i Q o uai 2 2 m �..) C O 1EL eL F 8 N N r .�- O9- 8 O V ‘I- 3 u N -f 0 9 2 M z . <- F- N N z ro N m N J t` 0 o a • N C o N r1 V1 F 0 I Q N N N N N N N N N N C@ Q N (7 N N N N N N N N N N • tl) 1- W O O O O O O O O O O *E' I- N N N N N N N N N N 0 J G O1 <a O O O O O _ N 0 a 03 = 0 ❑ V' G U2 2 M N N N N (a N N (a N 1 O wW T 0 U a Q m E m m N 0 d > CO❑ Q c t E G N ��y N La 00 U cn 1 Q L I m N NN(N N N N N of O h N N _ ° N N V O NI 0 0 0 0 N O .Ui N N o 0 (D N Y y N W NI N 1 N N NI O ON NO N NI d N N N �' _c L 0 OI 4 d •N- NI �I N NI NI NI OI N 6 y Y M m I- p O O N Q ml c0 m MI ml v (a ml ml m m m W M 0 U N vI VI O n UU)) ((C) 0) 0 j v R U O CO F- Q Il,l z �I 0 0 0 .o r j o Cit o p o 0 Cl v v v c a cc – 00 z W -I Z .c (O (7 a) s p H N N O o al a) V I N Q to N w c ¢ < a m V v n. a .. Page 13 of 18 7/15/2022 V N Zr hu_ E 9 86Z❑666L❑966L❑(IA)MO (/) O a. o w W Y U o L/OZO9 0 XLGL/0609 0 slel3W ZZl LL Z a. d U) O a Y y WIS OLZS❑OLZ9❑sHV'd N 2 _1 y t Q (nog)S9od a a = Z a) . I Q0) (6909)saP!ogsed 0O c 0) IW- 00Lii Y (OLZ9)s00nS o a CO m c 00 0Jaal❑eno0 03❑(9£09)deid a w b (0929)sa�eue6/xp W o .0 (o9z9)soon 8U N ❑09Z9❑391W/X319 z E 2 °) Hdl >- z E Z z N U wo w N l'• bt0-93❑9E0-90 0 Hdl Q m a f° o Oad 0(P)Hdl 0 lail g H �a w 2 2 7t w co 'O �a o ° o = a o io❑(6)Hdl❑ m .8 E a palelI!d Pled c m r, ui mc v) a) a paJJasaJd in N M 0 .0 a co CC 2 paivaseidun X X X X a) m rn Q > > a. 0 - 8 8 N Z N N CY N f" Z U Q �- •- •- •- a' s _ o Cn U co Z 0 X (0 o` Ex E W • (/) J J J J >- H 5 5 5 5 H • Q g u) u) u) u) coco o o w cLa ov- ❑ 8 2 2 N c .. W v U Q d d m J U o = (D ~ o 0 J E Z z ri N' Q w N r a. C ❑ U o V) c Q N H V) �tJ N N N N Q I-- o o O o C C F a a N N 8 O - T = Q C U 2 o Lo 0 V) V> O F w co is U o. E a a) m ❑ O > T E Q E o m o _ = y) Q f4 N = O N N N 4 O m d- 0 N o N 0 LI--- 1c.® Y `L N N 0 W N NI N CD NI N U) LL N 0 E 00 (0 o 22 o <6 (b N z (1) (0 w O y �, I . ai o) m co op w cc w o p o a o .0 N ON I- N Y(OOD 0 O ° 2 W Q Ili ma0lc S < 0 J (LW jQa j Q z (/) 0 U C 3 � m w m ® 0 ¢ u F- ❑ ❑ m S2zO K K Page 14 of 18 7/15/2022 1 Et ...*".c L`pyjL�•' (.". c L.-- — - ___ -- —- P.- ''a-NN'c'\ :2*LI -y U H N o9 91.e❑(J(,I./ _J<;(J / u(ii ,, NJ. U) c •-)D cn6 B I"' X!vLJUL09❑X'V1N6U9 L) ItI 01 L NCO -- - - --- - - - -- - — 0 cl ° uiJ ��f `� -- IN IS 0/l4i❑G CU❑ I IVB - - - - - --,/�� _ if- f `.1 In -- - - tc. Q ❑ a 1 D`W W N � 1WiLu (01C13) SOCA - Q Q c UJ � F 603IJnJLLIJIOu1L1 ( )(1 U ID in W Li (OUL`3 S)1 .1);/‘ O .r+ I + - - - - -- -- : : I1❑0, 13❑JB.LW!XJJ.0 - 3 w 6 1 O8W/i)21U i I d L 1 13 J f — -1 ---- ....., lail 1) m i I Vv's) J)09i.) J)l]VIii. I DJ DJ1'))1b z `o i CO I '�. \ .i G U 1 1JI I x V) II u �� _ I Oa.] I 1 III Il. 3 y P_ w , ; ,n1O111J 11)1°I..1 _.) u j. c, N J ,') O, V V u (N o 3\ ) vJ u) u 0 • v s" ) )J I �N 1111a `u ' J I ... I _ — . .._ I ... - I_._ U 2 +I . U 1 �, N N V .p Q O ID 0 0 6 6I S 1 I W I) I nl 1 1 G rl T w• v ._) u r O O" f, Oi L) J L ` t i 2 _f1 �d.r �-. n7 N u) - i al M —I 1� v S ro p u> S -) (" I a c4 n) t•-• N �.,,1 i .n 0 V 1 !1 ,u) u, wl Z. 2 N h u• o .� 9 A Q S1 „�„ (� .�� N C U z N 1 !-J 0 N, O r O U w 1 0 d D IC. ‘ o U chi iL aJ �� `'i `t1 C I Cn I 1 I, , (� (J' o cl 1S,f`� �1 `� CSI N1 r1 5� (, �I u it, rJ <7 I Q x N o o, cn o , i.1 Q `4 N ❑ g N !:"....,3 I t"1 [� 1 n £• Y - w J t (Q tJ C �1 a 1 IN fsl ` (4 cl \L1 I a y m o ,{S 1 '� i 1 CC"" o, u U UJ I' LL - � N u1 ' t .9 ( u) vJ T } o �. _ w 1 1� 1 Q X04 ` 2 U o = co ., LI -- 4 01 T T n2- 1-i 7 �f.c i, c-. 141,l L VI !. -` J� ( ( /� ^' ^ U Z ?� �' I u 1 1 Page 15 o&18 . 7/15/2022 C:]ft ■ LU 13- 71 ' \ 1 L3 -% C 4) 0 121 III .1 1- 1- (� /� \ I 1 O 11-`� _ -- 9 91 e LJ I)[)I LJ J(1 Li(I/�)J) i i Ur) N 110 (_) o (r X X[VL/OZ09 0 XLV//0109 0 Siel)W ZG L a A-X WIS0/LG'OOiC3LJSIIVLI _ l(24.4 ) t11 4 ) t ) <.! F L (I. ., JIn)i J HF — I 0 a --- -- ( m a ( w - (0Lza)` -,OUAS L E 0 < � Cj _ 't- _ii (. •)Jo')I.JJ)l L:1 7.,03 lJJ O( 0 )..1).) j F. yf `� — --- CI C LU ° (0961)sol (.+[ASO v, Ct y 103 I 1.1._ — }I —i V') u c ` ❑U9l,IJ 0 J9 UAJ I XJJ U D a)) — I EC — --- -' 41 OIV\J/O l 1-1d1. , L 6 -- — — — 1 lail • c.) a ow b S o VVJ9J09439)04Idl u, w .f z c 3 6 ) O21U 0 11))11(11 LJ I I ( o , - -- — -- -- —- -- ---- ---- - - ---- c. c F a U 1 )C_ l ii LJ l :Y-U ;1 h , paall J PIaU LI.) w a) 4 m w m 4 1--- -_Il c_ c cn a J) ] pJ JLS))9 co �/) V' N U co o 01 1 ! / Of fY 1 ml V = V u o (U FE x u i0 CrI IY C3' �; O •0 0 0 p 6 `/) V2 1/7 1tr'� ft v, y coIX� 2 CO .> o, t Ll J _1 Vi. � ii 7 N `) Q C� f 1N NJ N u) w „�\ N 1 C. 0 aV- O U s R V• 0 Q 1_ V+ m `.--,73 3 {r� w F I) � — 3 I � o .( ) M-- --moi XI N c'V ), �) c E w 6 1...I N N' 4 m m .. cof )`) (� �tl i° J U tW`•rrr V YLLl `�o1 -�y W w ,u ) Yricy `yN7 .OY /� 5' fII I[� ' 03 _ lU Ay 1! JI OJ UI J) u cn o Li_ 0 u) O 1 n n 0 CD 3 g v a r) p e u S I T S uic m 'n. w ) Z J v) -, _0 ato �) Y w r, Q 1 p� 0 CO Ll ---JI � 1', u 1 . I I cU J ii Page 16 of-48- e \ 7/15/2022 USDA United States Department of Agriculture Untte(1 Stag, Ihha1ln1(10 ol 1''tllultult Animal and Plant I leak!) litsptction ,Li VILA- Plant I'rot ()1),(I nilnit 7U0 RI\ti Ru1t1 id tit_ N11) 201)/ Permit to 1Rece1v e Soil Regulated b' 7 CFR 330 I �luuull his pit rut \\.n gout alul tJu ll twit lll\ (to tht (Pet holt,\,Iuu 11111111111 6 1111111111 VIII I'IR\IITII'IN \\11 Itnrl(1trcw I'Il \III \I \IBIR I')ii) 'Ulull) (OX1P1\1 Eurolin,( il,uunt 111 11'1'1 11 \1 ION \1 MB' It I',')t 1911 )I 001111,„!lf itto III ( I'I\ l\( \(,1)111 SS 7110 I mtoln Al n I,A I t INSI I I) ii) ill )U (I 111111 i. utltn(io\ ( \ ))'i I I \I\11 I\l. \1101(: ,S 711(1I utt.uln \\ tt Garden(,rill C•\' )111 191051' (71 11 1195 5 19 1 l 1N I \IOUI S 02/10/2023 PORI'01 \RIMI\ U/PI AN I I\SPI ( 110\ SI 11IO\N ;\k \tithort_t. \I Ilunn\tilt AI 1lobllt '\/ Dou'Lis \/ 1 ul,c\ilk 1/ \i(t) '\/ \o iii., \/ I'ho 11, \/ S lit I to 1/ I i. on l \ ( alt t.o t A 11 tit. undo C 1 Ire no ( A Ion littth 1. \ I)Ili mil ( \ 1)11111u t \ 1)11 i\I I ( \ IttlIILK nem, I. \ uu ulo l \ `,Iii DI tt ( \ NuI1t \ `, it 1 I lit ( \ tlh I I I I Itt I l \ I t It ( I) I) u\u ( I Il ulhutl ( I \.t, Hoon 1)1 lith.( Iii \\Viii to I I I It I tutLitt tIt II it \ ti, I I It l i.ltt I I Iacl.wttvtlk I I KL\ \\'c,t IL NItaint l I Wino(( tr to 1)111 ILLI I \ OPS tit) 11 011 nidi I I I'tn,,Itul t t I Port Canaveral I'L Port 1 vcrgladt.s IL Santoro I l 1 imp t 11 \V,,t I'tint 13c tch (t1 \Il not I (IA S,\nnnah GU Accu) III 1Itlo III Honolulu III Kahului 111 K,ulut pont III I 'huc 11) 1 a,yxul II (htwgo IN Inoi tnapolis KY I uuisvillc Mi\ South Boston I\II) II thnnort 111) Bell,\tilt. \II 11 incur \11 ILrt, Nil I button ML Portland MI Detain Ml Port 1Iunln MI 'Cumulus. MI S udl N lint M u u. MN Duluth \IN (Ir rid Portage MN Intern Mona] I all, MN Mlnnc molts MO K hist,l its Mit) Si I oil, MI' ( unuuonwt filth i)I Iht Northern M iii lila(,land, ''sIS (tullpurt \IS Punt Birt\ilk \I I I,t n lid \-11 Rt o,\Ilii NI I Nwttt t t , N( R 111/4,it'll NL \\tlnuns'ton NU Dun,ttlh NI) I tnlhut t \D Pi it 11 ,J lull u \\I \Ihutpt hint \VI (oluluhu, \\I Sun deft 1 \\ I t Ve 1, \1 \Ibui N \i 1,111 1 \1 IItu1,1\n Nl hulltiu N1 ( hn)illun Roust.,Point \1 J tilt lit I 191 \t\\btu' h UI I \,a tb II I ()I I I.111.1 uI ttt 01I I It\tl u d till t o1 mthn, ()II Toledo Oil Wilmington OK 0iLihomo(its (At roti(aid 1'1 111t.nlo\\n I'1 II irt,hutr 1'1 I MI 1 1,.11)lu 1 P 1 Pittsburgh I'A Scranton I'K Aguadllla PR Larollna PR I tp.utto I'R Ma) Iguv PR Ponce Ill Vt u'\\'ic /I'ro\olentt. SC (h a ltston IN 1luupIti 1'N NI h\ilk 1\ '\u,tin I\ Brow nv ilk I \ ( orpi, (. lnnu IN, I)tilt, I\ DLL RIO IN Ia It I'1 I \ III'1,0 I\ I Ibu1, 1 \ I tlton 1\ IwtIiunotl, I\ I rt.tport I\ (,II\t.,ton IX I lid tlgo I N Humble I\ 1 uredo I X. l o,Indio, I\ Ph uI I\ Port Aithul I\ Presidio I N Pro tress() I\ I(to(rra11tlt.l u\ I N Rt nt I 1\ N in \nituno IN \•'Limit l i S IIt I t6t( It\ V\ Dulls, V l Not loth 11 St C ror\ VI SI Ilion'is \ I i kt lmn 11 1 lit one 1\ 1 Oto\Ilii. b\ '1 1'0!t \It'Lies WA St 11 tt \1 \ Snot 1 \1 1 Aron Bo \11 \111,\ tui tt \t l oder iht conditions ptulled tlln Pet mit union i/L the iollovvlii... Ouanld) ol Soil uu.Shanncot and I rtaltntnl Sierih/olion 1s ill tutcrlu't,with tnlutdtd use 1 our 1 initis NIL'S 1 be impeded find motl to mutt. this oil SPECIAL INS I RU( I IONS I L) I SSPE C 1 URS N.t A.111111 tonotuou,halo( I ft it ! 11 3 0-211.0U11.14 11115 PI 10111 I IAS BEI N RPPRUtLD I I l C TR(iNI( \I 11 131 I I it D \I I 10110\VIN(t I'P(2 III ADQI '\R II It O1 1 111,11 VI 1 11'1 hitt I N ) Gibbs Smith 02/10/?U?0 I Page 17 of 18 7/15/2022 Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-97597-2 Login Number: 97597 List Source: Eurofins Calscience List Number: 1 Creator: Chang,Terri Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey N/A meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? True There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. False Received extra samples not listed on COC. Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 18 of 18 7/15/2022 E ,*. eurofins • Environment Testing America ANALYTICAL REPORT Eurofins Ca!science 2841 Dow Avenue, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 Tel: (714)895-5494 Laboratory Job ID: 570-105614- Client Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment For: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC 111 Hekili Street " n Ste. A601 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 Attn: Scott Moncrief Authorized for release by: 8/19/2022 12:44:30 PM Lori Thompson, Project Manager I (657)212-3035 Lori.Thompson@et.eurofinsus.com Designee for Terri Chang, Project Manager I (657)210-6295 LINKS Review your project results through • EOL Have a Question? Ask The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC,2009 TNI,and 2016 TNI ThTherequirements for accredited parameters,exceptions are noted in this report.This e report may not be reproduced except in full,and with written approval from the Ex e r*k laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or IRO telephone number listed on this page. This report has been electronically signed and authorized by thesignatory.Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten Visit us at: signature. www.eurofinsus.com/Env Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s)as received by the laboratory. Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Laboratory Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Table of Contents Cover Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Definitions/Glossary 3 Case Narrative 4 Detection Summary 5 Client Sample Results 6 QC Sample Results 11 QC Association Summary 13 Lab Chronicle 16 Certification Summary 19 Method Summary 20 Sample Summary 21 Chain of Custody 22 Receipt Checklists 26 Eurofins Calscience Page 2 of 27 8/19/2022 Definitions/Glossary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Qualifiers General Chemistry Qualifier Qualifier Description H Sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time H3 Sample was received and analyzed past holding time. Glossary Abbreviation These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report. c Listed under the"D"column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis %R Percent Recovery CFL Contains Free Liquid CFU Colony Forming Unit CNF Contains No Free Liquid DER Duplicate Error Ratio(normalized absolute difference) Dil Fac Dilution Factor DL Detection Limit(DoD/DOE) DL, RA, RE,IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis,Re-extraction,or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample DLC Decision Level Concentration(Radiochemistry) EDL Estimated Detection Limit(Dioxin) LOD Limit of Detection(DoD/DOE) LOQ Limit of Quantitation(DoD/DOE) MCL EPA recommended"Maximum Contaminant Level" MDA Minimum Detectable Activity(Radiochemistry) MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration(Radiochemistry) MDL Method Detection Limit ML Minimum Level(Dioxin) MPN Most Probable Number MQL Method Quantitation Limit NC Not Calculated ND Not Detected at the reporting limit(or MDL or EDL if shown) NEG Negative/Absent POS Positive/Present PQL Practical Quantitation Limit PRES Presumptive QC Quality Control RER Relative Error Ratio(Radiochemistry) RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit(Radiochemistry) RPD Relative Percent Difference,a measure of the relative difference between two points TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor(Dioxin) TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient(Dioxin) TNTC Too Numerous To Count Eurofins Calscience Page 3 of 27 8/19/2022 Case Narrative Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Job ID: 570-105614-1 Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience Narrative Job Narrative 570-105614-1 Comments No additional comments. Receipt The samples were received on 8/5/2022 9:40 AM. Unless otherwise noted below,the samples arrived in good condition, and where required, properly preserved and on ice. The temperatures of the 2 coolers at receipt time were 0.9°C and 1.2°C. Metals No analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described in the Definitions/Glossary page. General Chemistry Method Moisture-2540:The following samples were received outside of holding time: HAKA_BT_A(570-105614-1), HAKA_BT_AZ (570-105614-2), HAKA_BT_B(570-105614-3), HAKA_BT_C(570-105614-4), HAKA_BT_D (570-105614-5)and HAKA_BT_E (570-105614-6). No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page. Eurofins Calscience Page 4 of 27 8/19/2022 Detection Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 10900 8.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Lead 25.6 0.500 mg/L 1 6010B TCLP Lead 4.32 0.0300 mg/L 1 6010B SPLP West 111 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 11400 8.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Lead 22.9 0.500 mg/L 1 6010B TCLP Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-7 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-8 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-9 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-10 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-11 No Detections. This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results. Eurofins Calscience Page 5 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 10900 8.00 mg/Kg 08/11/22 12:59 08/15/22 16:37 10 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 11400 8.00 mg/Kg 08/11/22 12:59 08/15/22 16:40 10 Eurofins Calscience Page 6 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - TCLP Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 25.6 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:26 1 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 22.9 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:28 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:31 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:33 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:50 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:36 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:55 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:38 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-7 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:25 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:40 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-8 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:43 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-9 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:45 1 Eurofins Calscience Page 7 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - TCLP Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-10 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:48 1 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-11 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:55 1 Eurofins Calscience Page 8 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - SPLP West Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 4.32 0.0300 mg/L 08/17/22 20:17 08/18/22 14:53 1 6 Eurofins Calscience Page 9 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment General Chemistry Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Percent Moisture 22.0 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 28.2 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Percent Moisture 34.1 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 28.3 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:50 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 27.6 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:55 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 25.0 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Eurofins Calscience Page 10 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: MB 570-256107/1-A Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 256849 Prep Batch: 256107 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.821 mg/Kg 08/11/22 12:59 08/15/22 12:42 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-256107/2-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 256849 Prep Batch: 256107 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 49.5 47.79 mg/Kg 97 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-256107/3-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 256849 Prep Batch: 256107 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 50.5 50.96 mg/Kg 101 80-120 6 20 Lab Sample ID: LB 570-255340/1-B Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 255866 Prep Batch: 255638 LB LB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 13:57 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-255340/2-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 255866 Prep Batch: 255638 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 2.00 2.255 mg/L 113 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-255340/3-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 255866 Prep Batch: 255638 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 2.00 2.010 mg/L 101 80-120 11 20 Lab Sample ID: MB 580-400071/21-B Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 401081 Prep Batch: 400945 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.0300 mg/L 08/17/22 20:17 08/18/22 13:12 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 580-400071/22-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 401081 Prep Batch: 400945 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 1.00 1.035 mg/L 104 80-120 Eurofins Calscience Page 11 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: LCSD 580-400071/23-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 401081 Prep Batch: 400945 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 1.00 1.051 mg/L 105 80-120 2 20 Eurofins Calscience Page 12 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Metals Leach Batch: 255340 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B TCLP Solid 1311 8 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-11 HAKA_BTPC_E TCLP Solid 1311 LB 570-255340/1-B Method Blank TCLP Solid 1311 LCS 570-255340/2-B Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 1311 LCSD 570-255340/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 1311 Prep Batch: 255638 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-11 HAKA_BTPC_E TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 LB 570-255340/1-B Method Blank TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 LCS 570-255340/2-B Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 LCSD 570-255340/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 Analysis Batch: 255866 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-11 HAKA_BTPC_E TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 LB 570-255340/1-B Method Blank TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 LCS 570-255340/2-B Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 LCSD 570-255340/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 Eurofins Calscience Page 13 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Metals ISM Prep Batch: 255881 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Prep Batch: 256107 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid 3050B 255881 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid 3050B 255881 MB 570-256107/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 3050B 8 LCS 570-256107/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 3050B LCSD 570-256107/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 3050B Analysis Batch: 256849 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 MB 570-256107/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 LCS 570-256107/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 LCSD 570-256107/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 Leach Batch: 400071 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A SPLP West Solid 1312 MB 580-400071/21-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 1312 LCS 580-400071/22-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 1312 LCSD 580-400071/23-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 1312 Prep Batch: 400945 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 MB 580-400071/21-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 LCS 580-400071/22-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 LCSD 580-400071/23-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 Analysis Batch: 401081 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 MB 580-400071/21-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 LCS 580-400071/22-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 LCSD 580-400071/23-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 General Chemistry Analysis Batch: 255207 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-6 HAKA BT E Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 Eurofins Calscience Page 14 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment General Chemistry ISM Prep Batch: 255507 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Eurofins Calscience Page 15 of 27 8/19/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 1.0 g 1.0 mL 400071 08/10/22 14:13 JLS EET SEA SPLP West Prep 3010A 50 mL 50 mL 400945 08/17/22 20:17 JLS EET SEA SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 401081 08/18/22 14:53 TMH EET SEA Instrument ID: TAC047 TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL. TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:26 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255881 08/10/22 15:19 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 256107 08/11/22 12:59 CS5Z EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 256849 08/15/22 16:37 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:28 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255881 08/10/22 15:19 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 256107 08/11/22 12:59 CS5Z EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 256849 08/15/22 16:40 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:31 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Eurofins Calscience Page 16 of 27 8/19/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.01 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:33 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 9 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:50 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.04 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:36 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:55 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.02 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:38 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-7 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:25 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.04 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:40 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Eurofins Calscience Page 17 of 27 8/19/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-8 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.06 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:43 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-9 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 9 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.06 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:45 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-10 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.03 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:48 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-11 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:55 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 1 Completion dates and times are reported or not reported per method requirements or individual lab discretion. Laboratory References: EET CAL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 EET SEA=Eurofins Seattle,5755 8th Street East,Tacoma,WA 98424,TEL(253)922-2310 Eurofins Calscience Page 18 of 27 8/19/2022 Accreditation/Certification Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date Oregon NELAP 4175 02-02-23 Laboratory: Eurofins Seattle The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date Oregon NELAP 4167 07-08-23 10 Eurofins Calscience Page 19 of 27 8/19/2022 Method Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method Method Description Protocol Laboratory 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 EET CAL 4 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 EET SEA Moisture-2540 Percent Moisture SM EET CAL 4 1311 TCLP Extraction SW846 EET CAL 4 1312 SPLP Extraction SW846 EET SEA 3010A Preparation, Total Metals SW846 EET CAL 4 3010A Preparation, Total Metals SW846 EET SEA 3050B Preparation, Metals SW846 EET CAL 4 Increment,Prep ISM-Dry,Disaggregate,Sieve,Split, EPA EET CAL 4 Increment,Prep ISM-As Received, Disaggregate,Split EPA EET CAL 4 Protocol References: EPA=US Environmental Protection Agency SM="Standard Methods For The Examination Of Water And Wastewater" SW846="Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods",Third Edition, November 1986 And Its Updates. Laboratory References: EET CAL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 EET SEA=Eurofins Seattle,5755 8th Street East,Tacoma,WA 98424,TEL(253)922-2310 Eurofins Calscience Page 20 of 27 8/19/2022 Sample Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received 570-105614-1 HAKA BT A Solid 07/28/22 13:30 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-2 HAKA BT AZ Solid 07/28/22 13:35 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-3 HAKA BT B Solid 07/28/22 13:45 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C Solid 07/28/22 13:45 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D Solid 07/28/22 13:50 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E Solid 07/28/22 13:55 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A Solid 07/28/22 15:25 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B Solid 07/28/22 15:30 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C Solid 07/28/22 15:35 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D Solid 07/28/22 15:40 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-11 HAKA BTPC E Solid 07/28/22 15:45 08/05/22 09:40 EE Eurofins Calscience Page 21 of 27 8/19/2022 2 O o w u Z 01 G O � 44 . a C W1 -. vO � � �ctW T 7''',11 w o • 5 C m m m o O U a1 N 22 Z , o O O O W N oIn 5. c- U C - CI I- T •A I � ...4.4,4 ... QJ U .4 & N 2 2 d - �L ..,, O 3 4403;o JegwnN le;tey„ c e U '. Q o dE m RI u E E E • - If, z I E , 0 a 0 13 a m w 1-- r t 1 N 2 U 7 ( vi N E N g v v i EIE P a) F >, 5 v. ` I .4 m v ✓ 2 _4 *. Z 4aN,io s!,X)fiswpw 4uay�ed I4 , cn E CC �$ JON as saij BOOMS Peia lA Plel4 t N (X V 3 r , uIP = ttm w ,.op a v >. >. "C3 ina m i F U ', a a a o E E E 4J mU U U U f9 !D O °1a o e v o Id-. `3 I-V Ia a, a CC •C0 rJ 114 i t V C v a I °c Q r� ` `B N I Q v �} • .ter m m o # it a ` E E E E .)off o F2 ie o .o O E m t . v CO�/1 a` M.Q a 3 a t rn I I t o 76 0 0 0 0 j 1 ., - 1_ J , J ICD - ° E .z• Q) aNi •' J, `� z C o c t r ca \\ _ c D CV 0 US J o C o 0 \ .5 , T- N Cr; 11 e� E _ c_J V N N E V14V1A 4_ / r"i 1 ) ZJ 7GU �� ll 16 t Z c .0w �S- vE v r . +U 'v O. fA P.2`'2 Uf�7 Q� �N iCK L it ¢ s i1ea0 2 0 e4` V-- 1 ,.., ,..e L 2 — T Lc Nt O 0U �' L Q ? C n Wn QQA g C "G p Oc 2 ` ON ONUQCdC2 N = L O t. Cc d d d O E 2zzzz -¢m °-Io 5 of _ C Z� E o E E U L �< ZOaC7�N -»�TN U U� y C i 2 o r N V D 3 9 ¢ U m n w .p O o :: a) w a co0 O .0 o 2uV(02�'� o< � 0 L. v = za�o � o � V O¢��20 E foo � -� 01 0 N UO' , D ap ` 2zA Z ''.ca" uoww 0 o.`' 12 Ove as �i a amoowao=1—t e_, p _ a .`f c y siaule;uoo)o JagwnN bawl" o o c 2 c.° •w Q O m v - u o N E E E H `m .o w ..Q. E v z m m o w `8—c3 o" UlUllIllIll _ o'N t0 m0 IllIllUlIll Q) FJ DHhhhflflhl N coU m 2 =d K 1:4 N c Ii! h ro E mI aa180 � u > >"I.:. t -13 6peal dldS WMZL£L180L09 o v tx c U O o JO saV aSWfSWUUOJad 021111111111111111111111111111111 §. ETo W # (ON JO sa v adweg paaaalld Plaid c'_-------- w y F.ZI f( 8 .' a NIIIIIhhhIfl _F 0 : N fT2 "€ ' o U c Ua''.„ w lJ mo E. N EE E rt 6 IA ~ E a o m I." w oEw O m f'- d i , LUw E N> ---- i,-_-_" W UIc y cl v.m o1'NN y co G III � E E " ,am ,..m. 0oLE 13 m m E d � '� 6"U v A gyv o O T f w m j', tt t o• m N.y OV p f• Z Iti .9°f.' N� N a C l_6... v c 3 a o - i o L O Z m.2 2C C1 d c`o« •VO n =— 'vm 1111 cIn oo : 2aN �_w ca o O6ci Vv Uc ,L , -- U) Q Q v N c cn � M m al I mu = m o f, n_,, VN EJ HN 0 N• � c 01 . L cN a7 d m.E N € .a -p›'Hm i w O el c Goom mE v rn N ° o • s N 'v rn _ u m N i OC 'cUWroO2s Ear2`NQNE 'o m :: Q Zm 4 o E. � eKN H c V U U '- QtotH « taN a2n U) I Page 23 of 27 8/19/2022 .-Z-- '.... . \-I\ , • ,,.,,,,„.„,,,„,, _ _ ' Part 9 156297-435 RRDB EXP 01/23 lib3AMENEIIIIS X 4 .Lort.vozozzzr CL. /""" CM CC C=) = CO Z — —- ILI E. Lk! FP. cn r....cn zi tz ...z3- -- 110 cu ca cc GO ' = • N IA U.. = LIU I ammarionn •CC =I8 CC co Ce CM cz —• %en ¢ LC) IUM11111111111111M1111.1111111 c=i g=t 1-X NCO CI ::---: _.--.11 ••'1-"Th.'.._,J1.02 OM 1-4 77,-, 2 1 itaC ;.-• •-. d :.21 c2 , CD I- .... .,,. ...,. ... I.L1 .. .. ........—.. . = tiiIrlE°.-_-•..------- 11. I= _. .. .,--- ... ...... -. LL.. cz 1"..' witmemam•mi .......*.....*. •••.• CZ tu Ci = a-r.711=IN. „,.., 0•, 0 inniiii.M.MINIM .... .......m. C.) .-,-......,. ?•I. "..'.ri II'115 g"--q 1-TU en L CU LU = LU Q :----'- CD C."--- ,., __ 00 . — .... ......... ... 13'-- CO _ >, C/3 • P.-. (tr ... ai -..I LU cy =SIIIIN: -. nzl- ,r,. imam C3', 7r = i()-- C.., oCC *CC CD c9 cz2 ----- ;? ' ,- C,, C) ... (`' 7 ¢ c(f) C.# - "-ZWIteiale- 73 MIIIIIIMINIIIIIIIIIIIIMMIIIIL ... .........=...... _ =cs "tr 'tf. L.L. ....,2 -_F--11 . :2A---- CV CX.) 43 NJlail L. 0/n1 0)CC ,....., 1,... ,- T_T r• ,t1 c (.9 —,,_ i- ,„ nt 4. ti, 2 ¢-1--- o w cm 1. .oi,-,•• =-'11/tW - •-•c»1 lip-. gi. = rt-2 (.2 CCU CO ,--.Z .....,-.. k 0 CD (T) ,= c,,, ..'''11?.5'ei-,44*..,;e!,,,;.!,';'041;*'01,*,J.1-• ''''' '''''''' `'' Part it 156297-435 RRDB EXP 01/23 'I 1,11,3V(1661/MOS ,.....0). Ao EAR LvtizZaZzli 0..... II...... A co WE . c/3 eu -al d c•A ,....— c, CV N CD co cc C) 0 a, w I.L. 1 = LLJ <c o m *CC *Lo' ) cc o0ot--. a ea -tr X immammulex Ix) ,1 •.VAI CO C:1 Ul•-“t X CC = - .71 4=1 C:1 .....CC 1 CC.•07,4 I — 01-CD F- ...11 .-2--'- I att o_ ••co _J ....„ czl ...... ' f (SMUG) CO = ".;.' ILL' '4C soimmo.mmilmossoma ....._ CC I-- — - - - ... CO, LU CZ ,42 --7-: imminwimmem a, Z LU imannimii cu (Di i • — N I,— .. , /// ,•-• ....I LU 04 co 4 at > cr) -,_=51ISIFFAL vacir imiimm 0 - - • 'CC CI I ......r., --.5... 0 g;Em;4* .'- 0 , ..,-- .... \ c) ..... -_,-- -- • meamminimai -- e efts..4" 6 11.11111•1111MMINIMMOMMIIMIIIMEINIMM. OZWill In r• .e...ar L._, Nill IfIlIMIIIIII ,) 01--.-,0 CE 1- 14.4 CY I/.."`-.a;. Z.---..=-1=-..e.- 0...---- -' *ta.-• E CC CU IP OUT WM CCM a -..•--------Mii.111111011.111111 1---0 Page 24 of 27 8/19/2022 2112 11111111111111111 N N O N a> co T ii v 0 c ry u ilZ EU E p�gpa$ c 'n H 0 u` a �' z �� � o =iazzxMQm al`o u 5'i v$2 O 0 0 0 0 o o Ci ''g'• n w li.,/ u LF- N r 4 O n 9 u '� � `' a V yj F v -9 Q C ooo4ao -11‹ a a0 ; 4Z � giE° CQzrmW m vv_ o 'n r � a „ a CJ 068,0udiSZNZ2 .' u7ti1t.0 d 8 4 Q �l l8i ad -°., ia Qmvrauauc7z ' 4x g- I -43m p , , . s.taul uoo yo tagwoN 1glal c£ Q — 'P'.9 1, A ;--i_i p o y E..^E E F. C % Ca E. m m3 v Eyo N .. v P. 7� _ 2 F.: m 'c a) f a:o y _a vi y m ` m N N O 3 a I-; E m g m m vg a Ce o 1 C H w U E c c V m m Q �, . m A 0 t A o U a ` m a C a O ~ V N- wa ! V. H E 2 �.;` n € : cF m c 2 Q c c v - N m gg m > vino. 4- v oO - - U 2 ' Peel dldS W M Z104E101.09 X i m u 10 .2 ¢ 8 to 2a $ cv u = v w ON ao saA}nSW1SN1 1?�+W d 8 3- LO E w 2 m 0 ¢z (ON JO-:saA►aldwBS.Paiallld-Field .ci M >, ..iU toF ` ae < :4 j w moi`✓ 3 Y 3 a' O w o c �. 6 s" V: to t 2. m n o ,T, tli' o E. u o 0 0 O% "'o m U U U CO `m fib:: v S. 1.0 E m dl: °-'a o 0 E T al m "2a 0 q A N C c m yC Q.m 2 N m-5m �r r•VNen h 3 113 R cc m i o V w N " w b N' t - v m m N c N ---.. N m N fa 0 c #v a N 0 o Z' E-5 E n m o N ¢ a m o E -CNA 1° 5 5 5 4 .q m g' � mem a N a a c•-.; a 3 a i i in c d nom. to nom. r;m 10 m u w i c L4 u JcmE „01 , E R i N t o N J z cg 'al T. a.-. ami m" ' m O N C d 0 7 O , 0 p p W (. ...„.....j 7m c U m � '— c - E CD c: °inw dNO Ti O - C 0 m m mb N n C z !� cu> @ c E 6 m 0) j c Q u ...,Ii' 12 g v ^< c., 6- `� ¢0) $d ai9n ¢ 4 C m N ,_ .1,i m i U_ W N E-1 " 1- O n C . N mE _ � $ U:..n}mW m En n 2 o oc . C - CZ lQ Ca C U n m'c. E N m SI, c C ,p ' N 4 d dmm o N nr,oN o m P a 2 = m7s s E ' `nn D ma 0�) m 0 Q a%. O Cd) gU l N 10 (758. Uti4u7UF 'naNE Lin 0S z E 4 ] a K a Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-105614-1 Login Number: 105614 List Source: Eurofins Calscience List Number: 1 Creator: Patel,Jayesh Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey N/A meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? True There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. True Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 26 of 27 8/19/2022 Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-105614-1 Login Number: 105614 List Source: Eurofins Seattle List Number:2 List Creation: 08/12/22 12:11 PM Creator: Holdener, Heather D Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey True meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True IR8 3.1/2.5 COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? N/A Received project as a subcontract. There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. True Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 27 of 27 8/19/2022 APPENDIX A-2: 2022 SAMPLING RESULTS SUMMARY TABLES AND LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS This page was intentionally left blank. o Ce co. N o \\2 /7 § § ^ J \ Ct co.o 3 ,l- }/i CO � �/ \ // §~ - e \c ®▪ ) r o - / °\ g )o ) co U\) co a ra /. ■ '3 ) _ G 9 a J ° \ / \ E E § Ce _ N )a — oo » §1 `- , /ƒ° 2 7r a) R w — U) — CL k kk/ . o\ a) 2 0w § \ ` � = , \ j 0./ # kkk §g 0° ? acna 0 •O \ / } § CO 2 ° « _ e G @ } § kE ;o ) .4 = «/ ° % 2[ La i� N : &- � «CD wf m En = C ® 5 X0 2 ® � \ .TCS wE -0co ) 2 Nm \ 2 ■ N ` 2E-j I— _ )\) t \t ® E ` /al \ E ( \ /\� i. aj § § \m ` VS ch - — — — CD ° w p _ � I— Ce — - - m - 0 ) 2 ° pi, .5:,-C., § { { { { 2 - \ \ < � ( { \ f / { \ _ ( » * f . _ ( f ( 9 > f { ) § � � ) ® $ $ j ( \ al 17; « ( f 2 = 0 E 2 — ras i,i • 7. „ - & ` Xi $ 4 : \} U)- eI d / ] \ j / { \ f \ » ,' U \ � \ » 2 EEL ez § CL E 0 Cl) / /\ co E | \ / \ E \7 E - m \ » � \ " \ \ c E a) 2 C r > 0 ; � 2 _1 2 # ,— CO 2 c . ce / k 1- . § 2 § § ) « k $ k k E c 7:13 2E E ifs) r Cl) a > a as '5 \ k \ 89, e . o. I- ■ w > - % (� ) U) ce .- coZ. :.7. 0. 0 k a) e co U ) f \ \ 2 § 2 a) ± \ ] i [C . \ a 2 E u) iii rtS \ \ \ - E. 3 \ % 5 \ RS CO j j 0 E I / � < 2 = \ — o W § 0 En W § CO 2f / rn � / . V a « m k � \ I— ) J o c i LL r 0 co N N a , s n O N NO Q N O O N O oft O co Q 2 U VO . V o d m m o co p w- a I 3 rn 3 U _ -2 7, 'o m • o a- U .E , U E J m m J 00 2 co 2 cc «oo 7 T U) = 7 T U) = NN a 3 NN a n N o r2 m 2 ON ON N d m m N O 3 U) N o'‘- 0 3 (Q • QQ VIN co a" U uS 2 u) N OI O� 2. r @ V 6 t a D co M 0 reo V co M N o N N N N a a N UJ m E m m E J o E d o U- ao J O °' qao IX oo w M V O N ILU E N d N W ,5@ E °J coO p 3O p N N C o 0m NoC IT co O c° m o 0 c m + o c o O2 co Q '- 0 o C UQ = E mI N ❑ a o N D p4 a 2 `0- - C) X oo o ° N x 'o o ° W U N7 W U of 12. U 7, _ ° U _ - N n N y dy m a y. 9 KI R d 0 i y . 2 W co f0 d ` N o W g C L V W d O C o N = i U y N O C O 'p a a:=. 2 ` o J O 0 `- o m 'p a a:=. 2 ` 0 J O N `° 7 Cl) c y Q c 0 o o ?o = m Cl) d m Q c O.p o m 2 o = `,3)) c E d 0 0 � �:� 2 a c End 0 0 9 a E0 co N 4 w ~ ° E W 4 w ~ ° E m I- .:1?o 5 8 a) £ m 2 N ~ '0 T6 o 0 co pV a UQ > N N a 3 N _ > N N o. oU O N a N .+ N ❑ X Q J 3 1) 0 J m c W xU 0 . ce N ,_. W —c Le W xU .2UJ _ Cp N 3 N a, L p N 3 N Y N wU o C <- rn a- mo ° mW E o 0 W 0 m cn gW E o N = O Q a '0 O o ON ° 'a ON N d N 7 ° `o c N N v O J- E NGI 3A J- d oNJ1- N A J N4 JHJ N Iy ¢ m co0Q E.+ 0w L � E -O _ c, L 2E wN 0 c L 7 E NN NE O t O m E in N« d N N L t„, E� � U L m E� � U t L o s 2 L l n a L w -> 'O -`> w w Z m`w Z -O w Z ZOC rn @wz re rn mww z w q 0-, .a : - - wV - w 3Q Q co N N NjJ c. I = m w m E = m - - .L''' - — 00 3 = N = = Co = N = = N Id V v 00 `= ` N u oo m Eo= .s 13 a5 T cmw Nmmm 0o N>5 d_ _ li Q0 =ti E m m o d is 15 Q = E E L a a_ s c Q w c aa s cn - m - . N - - = E • om o m m yao 00 N 0 � Um .Q m T o Ox ° x x o v °' . a a N = _ _ o N tmy 3 CZrn '= IE = o 0 R coo 0 ` ` IEa co i 0 o o Z @ °o � W Z II j N CQ CCa C 4 J « mNN N 0 m m o ii cts Q Y Q -1 11 � a I >I0t ° noOE _• ' � Ez °w � at «I _ uJ m0 HS Z ® . E j / { r. \ @ a_cL -0 ci �\ /\ k k j \ \ \ a> § { 9 c 0 \ \ \ � - \ k ] To C 76 -c \ \ kas - CD � � � RI alEg o \ kc CV TD - m ❑ 0 2 c \ 0k 0 2 \ 2 2 ma 0. E ; � M m a) » ■ 2E ° \ C. > Ce \ � \ k • k / a)c I- 0 . a CD 0 / ] SE73 C = 5 L N I a 0 0 § - # g © /Jk / $ :k � \° { § % / k m ± \ 1- -0 as c $ co o o - Lo \ C M CD / ) \ / 2 ) \ N o - \ \ \ \ $ / / j j j a ¥ / � « 2 / \ :No i § `- CD - § 2 2 . co2 2 = o \ _ : c as / \ •4 E < w I ] \ E e ct / / ) / in a) — z u m r a 2 % o & or a) 0 9 e a = aI y u % / 5 2 F } e = 2 ) ƒ Q 2 1 CZ k E U) k \ / CC e ® \ 7 } E / 0 \ 2 G \ \ 7o a \ o Io © \Ib \ bR ) % r 7 a m _ % _ _ / - 0 - \ 3 \ \ ± s - / / - E E ct 7 - _ / 0 \ \ \07) \ 5 _ — D ii co �� / \ / \ Ci E / F ) e / 2 = { ) 2 / ° 2 z \ CO _ _ _ \ e e 2 , a) 7 = ! CCI � � C � E a @ ` \ ) E \ 2 m E / ) f § 2 a \ A { ) i— 0 E a _ 2 : U) E 2 $ w - \ ) < \ . 2 ` \ \ E % ) \ cu_ : CI m p / / \ / \ } u , ; 0m - � '17, 12 2 _ 0 ) \ ( ) + a) . t 2 re 0 ) < 5 a a) & 7 \ \ / a _re / go g / Le § j % \ \ } � . \ ) / ± { .471 7 ƒ R \ \ - \ ) « f § \ / k E « F. 2 0 a_ <0 \ % F. a) E \ q .0 Q 2 \ / k } 2 7 ® o cU 0 § { { ) \ & \ \ � .. _ : / \ " \ \ / .0 2 co 2 =cu - 2 ° ® � ) z to \ CO ° } \ o z z § 2 1- 5 2 \ s = z z a \ E ,*. eurofins • Environment Testing America ANALYTICAL REPORT Eurofins Ca!science 2841 Dow Avenue, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 Tel: (714)895-5494 Laboratory Job ID: 570-97597-2 Client Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment For: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC 111 Hekili Street " n Ste. A601 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 Attn: Scott Moncrief Authorized for release by: 7/15/2022 3:28:22 PM Terri Chang, Project Manager I (657)210-6295 Tern.Chanc„�T LINKS Review your project results through • EOL Have a Question? Ask The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC,2009 TNI,and 2016 TNI 4/The requirements for accredited parameters,exceptions are noted in this report.This report may not be reproduced except in full,and with written approval from the Ex e r*k laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or teleIRO phone number listed on this page. This report has been electronically signed and authorized by thesignatory.Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten Visit us at: signature. www.eurofinsus.com/Env Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s)as received by the laboratory. Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Laboratory Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Table of Contents Cover Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Definitions/Glossary 3 Case Narrative 4 Detection Summary 5 Client Sample Results 6 QC Sample Results 7 QC Association Summary 8 Lab Chronicle 9 Certification Summary 10 Method Summary 11 Sample Summary 12 Chain of Custody 13 Receipt Checklists 18 Eurofins Calscience Page 2 of 18 7/15/2022 Definitions/Glossary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Glossary Abbreviation These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report. ❑ Listed under the"D"column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis %R Percent Recovery CFL Contains Free Liquid CFU Colony Forming Unit CNF Contains No Free Liquid DER Duplicate Error Ratio(normalized absolute difference) Dil Fac Dilution Factor DL Detection Limit(DoD/DOE) DL, RA, RE,IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis,Re-extraction,or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample DLC Decision Level Concentration(Radiochemistry) EDL Estimated Detection Limit(Dioxin) LOD Limit of Detection(DoD/DOE) LOQ Limit of Quantitation(DoD/DOE) MCL EPA recommended"Maximum Contaminant Level" MDA Minimum Detectable Activity(Radiochemistry) MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration(Radiochemistry) MDL Method Detection Limit ML Minimum Level(Dioxin) MPN Most Probable Number MQL Method Quantitation Limit NC Not Calculated ND Not Detected at the reporting limit(or MDL or EDL if shown) NEG Negative/Absent POS Positive/Present PQL Practical Quantitation Limit PRES Presumptive QC Quality Control RER Relative Error Ratio(Radiochemistry) RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit(Radiochemistry) RPD Relative Percent Difference,a measure of the relative difference between two points TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor(Dioxin) TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient(Dioxin) TNTC Too Numerous To Count Eurofins Calscience Page 3 of 18 7/15/2022 Case Narrative Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Job ID: 570-97597-2 Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience Narrative Job Narrative 570-97597-2 Comments No additional comments. Receipt The samples were received on 5/26/2022 10:35 AM. Unless otherwise noted below,the samples arrived in good condition, and where required, properly preserved and on ice. The temperature of the cooler at receipt was 23.6°C. Metals No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page. Eurofins Calscience Page 4 of 18 7/15/2022 Detection Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Client Sample ID: DU39_6-12_202239 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-10 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 737 4.00 mg/Kg 5 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: DU41_6-12_202241 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-12 111 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 360 4.00 mg/Kg 5 6010B Total/NA Client Sample ID: DU44_6-12_202244 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-14 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 339 4.00 mg/Kg 5 6010B Total/NA This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results. Eurofins Calscience Page 5 of 18 7/15/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Client Sample ID: DU39_6-12_202239 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-10 Date Collected: 05/11/22 16:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 737 4.00 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 14:40 5 6 Client Sample ID: DU41_6-12_202241 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-12 Date Collected: 05/12/22 09:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 360 4.00 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 14:43 5 Client Sample ID: DU44_6-12_202244 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-14 Date Collected: 05/11/22 13:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 339 4.00 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 14:45 5 Eurofins Calscience Page 6 of 18 7/15/2022 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: MB 570-248997/1-A Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 249306 Prep Batch: 248997 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.812 mg/Kg 07/13/22 19:45 07/14/22 13:57 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-248997/2-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 249306 Prep Batch: 248997 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 51.0 53.16 mg/Kg 104 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-248997/3-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 249306 Prep Batch: 248997 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 50.8 51.88 mg/Kg 102 80-120 2 20 Eurofins Calscience Page 7 of 18 7/15/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Metals ISM Prep Batch: 246211 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-97597-10 DU39_6-12_202239 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-97597-12 DU41_6-12_202241 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-97597-14 DU44_6-12_202244 Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Prep Batch: 248997 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-97597-10 DU39_6-12_202239 Total/NA Solid 3050B 246211 570-97597-12 DU41_6-12_202241 Total/NA Solid 3050B 246211 8 570-97597-14 DU44_6-12_202244 Total/NA Solid 3050B 246211 MB 570-248997/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 3050B LCS 570-248997/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 3050B LCSD 570-248997/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 3050B Analysis Batch: 249306 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-97597-10 DU39 6-12 202239 Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 570-97597-12 DU41 6-12 202241 Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 570-97597-14 DU44 6-12 202244 Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 MB 570-248997/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 LCS 570-248997/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 LCSD 570-248997/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 6010B 248997 Eurofins Calscience Page 8 of 18 7/15/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Client Sample ID: DU39_6-12_202239 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-10 Date Collected: 05/11/22 16:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 246211 06/30/22 11:19 KZX6 ECL 4 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 248997 07/13/22 19:45 CS5Z ECL 4 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 5 249306 07/14/22 14:40 K1 UV ECL 4 Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: DU41_6-12_202241 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-12 Date Collected: 05/12/22 09:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 9 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 246211 06/30/22 11:19 KZX6 ECL 4 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 248997 07/13/22 19:45 CS5Z ECL 4 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 5 249306 07/14/22 14:43 K1 UV ECL 4 Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: DU44_6-12_202244 Lab Sample ID: 570-97597-14 Date Collected: 05/11/22 13:00 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 05/26/22 10:35 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 246211 06/30/22 11:19 KZX6 ECL 4 Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 248997 07/13/22 19:45 CS5Z ECL 4 Total/NA Analysis 6010B 5 249306 07/14/22 14:45 K1 UV ECL 4 Instrument ID: ICP10 Laboratory References: ECL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 Eurofins Calscience Page 9 of 18 7/15/2022 Accreditation/Certification Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date Oregon NELAP 4175 01-31-23 Eurofins Calscience Page 10 of 18 7/15/2022 Method Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Method Method Description Protocol Laboratory 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 ECL 4 3050B Preparation, Metals SW846 ECL 4 Increment,Prep ISM-Dry,Disaggregate,Sieve,Split, EPA ECL 4 Protocol References: EPA=US Environmental Protection Agency SW846="Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods",Third Edition, November 1986 And Its Updates. Laboratory References: ECL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 �1 Eurofins Calscience Page 11 of 18 7/15/2022 Sample Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-97597-2 Project/Site: Hakalau Assessment Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received 570-97597-10 DU39_6-12_202239 Solid 05/11/22 16:00 05/26/22 10:35 570-97597-12 DU41_6-12_202241 Solid 05/12/22 09:40 05/26/22 10:35 570-97597-14 DU44 6-12 202244 Solid 05/11/22 13:00 05/26/22 10:35 Page 12 of 18 Eurofins CIpg22 S—Q o 6-N N 6— > O cc U W N IX o N ai ai p av 1 X X X X X X X X X X F F. F Oc(11 p o a 981Z0661,L0961L0(IA)JO o 9 V a w Y XLbL/OZO9 0 XLhL/01.09 0 slelaW ZZ,I. O o YIli WISOLZ8❑OLZ8❑sHVd Z J 0 a) Q Q (2808)s80d o 0 0 Z I Q c (1908)sapiogsad U p 0 a 0 WL Y (0228)SODA r c 0 a 2 W c aJoQ 8.1.101❑woo u3 0(9E09)daid D 4= MI ° (0928)saleua6)(x0 2, (0928)SOOA aSw c 2 m ❑09Z8❑381W/X318 D a) z c d E Hdl Eil Z N U H N z hi'O-90 0 920-90 0 Hal_ Lc) Q 0 . -a a CO H OHO❑(p)Hdl❑ N Z Y w p O O w co 0 m m m 0 o I a 02:190(6)Hdt 0 Q 0 c co palallid Plaid 2 2 5 a) 0 c C c 0)1 0)co 0 pan)asa)d U) in N N. N 00 n M U 1- (0 IX o pan)asa)dun X X X X X X X X X X Q > > > arci 0 Z mCC a) a) cc 1 ¢ a �Z S' 0 F- 200 r a 00 _ — x N E N O CC E W U) O K -J -J J J J U LU ee W W W -J -J 0 I- >- NI 4 O O O O O Q Q Q O O N U) 00 0 N E w op in OI aa)i C o ❑ 0 2 2 2 2 2 y 0 Ca 0 IL ao 2 2 L vI)i Q o uai 2 2 m �..) C O 1EL eL F 8 N N r .�- O9- 8 O V ‘I- 3 u N -f 0 9 2 M z . <- F- N N z ro N m N J t` 0 o a • N C o N r1 V1 F 0 I Q N N N N N N N N N N C@ Q N (7 N N N N N N N N N N • tl) 1- W O O O O O O O O O O *E' I- N N N N N N N N N N 0 J G O1 <a O O O O O _ N 0 a 03 = 0 ❑ V' G U2 2 M N N N N (a N N (a N 1 O wW T 0 U a Q m E m m N 0 d > CO❑ Q c t E G N ��y N La 00 U cn 1 Q L I m N NN(N N N N N of O h N N _ ° N N V O NI 0 0 0 0 N O .Ui N N o 0 (D N Y y N W NI N 1 N N NI O ON NO N NI d N N N �' _c L 0 OI 4 d •N- NI �I N NI NI NI OI N 6 y Y M m I- p O O N Q ml c0 m MI ml v (a ml ml m m m W M 0 U N vI VI O n UU)) ((C) 0) 0 j v R U O CO F- Q Il,l z �I 0 0 0 .o r j o Cit o p o 0 Cl v v v c a cc – 00 z W -I Z .c (O (7 a) s p H N N O o al a) V I N Q to N w c ¢ < a m V v n. a .. Page 13 of 18 7/15/2022 V N Zr hu_ E 9 86Z❑666L❑966L❑(IA)MO (/) O a. o w W Y U o L/OZO9 0 XLGL/0609 0 slel3W ZZl LL Z a. d U) O a Y y WIS OLZS❑OLZ9❑sHV'd N 2 _1 y t Q (nog)S9od a a = Z a) . I Q0) (6909)saP!ogsed 0O c 0) IW- 00Lii Y (OLZ9)s00nS o a CO m c 00 0Jaal❑eno0 03❑(9£09)deid a w b (0929)sa�eue6/xp W o .0 (o9z9)soon 8U N ❑09Z9❑391W/X319 z E 2 °) Hdl >- z E Z z N U wo w N l'• bt0-93❑9E0-90 0 Hdl Q m a f° o Oad 0(P)Hdl 0 lail g H �a w 2 2 7t w co 'O �a o ° o = a o io❑(6)Hdl❑ m .8 E a palelI!d Pled c m r, ui mc v) a) a paJJasaJd in N M 0 .0 a co CC 2 paivaseidun X X X X a) m rn Q > > a. 0 - 8 8 N Z N N CY N f" Z U Q �- •- •- •- a' s _ o Cn U co Z 0 X (0 o` Ex E W • (/) J J J J >- H 5 5 5 5 H • Q g u) u) u) u) coco o o w cLa ov- ❑ 8 2 2 N c .. W v U Q d d m J U o = (D ~ o 0 J E Z z ri N' Q w N r a. C ❑ U o V) c Q N H V) �tJ N N N N Q I-- o o O o C C F a a N N 8 O - T = Q C U 2 o Lo 0 V) V> O F w co is U o. E a a) m ❑ O > T E Q E o m o _ = y) Q f4 N = O N N N 4 O m d- 0 N o N 0 LI--- 1c.® Y `L N N 0 W N NI N CD NI N U) LL N 0 E 00 (0 o 22 o <6 (b N z (1) (0 w O y �, I . ai o) m co op w cc w o p o a o .0 N ON I- N Y(OOD 0 O ° 2 W Q Ili ma0lc S < 0 J (LW jQa j Q z (/) 0 U C 3 � m w m ® 0 ¢ u F- ❑ ❑ m S2zO K K Page 14 of 18 7/15/2022 1 Et ...*".c L`pyjL�•' (.". c L.-- — - ___ -- —- P.- ''a-NN'c'\ :2*LI -y U H N o9 91.e❑(J(,I./ _J<;(J / u(ii ,, NJ. U) c •-)D cn6 B I"' X!vLJUL09❑X'V1N6U9 L) ItI 01 L NCO -- - - --- - - - -- - — 0 cl ° uiJ ��f `� -- IN IS 0/l4i❑G CU❑ I IVB - - - - - --,/�� _ if- f `.1 In -- - - tc. Q ❑ a 1 D`W W N � 1WiLu (01C13) SOCA - Q Q c UJ � F 603IJnJLLIJIOu1L1 ( )(1 U ID in W Li (OUL`3 S)1 .1);/‘ O .r+ I + - - - - -- -- : : I1❑0, 13❑JB.LW!XJJ.0 - 3 w 6 1 O8W/i)21U i I d L 1 13 J f — -1 ---- ....., lail 1) m i I Vv's) J)09i.) J)l]VIii. I DJ DJ1'))1b z `o i CO I '�. \ .i G U 1 1JI I x V) II u �� _ I Oa.] I 1 III Il. 3 y P_ w , ; ,n1O111J 11)1°I..1 _.) u j. c, N J ,') O, V V u (N o 3\ ) vJ u) u 0 • v s" ) )J I �N 1111a `u ' J I ... I _ — . .._ I ... - I_._ U 2 +I . U 1 �, N N V .p Q O ID 0 0 6 6I S 1 I W I) I nl 1 1 G rl T w• v ._) u r O O" f, Oi L) J L ` t i 2 _f1 �d.r �-. n7 N u) - i al M —I 1� v S ro p u> S -) (" I a c4 n) t•-• N �.,,1 i .n 0 V 1 !1 ,u) u, wl Z. 2 N h u• o .� 9 A Q S1 „�„ (� .�� N C U z N 1 !-J 0 N, O r O U w 1 0 d D IC. ‘ o U chi iL aJ �� `'i `t1 C I Cn I 1 I, , (� (J' o cl 1S,f`� �1 `� CSI N1 r1 5� (, �I u it, rJ <7 I Q x N o o, cn o , i.1 Q `4 N ❑ g N !:"....,3 I t"1 [� 1 n £• Y - w J t (Q tJ C �1 a 1 IN fsl ` (4 cl \L1 I a y m o ,{S 1 '� i 1 CC"" o, u U UJ I' LL - � N u1 ' t .9 ( u) vJ T } o �. _ w 1 1� 1 Q X04 ` 2 U o = co ., LI -- 4 01 T T n2- 1-i 7 �f.c i, c-. 141,l L VI !. -` J� ( ( /� ^' ^ U Z ?� �' I u 1 1 Page 15 o&18 . 7/15/2022 C:]ft ■ LU 13- 71 ' \ 1 L3 -% C 4) 0 121 III .1 1- 1- (� /� \ I 1 O 11-`� _ -- 9 91 e LJ I)[)I LJ J(1 Li(I/�)J) i i Ur) N 110 (_) o (r X X[VL/OZ09 0 XLV//0109 0 Siel)W ZG L a A-X WIS0/LG'OOiC3LJSIIVLI _ l(24.4 ) t11 4 ) t ) <.! F L (I. ., JIn)i J HF — I 0 a --- -- ( m a ( w - (0Lza)` -,OUAS L E 0 < � Cj _ 't- _ii (. •)Jo')I.JJ)l L:1 7.,03 lJJ O( 0 )..1).) j F. yf `� — --- CI C LU ° (0961)sol (.+[ASO v, Ct y 103 I 1.1._ — }I —i V') u c ` ❑U9l,IJ 0 J9 UAJ I XJJ U D a)) — I EC — --- -' 41 OIV\J/O l 1-1d1. , L 6 -- — — — 1 lail • c.) a ow b S o VVJ9J09439)04Idl u, w .f z c 3 6 ) O21U 0 11))11(11 LJ I I ( o , - -- — -- -- —- -- ---- ---- - - ---- c. c F a U 1 )C_ l ii LJ l :Y-U ;1 h , paall J PIaU LI.) w a) 4 m w m 4 1--- -_Il c_ c cn a J) ] pJ JLS))9 co �/) V' N U co o 01 1 ! / Of fY 1 ml V = V u o (U FE x u i0 CrI IY C3' �; O •0 0 0 p 6 `/) V2 1/7 1tr'� ft v, y coIX� 2 CO .> o, t Ll J _1 Vi. � ii 7 N `) Q C� f 1N NJ N u) w „�\ N 1 C. 0 aV- O U s R V• 0 Q 1_ V+ m `.--,73 3 {r� w F I) � — 3 I � o .( ) M-- --moi XI N c'V ), �) c E w 6 1...I N N' 4 m m .. cof )`) (� �tl i° J U tW`•rrr V YLLl `�o1 -�y W w ,u ) Yricy `yN7 .OY /� 5' fII I[� ' 03 _ lU Ay 1! JI OJ UI J) u cn o Li_ 0 u) O 1 n n 0 CD 3 g v a r) p e u S I T S uic m 'n. w ) Z J v) -, _0 ato �) Y w r, Q 1 p� 0 CO Ll ---JI � 1', u 1 . I I cU J ii Page 16 of-48- e \ 7/15/2022 USDA United States Department of Agriculture Untte(1 Stag, Ihha1ln1(10 ol 1''tllultult Animal and Plant I leak!) litsptction ,Li VILA- Plant I'rot ()1),(I nilnit 7U0 RI\ti Ru1t1 id tit_ N11) 201)/ Permit to 1Rece1v e Soil Regulated b' 7 CFR 330 I �luuull his pit rut \\.n gout alul tJu ll twit lll\ (to tht (Pet holt,\,Iuu 11111111111 6 1111111111 VIII I'IR\IITII'IN \\11 Itnrl(1trcw I'Il \III \I \IBIR I')ii) 'Ulull) (OX1P1\1 Eurolin,( il,uunt 111 11'1'1 11 \1 ION \1 MB' It I',')t 1911 )I 001111,„!lf itto III ( I'I\ l\( \(,1)111 SS 7110 I mtoln Al n I,A I t INSI I I) ii) ill )U (I 111111 i. utltn(io\ ( \ ))'i I I \I\11 I\l. \1101(: ,S 711(1I utt.uln \\ tt Garden(,rill C•\' )111 191051' (71 11 1195 5 19 1 l 1N I \IOUI S 02/10/2023 PORI'01 \RIMI\ U/PI AN I I\SPI ( 110\ SI 11IO\N ;\k \tithort_t. \I Ilunn\tilt AI 1lobllt '\/ Dou'Lis \/ 1 ul,c\ilk 1/ \i(t) '\/ \o iii., \/ I'ho 11, \/ S lit I to 1/ I i. on l \ ( alt t.o t A 11 tit. undo C 1 Ire no ( A Ion littth 1. \ I)Ili mil ( \ 1)11111u t \ 1)11 i\I I ( \ IttlIILK nem, I. \ uu ulo l \ `,Iii DI tt ( \ NuI1t \ `, it 1 I lit ( \ tlh I I I I Itt I l \ I t It ( I) I) u\u ( I Il ulhutl ( I \.t, Hoon 1)1 lith.( Iii \\Viii to I I I It I tutLitt tIt II it \ ti, I I It l i.ltt I I Iacl.wttvtlk I I KL\ \\'c,t IL NItaint l I Wino(( tr to 1)111 ILLI I \ OPS tit) 11 011 nidi I I I'tn,,Itul t t I Port Canaveral I'L Port 1 vcrgladt.s IL Santoro I l 1 imp t 11 \V,,t I'tint 13c tch (t1 \Il not I (IA S,\nnnah GU Accu) III 1Itlo III Honolulu III Kahului 111 K,ulut pont III I 'huc 11) 1 a,yxul II (htwgo IN Inoi tnapolis KY I uuisvillc Mi\ South Boston I\II) II thnnort 111) Bell,\tilt. \II 11 incur \11 ILrt, Nil I button ML Portland MI Detain Ml Port 1Iunln MI 'Cumulus. MI S udl N lint M u u. MN Duluth \IN (Ir rid Portage MN Intern Mona] I all, MN Mlnnc molts MO K hist,l its Mit) Si I oil, MI' ( unuuonwt filth i)I Iht Northern M iii lila(,land, ''sIS (tullpurt \IS Punt Birt\ilk \I I I,t n lid \-11 Rt o,\Ilii NI I Nwttt t t , N( R 111/4,it'll NL \\tlnuns'ton NU Dun,ttlh NI) I tnlhut t \D Pi it 11 ,J lull u \\I \Ihutpt hint \VI (oluluhu, \\I Sun deft 1 \\ I t Ve 1, \1 \Ibui N \i 1,111 1 \1 IItu1,1\n Nl hulltiu N1 ( hn)illun Roust.,Point \1 J tilt lit I 191 \t\\btu' h UI I \,a tb II I ()I I I.111.1 uI ttt 01I I It\tl u d till t o1 mthn, ()II Toledo Oil Wilmington OK 0iLihomo(its (At roti(aid 1'1 111t.nlo\\n I'1 II irt,hutr 1'1 I MI 1 1,.11)lu 1 P 1 Pittsburgh I'A Scranton I'K Aguadllla PR Larollna PR I tp.utto I'R Ma) Iguv PR Ponce Ill Vt u'\\'ic /I'ro\olentt. SC (h a ltston IN 1luupIti 1'N NI h\ilk 1\ '\u,tin I\ Brow nv ilk I \ ( orpi, (. lnnu IN, I)tilt, I\ DLL RIO IN Ia It I'1 I \ III'1,0 I\ I Ibu1, 1 \ I tlton 1\ IwtIiunotl, I\ I rt.tport I\ (,II\t.,ton IX I lid tlgo I N Humble I\ 1 uredo I X. l o,Indio, I\ Ph uI I\ Port Aithul I\ Presidio I N Pro tress() I\ I(to(rra11tlt.l u\ I N Rt nt I 1\ N in \nituno IN \•'Limit l i S IIt I t6t( It\ V\ Dulls, V l Not loth 11 St C ror\ VI SI Ilion'is \ I i kt lmn 11 1 lit one 1\ 1 Oto\Ilii. b\ '1 1'0!t \It'Lies WA St 11 tt \1 \ Snot 1 \1 1 Aron Bo \11 \111,\ tui tt \t l oder iht conditions ptulled tlln Pet mit union i/L the iollovvlii... Ouanld) ol Soil uu.Shanncot and I rtaltntnl Sierih/olion 1s ill tutcrlu't,with tnlutdtd use 1 our 1 initis NIL'S 1 be impeded find motl to mutt. this oil SPECIAL INS I RU( I IONS I L) I SSPE C 1 URS N.t A.111111 tonotuou,halo( I ft it ! 11 3 0-211.0U11.14 11115 PI 10111 I IAS BEI N RPPRUtLD I I l C TR(iNI( \I 11 131 I I it D \I I 10110\VIN(t I'P(2 III ADQI '\R II It O1 1 111,11 VI 1 11'1 hitt I N ) Gibbs Smith 02/10/?U?0 I Page 17 of 18 7/15/2022 Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-97597-2 Login Number: 97597 List Source: Eurofins Calscience List Number: 1 Creator: Chang,Terri Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey N/A meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? True There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. False Received extra samples not listed on COC. Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 18 of 18 7/15/2022 E ,*. eurofins • Environment Testing America ANALYTICAL REPORT Eurofins Ca!science 2841 Dow Avenue, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 Tel: (714)895-5494 Laboratory Job ID: 570-105614- Client Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment For: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC 111 Hekili Street " n Ste. A601 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 Attn: Scott Moncrief Authorized for release by: 8/19/2022 12:44:30 PM Lori Thompson, Project Manager I (657)212-3035 Lori.Thompson@et.eurofinsus.com Designee for Terri Chang, Project Manager I (657)210-6295 LINKS Review your project results through • EOL Have a Question? Ask The test results in this report meet all 2003 NELAC,2009 TNI,and 2016 TNI ThTherequirements for accredited parameters,exceptions are noted in this report.This e report may not be reproduced except in full,and with written approval from the Ex e r*k laboratory. For questions please contact the Project Manager at the e-mail address or IRO telephone number listed on this page. This report has been electronically signed and authorized by thesignatory.Electronic signature is intended to be the legally binding equivalent of a traditionally handwritten Visit us at: signature. www.eurofinsus.com/Env Results relate only to the items tested and the sample(s)as received by the laboratory. Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Laboratory Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Table of Contents Cover Page 1 Table of Contents 2 Definitions/Glossary 3 Case Narrative 4 Detection Summary 5 Client Sample Results 6 QC Sample Results 11 QC Association Summary 13 Lab Chronicle 16 Certification Summary 19 Method Summary 20 Sample Summary 21 Chain of Custody 22 Receipt Checklists 26 Eurofins Calscience Page 2 of 27 8/19/2022 Definitions/Glossary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Qualifiers General Chemistry Qualifier Qualifier Description H Sample was prepped or analyzed beyond the specified holding time H3 Sample was received and analyzed past holding time. Glossary Abbreviation These commonly used abbreviations may or may not be present in this report. c Listed under the"D"column to designate that the result is reported on a dry weight basis %R Percent Recovery CFL Contains Free Liquid CFU Colony Forming Unit CNF Contains No Free Liquid DER Duplicate Error Ratio(normalized absolute difference) Dil Fac Dilution Factor DL Detection Limit(DoD/DOE) DL, RA, RE,IN Indicates a Dilution, Re-analysis,Re-extraction,or additional Initial metals/anion analysis of the sample DLC Decision Level Concentration(Radiochemistry) EDL Estimated Detection Limit(Dioxin) LOD Limit of Detection(DoD/DOE) LOQ Limit of Quantitation(DoD/DOE) MCL EPA recommended"Maximum Contaminant Level" MDA Minimum Detectable Activity(Radiochemistry) MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration(Radiochemistry) MDL Method Detection Limit ML Minimum Level(Dioxin) MPN Most Probable Number MQL Method Quantitation Limit NC Not Calculated ND Not Detected at the reporting limit(or MDL or EDL if shown) NEG Negative/Absent POS Positive/Present PQL Practical Quantitation Limit PRES Presumptive QC Quality Control RER Relative Error Ratio(Radiochemistry) RL Reporting Limit or Requested Limit(Radiochemistry) RPD Relative Percent Difference,a measure of the relative difference between two points TEF Toxicity Equivalent Factor(Dioxin) TEQ Toxicity Equivalent Quotient(Dioxin) TNTC Too Numerous To Count Eurofins Calscience Page 3 of 27 8/19/2022 Case Narrative Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Job ID: 570-105614-1 Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience Narrative Job Narrative 570-105614-1 Comments No additional comments. Receipt The samples were received on 8/5/2022 9:40 AM. Unless otherwise noted below,the samples arrived in good condition, and where required, properly preserved and on ice. The temperatures of the 2 coolers at receipt time were 0.9°C and 1.2°C. Metals No analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described in the Definitions/Glossary page. General Chemistry Method Moisture-2540:The following samples were received outside of holding time: HAKA_BT_A(570-105614-1), HAKA_BT_AZ (570-105614-2), HAKA_BT_B(570-105614-3), HAKA_BT_C(570-105614-4), HAKA_BT_D (570-105614-5)and HAKA_BT_E (570-105614-6). No additional analytical or quality issues were noted, other than those described above or in the Definitions/Glossary page. Eurofins Calscience Page 4 of 27 8/19/2022 Detection Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 10900 8.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Lead 25.6 0.500 mg/L 1 6010B TCLP Lead 4.32 0.0300 mg/L 1 6010B SPLP West 111 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit Dil Fac D Method Prep Type Lead 11400 8.00 mg/Kg 10 6010B Total/NA Lead 22.9 0.500 mg/L 1 6010B TCLP Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-7 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-8 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-9 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-10 No Detections. Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-11 No Detections. This Detection Summary does not include radiochemical test results. Eurofins Calscience Page 5 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 10900 8.00 mg/Kg 08/11/22 12:59 08/15/22 16:37 10 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 11400 8.00 mg/Kg 08/11/22 12:59 08/15/22 16:40 10 Eurofins Calscience Page 6 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - TCLP Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 25.6 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:26 1 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead 22.9 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:28 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:31 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:33 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:50 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:36 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:55 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:38 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-7 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:25 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:40 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-8 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:43 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-9 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:45 1 Eurofins Calscience Page 7 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - TCLP Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-10 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:48 1 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-11 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 14:55 1 Eurofins Calscience Page 8 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) - SPLP West Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Lead 4.32 0.0300 mg/L 08/17/22 20:17 08/18/22 14:53 1 6 Eurofins Calscience Page 9 of 27 8/19/2022 Client Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment General Chemistry Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Percent Moisture 22.0 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 6 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 28.2 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Oil Fac Percent Moisture 34.1 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 28.3 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:50 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 27.6 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:55 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Percent Moisture 25.0 H H3 0.100 % 08/09/22 16:00 1 Eurofins Calscience Page 10 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: MB 570-256107/1-A Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 256849 Prep Batch: 256107 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.821 mg/Kg 08/11/22 12:59 08/15/22 12:42 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-256107/2-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample El Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 256849 Prep Batch: 256107 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 49.5 47.79 mg/Kg 97 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-256107/3-A Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: Total/NA Analysis Batch: 256849 Prep Batch: 256107 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 50.5 50.96 mg/Kg 101 80-120 6 20 Lab Sample ID: LB 570-255340/1-B Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 255866 Prep Batch: 255638 LB LB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.500 mg/L 08/09/22 20:18 08/10/22 13:57 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 570-255340/2-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 255866 Prep Batch: 255638 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 2.00 2.255 mg/L 113 80-120 Lab Sample ID: LCSD 570-255340/3-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: TCLP Analysis Batch: 255866 Prep Batch: 255638 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 2.00 2.010 mg/L 101 80-120 11 20 Lab Sample ID: MB 580-400071/21-B Client Sample ID: Method Blank Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 401081 Prep Batch: 400945 MB MB Analyte Result Qualifier RL Unit D Prepared Analyzed Di!Fac Lead ND 0.0300 mg/L 08/17/22 20:17 08/18/22 13:12 1 Lab Sample ID: LCS 580-400071/22-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 401081 Prep Batch: 400945 Spike LCS LCS %Rec Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits Lead 1.00 1.035 mg/L 104 80-120 Eurofins Calscience Page 11 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Sample Results Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method: 6010B - Metals (ICP) Lab Sample ID: LCSD 580-400071/23-B Client Sample ID: Lab Control Sample Dup Matrix: Solid Prep Type: SPLP West Analysis Batch: 401081 Prep Batch: 400945 Spike LCSD LCSD %Rec RPD Analyte Added Result Qualifier Unit D %Rec Limits RPD Limit Lead 1.00 1.051 mg/L 105 80-120 2 20 Eurofins Calscience Page 12 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Metals Leach Batch: 255340 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B TCLP Solid 1311 8 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D TCLP Solid 1311 570-105614-11 HAKA_BTPC_E TCLP Solid 1311 LB 570-255340/1-B Method Blank TCLP Solid 1311 LCS 570-255340/2-B Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 1311 LCSD 570-255340/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 1311 Prep Batch: 255638 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 570-105614-11 HAKA_BTPC_E TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 LB 570-255340/1-B Method Blank TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 LCS 570-255340/2-B Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 LCSD 570-255340/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 3010A 255340 Analysis Batch: 255866 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 570-105614-11 HAKA_BTPC_E TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 LB 570-255340/1-B Method Blank TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 LCS 570-255340/2-B Lab Control Sample TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 LCSD 570-255340/3-B Lab Control Sample Dup TCLP Solid 6010B 255638 Eurofins Calscience Page 13 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Metals ISM Prep Batch: 255881 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Prep Batch: 256107 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid 3050B 255881 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid 3050B 255881 MB 570-256107/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 3050B 8 LCS 570-256107/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 3050B LCSD 570-256107/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 3050B Analysis Batch: 256849 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 MB 570-256107/1-A Method Blank Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 LCS 570-256107/2-A Lab Control Sample Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 LCSD 570-256107/3-A Lab Control Sample Dup Total/NA Solid 6010B 256107 Leach Batch: 400071 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A SPLP West Solid 1312 MB 580-400071/21-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 1312 LCS 580-400071/22-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 1312 LCSD 580-400071/23-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 1312 Prep Batch: 400945 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 MB 580-400071/21-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 LCS 580-400071/22-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 LCSD 580-400071/23-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 3010A 400071 Analysis Batch: 401081 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 MB 580-400071/21-B Method Blank SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 LCS 580-400071/22-B Lab Control Sample SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 LCSD 580-400071/23-B Lab Control Sample Dup SPLP West Solid 6010B 400945 General Chemistry Analysis Batch: 255207 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 570-105614-6 HAKA BT E Total/NA Solid Moisture-2540 255507 Eurofins Calscience Page 14 of 27 8/19/2022 QC Association Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment General Chemistry ISM Prep Batch: 255507 Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Prep Type Matrix Method Prep Batch 570-105614-1 HAKA_BT_A Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-2 HAKA_BT_AZ Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-3 HAKA_BT_B Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E Total/NA Solid Increment,Prep Eurofins Calscience Page 15 of 27 8/19/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-1 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab SPLP West Leach 1312 1.0 g 1.0 mL 400071 08/10/22 14:13 JLS EET SEA SPLP West Prep 3010A 50 mL 50 mL 400945 08/17/22 20:17 JLS EET SEA SPLP West Analysis 6010B 1 401081 08/18/22 14:53 TMH EET SEA Instrument ID: TAC047 TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL. TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:26 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255881 08/10/22 15:19 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 256107 08/11/22 12:59 CS5Z EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 256849 08/15/22 16:37 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_AZ Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-2 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:28 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255881 08/10/22 15:19 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Prep 3050B 10 g 500 mL 256107 08/11/22 12:59 CS5Z EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis 6010B 10 256849 08/15/22 16:40 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-3 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:31 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Eurofins Calscience Page 16 of 27 8/19/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-4 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.01 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:33 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-5 9 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:50 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.04 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:36 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL. Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BT_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-6 Date Collected: 07/28/22 13:55 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.02 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:38 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Total/NA ISM Prep Increment,Prep 255507 08/09/22 13:30 KZX6 EET CAL Total/NA Analysis Moisture-2540 1 255207 08/09/22 16:00 B4QL EET CAL Instrument ID: BAL62 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_A Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-7 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:25 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.04 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:40 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Eurofins Calscience Page 17 of 27 8/19/2022 Lab Chronicle Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_B Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-8 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:30 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.06 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL. TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:43 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_C Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-9 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:35 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 9 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.06 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:45 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_D Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-10 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:40 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.03 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:48 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 Client Sample ID: HAKA_BTPC_E Lab Sample ID: 570-105614-11 Date Collected: 07/28/22 15:45 Matrix: Solid Date Received: 08/05/22 09:40 Batch Batch Dil Initial Final Batch Prepared Prep Type Type Method Run Factor Amount Amount Number or Analyzed Analyst Lab TCLP Leach 1311 100.05 g 2000 mL 255340 08/08/22 23:00 XBO9 EET CAL 4 TCLP Prep 3010A 5 mL 50 mL 255638 08/09/22 20:18 ECX6 EET CAL TCLP Analysis 6010B 1 255866 08/10/22 14:55 VZOK EET CAL Instrument ID: ICP10 1 Completion dates and times are reported or not reported per method requirements or individual lab discretion. Laboratory References: EET CAL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 EET SEA=Eurofins Seattle,5755 8th Street East,Tacoma,WA 98424,TEL(253)922-2310 Eurofins Calscience Page 18 of 27 8/19/2022 Accreditation/Certification Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Laboratory: Eurofins Calscience The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date Oregon NELAP 4175 02-02-23 Laboratory: Eurofins Seattle The accreditations/certifications listed below are applicable to this report. Authority Program Identification Number Expiration Date Oregon NELAP 4167 07-08-23 10 Eurofins Calscience Page 19 of 27 8/19/2022 Method Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Method Method Description Protocol Laboratory 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 EET CAL 4 6010B Metals(ICP) SW846 EET SEA Moisture-2540 Percent Moisture SM EET CAL 4 1311 TCLP Extraction SW846 EET CAL 4 1312 SPLP Extraction SW846 EET SEA 3010A Preparation, Total Metals SW846 EET CAL 4 3010A Preparation, Total Metals SW846 EET SEA 3050B Preparation, Metals SW846 EET CAL 4 Increment,Prep ISM-Dry,Disaggregate,Sieve,Split, EPA EET CAL 4 Increment,Prep ISM-As Received, Disaggregate,Split EPA EET CAL 4 Protocol References: EPA=US Environmental Protection Agency SM="Standard Methods For The Examination Of Water And Wastewater" SW846="Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste,Physical/Chemical Methods",Third Edition, November 1986 And Its Updates. Laboratory References: EET CAL 4=Eurofins Calscience Tustin,2841 Dow Avenue,Tustin,CA 92780,TEL(714)895-5494 EET SEA=Eurofins Seattle,5755 8th Street East,Tacoma,WA 98424,TEL(253)922-2310 Eurofins Calscience Page 20 of 27 8/19/2022 Sample Summary Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job ID: 570-105614-1 Project/Site: Hakalau Lead Assessment Lab Sample ID Client Sample ID Matrix Collected Received 570-105614-1 HAKA BT A Solid 07/28/22 13:30 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-2 HAKA BT AZ Solid 07/28/22 13:35 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-3 HAKA BT B Solid 07/28/22 13:45 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-4 HAKA_BT_C Solid 07/28/22 13:45 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-5 HAKA_BT_D Solid 07/28/22 13:50 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-6 HAKA_BT_E Solid 07/28/22 13:55 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-7 HAKA_BTPC_A Solid 07/28/22 15:25 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-8 HAKA_BTPC_B Solid 07/28/22 15:30 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-9 HAKA_BTPC_C Solid 07/28/22 15:35 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-10 HAKA_BTPC_D Solid 07/28/22 15:40 08/05/22 09:40 570-105614-11 HAKA BTPC E Solid 07/28/22 15:45 08/05/22 09:40 EE Eurofins Calscience Page 21 of 27 8/19/2022 2 O o w u Z 01 G O � 44 . a C W1 -. vO � � �ctW T 7''',11 w o • 5 C m m m o O U a1 N 22 Z , o O O O W N oIn 5. c- U C - CI I- T •A I � ...4.4,4 ... QJ U .4 & N 2 2 d - �L ..,, O 3 4403;o JegwnN le;tey„ c e U '. Q o dE m RI u E E E • - If, z I E , 0 a 0 13 a m w 1-- r t 1 N 2 U 7 ( vi N E N g v v i EIE P a) F >, 5 v. ` I .4 m v ✓ 2 _4 *. Z 4aN,io s!,X)fiswpw 4uay�ed I4 , cn E CC �$ JON as saij BOOMS Peia lA Plel4 t N (X V 3 r , uIP = ttm w ,.op a v >. >. "C3 ina m i F U ', a a a o E E E 4J mU U U U f9 !D O °1a o e v o Id-. `3 I-V Ia a, a CC •C0 rJ 114 i t V C v a I °c Q r� ` `B N I Q v �} • .ter m m o # it a ` E E E E .)off o F2 ie o .o O E m t . v CO�/1 a` M.Q a 3 a t rn I I t o 76 0 0 0 0 j 1 ., - 1_ J , J ICD - ° E .z• Q) aNi •' J, `� z C o c t r ca \\ _ c D CV 0 US J o C o 0 \ .5 , T- N Cr; 11 e� E _ c_J V N N E V14V1A 4_ / r"i 1 ) ZJ 7GU �� ll 16 t Z c .0w �S- vE v r . +U 'v O. fA P.2`'2 Uf�7 Q� �N iCK L it ¢ s i1ea0 2 0 e4` V-- 1 ,.., ,..e L 2 — T Lc Nt O 0U �' L Q ? C n Wn QQA g C "G p Oc 2 ` ON ONUQCdC2 N = L O t. Cc d d d O E 2zzzz -¢m °-Io 5 of _ C Z� E o E E U L �< ZOaC7�N -»�TN U U� y C i 2 o r N V D 3 9 ¢ U m n w .p O o :: a) w a co0 O .0 o 2uV(02�'� o< � 0 L. v = za�o � o � V O¢��20 E foo � -� 01 0 N UO' , D ap ` 2zA Z ''.ca" uoww 0 o.`' 12 Ove as �i a amoowao=1—t e_, p _ a .`f c y siaule;uoo)o JagwnN bawl" o o c 2 c.° •w Q O m v - u o N E E E H `m .o w ..Q. E v z m m o w `8—c3 o" UlUllIllIll _ o'N t0 m0 IllIllUlIll Q) FJ DHhhhflflhl N coU m 2 =d K 1:4 N c Ii! h ro E mI aa180 � u > >"I.:. t -13 6peal dldS WMZL£L180L09 o v tx c U O o JO saV aSWfSWUUOJad 021111111111111111111111111111111 §. ETo W # (ON JO sa v adweg paaaalld Plaid c'_-------- w y F.ZI f( 8 .' a NIIIIIhhhIfl _F 0 : N fT2 "€ ' o U c Ua''.„ w lJ mo E. N EE E rt 6 IA ~ E a o m I." w oEw O m f'- d i , LUw E N> ---- i,-_-_" W UIc y cl v.m o1'NN y co G III � E E " ,am ,..m. 0oLE 13 m m E d � '� 6"U v A gyv o O T f w m j', tt t o• m N.y OV p f• Z Iti .9°f.' N� N a C l_6... v c 3 a o - i o L O Z m.2 2C C1 d c`o« •VO n =— 'vm 1111 cIn oo : 2aN �_w ca o O6ci Vv Uc ,L , -- U) Q Q v N c cn � M m al I mu = m o f, n_,, VN EJ HN 0 N• � c 01 . L cN a7 d m.E N € .a -p›'Hm i w O el c Goom mE v rn N ° o • s N 'v rn _ u m N i OC 'cUWroO2s Ear2`NQNE 'o m :: Q Zm 4 o E. � eKN H c V U U '- QtotH « taN a2n U) I Page 23 of 27 8/19/2022 .-Z-- '.... . \-I\ , • ,,.,,,,„.„,,,„,, _ _ ' Part 9 156297-435 RRDB EXP 01/23 lib3AMENEIIIIS X 4 .Lort.vozozzzr CL. /""" CM CC C=) = CO Z — —- ILI E. Lk! FP. cn r....cn zi tz ...z3- -- 110 cu ca cc GO ' = • N IA U.. = LIU I ammarionn •CC =I8 CC co Ce CM cz —• %en ¢ LC) IUM11111111111111M1111.1111111 c=i g=t 1-X NCO CI ::---: _.--.11 ••'1-"Th.'.._,J1.02 OM 1-4 77,-, 2 1 itaC ;.-• •-. d :.21 c2 , CD I- .... .,,. ...,. ... I.L1 .. .. ........—.. . = tiiIrlE°.-_-•..------- 11. I= _. .. .,--- ... ...... -. LL.. cz 1"..' witmemam•mi .......*.....*. •••.• CZ tu Ci = a-r.711=IN. „,.., 0•, 0 inniiii.M.MINIM .... .......m. C.) .-,-......,. ?•I. "..'.ri II'115 g"--q 1-TU en L CU LU = LU Q :----'- CD C."--- ,., __ 00 . — .... ......... ... 13'-- CO _ >, C/3 • P.-. (tr ... ai -..I LU cy =SIIIIN: -. nzl- ,r,. imam C3', 7r = i()-- C.., oCC *CC CD c9 cz2 ----- ;? ' ,- C,, C) ... (`' 7 ¢ c(f) C.# - "-ZWIteiale- 73 MIIIIIIMINIIIIIIIIIIIIMMIIIIL ... .........=...... _ =cs "tr 'tf. L.L. ....,2 -_F--11 . :2A---- CV CX.) 43 NJlail L. 0/n1 0)CC ,....., 1,... ,- T_T r• ,t1 c (.9 —,,_ i- ,„ nt 4. ti, 2 ¢-1--- o w cm 1. .oi,-,•• =-'11/tW - •-•c»1 lip-. gi. = rt-2 (.2 CCU CO ,--.Z .....,-.. k 0 CD (T) ,= c,,, ..'''11?.5'ei-,44*..,;e!,,,;.!,';'041;*'01,*,J.1-• ''''' '''''''' `'' Part it 156297-435 RRDB EXP 01/23 'I 1,11,3V(1661/MOS ,.....0). Ao EAR LvtizZaZzli 0..... II...... A co WE . c/3 eu -al d c•A ,....— c, CV N CD co cc C) 0 a, w I.L. 1 = LLJ <c o m *CC *Lo' ) cc o0ot--. a ea -tr X immammulex Ix) ,1 •.VAI CO C:1 Ul•-“t X CC = - .71 4=1 C:1 .....CC 1 CC.•07,4 I — 01-CD F- ...11 .-2--'- I att o_ ••co _J ....„ czl ...... ' f (SMUG) CO = ".;.' ILL' '4C soimmo.mmilmossoma ....._ CC I-- — - - - ... CO, LU CZ ,42 --7-: imminwimmem a, Z LU imannimii cu (Di i • — N I,— .. , /// ,•-• ....I LU 04 co 4 at > cr) -,_=51ISIFFAL vacir imiimm 0 - - • 'CC CI I ......r., --.5... 0 g;Em;4* .'- 0 , ..,-- .... \ c) ..... -_,-- -- • meamminimai -- e efts..4" 6 11.11111•1111MMINIMMOMMIIMIIIMEINIMM. OZWill In r• .e...ar L._, Nill IfIlIMIIIIII ,) 01--.-,0 CE 1- 14.4 CY I/.."`-.a;. Z.---..=-1=-..e.- 0...---- -' *ta.-• E CC CU IP OUT WM CCM a -..•--------Mii.111111011.111111 1---0 Page 24 of 27 8/19/2022 2112 11111111111111111 N N O N a> co T ii v 0 c ry u ilZ EU E p�gpa$ c 'n H 0 u` a �' z �� � o =iazzxMQm al`o u 5'i v$2 O 0 0 0 0 o o Ci ''g'• n w li.,/ u LF- N r 4 O n 9 u '� � `' a V yj F v -9 Q C ooo4ao -11‹ a a0 ; 4Z � giE° CQzrmW m vv_ o 'n r � a „ a CJ 068,0udiSZNZ2 .' u7ti1t.0 d 8 4 Q �l l8i ad -°., ia Qmvrauauc7z ' 4x g- I -43m p , , . s.taul uoo yo tagwoN 1glal c£ Q — 'P'.9 1, A ;--i_i p o y E..^E E F. C % Ca E. m m3 v Eyo N .. v P. 7� _ 2 F.: m 'c a) f a:o y _a vi y m ` m N N O 3 a I-; E m g m m vg a Ce o 1 C H w U E c c V m m Q �, . m A 0 t A o U a ` m a C a O ~ V N- wa ! V. H E 2 �.;` n € : cF m c 2 Q c c v - N m gg m > vino. 4- v oO - - U 2 ' Peel dldS W M Z104E101.09 X i m u 10 .2 ¢ 8 to 2a $ cv u = v w ON ao saA}nSW1SN1 1?�+W d 8 3- LO E w 2 m 0 ¢z (ON JO-:saA►aldwBS.Paiallld-Field .ci M >, ..iU toF ` ae < :4 j w moi`✓ 3 Y 3 a' O w o c �. 6 s" V: to t 2. m n o ,T, tli' o E. u o 0 0 O% "'o m U U U CO `m fib:: v S. 1.0 E m dl: °-'a o 0 E T al m "2a 0 q A N C c m yC Q.m 2 N m-5m �r r•VNen h 3 113 R cc m i o V w N " w b N' t - v m m N c N ---.. N m N fa 0 c #v a N 0 o Z' E-5 E n m o N ¢ a m o E -CNA 1° 5 5 5 4 .q m g' � mem a N a a c•-.; a 3 a i i in c d nom. to nom. r;m 10 m u w i c L4 u JcmE „01 , E R i N t o N J z cg 'al T. a.-. ami m" ' m O N C d 0 7 O , 0 p p W (. ...„.....j 7m c U m � '— c - E CD c: °inw dNO Ti O - C 0 m m mb N n C z !� cu> @ c E 6 m 0) j c Q u ...,Ii' 12 g v ^< c., 6- `� ¢0) $d ai9n ¢ 4 C m N ,_ .1,i m i U_ W N E-1 " 1- O n C . N mE _ � $ U:..n}mW m En n 2 o oc . C - CZ lQ Ca C U n m'c. E N m SI, c C ,p ' N 4 d dmm o N nr,oN o m P a 2 = m7s s E ' `nn D ma 0�) m 0 Q a%. O Cd) gU l N 10 (758. Uti4u7UF 'naNE Lin 0S z E 4 ] a K a Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-105614-1 Login Number: 105614 List Source: Eurofins Calscience List Number: 1 Creator: Patel,Jayesh Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey N/A meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? True There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. True Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 26 of 27 8/19/2022 Login Sample Receipt Checklist Client: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC Job Number: 570-105614-1 Login Number: 105614 List Source: Eurofins Seattle List Number:2 List Creation: 08/12/22 12:11 PM Creator: Holdener, Heather D Question Answer Comment Radioactivity wasn't checked or is</= background as measured by a survey True meter. The cooler's custody seal, if present, is intact. True Sample custody seals, if present, are intact. True The cooler or samples do not appear to have been compromised or True tampered with. Samples were received on ice. True Cooler Temperature is acceptable. True Cooler Temperature is recorded. True IR8 3.1/2.5 COC is present. True COC is filled out in ink and legible. True COC is filled out with all pertinent information. True Is the Field Sampler's name present on COC? N/A Received project as a subcontract. There are no discrepancies between the containers received and the COC. True Samples are received within Holding Time(excluding tests with immediate True HTs) Sample containers have legible labels. True Containers are not broken or leaking. True Sample collection date/times are provided. True Appropriate sample containers are used. True Sample bottles are completely filled. True Sample Preservation Verified. True There is sufficient vol.for all requested analyses, incl. any requested True MS/MSDs Containers requiring zero headspace have no headspace or bubble is True <6mm (1/4"). Multiphasic samples are not present. True Samples do not require splitting or compositing. True Residual Chlorine Checked. N/A Eurofins Calscience Page 27 of 27 8/19/2022 APPENDIX B: Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure Batch Test Leaching Method Results This page was intentionally left blank. Batch Test Leaching Model Version:Fall 2017Hawai'i Department of Health Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office -Refer to accompanying technical memorandum for background and use of this spreadsheet(HDOH 2017). -Physiochemical constants updated in Fall 2017 (refer to HDOH 2017). -Spreadsheet calculates Kd desorption coefficient based on input contaminant concentration in soil and Batch Test data. -Correlative concentration of contaminant in leachate calculated based on estimated Kd value (may differ from batch test data). -Future impacts to groundwater estimated using simple groundwater/leachate dilution factor. -Alternative model based on soil gas data provided in accompanying worksheet. -Possibility of past impacts to groundwater not considered and must be evaluated separately. -Check to ensure that this is an up-to-date version of the spreadsheet. -Remove write protection if problems occur in selection of contaminant. Password to unprotect worksheet is"EAL" (under Tools menu). STEPS: 1. Select chemical from pulldown list(unlisted chemicals-unprotect spreadsheet and input chemical name and chemical constants). 2. Input total contaminant concentration and SPLP (or other applicable batch test)concentration. 3. Input sample properties. Use default values if sample-specific data are not available. 4. Input Batch Test method information. Default SPLP method parameter values noted. 5. Input groundwater:leachate dilution factor(DF of 1.0 = no dilution; USEPA default=20, USEPA 2002). 6. Input target groundwater action level for comparison to model calculation of groundwater impacts(optional). 7. Input chemical-specific Henry's Law Constant(Kh)and solubility if"Generic(Volatile)" or"Generic(Nonvolatile)"selected from pulldown list. Input"0" if values not available. 8. Spreadsheet calculates sample-specific Kd value and dissolved-phase concentration of contaminant in saturated sample. 9. Spreadsheet calculates concentration of contaminant in groundwater following impact by leachate. Step 1: 1'Select Contaminant(use pulldown list) LEAD Step 2:Input Sample Data DEFAULT INPUT 3Step 5: Input Groundwater/ DEFAULT INPUT Concentration in soil sample (mg/kg) N/A 1.1E+04 Leachate Dilution Factor 20 20 Concentration in Batch Test solution (ug/L) N/A 4.3E+03 °Step 6 (optional):Input Target Groundwater Step 3:Input Sample Properties (5USEPA soil defaults noted) Concentration(ug/L) Sample density(g/cm3) 1.50 1.50 Model Results Particle density(g/cm3) 2.65 2.65 5Kd partition Coefficient(cm3/g): 2.5E+03 Fraction air-filled porosity(assume saturated soil) 0.00 0.00 6Estimated Concentration in Step 4: Batch Test Method Data (SPLP defaults noted Source Area Leachate (ug/L): 2Batch Test Solution Volume (ml): 2,000 2,000 7Estimated Concentration in 2Batch Test Solution Density(g/cm3): 1.0 1.0 Groundwater(up/L): 2Batch Test Sample Weight(grams) 100 100 Step 7: 10Chemical Constants [Generic Chemical only] Kd>20. Contaminant not significantly mobile for concentration and soil type tested. Do not place below water table without further evaluation. Address other potential environmental concerns as needed(direct exposure, gross contamination, etc.). Calculations: Sample porosity-total 0.43 Sample porosity-air-filled 0.00 Sample porosity-water-filled 0.43 Batch Test Solution Mass(grams) 2.0E+03 Batch Test Sample Mass(grams) 1.0E+02 Sample Mass:Solution Mass Ratio (gm/gm) 5.0E-02 Total Mass of Contaminant(ug) 1.1E+06 Mass Contaminant in Batch Test Solution (ug) 8.6E+03 Mass Contaminant Sorbed to Soil(ug) 1.1E+06 Concentration Sorbed (ug/kg) 1.1E+07 Batch Test Percent Solid Phase 99.2% Batch Test Percent Dissolved Phase 0.8% Batch Test Solid-Phase Contaminant Conc. (mg/kg) 1.1E+04 Batch Test Solution Contaminant Conc. (ug/L) 4.3E+03 Notes (refer also to accompanying memo). 1. Total contaminant concentration measured in soil sample and results of Batch Test analysis(e.g., SPLP). Hawaii DOH Fall 2011 Batch Test Leaching Model 2. Batch Test: Default SPLP method calls for 100 grams of sample and 2 liters of solution with a density of approximately 1.0 3. Site-specific or default groundwater/leachate dilution factor(default=20, USEPA 2002). 4. Target groundwater action level. Refer to HDOH EAL document and appropriate groundwater category. 5. Partition Coefficient(Kd) =Concentrationsotned/Concentrationsol tio„(after Roy et al 1992). Partition Coefficient units in L/Kg Rug/Kg)/ug/L)] or cm3/g Rug/g)/ug/cm3)] 6. Estimated dissolved-phase concentration of contaminant in saturated sample based on calculated partition coefficient Kd contaminant concentration in leachate during transport through vadose zone not considered. Refer to Tier 2 concentration 8. Caution Message:A caution message will appear if the input batch test concentration is greater than 75%of the assumed contaminant solubility and a Kd value will not be generated (refer to"Leaching Evaluation of Heavily Contaminated Soils" in text). Model assumes that free product is present in the batch test solution and a Kd cannot be calculated (see text). 9. Error Message: The batch test data are not valid if the contaminant mass calculated for solute exceeds total mass calculated for sample (based on sample mass and input total contaminant concentration).This may not be uncommon given the potential for lab error at very low concentrations of contaminants. 10."GENERIC CHEMICAL" can be selected from pulldown menu an used to model of any chemical, including chemicals not listed. Selection requires input of Kh (atm m3/mole)and Solubility constants in Step 7 if available. Note that a chemicals physiochemcial constants affect results for VOCs only if input Fraction Air-Filled Porosity is>0% (model considers partitioning into pore space air for VOCs as well as leachate). References: HDOH, 2017, Use of laboratory batch tests to evaluate potential leaching of contaminants from soil (updated Fall 2017): Hawaii Dept.of Health, Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response, http://hawaii.gov/health/environmental/hazard/index.html HDOH, 2017, Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater: Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response, Fall 2017,www.hawaii.gov/health/environmental/hazard/ea12005.html. USEPA, 1994, Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, SW-846 Method 1312, September 1994,www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/test/main.htm. USEPA, 1999, Understanding Variation in Partition Coefficient, Kd,Values: Office of Air and Radiation,August 1999, EPA/402/R/99/004A, http://www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/kdreport/ USEPA, 2002, Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste and Emergency Response, OSWER 9355.4-24, December 2002, http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/soil/ssg_main.pdf Hawaii DOH Fall 2011 Batch Test Leaching Model APPENDIX C: Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) and To-Be-Considered (TBC) Criteria This page was intentionally left blank. o .N- c o 3 @N 'pm= N cCN m o QO LNCcu 3 ao 2 NL_. ° ° o Qm • aa m oYy c.) 5 m'1' E o m a)Q . -m 2 Iw T@ K E N , O ccc . 3. acma <12 )Cc> u !moU@ @'17 ' ovam o.1 E c oa,.m 2 a o° m 'mmv; m " o E— Q ai o n sa .<',5 -6 N o o @ a @ 2 U - @N NyN-2,0,23 N N @ N ON@remOa o)Cam °m O's4L _ yNo E N-O O > oN, m .• N Co a _ lf, °-6 C o' CNa- c9 C O L OC E Od@ a)— Q O Ca C - 2 LN Q@ ° sdp. i@ •2 N C o• oa _ °_O Q s-oa _ p m > o N o ?a m mm m c 3 a9o ai@NC m o aN @ @N DO COE C Ua m > aymm C E u N 15 E ma4 mN 5 no o E m E cQ Y -a. Nac E a9 ComULN ON � Oyd J aC N E• N O J m3 N Nm ETo E y Q m ° (° u) W O m@EQcNm xNO = = K Z m WEoF -oWa@U m E o a o c a = c1 Om E E=3 F,•A 0E-.Ea ao@@mam mLM mocoo _a, a 2 N).7 O a @aaUEW m -mnr ° mu 2c N6' Lm2t 2 Oata) N QaN Qm =t > .E O EUm O O N Na T3N 2.2 > N ,$2c% 0, 2-,2 m O NE E a)-c > ncaNmQN ,C. E OO mNN aC O O'€E ) U O C NO <6= E N N 11 E Ca-2)@y O -2 . E O-m c EYEcEca 7-2. cc 2o@. 3cm cEmYcN U Uamamco .m a) &E oEaQ: 88ama 0opm'. aY Nc aS@ E 0 O m$ O O a— `oa NaE .)L co F m = a CoOo mmo EcL N m m _W _= mom Nye o Cyp rnac 7 a) N C oY N wQo Y m m mNm o mm � y Nm _ o mw ° ma @ N m g m _c mY s >n xaExWV) O. ) O C > m 0U0 NNa 0 C) 9 p. o 3-cn N N-m @C y C. O_@ O : o a NO'-o N c m m m@ 3 m c .o o m - a) 6 w@ E@ E Q m w m 0_7v m )a Y _ Nd=Ua) @aUto aOW zUH ) F Q o F@ a= F ) e CL ca o 0 0 CL w w 0 0 0 U 0 T U U CO 1- O. O. .0 .@ O •U •U c a) aO Tv v QN �o no nc a ncQE E . c ' 0 0 a if, a) a) @ Q a QJ J -o _ U U E a) P m U dt• d E m o `° o 77') m w `o o m a d c - C-c a m a @ O ri 0 o N O a N c 0 m a co c - c aa) - a : - m NNO O @ am O m!m a Cas m a mm o t3m i > 'N O oo <7aC c UmUm N = gO a O mCo6 mC LO tE ) '5 .) N o m a) m2- c cti f,• E c 93 c o Y r m m " a)Q a m a).Ta m.2,-4, .T ° o mE) a) - mm - ma docm @ m a-- ° m .4@ 3 2 a " 32a .mm= O 4$ca Qovio o ).c oy o- _ a v ow a - o .c ° a).?-oE c a > o 5 a m >, . c y 0m -0 M0 m a 17),7 m YEE ° a) m L N £ c u .o 5am _2 . O y m > @@ rN 287p' mCQC mQC ' n a 3 C a)a co Q N a_c a)E K ELo E m n°o a "2' 8 '2.,; E ' aac EEd CcOC m@: m2 o .2 2, ',' � O 9 a N illiN 6 C N 0 2@r U C • U yNN N C D "O J0 O a aN mOO O J)- 0,a Nm Nil asa @ 2O CO pa E KOOOQO@U m OCoKa p c a 4 o a o (O o C N 9 M (I) cOa a •@ O ON o 4 E 7 >0 C . p C M a m a• Ei > a NN E 0 M ,-0c)(1) 0 d o o ? `q) `m o) 1- a cm- '627'6 Z a am c U K :° N ° y r m o•m n -- o 0 (� c •«O U2 m M(`1 U aa)Tm m m F •�V f0 (,.-aI V M co N(/J C L d F J -e M - CO N N C C U v r% W a<m� oN (oaM a m o mU a K = c y w, F N upo rma F oa a o ¢ O '� a U co m ¢ct (o m 3 0 a _ a 0 Coo® o �o �a c[ ° m Eco V W S N M M7 M0 o) U U S W SQN 4 Ta r a o E =a wmw a 0 D a C E o a m -O a It c m a E a .@ 2 k E ce 2°2 Nc m c m 0 .8C2 p J CO O O pcW m. m - Q Cmm N N w a)'O a > - W sap RoYu> ` Esz aa. aa) -- mmO U ) oa- o n �wa ili z V (n 0 0 c c g ? 4;, o > o m w m m n -0 2,7;:2 E a'o a ] L Nc m � m E -o m° dv ° > m r. • E cno °� m oQ/ YaN oo,Y E ,_8 w s o m ? cxmm vim3a 3 ) °" cm o ° um UisN UNmN N NO m omO m.L-N N.2 > O .38 Lmcnm ° N-Qa DON LmNm cN cLmE (7,-,; = 1))4, s o ms 5 c wW T2 .0o63 L° 3oX NNL , o ffO s NC .> 5 ° NO pmo En N a U °m Nam43 °am U mm U Q c- E. 12 RI rS CC OTm Lmomm mL.L� m mE n2 m a oN .Elig o -mZ> m 3 Z m mc m = mm aa am o mO mmNcot m m1oo o> y as E m ommm m- m2mn z3„01 . ,m oi >.oc7n ao m X c ° mc ° m , 0 ` 1]-'8 mmv m m oCnnm , E yKa,cmm`= m ° NmN oN 2 o 6 4g 1) > N 6 o o.` om.N N° am aL ?w c. ao a m m UOn NNN `D °n � 7m3 U LTOOU L� E L a N V a NaN m a m ` mmNN VatV7 m>- mN n.- Nocoo n0 rsm nOLma.,=40 > XNwc LU O ° m - .2. 0.-E... and QO .3 ....0 uNm o° •>'.27E-ST. a)LN Ol n ” ,c m aLLQ ai �aL ,T)ao mLma _ .-J3 mma¢ m E g . m s0 . s - mo m mLTm ... tm co 3 ° mynawam d c d nma m N '6E aE d =ofloo dNSOcd E °S 8o ooC0 mm n m L- T; a) 0 a - � N 1.' 3 a - U am C > OT N a R220! o 2NmO iC iN T 7 12 yy O=sa E .m L c c m m'329m m ° v ° E c c ma V UX U , N N y .° m p E Ol Qm O m aas p. NO N S.°, o_ n @ 2 m d a a Q O) _ N N _N .y c a) O DI' 0 9 i 0 o-'- n 0 N a a O "a 3 2 2mo O) 7? i 'a°, 0 .2 Z Q °U a °U m a) p. O F O U 0 mC 0 m ,� U U a N Q E nn n c u?Q N O O O c O O O m m U U y Q Q U Q J J 1' Nm O y.Z' 0 E r . 2 >Q m m m m ° m m N N N N o R A aai oaai C LL LL LL LL as -a m w r a S L D m ° o) r> E C - N.yc ' s a 0 y UI ya ac -, C m p (0 O ro - nONC > NCam EE -E-E, N0 O m N oom > ffmOCO m U ad"p .. _Ea omN E- .5 ` Q � 'o,Lm Nooy smo :9 2 >-E- LD m . n m ° ° -,2 m m 3m e 112 o o m3 m no o k oo0 O " 'O myoE EmoQ m accm m w 5NE 5E '' u 3 ,'i,=.2 m N ° ca=wm m- m msc 12mn3'E o� ow .E >ioym N ,0-2j (, ,,,-E-2 O E'"3a E2 E ' 2 xEa= mm N O- Lmm °� � OUN EEmL se O trn m Oo1ncEm .dg E N Tnai yU .0 n 'Oa.naN55a m- m3 S. c2258- DIM aOUow nL ° o= wo, o3n.yE py: m d K I o m A"p K 0. p m a '-o-' .43 o c 'O.' P.2 .; 7 o Z m CC 5 a o U co mm p a E c o __<a N N c M p N M Q 'a O. m c K N U m t t N A m M O (O CO N O o 0 « ,M O O N N 'p) M .� 0]� 0,-.---g o -C .0 O M cm M a a Or o u Q r 'Ic , , W° a, c w o F F U co CC W C m S d a a °E =Oo S v ate+ I A y a 0 Q m o W O ° d >, N p m = a c .,? m m �' i `o'� R F c m m CO m w o m ate°` m c a cmiaar U E c o a 2 '8:= 0 m c x m p LL Z w.g . ,,, (um i E c o 'a .E .� `o `o 'p is o c E o > >' Q o m Q w 8 0 wdd'I V .5 Zaa o 0 0 -83 oo -Em �. E w£ i ENE , fl-EE y N soa6— aui -@ waV m — ' orym •mE o 2sEs7". . -.?. R @ a aEc - a g3o ' dNo -w E . g' y mmoE ' m „ Q?w d E a, im m 2cL.9 mo> mmm Nm @ I rnFmEE yE_ , ,-;,- ,7, T1-8 o- E Kq s22 @Na mc Noa L > cu r � Zodwi s LE Lm- 0 ainmE 102 E U 0 — N .« _.Zmo gaaim kikEE oEr ' vEoE -ommmUaN U oma UQQ ° 88H) 23-2'N'a amu Soo Ba2 1"a2'g amoP f 0 _ m a00 . _ 14E, � EPER! � am 9292 ,-c-oTomycT�$ 2QEm� Emc 7",72 '28 § omoU � U3EtQoo 22A2 . Eo LLa g_'” a n 11' LLoEy LL-2. il N l', a 3 o a rn o dLm mc Eo ` a -mw 3 ` -o - m . E63x ,-L moEaS o ' moa, me"° E a sN2 EEN o�= E ms LyNa3= um d m E d m E E m oct0i AJ N s d TQ s 4' CO Q>'N a H S s s S ; 3 U 2 a d a ii_ _ _w wN N N N`4 �? c4 q'o o 0 0m m it R 'O II: E ., `w a_ E5 L N N O it N '7, N N N U U' Q a d a (C LL LL ( LL 2 5 o m IA ci L o 2 m 7,2_,L; m o �`o N� �' m rn .. a 0'.' " _ m m m 3 0 m C7 0 3E % o y - o o'E� a n 0E ^' Eo3 'g Ea N '9,-'' ° t3 LLDasN ON --,,,- ,57, ' OVa 4E C N - wO ' N ON 25DQ m j ,-E T .t6 o ¢ sdov3Q3 Uf N_ c- m oa° N oy ou @oQ y °E a 'aa a Q NR °1Efo -,qo 6.,o QNL 2t a7;-,1q3 aa m 5a N ' 1.mu m r _ c O m LL n cc 4 V 3 0 NcV s r m. C _w m U R R K N N7U R O E E 7 I xF - CK U SLLin Z li m v o c m E a E c x o m a c rs E u m E 72 U a `o o m a '_ g,'" c o V Q S LL 'a m inc -Nmm _ rn CI. Lt d 2E �t 3 0= o N o c o '' o o y T,a o m m m "o Q U mK aQa' z ma`za` = w APPENDIX D: REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE COST COMPARISON This page was intentionally left blank. Vzo °- m m m 2- w m CO 0, Y a d c°'i-SD m— a E cries m w H `»•» es e>» •»»<».a F .»»vi.n w L a d "0 0 2 - m t r❑ IDS1' ;9 g p E�':o.,4_ „, .. , <2 a E n E V II a`o E ry v 0 rv = 0 v 0 0 w c 0 w w w d i m- - i `m nd �Q35w >.wd � a w ¢" i. Z=ma E 2 O1 o r a - -e m _ _ o U 3 " -q :',c E _ 0 T H H dim a '' txd "� _ o m p w 1 o E p O m C - m im — v > E — a O R K o 0 0 o Q �'w o mi orns 0 2 0 2 Q'E 'g d E - „ ,q,- 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 1 0 0 0 0 ti ` x z g a � ” g Q'm o E E 00 w a m E pu i s n@ o f n Q `arnU ,4 w _ m O u F 3 _- 72.2 - vi »F» F F»v3<»e3 a a s3=2-2 o K l i. w 02;'g' - U d _m= FN 2 mN oN u so m s s FFFF r! ? N 0 0 0 ry 0 j " - - 2inkWi LZ 1i1 111 U w o a 3 a*° _ - w - 6,—,9 6, CO w <n<»<n.n w- 3�a Q o a a a'_ H .» es ea F» w H O O`�- 9 o _ O pp\ `0 EU W 5E m -- U o ro E a x o o - :iE s o _ j a : vEEE - 0 1 4 ?' 0m , 02 1 FFFF F 2¢ v _ _ w VA awaNaCoA 11 2 w a a ma a m O i 7,,'I ,°-' ' w� Tos2 )L,±£oi o H to «n'" �� � . m O a MI� E � _ d ' ' nEY - 2E.E 0 0 ON 00m0m ma3z° m w aaaa gnm" m c 0 w a r mE-H H <», - , �e> w H N 2E y s -l E Q T,Jr > s m c'`> " y E m= ..' 15._ m m—— p_ a 8 '5 .: a.-_7, m r d v O o 'v mr U m a,1 -'1 g x x x x x x x ' x x x g t i t s W , ~ N N -2 O 11 ! -LY = J ID o Fr t— O§ o. O 2x c Ng F2 ,9. 2 t u d no `- @a o k u2(2,1 O1 o a - p o w m oa E g amw aV a av d d m d C Ax: ' UUUU Q 2 0 a` N r LEA 0 w a` O F a` N - m m m m 4 .zoa m 2 ,',A , m w a d u o m— a.722-2 v w m w F ----- ; F - » w m L . o m 0= a m 2 - m t=❑ E m H ' o !iii ' !! , a E n£V! o f g N . = . . ? ry 4111- - i `m nd " i. nma ` Em 3 ° urn r F F@U33 5o o ¢ LSx o T, E' ,a U m O o '>6A,7 m¢i _ - x z w a m g a E °u �' g Q'y o E E 00 l 9 0_@ a¢ `arn U • w _ st O L F 3 -m— 72E, — m 2222, 22 ,%' , XX 2"22,.; `2 S o L z 2 _ c F »v> e» F w =O m = o❑ = O d - m N aIN o u m s % 11 m v v v n w E W Em _ - vsiQ A fn0 W u Z Q n 5 111 -. w m 0 n 2701 a K = c a v�e»ei»r» e» F» <» <» <» w • a¢ rna a m - F `n F O`�— U W Q E _ , a Opp\ 10 E - U ro Q S F E o a E d g- o - 2 a'm° _ - w a a E ° a w a" `o N a 1 ¢` a w T a ma a w w s t—.I w ` T E ,w L i a F m p o a a _ fLA- `m E 3z°Q a i.n ' n E Y aa q`.E > a mam w :0o .;.'0-2! Ea Ee y w a r F H N 2 P;;_0 Q ',13Jr > E m= a 2 2 E a :'' '15,-“a' .2_,:=_7-1-.W E - O .5 yE n _ � _ _ Ua ti ti y. g _ _' s E E E g a i' ''' 2 '' '' 2— 4' 73 a y m' g . -c3 E al , i IP 7. N FA cfl K 2 E rn Y a. r o 'o A L i ' O d d t S0 C s a 0 3 I 2 - x N t y- yCu ny~_ kmO1 E •` LQ C A S 6 -f A aEm t ' CY W ; rM W3S an G FVma` n N w 2 o ,n 2 ai amaw e 2 o ii E- m m m m. m a _ _ gi a d u Z m- n E g w `°v W H w » A � o Y' av �E 'o Q 2 - m t r❑ m E m q 4I 2 p E"' `oa r - a EnE` - aE N -,Q W >,m N O. W Q i.fl.d g __ m ti TR4 s 2 w U'; y m 12“c E , 4 rn T H w .» w w H d ¢ >. �� � I n r,t rn s C- E_ ! 2 o E E N¢ o '4 1 - F, v a N ti R , ro : ` x g� " � u', r,Q'rO o E 9 E UU w a m E 00 19 0_ O u x¢ O U v v w _ 2 = 8 5-t_,F s n = - - ‘1 ,7 ,0, I n g g1,1—Lav, H-e3 - -gL e » EK pE d - » » » OO __ U- e .) -m E N a0i m N o S > E s m a E „ R2 s m h Ev o E E w E', - E ,, _ _ v -, -, R - L.2 N RRRRR Eginod.�_ o LZ' JV ilt ¢1 ¢ m 0 n 322 77' 3 aQ a'.'-g! ! =a '_ CO N w a 7 m 9 ytm c _ U 2 o Ag .» w -t m E - . x c E o a E m m-s+om _ E [i a E-o E € 0 E E m - _ v i - . N a N N v, v, v, p E- i 'w ,, m E.2 c 2 vmi¢3m ,LIN _ W ¢ nE ° maW¢ a ARM a W T a a w w ° x 7.-Si 2E-. � E ,, € Wi T v p o a a` O H - _ m E¢ - ' ' ELE Y p E 2 m¢3z° m w n'O gamy m H a e E e H w ,i Q 2 N S I l. y E m ci a c g E 2 p_ Y - = a a m m r d m E - O 1, V v m r m ((J v a H H s E j `-' T a p N a m E m - 3 .p m m m v m m d H y 0 0 • N E V u w a v ° v a w 22 I• UC ¢ o•• - .1; es F» r» v3 e» v3 F» J w '5i W - E 9 A ce a O O 3 = L Y a `-' o `m = m fg K s v = =,, m m ¢ a ti 0 A -- 3 - = a y 7 m -x 42(i) 74_777 2-g8 ,2 +; - ;15 A2 F a TmQ=c 0 , 31' 31.' 2 . 1 mx21 - = o � rW ` o ' , E3 mwUU xAsa , c mWwm . 7 -7,2 V "ia n= o A N- EWa y , o', d ¢ ¢ 2- QGVao3' uvVw E o? V1 _ 2D ¢ ax a 0 o m" m 6,%;:n1 m a _'E v -O F <» '' »'»F» w w w `9 w L g .; .8L 'E m 0= 0 m E v H i o v Z- 120, !! Y 41111! h77, i'7' 2 " -23:g°-a H-r - a '''MEM f ? o a r� 222 d E yi m - i m na �Q35w ¢" i. nma mem -g 2 t x.%d E 2 o :: _ �w g 2 c = x z g m of Q'a o E 9 E pU w a m E °u g 9 oa @ E a lli!U w - O L F } 57,1 - - - 8 ' '_ F ea' - 2 7i.-2=12± p E d <» _D O m _ _ U Q w ua w h — a — m E N ami m N u E s m E s s m C .E v o N.� % j 00 3 g .. _ n w ` , o 3 n ` sa 3 F o Q t o a a m_ - F » ��p t m 9 U W y E c o w w w O p a 10 E m U T 1 x g E o a - ,: E E! , - i1 ` a 1- _ aEo - v ? w w 2w12 211Mii E ¢ aEmnwa `NIg w T a s ma a w i 7,37i w m p o m E _ ' ..°,i WI i g i- E ' = 2-! Y E E a A w a i.a s gam y mE ae Ee N F w v. 2 w — 2 E r -a E Q y ��sr E m a 1 g, E a .:.' 15._“ _ a' a a m m r d m E N U 'D =2o 3 — 2 ua Ea`o a'4 , _ a F2 ¢ Po U C 8 sa O a as (2 N 67.wO go) O Q F g NQ 0 N d 0 mA 2 ° E 7 — — w - E N K O3 tc r a:= - = n F o 0 12c. m x 2 A 2 ° C L m T N A V F"g F N 2 m - J E T20'870 m O 7 S 1 N : c 2 0 U tj , U O OI Q C 2 = A a U o(' m E p E. 12 F C alt F - -Q O 2 - IL OF a a i j¢ G Iv - 3 EL � K j � M. Q V a`, UJ vi El lit d d 1 N m WSJ 15 27 - >O Q- y mmd O.@ 'f' UU Om N fl_NN 22 °_a N- N- N- N- N- r N0 M M co N =mQmw' ❑ C 1 69 Z; savaU9 A w eR 6. vi 49 6. t9 g� u -! Uo Y wN = -• C = > v3 m F-o �W=o� EE— 0o5U 1;114-1 ! oa ;o 5a0tsN >. _Qxhm 1 Qo- a - 0 N \ wn8O m m N soE m d d £ aooN mEm' m o o flosm o 4 o o m o2 0 0 0 0 m !wm a _ ad . axo5 v w m w m v v N- N- N- w ? M m M rEgm Q as 2T c v' aE _ lwsc L'Q 3 rn w F m °2 m m E 2 E °a m °o S a N E Q x o n o M a m M M M o ^ '1,'' v v> n' v oi o N v § o o ,- m o 0 0 0 0 o v v m o co or o o- o co m U R N c,° - t _ N- a M M N N i[1 m o o.3 sg E Y `ta M» , r- N. N»- e»co co 6 Y ua va va va N O t o - - `m m Ti nF o p . = m U -- Na—_ X '-5 SE Exu0Na 0 o m m' m aE uo Nogco 8- 0° , 00 8N ▪ waxk„ x !a _ N ? E , ',F,,,- .<?,. N N- N- N ,_ s¢ 1 =823Er E ° g" N N M M O W O? M M M a to M O (D M ( O M O N 70-2 �� o a n v m x - v o tn o N M - w �' in o in r �a 2 6 6 VII �-a m E F» m .+a `-' O 0°x-O N 2 d - H H 3 0 0 0 0 — N ''. -0.,!, m E s Ym :jJ ; 01 : > Cm - o ' € Novv iN M x =m a 9w o'Em m 9 °J Mw N N w N- N- v w < rE ?Voa8 2 o_m Qta wm L', ¢ 3 °°m• w ¢ o.E ° g n m i °s ¢o v, . ao Wa <',- ,Z' 0 • T5g, A 4 CO N N CO 0, > 6 • F201-14-71,1! Y va z z.1; va s3 'a c Y EE 1- w F- L '' a' E o 1 o w x i. m Es x °Y o0 a m ° < L ' E w N 5 0 0 Ema o m a'a N o 0 o N L a C m N¢ o w o. v co v v N v v m v m c D E 2Q322- E ¢ 2.E872N ' o of 6 M v o m y -V N� N 2 2 O 2 N e^ . N a U o m H H ENL - E d waaNN co N E ;amE co ro o o oa 2 .= E F i N- 5 5 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x x x x x x x x x x x a ° r r t t a p 3 J m N N N Q vi va ua ea c» ua 69 va 63 Ev ea ea vi e9V3 ea E K m E 9 - J N - m a 0m � 11 .= N` U t,- ,-UU1g V5. yO1N ¢ N V ` m •mm 4. o ❑ C m CCmao 0m . 0C ., Ow o 0 E a2 2 - o Qd 0 m m m L m oJ - aa ` U a U U U Um E am m wr aa m w s mYm o Q � C oo yN 2 2 2 2 0 _Jw 0 a6. 00 aU0a0 si mmCO m 0 U' CO o 0 0 0 I- .°22 d @ L U U p O. N y SU a 43 �_ N N N N- N N CP a a F N- o Q N c O 69 69 U3 to W u9 Yi 63 M 63 LO t__ Q, . -%' 88 'u,' ' 22 , - ' U O N ❑ c 4i M W ° >Q O Y Y O N N q °L N U d g O❑ N 0 F N - H H O= N E V t w.3 m.. 8-a o ° K t E 5 m x ° , ¢ o t=t m a ° 3 w a U N N O N \ t C V W N O O `o@ N > E N N L O1_5 E O ° ° E O ° °a ° N ✓E %N R N n° c 2 L 6 ° y=S E 'ga g a N N N V r 0 N N N M W U d 2 ° a s W T N Q, O N O E W 2 - r .n Q 2 W P m °u 2 E m W oM E °a m °>❑0 a u 5 a 2 N8WW N O N rnp O O Oa M 43 . c0 co O a s ocoOO-N Cl a N Na (° W Mo. v , a D.o M u; aa < 3ea NOO » eY <» » »° ° o _ E3 YF» » . v3zs Eg ca m4-Oto N N NN 4- 0 NO ° c Xm - -24 77 UN -- - ° 1-q ON s 0 2 2 N N m M9E 5pu d aEw E a?Co ?WO❑. W cnNE= nOd L . Ta 'cnO2cE3 z 2 8 _ < ow0 rn rn o 0 0 a Ea rr N mm m O N m 12 v aa u - avr a ,oa0w a' M "' i ,,-7-, : -- 6, ,_ ,,, ,_ . m- m x -- v in a u , LI LI ~ am E ° E 1 m E sm x6 ° 'am° - H H 3 o ° o , _ m E❑fl ° p¢a° °x °= N= o po W4 aoW Nt 6 i m2o ° m ° w 0 M M N N N a M> E ° c ° a c - `-o, ° ° ° ° y v v vN N N v N °- c ° 2 gEdEvi 7E ?UOo2 No _ m at-o2PL' OY °°m¢ w ¢ a $ nmf ° E Q ' wsa 2 o Es YT Y c � H aoa CowE C 2 >. 2 E 0 o W M E. m o s x ° o ° O W ° Q (21_ ,) °"o O E E m ''o' o o sa ° ° o a c c ° c w _E E a a 2 3 0 5 m o E 7 7 o a 3 2 2 w ¢ n E ° m m w €'w E i» i a E ° Y a m '21-H H ENL2. E ° 4 m m '1_1'i o 7 0 a 3 a`a'm m F7 t t E E a o 7 -o a _ o m o E s a 3 N co m N N N a Q aE/469- EA EA U3 EA - - 6369 EA , fA fA Q (,969 fl E O K N N ° U 01N le›. o v -E' s ^ m E - .fl' -.7 x E E s E d El 9 L ° E Y a No 9 a '- a '` mN m 3N i - H M - o2 01 c,,-. C. iL ° `m � - x v 2 d r a Q o m .... -F, dE ° m m > `U ° ❑ 7o N 3 (0 > = o o r❑Na m o a Naox@cW ° E > > 20 M U d W a LL K m E EN W m 0 N N aU@x W Y m ° (n o 0 Q U U I— = o 0, 0 CO CO ooav vt m o- > a cci o O a N N N o � -yya m`a2, m .= E7O1 r„,- 01 C o No Lm '' - mo o¢ @eOa E90 69, w ca ea m »NEm� d33v Eao ? - °ao _ m . . o= w E v w.38 .2 S �m.. � �'a o ° �K� Ev', W @N \▪ coo L00 E2 N @N 2 O, OE@ L aE o o- E OO d - L-VN E2 f f o N 2 2 Co Co N N m m o N o ✓ X@ _ N a? @ 2= O DN mv_ v_ M E .-L. ) .-1,' °3 ,-°11' 1- c o _ w-. _ .nQ _wFm °2mm ENE °.m °osa EE¢` - 0 o O N O ao N a 0 0 0 o m O o r ON T N oV O O r r N r O O M N00cYV '' N OW [O 0 O M A HN O N <» » NY o »N Nd 8m E 00, O o _ =,,, _ _ E m H » en -20a,)2 - 0 0 g co 0 oom28 _ r CO — L) -- N -_ o N NEO= uOcd aU m, @0=„m = 1E ▪ WO d W , n o 8 , , 2 - 22 ,9222 M N 0 C¢ _ 053EL z E $._ ¢v -Co cof OONOOaOOOONM vd O NI E - 00 V N N M O N O CO Vr V V 0 T ww 2 E2 EA � N � Hi ea NON '4? a a) Co cL c1 N e- ee V o 0 o 0 E ti . - a,'3 @ » . 3 0 = N o - , 0 iI m m p n" 2 @ t m° m Lo°. _ o MpW - V ms,..T., ,,,, o N m ¢ ¢ o m«aE@ mNrnE ) y ? ? oE▪ N xE@ a E-022 € 6 E N V V N - N N N N N N N 0 Y ? OoE 2 No_ Qt.o wm 0 0 2 . E c▪ m o 0 a EE C H E >- 2 E mo 0 w= 0L= 2-20E-EE fl o m O W O ¢ a 00.000 o a c m w c _E2-<2 2 '° 2 . 8n E oa32E- EnE ° c5@w a m Y aoE m @ 1- PE'.- a E 2E_ c m E 1:1'0, 0 ' ,T,73 6-_,3 m m o • m n H N m N N V Q V Hi V3 N N r to V3 U3 V EA Vi .74Ui - F» EA V3 Efl EA E9 EA E9 43 E _ K 0 7.4 m m oE ° E F F E 3 o '1 E O m w N Y ` = 0 K dc' + Ia am ° c _a ng mw- E w= m - oSoc w Ea cz o0 O N = o o O ` zWm auio mNS U pN . m2 > UmUQw m __ m . cn " lYQ _@ op ' dLt a K Y Q .a U= w • _ > 0 2 8 Lt U w CC 0 w-W- 12 0 U w Q CC a 0 CC N COCO o Co Co a U _ _ _ _ I— LS 2 v Y 2. co co E ,si Ni o 0 o M v oFEy y a `a s m 0 m E y S 8NO -4. .o_O @ mU U O- °-9- io QN co O v OO ` Fli aR c U UR UO 69 69 69 eA CC zAw tli to WRm Rt SON Ad ( d - HNaO L N E U2N Nad aQ€Om. mO oE VaKcEw « N go_ :,_, N .,r,-2 c R 3 N O 2Q2 L= amUx \ w-2UORE' N RN O 5LoERr o E;2.2 '50_4m> E mm 0• d 0a 2 N 0 uo N W- '' V NhaR EW - D o ? NdQa enmwPm °0mm w2• 2 --, 8-. .-F25°am °o.a .Qa n o n n nnmoN o w e 1 ano- O O ',°,'' , R O - -sg E Y tMo Fcf03 oAN m e 6 6 6 1M :it r tet 3 RN NN C n -EiW0 lel EN O m Fm R s R ! ¢g .1.)':U o�jEF`S LLa N NR rRenN o C wop.`., x ..g ? D E= a 2yr w m 82113c2 mw eA eA O V m M tO O O N N r 0 M Vmx O a a o) Vcefls3toeA 2 . - o as O m E m oxa ° d H w• w w - 0 0 � _ mpO0 1R ' -0-.E, 1P2 00' 0popw4 a.0w �d-O Vm 6Q o ? v m« . 0 - N N> ENo N '" R2 _ ` oEOE oNd D w m ovvvvr " m= c a2 28gT E ?2Oo2 2 N2 = 22-t-owr V • v m r v `9 O M M V O ! c n uj ° :Qaa n w uw c 42 L >. m E m 1 A w= — a enR E s x 8_22 z o w N Q d 0 5 0 0 1o a w2c '4 a 30 m E oa5Z °- � Q .' ° , RN 0 CO N m w m M Q v w 6 m tfl 4, a m R H PE'. E o 2 E c E m m o 0 ;m3 m a' mm "1„';a N « C J ~~ s j -o a a a O o F m E E P r a a as 3 12 12N m M F ✓ v g; Ev v3 u3 e» esao o (p _ a, 0 E K 0 7.4 = = d m F x• x mE LLH MC 1E' NN cc O UCM Z 2 « `Y0 ` 'E.o, N - J w EoQ oU CUC0_ xg x O O1 Qm v m ~ O oKx- . p p - -cc ? CO« _o d co m 2_�YmE N LL 0 LL 0 a a U 2 3 W ca g.,C U) 'o Q 1— APPENDIX E: TREATABILITY STUDY Appendix E Bench Test Treatability Study on Hakalau Beach Park Soil — Batch 1 : Triple Superphosphate and Batch 2: Portland Cement Introduction A Bench Test Treatability Study was performed to evaluate the potential for treating high concentrations of lead in the soil on the floor of Hakalau Valley to reduce the toxicity of the soil. During soil investigations performed at Hakalau Beach Park between 2017 and 2022, a large area under the Hakalau bridge and primarily on the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation right of entry easement land, soil sample results have identified concentrations of lead in the soil as high as 25,000 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). The total lead results are well above the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for Commercial/Industrial Land-use (800 mg/kg) and the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for Unrestricted Land-use (200 mg/kg) and are considered gross soil contamination. The DOH HEER office would require that lead-contaminated that meets the threshold for gross contamination be a priority for remedial action. Additionally, these samples exhibited hazardous waste characteristics well over the United States Environmental Protection Agencies Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) definition of lead as a hazardous waste (5.0 milligrams per liter [mg/L]). Results from RCRA toxicity characteristic leaching procedure testing (TCLP) on samples from this area have had concentrations of leachable lead high as 31.8 mg/L on a sample with a total lead concentration of 8,820 mg/kg, let alone other samples as high as 25,000 mg/kg. There is no facility in the State of Hawaii that can accept lead-impacted soil that has a TCLP result higher than 5.0 mg/L. One alternative that may potentially reduce the cost of remediating the soil would be to stabilize some portion of the soils that exceed the hazardous waste criterion so that their TCLP results were below the RCRA toxicity characteristic definition of a hazardous waste (TCLP lead <5.0 mg/L). Materials Batch 1 Triple Super Phosphate (TSP) was used as a soil additive to treat the contaminated soil that was removed from Hakalau Beach Park. To evaluate the effectiveness of TSP as a stabilizing agent on lead-impacted Hakalau soil, two (2) DUs that have previously been identified with high concentrations of lead were resampled to provide media for the bench test study. TSP is a commercially available soil fertilizer than can also be used to reduce the mobility of lead in the soil. Phosphate is a compound made up of phosphorous (P) and oxygen (0) and phosphorous atoms that act as an anion that binds readily to lead cations. TSP can also be combined with different ions to impact solubility under acidic conditions. It is most commonly used as fertilizer produced from phosphate rock and phosphoric acid and is technically known as calcium dihydrogen phosphate and monocalcium phosphate, [Ca (H2PO4)2.H2O]. Treatability studies for in situ lead stabilization that used phosphate-based binders found a significant reduction in the bioavailable lead in soil when it was amended with TSP (Hettiarachchi et al. 2001 and Gene 2008). Batch 2 Portland Cement is composed of 60-67% Lime (CaO), 17-25% Silica (SiO2), 3-8% Alumina (Al2O3), 0.5-6% Iron oxide (Fe2O3), and 0.1-4% Magnesia (MgO). It is a global commodity used in making cement and is widely available in bulk quantities to supply the construction industry. Portland cement is the binding agent in industrial concrete and is alkaline and a good candidate for buffering acids (pH of 11). This property was evaluated as a way to reduce the mobility of lead in the bulk soil sample collected for Hakalau using a cost-effective ubiquitous material. The Portland Cement was also selected as a potential way to convert loose soil into a potentially structurally sound material that would be amenable to be put into a consolidation cell or a form that would be easily transported to a facility for disposal. Methodology As part of the remedial alternative evaluation, in May of 2022, KPC collected a bulk sample using ISM from the most heavily impacted areas below the bridge on the southern side of the Hakalau stream bench from DUs 32 and 33 which had been documented in previous investigations as having the highest total lead concentrations in the project area (DUs 32 and 33 were composed of the consolidated DUs 1, 2, 11, and 21). The two (2) DUs sampled for the bench test material were DU32 and DU33, and these are confirmed as the locations for some of the highest lead concentrations in the Hakalau Bridge study area. Surface soil samples (0-3 inches bgs) were collected via the incremental sampling method (ISM) method from both DUs which provided a bulk sample that was used for the treatability test. Fifty 200-gram incremental sampling locations were collected which resulted in 10 kg of soil collected from DUs 32 and 33 and placed into a new 5-gallon plastic bucket. On July 26th, 2022, all of the soil (a total of 23.290 kg) was poured into a 14-gallon open- head poly drum and was hand-pushed (rolled) for 30-minutes to ensure all soil was completely homogenized before the TSP addition. After the soil was homogenized for the Batch 1 evaluation, aliquots of each bulk sample were submitted for the total lead and then TCLP lead. Each Aliquot will be a multi- increment subsample from the bulk sample this will consist of 50 twenty (2) gram increments (1 kg total sample). A 50-lb bag of granulated TSP was purchased locally on the island for the TSP addition. Using a large mill, the TSP material was ground down to a fine powder-like material. On July 28th, 2022, two (2) KPC team members conducted the bench test process. One (1) kg of TSP was weighed out per one (1) kg of soil sample. TSP was added at increments of 5% (50 grams), 10% (100 grams), 15% (150 grams), and 20% (200 grams). The TSP additives were mixed thoroughly with each soil sample by kneading the mixture in a bowl with gloved hands. Following the mixing, the treated soil samples were placed into plastic Ziploc Bags with their unique sample ID reflecting the TSP addition percentage in preparation for laboratory analysis. Next, the second batch (Batch 2) of soil samples was weighed out and placed in five (5) trays for the Portland Cement addition. Portland Cement was added to the sample to decrease the leachability properties of the lead. A total of 500 grams of soil was weighed out and TSP was added at increments of 0 grams, 25 grams, 50 grams, 75 grams, and 100 grams (a total of 5 aliquots of soil). Next, the Portland cement was added following a ratio of 1 to 3, Portland cement to each of the 5 aliquots TSP treated soil. Water was not added since there was enough soil moister to allow complete mixing to achieve the desired consistency (a thick slurry resembling wet cookie dough). The mixture of soil, TSP, and Portland cement was then formed into cylindrical shapes, allowed to cure for 72 hours, crushed, bagged, and sent to the lab for TCLP analysis to evaluate whether a lead is stabilized using Portland Cement and TSP-treated soil mixture. All samples were bagged and shipped overnight to Eurofins Calscience, Tustin, California for lead-level and TCLP analysis testing. Results Based on the laboratory results, the TSP addition was successful in reducing the lead concentrations in the soil. Table 1 presents the results from the bench test study. Sample ID HAKA_BT_A and the duplicate sample (HAKA_BT_AZ) were control samples and therefore were not treated with TSP and were analyzed for total lead, TCLP lead, and SPLP west lead. The control showed total lead results of approximately 11,000 mg/kg and TCLP results of approximately 23 mg/I. Both values were over the Reporting Limits. The lowest addition of TSP was 5%, and that resulted in TCLP lead concentrations below the laboratories method reporting limit (Non-Detectable [ND]). Batch 2 — Portland Cement showed similar efficacy, where soil with 0% TSP and 33% by mass of Portland cement added to the aliquot, TCLP results were also ND. These results show that the addition of TSP and Portland Cement effectively reduces lead concentrations in the lead-contaminated soil. Conclusions The study concluded that TSP was effective at reducing the toxicity of the lead in the areas where the highest total lead. The total lead concentrations from ISM soil samples collected from DU32 and DU33 were 11,400 mg/kg and had a respective TCLP result of 25.6 mg/I, which is well above the RCRA toxicity characteristic for the lead of 5.0 mg/L. However, if TSP is added to an aliquot from this same ISM from DU32 and DU33 at a concentration of just 5% of the total soil mass, the TCLP results were shown to reduce concentrations below the laboratories method reporting limit (or in other words non- detectable dissolved lead). This was achieved without any additional pH buffering additives and demonstrated that immobilization/stabilization using TSP is highly effective and has ratios that are economically feasible. Portland Cement was added to the impacted soil at a typical mass ratio for making concrete (1:3). Samples of the soil were weighed, and Portland Cement was mixed with the soil, no other sand or gravel was added and because the soil already had a high moisture content, water was not added to the mix. After the mix was cured, samples were pulverized and submitted to Eurofins for analysis. TCLP analysis on this final material also showed that Portland cement can reduce the TCLP result to below the laboratory reporting limit without the addition of TSP. All of the aliquots of the primary ISM soil sample for DUs 32 to 33 to which Portland Cement was added exhibited structural properties similar to a bone-dry terracotta clay (unfired variety). It was durable but could be pulverized back into a powder with relative ease using a 50 lb millstone. The bench test demonstrated that the addition of TSP and Portland Cement to reduce the leachability of lead is effective and could be used as a treatability recommendation for the lead-contaminated soil at Hakalau Beach Park. The TSP addition is a cost- effective on-site solution for remedial action for the lead-contaminated soil and could be applied on a larger scale to successfully treat contaminated DUs in the Beach Park. Table 1: Bench Test Laboratory Results Sample ID Sample Treatment Analysis Unit Results RL Description Total Lead mg/kg 10,900 8.0 HAKA_BT_A Not treated with TSP TCLP Lead mg/I 25.6 0.500 SPLP West Lead mg/I 4.32 0.0300 Duplicate sample to Total Lead mg/kg 11,400 8.0 HAKA_BT_AZ HAKA_BT_A TCLP Lead mg/I 22.9 0.500 SPLP West Lead mg/I NA - HAKA_BT_B +5%TSP TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 HAKA_BT_C +10%TSP TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 HAKA_BT_D +15%TSP TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 HAKA_BT_E +20%TSP TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 +0%TSP with 33%by HAKA_BTPC_A mass Portland cement TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 +5%TSP with 33%by HAKA_BTPC_B mass Portland cement TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 +10%TSP with 33%by HAKA_BTPC_C mass Portland cement TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 +15%TSP with 33%by HAKA_BTPC_D mass Portland cement TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 +20%TSP with 33%by HAKA_BTPC_E mass Portland cement TCLP Lead mg/I ND 0.500 Notes: 200 mg/kg Lead or greater exceeds the State of Hawaii Department of Health Tier I EALs,Direct Exposure Action Levels-Unrestricted Land-Use Scenario presented in Table I-1 of the Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater(Fall 2017 Edition). 800 mg/kg Lead or greater exceeds the State of Hawaii Department of Health Tier I EALs,Direct Exposure Action Levels-Commercial/Industrial Land-Use Scenario presented in Table 1-2 of the Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater(Fall 2017 Edition). 800 mg/kg Lead or greater exceeds the State of Hawaii Department of Health Tier!EALs,Direct Exposure Action Levels-Construction/Trench Worker Exposure Scenario presented in Table 1-3 of the Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater(Fall 2017 Edition). mg/kg=milligram(s)per kilogram(i.e.parts per million(ppm)). mg/I=milligram(s)per liter(i.e.parts per million(ppm)). NA=Not Analyzed.Indicatesthatthe sample was not requested to be analyzed by the laboratory for the specified analysis. ND=Not Detected.Indicates that the analyte was not detected in concentrations above the laboratories method reporting limit. RL=Reporting Limit. FINAL RESPONSE ACTION MEMORANDUM Hakalau Beach Park Hakalau, Hawaii TMK (3) 2-9-002:080 Prepared For: Hawaii Department of Health Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office 2385 Waimano Home Road Pearl City, Hawaii 96782 Responsible Party: Hawaii Department of Transportation Aliiaimoku Building 869 Punchbowl Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Prepared By: Kealamahi Pacific Consultants, LLC. 111 Hekili Street,Ste A601 Kailua, Hawaii 96734 October 2023 i Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum This page is intentionally left blank. ii Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Assessment of the Property 1 1.2 Description of Preferred Remedy 1 2 Site Location and Description 3 2.1 Site Background 4 2.2 Investigation History 4 2.3 Magnitude and Extent of Contamination 4 2.3.1 X-Ray Fluorescence: HDOH 2016 5 2.3.2 Paint and Soil Sampling: ESI 2016 6 2.3.3 Soil Sampling: KPC Spring 2022 (April 18-20 and May 10-12) 6 3 Environmental Hazard Evaluation 21 3.1 Chemicals of Potential Concern 21 3.2 Exposure Setting 22 3.3 Potential Human/Ecological Receptors 22 3.4 Exposure Pathway Analysis 22 3.5 Environmental Hazard Evaluation Summary 22 4 Remedial Strategy 27 4.1 Development of Remedial Action Objectives 27 4.1.1 Applicable Remedial Action Levels 27 4.1.2 Remedial Action Objectives 27 4.2 Estimation of Soil Volumes Needing Remedial Action 27 4.3 General Response Actions 27 4.4 Development of Remedial Alternatives 27 5 Evaluation of Remedial Action Alternatives 29 6 Proposed Remedy 39 6.1 Long-Term and Short-Term Effectiveness 42 6.2 Implementability 43 6.3 Estimated Costs 43 7 Final Remedy Selected 45 8 Responsiveness Summary 46 9 References 47 iii Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum FIGURES Figure 1-1: Site Location Hakalau 2 Figure 2-1: Site Location Hakalau Beach Park 3 Figure 2-2: 2016 and 2020 DU and Sample Results Hakalau 15 Figure 2-3: 2022 DU and Sample Results 17 Figure 5-1: Alternative 5a or 5b, Removal 200+ mg/kg and Capped Soil Areas 35 Figure 5-2: Removal of Soil Over 800 mg/kg, Cap 200 mg/kg 38 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: 2016, 2020, and 2022 Combined Soil Sample Results 11 Table 2-2: Hakalau Beach Park Southern Bank Results above 800 mg/kg for Lead 19 Table 3-3-1: Conceptual Site Model (CSM)for Human and Ecological Receptors 25 Table 5-1: HDOT and Privately Owned Parcels which exceed 800 mg/kg 31 Table 5-2: Hawaii County and Privately Owned Parcels which 31 Table 5-3:Alternative 5a: No Removal, Cap Only, Cubic Yards 32 Table 5-4:Alternative 5b—Soil Removal 200+ mg/kg, Clean Fill, Cubic yards 33 Table 5-5: DUs which Failed TCLP (2016) and Require Mainland Disposal 34 Table 5-6:Alternative 5c—Soil Removal 800+ mg/kg, Clean Fill Cubic Yards 37 Table 6-1:Alternatives Analysis- Protectiveness 40 Table 6-2: Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility,and Volume through Treatment Comparison 42 Table 6-3: Cost Summary Table 44 Table 8-1: Public Comments Submitted During Public Comment Phase 46 iv Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum List of Acronyms and Abbreviations bgs below ground surface c-EHMP Project specific construction Environmental Hazard Management Plan COC Contaminant of Concern COPC Contaminants of Potential Concern CSM Conceptual site model CY Cubic yard(s) DU Decision Unit HDOT State of Hawaii Department of Transportation EAL Environmental Action Level EHMP Environmental Hazard Management Plan EHE Environmental Hazard Evaluation EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESI Environmental Science International Final RAM Final Response Action Memorandum HAR Hawaii Administrative Rules HDOH State of Hawaii Department of Health HDOH TGM State of Hawaii Department of Health Technical Guidance Manual HEER Hazardous Evaluation and Emergency Response ISM Incremental Sampling Methodology KPC Kealamahi Pacific Consulting LLC LBP Lead-Based Paint v Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum mg/kg Milligram per kilogram PPE Personal Protective Equipment RAA Remedial Alternatives Analysis RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan SPLP Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure sq. ft. Square Feet TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure TSP Triple Superphosphate TMK Tax Map Key XRF X-Ray Fluorescence vi Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 1 Introduction This Final Response Action Memorandum (Final RAM) has been prepared by Kealamahi Pacific Consultants (KPC) and presents the proposed (preferred) remedial alternative selected for Hakalau Beach Park("the site"). The site is located at Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii on the Hamakua Coast approximately 14 miles north of Hilo HI (Figure 1-1). The site is used a public park for general recreation, swimming, surfing, and fishing. The site includes the Hawaii County Tax Map Key (TMK) (3) 2-9-002 Parcel 080. This Final RAM describes the proposed remedial alternatives and the selected final alternative. It also summarizes site information, environmental investigation data, and provides the basis for remediation as well as the rationale for the selected remedial alternative. This Final RAM was developed based on the Remedial Alternative Analysis (RAA) Report from July 2023 and the Draft RAM from February 2023. The preferred remedial alternative selected is 5b: Removal of all soil which exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill. 1.1 Assessment of the Property The area of concern is located in the park and surrounding area, which is below the Hakalau Stream Bridge (Figure 1-1). Lead-impacted soil has been documented at Hakalau Beach Park and potential impacts on human health, several site investigations were conducted in 2016, 2020, and 2022 to identify and delineate the extent of lead-impacted soil within Decision Units (DUs) at the site. The site is a public County of Hawaii managed park which is used for general recreation, surfing, and fishing and the site is anticipated to remain a public park. Therefore, based on the current plans for future site use, a response action must be implemented to protect human and ecological health and the environment. 1.2 Description of Preferred Remedy The overall preferred remedial alternatives for the site were recommended by the environmental consultant in coordination with the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office (NEER Office) and the Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) after investigating the environmental contamination of the site. Six (6) potential remedies were selected: 1. Recycle or Reuse, 2. Destruction or Detoxification, 3. Separation, Concentration, or Volume Reduction, 4. Immobilization of Hazardous Substances, 5. On-site of Off-site Disposal, Isolation, or Containment, and 6. Institutional Controls or Long-Term Monitoring The fifth remedial option, specifically 5b, was selected as the preferred remedy based on recommendations from the site environmental consultant, as well as a review of the site investigation and RAA report. On-site or Off-site Disposal, Isolation, or Containment is a long- term solution where all soil within the open park and surrounding area that exceeds HDOH Tier 1 Unrestricted Land Use Environmental Action Level of 200 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) for 1 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum lead will be removed offsite for disposal and will be replaced with clean fill. This will achieve substantial risk reduction, remove the source of contamination, eliminate the need for an environmental hazard management plan (EHMP), and remove the possibility of lead-impacted soil or sediment becoming exposed during future flooding or erosion events. Figure 1-1: Site Location Hakalau 331001008 • 42 m LJ Kalaoa Holualoa '. Hawall ,31777 � Hawa,i � 331001003 volcanoes .,�""" National Parts Ala K nakai � 329002888 ,.^y`y His[o�cirail \ i °',1 uk,, ',,yvy�,„ Hakalau)Beach Park ..: 331001002 Y7 331001004 329006021 .00,02, 31009 1111.329002025 324006020 Tax Parcels 11 3 290060 1 0 �. 329002023 y"; ,600.. County of Hawaii Parcel 1„1 .� HDOT ROW Parcel 329002064 9000 3 • 32900601 ,p \ 1� rn 32p1 S', 2 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 2 Site Location and Description Hakalau Beach Park is located in Hakalau, Hawaii, approximately 14 miles north of Hilo. The TMK is (3) 2-9-002 Parcel 080. The HDOT owns an easement under the Hakalau Bridge that extends out ten feet on either side of the bridge which is TMK (3) 2-9-002 Parcel 999. The access road transits across two privately owned triangular parcels which straddle the stream. The site is located in a steep gulch and is bisected by the wide and rocky Hakalau Stream which opens to the Pacific Ocean (Figure 2-1). A paved road descends into Hal<alau Gulch and crosses Halcalau Stream via a stabilized channel crossing and becomes gravel/dirt/rock. The southern embankment includes the County of Hawaii Park parcel. This parcel is open and grassy, with a concrete-floor pavilion, and the partial walls from the former Hakalau Sugar Mill. Another dirt/rock road serves the northern embankment. The area under the Bridge is rocky with tall grasses. The site is a public park used for general recreation, surfing, and fishing. Figure 2-1: Site Location Hakalau Beach Park ,011• 4 4' .� { • s� 9 Y _{ iegartall 3.s7,h: � yi (Hakalau Beach Park, hf' LS i L4 'Y } � y x�'� 7„x iT ""411-.7 . hy. "y • #K y ' 3 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 2.1 Site Background In the past, the site had been used for agricultural purposes. Like the other Hamakua bridges, Hakalau Stream Bridge was originally constructed for a railway in the 1900s. The original footings remain, but it was rebuilt after the 1946 tsunami as a highway bridge. The lead-based paint used on the metal support structure flaked and dispersed into the soil below causing the contamination. The lead paint on the bridge was removed in 2000. 2.2 Investigation History Lead was found in soils at concentrations exceeding the 200 mg/kg Environmental Action Level for level established by HDOH for unrestricted land use. Soil exceedances were identified in the County Park parcel, HDOT ROW, and between 70 to 200 ft west and east from the ROW within privately owned parcels. The County of Hawaii Beach Park Parcel had sample results which exceeded 200 mg/kg for lead, however, sample results in this parcel did not exceed the 800 mg/kg Construction/Trench Worker EAL for lead. The concentrations of lead in the soil within the County Park parcel are comparable to results found at some schools along the Hamakua Coast. Lead results within and adjacent to the HDOT ROW exceeded the HDOH Construction/Trench Worker Scenario EALs. Six DUs also exceeded the gross contamination EAL of 1,000 mg/kg for lead. All of the DUs which exceeded gross contamination levels were located within the HDOT ROW. Several DUs in the area also failed Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) which assesses leaching in a landfill. Soil from these DUs requires out-of-state disposal. 2.3 Magnitude and Extent of Contamination The potential for harmful health effects from swallowing the lead-impacted soil or lead-containing paint chips depends upon the levels of lead in the soil and paint, how much soil and paint were ingested, and how often. Previous site investigations on bridges along the Hamakua Coast identified that lead-based paint flakes and arsenic could be a concern in the HDOT Highways right of way below the bridges. Multi-increment soil sample investigations in 2016 identified lead-impacted soils in 15 of the 19 DUs at the site. One DU was paved and not sampled. Only four DUs met the HDOH-NEER Unrestricted Land Use (residential land use) Environmental Action Levels (EALs) for total lead (HDOH revised Fall 2017). Follow-up sampling in 2020 and 2022 expanded the DU areas and included additional depth profiles. The sampling confirmed that the southern embankment HDOT ROW contained the highest lead concentration sample results. The area under the Hakalau bridge had lead concentrations that exceeded the gross contamination levels (<1,000 mg/kg) in soil beginning from surface soil to a depth of 12-inches below ground surface (bgs). The highest results in the ROW were 25,000 mg/kg 4 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 of total lead. Ultimately every DU in the HDOT ROW exceeded the construction/trench worker action level of 800 mg/kg of total lead. The area was not confined to the ROW. Lead-impacted soil was found in the adjacent properties (Figures 2-2 and 2-3), primarily upstream on the southern embankment. In total approximately 6,000 sq. feet on the Northern Embankment and approximately 43,000 sq. feet on the southern embankment exceeded the 800 mg/kg lead EAL for Construction/Trench Workers. Concentrations decreased at greater distances from the bridge. Total lead remained between 200 mg/kg and 800 mg/kg even 80 to 100 feet from the bridge in the northern embankment. Lead-impacted soils were found approximately 225 ft from the bridge on the southern embankment. The County of Hawaii park area DUs were between 200 mg/kg and 800 mg/kg within the primary park area. No DUs exceeded 800 mg/kg. Lead-impacted soils covered an area approximately 43,000 sq ft of the parcel (the majority of the park space). Some DU depth profiles in the County of Hawaii parcel met the HDOH Tier I EALs for unrestricted land use. Soil containing lead could pose a health risk to young children who play in the park. Lead can be harmful to children who accidentally eat small amounts of lead-impacted soil or lead-containing paint chips. Lead is more harmful to children than adults because it can accumulate and persist in their bodies. Lead is particularly toxic to the developing brains and neurologic systems of young children. The screening levels used by the HDOH, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) are designed to protect people using the area. The screening levels assume that areas, where children play, will be barren and the soil exposed. Fortunately, the impacted soil at the park is covered with thick grass. This helps to minimize contact with the soil and reduces concerns about health risks from the periodic use of the park by young children. It is important to continue efforts to make sure that the contact with the soil is minimized. 2.3.1 X-Ray Fluorescence: HDOH 2016 In 2016, the HDOH HEER performed a surface soil site investigation to evaluate the impacts of Lead- based paint (LBP) and sugar plantation activities at the site. HDOH used an X-ray Fluorescence (XRF) analyzer to screen for lead, arsenic, and mercury in a single composite soil sample. This single- exposure DU was located directly below Hakalau Bridge and represented the most probable location of the lead-impacted soil. Thirty (30) increments of soil were collected from the top 2 to 3-inches of soil within this DU. The DU was approximately 120-feet long by 30-feet wide. Sixteen (16) XRF measurements were taken from the combined incremental soil samples and averaged. The average lead concentration was 196 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and the average arsenic concentration was less than 8.7 mg/kg. Mercury was not detected in any of the XRF measurements (HDOH 2016). 5 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 2.3.2 Paint and Soil Sampling: ESI 2016 Due to high levels of LBP found at other locations on the Hamakua Coast, ESI tested paint chips that were found on the bridge footings and steel girders (ESI 2016). Greyish-black paint chips were collected from the base of four (4) of the steel girders. Lead concentrations ranging from 89 to 510 mg/kg and arsenic concentrations ranging from 61 to 110 mg/kg were found. Red and black paint chips on the rocks beneath the bridge were also tested, and lead was detected in the red paint at 11,000 mg/kg, and in the black paint at 2,700 mg/kg. Arsenic was detected in the red paint at 130 mg/kg and was not detected in the black paint (ESI 2017a). Additional multi-incremental soil samples were collected from nine DUs in Spring 2016 and twelve more DUs in Fall 2016 (Table 2-1 and Table 2-2) at depths of 0 to 3 inches bgs and 3 to 6 inches bgs. The 2016 soil sample results found exceedances for lead, with results as high as 25,000 mg/kg directly below the bridge. Nine DUs exceeded the HDOH Construction/Trench Worker Direct Exposure EAL of 800 mg/kg for lead, and eight exceeded the HDOH Gross Contamination EAL of 1000 mg/kg for lead (ESI 2017b). As a result of the high lead exceedances, Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) was performed on soil from seven DUs (KPC 2022). TCLP is a soil sample extraction method for the assessment of the toxicity of heavy metals or other compounds in contaminated soil media. The method incorporates an extraction fluid with a pH that simulates the acidic conditions that soil if it were disposed of in a permitted landfill. If TCLP is detected at concentrations which exceed the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste criteria (in the case of lead it is 5 mg/L), the material is classified as hazardous waste and must be disposed of in the continental United States as there are currently not any landfills in Hawaii that can accept this type of waste. TCLP analysis results for three of the DUs exceeded the RCRA listed hazardous waste criterium of 5 mg/L (DU-1B, 11A, and 21A), see Figure 2-1. All of these are located on the southern embankment, under the middle girder (KPC 2022). However, it is estimated that DU2 could also fail TCLP based on the high total lead concentrations. 2.3.3 Soil Sampling: KPC Spring 2022 (April 18-20 and May 10-12) Concerns about the extent of impacts along both banks of the stream valley floor, shoreline, and the leachability of lead-impacted areas transferring to groundwater and surface water were addressed in the 2022 sampling. Sampling had been planned for 2021, however, it was delayed due to COVID and right of entry documentation to access private land areas in the vicinity of the project area. Surface and subsurface soil samples were collected along the northern bank as well as upstream at the southern embankment. As shown in Figure 2-3 the vertical and horizontal extent of the lead- impacted soil had not been established on the mauka and makai sides of the bridge on the northern stream bank and in the mauka direction of the southern stream bank. The purpose of the 6 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 2022 sampling events was to identify the limits of the contamination "hot zone" to the point where concentrations of total lead in soil fall below the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg) (EnviroQuest 2020). Sediment Sampling from Stream Bank During this mobilization, sediment sampling had been proposed along both sides of the stream bank (KPC 2022). When KPC arrived to perform the first of two sampling events in April 2022 extensive scouring, associated with a heavy rain event days preceding the sampling had removed all fine sediment associated with the planned sediment DUs and only large cobble and boulder- sized material remained on the banks. As a result of the high stream discharge rate following the rain event, the vast majority of the sediment formerly along the banks of either side of the stream mouth had been transported out into Hakalau Bay. KPC discussed this event with Mr. Thomas Gilmore (HDOH HEER Remedial Project Manager) who visited the site on April 18, 2022, while KPC was conducting sampling on the northern bank of the Hakalau Stream. Mr. Gilmore concurred that sampling for sediment was not practicable since there was longer fine sediment available to sample in the four planned DU locations on either side of the stream. KPC returned approximately one month later on May 10, 2022, to complete the sampling activities and observed that the sediment in the planned sediment sampling DUs still had not fully returned to its former position. Coarse cobble and boulder-sized sediment made up the bulk of the stream shoreline in these areas, while the gravel-sized sediment was still in the littoral region of the bay and was only beginning the regress into the mouth of the stream. Based on the April and May 2022 observations it was apparent that the fine sediment is displaced from the mouth of the stream into Hakalau Bay following high rainfall events, then constant wave action winnows out the fine sediment particles out of the slug of new sediment entering the bay and slowly pushes the remaining courser sediment back in the mouth of the stream over days/weeks. The rate that sediment returns into the mouth of the stream depends on the wave conditions and a large portion of the fine sediment formerly in the estuary likely remains offshore and the vast majority of the material originally transported into the bay is redeposited is medium to coarse gravel and cobble- sized material. This cyclical process is repeated perhaps a couple of times per year on the scale that we observed, and several times per year on a smaller scale that acts to continuously winnow out the fine sediment (including fine lead particles in the sediment) from the mouth of the stream. Based on these observations it is unlikely that there is a complete exposure pathway to human receptors (beachgoers, fishermen) posed by lead in the beach and river sediments. Delineation Sampling North and South Stream Bank Benches Results As shown in Figure 2-3 the vertical and horizontal extent of the lead-impacted soil had not been established on the mauka and makai sides of the bridge on the northern stream bank and in the mauka direction of the southern stream bank. The purpose of the 2022 sampling events was to identify the limits of the contamination "hot zone" to the point where concentrations of total lead in soil fall below the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg). 7 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 The results showed a drop-off in total lead concentrations approximately 225 feet upstream along the southern stream bench and 125 feet along the northern stream bench. The goal was to identify the limits of contamination, where soil met HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use. In the 2022 sampling event, no DU exceeded 800 mg/kg of total lead. Three DUs exceeded the HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use (Figure 2-3). Groundwater Sampling Results The plans to collect a groundwater sample from within the highly contaminated zone represented by DUs 32 and 33 using an auger and a gas-powered direct push rig were abandoned based on the observation of the sub-surface cross-section of the southern stream bank adjacent to these DUs. On May 10, 2022, a steep stream bank resulted from high volumes of water scouring the southern bank exposed a 4-foot cross-section that exhibited that a thin veneer of a coarse gravel layer mixed with sand and silt extend from the surface to about 8-12 inches below the upper surface layer. This unit was underlain by rounded large cobble to small boulder-sized rock unit from the base of the described upper layer to the base of the stream bank cross-section where it was covered by other course sediments that made up the rest of the stream bank sediment. This type of geologic unit would not allow a boring to be installed using the available drilling methods and in lieu of the temporary monitoring well, an additional surface water sample collected from the slow meandering stream that passes through the southern side of the steam where the DUs with the highest lead concentrations were found this portion of the stream bench was conducted as a proxy to evaluate the potential soil groundwater leaching effects. This is described in greater detail below. Surface Water Sampling Results In accordance with the Final SAP, Addendum samples were collected from surface water at two locations from the small stream flowing along the base of the southern embankment that supports the access road down the side of Hakalau valley (KPC 2022). An additional location was added at the approximate midpoint where the stream passes through the highly contaminated zone (DUs 32 and 33). DU sample from the stream was conducted following the HDOH TGM and the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-54. This tributary stream has a width of approximately 6 feet and a depth of approximately 3 feet and runs parallel to the southern wall of the valley, then cuts north and discharges into the Hakalau stream, close to the public beach area. Because this stream passes through the most contaminated areas identified, a sample was planned to be collected in the SAP where the stream turns north and discharged into the main course of Hakalau stream just before where an open concrete dip stream crossing is present in the access roadway connecting to the park, As described above, this point was selected to assess the potential that lead in the soil may be leaching into the surface water as it passes through this highly contaminated zone as described above. These surface water DUs and presented as 202249, 202250, and 202251 in Figure 2-3. A total of three (3) surface water samples were collected and tested for total lead concentration (mg/L). Concentrations of lead in the water samples were all below the laboratory method reporting 8 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 limit. Results indicate that there is likely no impact on the surface water body via lead mobilizing from soil to groundwater and groundwater then discharging to surface water. This is supported by the results of the Batch Test Leaching Model (HDOH 2007), which concluded that the mobility of lead in the soil was very low based on the result of the Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (SPLP) results of the Incremental Sampling Methodology (ISM) samples collected from the DUs with the highest concentration of lead (DUs 32 and 33). 9 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 This page intentionally left blank. 10 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 Table 2-1: 2016, 2020, and 2022 Combined Soil Sample Results at Hakalau Beach Park Lead results below HDOH Tier 1 EAL Unrestricted Land Use(200 mg/kg) IIII Lead results above HDOH Tier 1 EAL Unrestricted Land Use(200 mg/kg), but below Construction/Trench Worker Scenario(800 mg/kg) Lead results above HDOH Tier 1 EAL above Construction/Trench Worker Scenario (800 mg/kg), but below gross contamination (1,000 mg/kg) Lead results above gross contamination (1,000 mg/kg) 2020/202 2016 Previous Sample Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner 2 DU DU Sample ID Date (in) Results(mg/kg) Description 1 DU-1 2016 0-3 25,000 Area around the 1 DU-1D 2016 0-3 23,700 bents 4 and 5 1 DU-1T 2016 0-3 23,600 under the bridge HDOT 1 DU-1B 2016 3-6 7,880 on the south side 32/33 1 DU-1B 2020 6-12 3,250*;3,360*; 2,960* stream. 2 DU-2 2016 0-3 10,200 Between the road 2 DU-2B 2016 3-6 9,480 and stream HDOT 32/33 2 DU-2B 2020 6-12 3,250*;3,360*; 2,960* around bent 6 1111 3 DU-3a 2016 0-6 69.4 Southern stream HDOT bank 4a DU-4a 2016 0-6 3.81 Northern stream HDOT bank. Observed 4a DU-9+ 2016 0-6 2.8 scour in 4a DU-10+ 2016 0-6 2.52 Feb.2020 4b DU-4b 2016 6-18 2.99 5 DU-5 2016 0-311111 0 Northern stream 34 5 DU-5 2020 0-6 221* bank.Areas around HDOT 34 5 DU-5 2020 6-12 918* the bridge bents. Northern bank: 34 6 DU-6 2016 0-3 282 Access road HDOT between Bents 9- 10 7 DU-7 2016 0-3 2,530 7 DU-7B 2016 3-6 Refusal Road on S. Embankment, HDOT between Bents 5 33 7 DU-7B 2020 6-12 3,538* and 6. 8 DU-8 2016 0-3 1,850 32 8 DU-8 2020 3-6 13,500* Vegetated area 8B 8 DU-8 2020 3-6 2,680** on S.embankment Wolf Property 32 8 DU-8 2020 6-12 7,510* south of the access 8B 12+ Refusal road to park area. 11 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 2020/202 2016 Previous Sample Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner 2 DU DU Sample ID Date (in) Results(mg/kg) Description 11 DU-11A 2016 0-3 8,820 11 DU-11B 2016 3-6 Refusal \Jarrow DU south of HDOT 32/33 11 DU-11B 6-12 3,538*;7510* DUI. 12 DU-12A 2016 0-3 1,410 12 DU-23A 2016 0-3 1,040 12 DU-24A 2016 0-3 Grassy area,likely Marian Land DU-12A/B, used by public. Co. 12 12 24A/B 2016 4-6 738** 12 DU-12B 2016 3-6 773 13 DU-13A 2016 0-3 357 Grassy area,likely Marian Land 13 DU-13B 2016 3-6 372 used by public. Co. 14 DU-14A 2016 0-3 57 Driveway area, Marian Land 14 DU-14B 2016 3-6 93.4 acceptable for Co. public use 15 DU-15A 2016 N/A Paved Marian Land Paved drainage 15 DU-15B 2016 N/A Paved swale. Co. 16 DU-16A 2016 0-3 339 16 DU 16B 2016 3-6 348 Park area. Heavy County of use by public. Hawaii 37 16 DU-16B 6-12 368* 17 DU-17A 2016 0-3 232 17 DU 17B 2016 3-6 161 Grassy area south County of of park. Hawaii 37 17 DU-17B 2020 6-12 368* 18 DU-18A 2016 0-3 104 Grassy Park area 18 DU-18B 2016 3-6 226 at mouth of County of 38 18 DU-18B 2020 6-12 764* Hakalau stream. Hawaii 19 DU-19A 2016 0-3 28.4 Grassy strip west of DU 18. County of 19 DU-19B 2016 3-6 14.1 Acceptable for Hawaii public. 20 DU-20A 2016 0-3 760 20 DU-20B 2016 3-6 570 DU-20A and Vegetated area Wolf Property 20 20 DU2OB 2020 3-6 1,640** west of DU-8. 20 6+ Refusal 21 DU-21A 2016 0-3 5,080 21 DU-21B 2016 3-6 2,720 Directly below HDOT ROW 32 21 DU-21B 2020 6-12 3,538*;7510* bridge south bank. 12 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 2020/202 2016 Previous Sample Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner 2 DU DU Sample ID Date (in) Results(mg/kg) Description 22 DU-22A 2016 0-3 3,830 Wolf Property: 32 22 DU-22B 2016/2020 3-6 2,870; 13,500* Area between HDOT/Wolf driveway and 32 22 DU-22B 6-12 7,510* stream. Potential Property high use. 26 2020 0-3 1,320** 3+ Refusal Southern bank Wolf Property upstream of DU22 6-18 27 2020 0-3 1,680** Southern bank 27 3+ Refusal upstream of DU26 Wolf Property Northern bank: 34 2020 0-6 221* renumbered from HDOT DU35 in 2020 SAP 34 2020 6-12 39 2022 0-6 490 Northern bank: Marian Land adjacent to bridge 39 2022 6-12 737 downstream Co. Northern bank: Marian Land 40 2022 0-6 131 downstream from DU 39 Co. 41 2022 0-6 386 Northern bank: Majority Wolf adjacent to ROW 41 2022 6-12 360 upstream Property 42a 2022 0-6 99 Northern bank: Wolf Property upstream of 41. 76.8 Northern bank: 42b 2022 0-6 Wolf Property (arithmetic mean) upstream of 42A. 43 2022 0-6 146 Southern bank: Wolf Property streambank 44 2022 0-6 402 Southern bank: across from 43. Wolf Property 44 2022 6-12 339 45 2022 0-6 83.7(arithmetic mean) Southern bank: Wolf Property upstream of 44 13 Hakalau Beach Park Final Response Action Memorandum October 2023 This page intentionally left blank. 14 M N sp u o w m w lek 1 Y m m Y Y ViaZ23- , Y "„ .... coM 0 "fir •... E rn E E S '• = w o E o E �: ► . m g u, g •fie @4' $ i ,• s y , Q O O W N yry 2 ?� ❑ .E > -E% > 1 e ,,d`..,, I i `. T V, ' C 0 N O O b '•df � x1• 4 Li � 7, '' ';1- j U m Z N N N N ' JJJ KI Z '°,L, M _ �, �� E- `� .-. aa) ;"fir.4 i a .a �� CO '7 Ln a V � : 1. �a O Ip , .C " . l\ cr. Nx, e • y } i Y Eµ. i • N 'forY, kd o f m ¢ �" 7 U 73 E co a N N N L O U cu W CL5 O W^ V/ W /I'1 V! 0) Y Y tG Q d L L 2 N l0 ) Yw CU U1 2 K "• 7 -7,..W- '"7 i "It ,- It. , , i t . .. .. „., NI o it ' ,e" `,.•.- ,,, , a ‘-..t . -7 4.Jr,4, '0 ''re'-;i -V co sn -''' ' ...7' tjnhVe' 'Eh - E Q Qd ,. .... ' r ,,," r...., cu. cu , .1. rt \ #,if 1' e :7 i' .t R M . . -0 \\ .0 . , 11!' 444 . '' ' .r. r .• , , LE-?) .. Crl. .... - i ¢) cu 0 ,„\ a D. . E E CU 5 r3 ru. , 4' "iplit' r ip. t:?,:i,:1,",,, , \ WV '4r-I ,N -c -0 \,.. , ''„„: . '-,- r3 - , ., a.,.. 21 4 il.,,. ;1.-i k.; •— ., ..L., \ -C'..r.‘... '°,' .' *'''' ..* : — . '..,.. -1, „ A. c ..r,;'.'fe. .41,4 ,, '*-' ' ' ''''''' 4 , .• •„ ,,. \<',.1.•••••• 8 ,, 12 cli, cr. in , [1 L.—.) „...., r.J .CD rs.1 .1 ' 1; : to • . , 4. 4-. . .,,= I'7 i 1 5 ' , ...r. 0 E a r r Ye Tr' 1, .... . as '. ............. r •.°,: -4' NI r-, ., ... v • ., c . ,.. . , ,.. co .;,,,,,4 ; .. D •.....•; 10,, )0044 i" ,-----,. - ,.... _ N , 1 0 _hleali 1044. -..• N I t .. ...w.. ,,,, ... 1 ... , . .. .„ N . . . . . • = i , a) • .... --. ., . . ,... .., " "17,4..' '554 i r „ -''"N575'' i r . 4 5,1 55,5 t . : , , 0 ti,. ''V ' * . * . '... „ , ,,,'1:41". L.,,,..'41:' '''''.',. .",.-‘, "4'''''''i . * ,, ,, •, ... r. '' . .,,,, ..,,,::. ,..,_..';•-, •, • 43 %. , 5r5 ,5 , , ., to• ,., ,. .,"'"%.."'" , P‘'.7'.' . . , 1.c; as ‘c7, , 4-7 WI ' , c ''', '.' 1-.. - ..' , ." .,., ,, .° ... 5 r ,,„,, I.:. m 7.. g I 14° E ,a a, = ac N N N L O U Y 0 00 W ^-1 V/ (13 W /I'1 V! 0) Y Y tG Q d L L 2 N l0 ) Yw CU U1 2 K Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Table 2-2: Hakalau Beach Park Southern Bank Results above 800 mg/kg for Lead Exceeds Commercial/Industrial Above HDOH Tier 1 EALs for construction/trench worker direct Scenario exposure(800 mg/kg) oss Contamination Exceeds HDOH EALs for Gross Contamination (1000 mg/kg) NA Not sampled 2020/2022 2016 DU Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner DU (in) Results(mg/kg) Description HDOT ROW DUs DU-1 0-3 25,000 DU-1D 0-3 23,700 DU-1T 0-3 23600 Area around the 1 HDOT DU-1B 3-6 bents 4 and 5 32/33 DU-1B 6-12 3,. ,96I DU-2 0-3 10,. Between the road DU-2B 3-6 9,4 2 and stream around HDOT 6 12 3,250*; 3,360 32/33 DU-2B •.1* bent 6 DU-7 0-3 2,530 Road on South 7 DU-7B 3-6 Refusal stream bank, HDOT 6-12 3,538* between Bents 5 33 DU-7B and 6. DU-11A 0-3 8,820 11 DU-11B 3-6 Refusal Narrow DU HDOT 32/33 DU 11B 6-12 3,538*;7510* south of DUI. DU-21A 0-3 5,080 21 DU-21B 3-6 2,720 Directly below HDOT ROW 32 DU-21B 6-12 3,538*;7510* bridge south bank. 22 DU-22A 0-3 3,830 Wolf Property:Area 32 DU-22B 3-6 2,870; 13,500* between driveway HDOT/Wolf 32 DU 22B 6-12 7,510* and stream. Property Potential high use. PRIVATELY OWNED PARCELS DUs DU-8 0-3 1,850 Vegetated area 32 DU-8 3-6 13,500* On southern stream Wolf 8B 8 DU-8 3-6 2,680** bank south of the 32 DU-8 6-12 7,510* access road to park Property 8B 12+ Refusal area. 19 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 2020/2022 2016 DU Depth Previous Lead Current Use Owner DU (in) Results(mg/kg) Description DU-12A 0-3 ii. 12 DU-23A 0-3 Grassy area, likely Marian Land DU-24A 0-3 897 used by public. Co. DU-20A 0-3 760 20 DU 20B 3-6 570 Vegetated area west Wolf 20 DU 20A and 3-6 1 640** of DU-8. Property DU2OB 20 6+ Refusal DU-22A 0-3 Wolf Property:Area 3222 DU-22B 3-6 between driveway HDOT/Wolf 32 and stream. Property DU-22B 6-12 Potential high use. 26 0-3 1,320** Southern stream Wolf 3+ Refusal bank upstream of 6-18 DU22 Property 27 0-3 1,680** Southern bank Wolf 27 3+ Refusal -' upstream of DU26 Property *DU10 consists of a sample,duplicate and triplicate.For the purposes of this table,the highest total lead sample result is identified. 2016/2017/2019:Year Sampled ###mg/kg:Total Lead Results 20 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 3 Environmental Hazard Evaluation The Environmental Hazard Evaluation (EHE) process was developed by DOH to respond to site investigation activities in an RAA. The objective of the EHE was to evaluate the existing soil on the site in relation to HDOH current criteria. A Conceptual Site Model (CSM) was developed (Table 2) to examine the potential exposure of human and ecological receptors to lead- contaminated soil at the site. 3.1 Chemicals of Potential Concern Lead paint was used for decades on the Hakalau Bridge and may have been used on the Hakalau Plantation Flume (destroyed in 1946). Other bridges along the Hamakua Coast have also been identified as contributing sources for lead paint. Initial studies performed at Hakalau Beach Park assessed lead, arsenic, and mercury as chemicals of potential concern (COPC). Sampling identified lead as the chemical of concern (COC). Lead-based paints were used as a corrosion-inhibiting coating on the Hakalau Bridge for decades until removed in 2000. During previous analyses, lead was found to exceed the HDOH Tier 1 EALs for construction/trench worker direct exposure scenario of 800 mg/kg for lead within multiple DUs (Table 1b) for a total area of approximately 46,550 square feet (sq. ft.) Approximately 103,390 sq. ft. were found to be above the HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg). Lead is persistent in the environment and accumulates in soils and sediments through deposition. Once absorbed into the body, lead may be stored for long periods in mineralizing tissue (e.g., teeth, bones, etc.). The stored lead may be released again into the bloodstream, especially in times of calcium stress (e.g., pregnancy, lactation, osteoporosis, etc.) or calcium deficiency. Depending on the level of exposure, lead can adversely affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproduction and developmental systems, and the cardiovascular system. Lead exposure also affects the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood. The lead effects most commonly encountered in current populations are neurological effects in children and cardiovascular effects (e.g., high blood pressure, heart disease, etc.) in adults. Infants and young children are especially sensitive to even low levels of lead, which may contribute to behavioral problems, learning deficits, and lowered IQ. Ecosystems near point sources of lead demonstrate a wide range of adverse effects including losses in biodiversity, changes in community composition, decreased growth and reproductive rates in plants and animals, and neurological effects in vertebrates. 21 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 3.2 Exposure Setting Hakalau Beach Park is a public, County of Hawaii Park. However,some portions of private parcels (TMKs) adjacent to the County and HDOT-owned parcels have been used as de facto extensions of the parking area as they are readily accessible to park users but are not owned by the County of Hawaii. The park was closed in 2017 due to concerns about lead-impacted soil and previously served as a park, fishing area, and general recreation site. 3.3 Potential Human/Ecological Receptors A conceptual site model (CSM) provides a framework regarding potential sources of contamination, types of contaminants, contaminated media, exposure and migration pathways, and receptors. The CSM (Table 2) was used in the preparation of the Remedial Alternatives Analysis (RAA). Based on the results of the document review, the following are identified as potential human receptors: • On-site construction workers— including personnel involved in repair or construction/trenching during future site activities; and • On-site landscapers/site workers— personnel who may maintain landscaped areas and may mow, weed whack, and perform general site maintenance (trash pickup, re-seeding, shrub trimming). • General Public/Site Users— Including individuals of all ages, who may camp, recreate, or otherwise use the park setting and may potentially dig, touch, drive, lie, or be exposed to lead-impacted soil or dust. • Ecological Receptors— including native and non-native birds, and mammals that may nest, loaf, hunt, or transit across the site (AECOS 2019). 3.4 Exposure Pathway Analysis Direct exposure to lead-impacted soil is a potential exposure pathway to human receptors at the site via the following pathways: • Direct Contact: Incidental ingestion or dermal contact with soil; • Air: Inhalation of fugitive dust; • Surface Runoff and Sediment Exposure: Contaminants bourn by water or revealed by erosion; and • Groundwater Exposure: Contaminants leaching from soil or impacting flowing groundwater. 3.5 Environmental Hazard Evaluation Summary The exposure pathway analysis described in the previous section identifies various exposure pathways (direct and indirect) where lead-impacted soil may pose risk to human and ecological receptors. The conceptual site exposure model provides a graphical comparison release mechanism, pathways, and exposure routes to potential current and future receptors at the Site (See Table 3-1). 22 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum COPC Sources and Release Mechanisms The primary source of the Contaminants of Potential Concern (COPC) at Hakalau Beach Park is lead-impacted surface and subsurface soil from lead released into the environment from lead- based paint used in historical bridge maintenance activities. Lead-impacted soil present at the site has been shown to exist at concentrations above the HDOH Tier EALs for gross contamination (1000 mg/kg). Total concentrations vary across the site and include portions that are at or below HDOH Tier 1 EALs for unrestricted land use. The secondary release mechanism, besides direct contact with soil, includes dust, surface water runoff, and leaching. Pathways and Exposure Routes Lead poses a hazard to potential receptors through direct exposure to contaminated media through pathways including surface soil, subsurface soil, ambient air, surface water and sediments, and groundwater. These pathways potentially expose receptors to lead via inhalation, ingestion, or dermal absorption. Potential Receptors Current and Future Land Use The main human exposure scenarios identified under current land use as a County of Hawaii beach park are the general public, maintenance workers, and construction works. Since the park is owned by the county and land use is not likely to change, future land use includes these same human exposure scenarios. This is also true for avian and aquatic receptors. Complete Exposure Pathways Complete exposure pathways exist for all receptor scenarios exposed to surface and subsurface soil at this site under current and future conditions. Exposure to dust is a complete pathway to on-site maintenance and construction workers when the current grass cover is disturbed and there is a potential for inhalation of dust under dry windy conditions when activities such as land mowing and excavation occur. Potentially Complete Exposure Pathways Potentially complete pathways to the general public, terrestrial and aquatic ecological receptors exist via direct exposure to fugitive dust if the grass cover was not maintained or a construction excavation project was conducted at the park and dust controls were not implemented correctly. This potential exposure route could be controlled using proper materials management practices and could limit this exposure pathway. Currently, there is no complete pathway to any receptors via surface water runoff, but again, future construction activities could potentially complete this pathway if not conducted with care. Additionally, if there were a natural disaster such as a tsunami that could scour away the current stream bank and redistribute lead-impacted soils in the current park in the Kolekole valley floor sediment and runoff could be a completed exposure pathway. Exposure to Lead Leaching There has not been an identified complete pathway to current and future receptors via leaching 23 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum in subsurface soil or groundwater. A batch test leachability model based on SPLP analyses from soil collected from the DUs with the highest documented throughout the aggregated sampling events demonstrated that the absorption coefficient is high enough to prevent contaminant mobilization from the soil to groundwater. This is also in part supported by the results of surface water sampling conducted in May of 2022 from a small slow-flowing stream that borders the southern valley escarpment that meanders through and around the most heavily lead-impacted areas. Three surface water DUs were sampled from this stream (DUs 202249, 202250, and 202251, See Figure 2-3) from locations; 1) prior to passing through most impacted areas (DU 202249), 2) at the point which was adjacent to the areas where highest soil concentrations have been identified (DU 202251), and the final point just downstream of the areas of greatest lead concentrations (just before draining into the mouth of Hakalau stream and Hakalau Bay) (DU 202250). 24 CO N a� Aquatic Ecological x >< >< >< 0 0 0 — — — — — 0 V U C o a J Terrestrial Ecological X X X X 0 0 0 — — — — — a) v a)U X X X X 0 0 0 CC LL General Public/ CD z L c On-site Landscape or x x x x x O O — — — — — O �oo Construction Workers Aquatic Ecological x x x x O O O — — — — — CL m az as c u 2 Terrestrial Ecological x x x x 0 O O — — — — — O aC, p General Public x x x x 0 0 0 — — — — — C1 = W .a On-site Landscape or x x x x x O O — — — — — C Construction Workers asc ca E C C C C C c C z 0 Ta o 2 0 �o 0 Ta 0 2 2 N E N E o v v E N E o C Exposure Route ao o ao o To an o a°'.o o ao o To Y E N 2 U0 U C 0 a) CD a CD a — ++ j E a)a) -0 Pathway 0 cn �° co 2 = m E � � o v N E E, in L U Y T - R ro b0 = a) a) 4 al O C " a, C a SecondaryRelease Mechanism ° ° o °U' 0 o ° a, y z z � � a) of C.) i J d C 7 I .= O (1) 0 U C .. -0 C CD A -p - — Q Secondary Sources co a �o tn — E > 0 co = - R 3 -a 0 E I— E E C a, a a, Primary Release Mechanism a) C o J m .0 m 0 a, A°▪Q a a na x C v cc N o a, c6 N CO V) N U ooQ a co Lt Primary Sources a uE Y [: J U - co•Co_ C ILL E x to co i, Z 0 Z * N N N U) 0 U 0 O N (1.) • H a O, h E 0 C 16 O E U) C 1 O aQ U N C O CO 2- . . m Q' Y (p C 2 LL Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 4 Remedial Strategy 4.1 Development of Remedial Action Objectives The Remedial Action Objectives for Hakalau Beach Park were based on the multiple rounds of soil sample analysis described above to identify the nature and extent of contamination. The objective of the remedial action is to meet the requirements of HDOH and protect the health of users, site workers, and ecological receptors. 4.1.1 Applicable Remedial Action Levels The HDOT has chosen to implement soil removal and offsite disposal (Option 5b) for soil in the areas which exceed the HDOH Tier 1 Unrestricted Land Use Environmental Action Level of 200 mg/kg for lead, and replacement of impacted soil with clean fill. 4.1.2 Remedial Action Objectives The Remedial Action Objectives for Hakalau Beach Park as identified by the site owners and as recommended by the state guidance is to remove the lead-impacted soil which exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead from direct contact with site users, site workers, and potential ecological receptors (Option 5b). This option will achieve substantial risk reduction, remove the source of contamination, eliminate the need for an environmental hazard management plan (EHMP), and remove the possibility of lead-impacted soil or sediment from becoming exposed during flooding or erosion in the future. 4.2 Estimation of Soil Volumes Needing Remedial Action A total of 1,265 Cubic Yards (CY) of soils that exceeded the 200 mg/kg lead criteria for soil removal will be removed and disposed of off-site at a permitted waste disposal facility. The total volume includes approximately 1,150 CY of soil exceeding 200mg/kg and approximately 115 CY of soil exceeding 800 mg/kg. Soil which exceed 800 mg/kg will require off-island disposal. 4.3 General Response Actions Actions may include restricting access, fencing, administrative/institutional controls, reducing contact with lead-impacted soil through physical barriers, or removing the source of contamination. The option to remove the source of contamination had an open public comment period. Notices were placed in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald on June 30, 2023. The public Fact Sheet and Draft RAM was available to the public through the HDOH HEER Office website (http://hawaii.gov/doh/heer) during the public comment period Comments from eight people were received. All supported a clean-up activity, and 6 supported option 5b. One person identified 5c as their preferred alternative, and one person identified 6a as their top choice. Option 5 b was ultimately chosen as the final remedial action. 4.4 Development of Remedial Alternatives HDOT operates Hakalau Beach Park and is responsible for the cleanup. HDOT has coordinated to investigate the environmental contamination at the site and has evaluated six (6) potential remedies. The State of Hawaii Department of Health Technical Guidance Manual (HDOH TGM) 27 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum (Section 16.2.2.2)and the Hawaii State Contingency Plan [HAR 11-451-8(c)] (HAR, 1995) identifies a hierarchy of remedial response actions in the following descending order: 1. Recycle or Reuse, 2. Destruction or Detoxification, 3. Separation, Concentration, or Volume Reduction, 4. Immobilization of Hazardous Substances, 5. On-site or Off-site Disposal, Isolation, or Containment, and 6. Institutional Controls or Long-Term Monitoring. 28 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 5 Evaluation of Remedial Action Alternatives Alternative 1: Recycle or Reuse The COC is dispersed lead-paint flakes. The lead paint material is not dense enough to be separated from the soil to be recycled or reused.This alternative is not suitable to remove the contaminant from the site or reduce potential exposure pathways. Alternative 2: Destruction or Detoxification The lead at the site is also not organic, corrosive, or explosive and is relatively immobile. This alternative is not suitable to remove the contaminant from the site or reduce potential exposure pathways. Alternative 3: Separation, Concentration, or Volume Reduction Under this alternative, contaminated material may be completely or partially separated from material that is not contaminated, or contamination may be reduced in a large volume of material by concentrating the contaminant in a smaller volume. Soil particle size separation is conducted to reduce contaminated soil volume, soils at Hakalau and lead paint flakes are not suitable for volume reduction in this form and contamination would not be reduced significantly. Alternative 4: Immobilization of Hazardous Substances Portions of the site exceed gross contamination and fail TCLP. Soil in some DUs would be classified as hazardous waste if removed for disposal (areas of 8390 sq ft). This soil cannot be disposed of in Hawaii as there are no facilities that are permitted to accept hazardous waste. Reducing bioavailability by stabilizing the lead with a strong buffering agent application was tested to reduce the concentration which could allow for disposal in the state (e.g., through the application of triple superphosphate (TSP) as an amendment to the soil). This would be in conjunction with soil excavation and removal and would not be used for in-situ stabilization. Treated soil would be hauled to RCRA subpart D permitted landfill (e.g., West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill). TSP is a commercially available soil fertilizer than can also be used to reduce the mobility of lead in the soil. Phosphate is a compound made up of phosphorous (P) and oxygen (0) and phosphorous atoms that act as an anion that binds readily to lead cations. TSP can also be combined with different ions to impact solubility under acidic conditions. It is most commonly used as fertilizer produced from phosphate rock and phosphoric acid and is technically known as calcium dihydrogen phosphate and as monocalcium phosphate, [Ca (H2PO4)2.H20]. Treatability studies for in situ lead stabilization that used phosphate-based binders found a significant reduction in the bioavailable lead in soil when it was amended with TSP (Hettiarachchi et al. 2001 and Gene 2008). TSP can also be combined with different ions to impact solubility under acidic conditions. Based on the high concentrations of lead in soil at the Hakalau site, TSP was not considered as a potential in situ stabilization remedial alternative approach. Instead, TSP is evaluated in this alternative and was considered as an amendment to be added to the contaminated soil after it is excavated in an effort to reduce the toxicity through immobilization/stabilization of the soil to allow it to be disposed of on island. This is a variation 29 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum of the scenarios that are evaluated under Alternative 5. As part of the remedial alternative evaluation, in May of 2022, KPC collected a bulk sample using ISM from the most heavily impacted areas below the bridge on the southern side of the Hakalau stream from DUs 32 and 33 which had been documented in previous investigations as having the highest total lead concentrations in the project area (DUs 32 and 33 were composed of the consolidated DUs 1, 2, 11, and 21). The study concluded that TSP was effective at reducing the toxicity of lead in the areas where the highest total lead was present. The total lead concentrations from ISM soil samples collected from DU32 and DU33 were 11,400 mg/kg and had a respective TCLP result of 25.6 mg/I, which is well above the RCRA toxicity characteristic for lead of 5.0 mg/L. However, if TSP is added to an aliquot from this same ISM from DU32 and DU33 at a concentration of just 5% of the total soil mass, the TCLP results were shown to reduce concentrations below the laboratories method reporting limit (or in other words non-detectable dissolved lead). This was achieved without any additional pH buffering additives and demonstrated that immobilization/ stabilization using TSP is highly effective and ratios that are economically feasible. As a component of the bench test treatability study in addition to evaluation of the effectiveness of immobilizing lead by adding TSP as an amendment, KPC also evaluated the effectiveness of adding Portland Cement as a way to stabilize the lead. The concept was that if Portland Cement could both buffer the soil to reduce the mobility of the lead and create a material that is could consolidate the lead soil as long-term management to reduce disposal costs (e.g., construct an onsite encapsulation cell). Portland Cement was added to the impacted soil at a typical mass ratio for making concrete (1:3). Samples of the soil were weighed, and Portland Cement was mixed with the soil, no other sand or gravel was added and because the soil already had a high moisture content, water was not added to the mix. After the mix was cured, samples were pulverized and submitted to Eurofins for analysis. TCLP analysis on this final material also showed that Portland cement is able to reduce the TCLP result to below the laboratory reporting limit without the addition of TSP Appendix D. Alternative 5: On-site or off-site disposal, isolation, or containment This method offers a good option to prevent the general public from coming into contact with lead-impacted soils. There are three scenarios evaluated in the RAA that are considered effective presumptive remedies for addressing lead-impacted sites by the EPA. Generally, if lead-impacted soil remains on-site it will be encapsulated and direct exposure to park users is prevented, however, site maintenance workers/construction workers may come into contact with it in the future. An Environmental Hazard Management Plan (EHMP) will need to be maintained and updated when future work activities are planned in areas where encapsulated contaminated soil is present. A project-specific construction EHMP (C-EHMP) will need to be prepared for each future repair and construction activities need to plan for managing lead- impacted soil to be protective of all potentially exposed receptors for the duration of the project. Alternatively, if lead-impacted soil is removed in its entirety from the site as a remedial approach then all potential exposure risk is removed and no EHMP is required for the long term. 30 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum This alternative presents the remedial alternatives that reduce or remove contamination from direct contact with receptors at the site. Due to the overlapping rounds of sampling and DUs that have occurred between the period 2016 and 2022, Tables 5-1 and 5-2 identify the total area of the exceedances broken down by landowner, location, and DU. Table 5-1: HDOT and Privately Owned Parcels which exceed 800 mg/kg Stream Area Perimeter Total Side Owner(Description) Lead DUs (sq ft) (ft) (sq ft) North HDOT(ROW) 800+mg/kg 5885 313 5,6,34 South HDOT(ROW 800+mg/kg 5510 331 1,2,7,33, 22 Streamside) (partial) South HDOT(ROW Roadway) 800+mg/kg 3026 285 7,32,33, South HDOT(ROW Upslope) 800+mg/kg 10805 421 1,7,11, 21,32,33 South Wolf Property 800+mg/kg 5219 308 22,27 (Streamside) Not sampled, South Wolf Property 800+mg/kg 1817 248 likely 800 mg/kg (Roadway) + South Wolf Property 800+mg/kg 10382 404 8,20,26 (Upslope) South Marian Land Co(makai 800+mg/kg 3907 345 12, portion 13 of bridge) Total HDOT Area 800#mg/kg 25,226 Total Privately Owned Parcel 21,325 Total Area 800#mg/kg 46,551 Table 5-2: Hawaii County and Privately Owned Parcels which exceed 200 mg/kg and are below 800 mg/kg * Stream Area Perimeter Total Side Owner Lead DUs (sq ft) (ft) (sq ft) North Wolf Property(mauka) 200+ mg/kg 5847 310 202241 North Marian Land Co 200+ mg/kg 4100 267 202239 (makai) North Side:Between 200-800 mg/kg 9947 South County of Hawaii 200+ mg/kg 36017 875 16, 17,18,37,38 36017 South Wolf Property upslope 200+ mg/kg 9035 374 202244 9035 South Marian Land Co 200+ mg/kg 1355 161 13 1355 South Side:Between 200-800 mg/kg 46407 Total Area 200-800 mg/kg 56354 *All HDOT DUs exceed 800 mg/kg 31 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 5a: On-site isolation and containment HDOH and EPA-acceptable mitigation measures include soil encapsulation. During soil encapsulation, DUs which exceed HDOH unrestricted land use EALs (200 mg/kg) (Figure 5-1) for lead would first be covered with orange mirafi (geotextile) or black geotextile material with caution tape laid at intervals to produce a visible barrier between the clean and impacted soils (Table 5-2). Confirmation visual confirmation will be conducted to ensure that all targeted soil is covered. • Clean fill would be brought in and overlaid across the impacted site at a depth of either 18 or 24 inches and grass would be maintained to prevent potential exposure (Table 5-3). Additional cubic yards of clean soil would also be needed for drainage and grading. An exposure assessment conducted at nearby Kolekole Beach Park in 2017 for park maintenance workers demonstrated the grass cover on the impacted soil areas effectively prevented a complete exposure pathway while performing maintenance activities (e.g., lawn mowing). The results of this assessment also demonstrated that grass cover was protective of park user exposure scenarios as long as there were restrictions on activities that could render the grass cover ineffective (e.g., digging, driving fence posts, etc.). This may be suitable for the County of Hawaii Park Parcels but may not be adequate for the HDOT ROW due to high COPC levels. This option leaves the lead-impacted soil on site (including areas of Gross Contamination) and an EHMP would still be needed. Batch Test Leachability analysis demonstrated that lead is immobile and unlikely to affect groundwater and surface water. Workers within the DOT ROW would need respirators when performing maintenance tasks where they are digging/trenching in soil. Table 5-3: Alternative 5a: No Removal, Cap Only, Cubic Yards Cubic Yards Ownership Sq Ft Clean fill 18" Grass Clean fill (24") Cap Grass Cap County of Hawaii 200-800 mg/kg 36017 2001 2667 HDOT ROW (North) 800+ mg/kg 5885 327 436 HDOT ROW (South) 800+ mg/kg 19341 1075 1433 Private Parcels (North) 200 - 800 mg/kg 9947 553 737 Private Parcels (South) 200—800 mg/kg 10390 577 770 Private Parcels (South) 800+ mg/kg 21325 1185 1580 Total 102905 5718 7623 32 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Annual operation and maintenance costs are not typically high for this alternative; however, the location could be impacted by erosion due to heavy rains and storms. The hard cap and soil cover option may be undermined during large storms. If this occurs, additional soil or hard cap repairs may be needed. If evidence of erosion impacts the mirafi layer, there is a potential that impacted soil may be spread over areas currently identified as "lower risk" and additional sampling could be required. It is vital that this cap is maintained to protect park users. Areas where this would be impracticable (steep slopes, areas of intense vegetation/trees on the southern embankment) would be fenced and signs would be maintained to restrict access. 5b: Removal of all soil which exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill DUs which pass TCLP and exceed HDOH Tier I unrestricted land use EALs for lead (200 mg/kg) (Figure 5-1) will be excavated, hauled to West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill, and replaced with clean fill at a design fill depth of 24 inches. DUs in the County of Hawaii parcel meet this standard. Other locations, particularly the DOT ROW area and some private parcels, do not meet this standard and may require disposal off-island (Table 5-4). Table 5-4: Alternative 5b—Soil Removal 200+ mg/kg, Clean Fill, Cubic yards Ownership Sq Ft DU ID Remove soil (12" estimate)that Clean fill Clean fill exceeds 200 mg/kg(CY) 18" (CY) 24" (CY) County of Hawaii 36017 16, 1334 2001 2667 200-800 mg/kg 17,18,37,38 HDOT ROW (North) 5885 5,6,34 218 327 436 800+ mg/kg HDOT ROW (South) 19341 1,2,7, 11, 21, 716 1075 1433 800+ mg/kg 22, 32, 33 Private Parcels (North) 9947 202241, 368 553 737 200-800 mg/kg 202239 Private Parcels (South) 10390 13, 202244 385 577 770 200-800 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 21325 8, 12, 13, 790 1185 1580 800+ mg/kg 22,27, 26 Total 102905 3811 5718 7623 Initial costs would be high as soil which is classified as hazardous waste could not be disposed of at facilities in Hawaii. DU1, DU2, DU11, and DU21 failed TCLP at different depth profiles, (0 to 3-inches bgs), and near-surface soil (3 to 6-inches bgs) (Table 5-5). This is approximately 8,390 sq ft. It is possible that DU2, which was not tested at the time, could also fail TCLP due to its high total lead concentrations. DU2 is approximately 2,444 sq ft but both 0.25-inch depth layers are likely to fail TCLP so at least 0.5 feet would be removed and would require off-island disposal. 33 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Table 5-5: DUs which Failed TCLP (2016) and Require Mainland Disposal DU Owner sq. ft Depth* CY Total Lead TCLP mg/kg DU-1B HDOT 5847 3 - 6 inches 54.14 7880 26.2 DU-11 HDOT 1228 0- 3 inches 11.37 8820 31.8 DU-21 HDOT 1315 0- 3 inches 12.18 5080 14.2 DU-2A HDOT 2444 0- 3 inches 22.63 10200 Fails TCLP* DU- HDOT 2444 3 - 6 inches 22.63 9480 Fails TCLP* Total 13278 122.94 Soil Excavation,and Off-Site Disposal of all soil which exceeds the HDOH Tier 1 EAL for unrestricted land use for lead(200 mg/kg)Replace contaminated soil with clean fill. Note=DUs 2A and 2B are assumed to fail TCCP based on total lead concentrations *As a conservative measure assume that an entire 0.5 will be removed from each of these DUs total of 246 cubic yards(123 CY x 2=226 CY). Confirmation sampling will be conducted to ensure that all targeted soil is removed from each DU. All DUs would be excavated in 6-inch lifts until confirmation samples indicated that soil concentrations were below the HDOH EAL for unrestricted land use (200 mg/kg). Approximately 103,000 sq ft of soil would need to be removed to various depths. For this alternative, we used an estimated depth of 12". The depth may be less on a site-wide average (Table 5-3). Clean fill would then be brought in and overlaid across the impacted site at a depth of 24 inches and grass would be maintained to prevent potential exposure. Additional clean soil for drainage grading would be needed. An archaeological consultation and monitoring would be required during the excavation. The lead-impacted soil would be removed, therefore an EHMP will not be needed. Once removal is completed, soil onsite would not require an EHMP. The primary maintenance item would be cutting grass and addressing any erosional issues to the grass cover over the new layer of imported soil. 34 M N O ..*....;'.. ...-f/om � "! " a+ + 'I v O J C J S !J O N fi / '8 ��°d' ti^ � � �5 1 �, � SSSS f1ice. T 5 ,, O > 2 2 1 .� .% ' p N N Ii Q b' vN m• d I- N C= V = Qc r ti o Ngg N V F ,:p 1,y 4a- R A ,, M • ^w .11 , ,err �� �r U ,r1� , • ��s meq ..!1°..,....z' � p •y �'� r�., E • p d 14 r. r 4 r, C r r a ca :t' - ir) Q1 «sit +fi '. • y '' fir.] � '++ ,.. 3 Gil I. ni L Cl T . « - u1 I ? fit+ d -4.. w NA ui cc ,.� .. at lit q / y W" �y Y E li e S• K O N O 0 Cu o � CU •C 4 • v • Q 2 L L .2 cYcs • Q O] — • N (0 Y v (0 S K Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 5c: Removal of soil that exceeds 800 mg/kg for lead, containment, and replacement with clean fill. DUs within the HDOT ROW and privately owned parcel exceed the HDOH EALs for the construction/trench worker exposure for lead (800 mg/kg) (Figure 5-2). This is approximately 46,551 sq ft. (See Table 5-1). Soil from these DUs will be removed. Confirmation sampling will be conducted to ensure that all targeted soil is removed. The soil will be replaced with clean fill at an estimated fill depth of 24 inches (Table 5-6). DUs which exceed the HDOH EALs for unrestricted land use for lead (200 mg/kg) would first be covered with orange mirafi (geotextile) or black geotextile with caution tape laid at intervals to produce a visible barrier between the clean and impacted soils. Clean fill would then be brought in and overlaid across these DUs at a depth of 18- 24 inches and grass will be maintained to prevent potential exposure. Additional cubic yards of clean soil may also be needed for drainage and grading. Table 5-6: Alternative 5c—Soil Removal 800+ mg/kg, Clean Fill Cubic Yards Cubic Yards Remove soil (12" Clean fill Ownership Sq Ft estimate)that18„ Clean fill (24") exceeds 800 mg/kg County of Hawaii 36017 2001 2667 200-800 mg/kg HDOT ROW (North) 5885 218 327 436 800+ mg/kg HDOT ROW (South) 19341 716 1075 1433 I. 800+ mg/kg Private Parcels (North) 9947 553 737 200—800 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 10390 577 770 200—800 mg/kg Private Parcels (South) 21325 790 1185 1580 800+ mg/kg Total 102905 1724 5718 7623 37 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Figure 5-2: Removal of Soil Over 800 mg/kg, Cap 200 mg/kg ,,. . .,,,, .:.. „... , „,., .. , t.-N , ..-•'-' �a � yw�e�,,avapARP x " t a` ' y °' V " � d *4', ---:- dry y , ', '. ,�.1 r'fpi �}i "tp ,,';. a.s. , + "+.,;',`Y y .,k X34 • g, 38 411-/18‘:–. � 1M,, 310C1001 � i i " yA`>� � fir}" '+, .* r.=r .� ;;'',._ Bea• Park , 1� �� t . 4' ,''''--,'N", / j //:17: xis`" 1 t J. 0--- 'O\ — 0225 3 H�•• .;.,...•,C". :;v :rX 4S14"1,1344:".• q t T 9 '•y a •,, z VJ f p�'mIP • 22 _ � " {`r , . . moS � �2 *x � 4 ' . p "`4. 4/ ZD .. ^ t.A V� T .,. .'AO, .r:a v5: X26 �. . , #r.r � r,. r .r„a� -t 8 Private and HDOT ROW:Over 800 mg/kg '�¢ O.Kat' 'd�"•L ®County of Hawall Area:200 mg/kg f r w .'Z'.,. ±•qy,{ "a _�` G �\,; �i Tax. Parcels:TMK IDs i"' "t `ti14P. � .." 0 Previous DUs:Lead Sample Results Above 800 mg/kg �'. ° Cy�0" ., - DecLLj D ision Units Hakalau 2016 y� t '" nn l. "� " r°,1 '1 *".4",40,4t*�, 2 Previous Otis:Lead Sample Results Between 200-800 mg/kg 3'' .' „ -;It/. - ":0' Pl`m 4:c.„ 2022 Sampling:Between 200-800 mg/kg ..ri,HERE;Gartnu •"�' •�- ''^` ° _ - 5►,, . ' ,�6\0 S..` ..,...7-'4„,t4:1 T-'4'^. ` 0 Surface Water Alternative 6: Institutional Controls or Long-term Monitoring This option removes harm to the public but does not remove or reduce the impacts from the site. This option also removes the use-value from the site. Archaeological consultation and monitoring would be required during the excavation period (approximately five weeks). A portion of the lead-impacted soil would remain on-site, therefore an EHMP will be needed. Initial costs would be high as soil which is classified as hazardous waste could not be disposed of at facilities in Hawaii and be required to be disposed of in the mainland United States. DU1, DU11, and DU21 failed TCLP at different depth profiles, (0 to 3-inches bgs), and near-surface soil (3 to 6-inches bgs). This is approximately 8,390 sq ft. DU 2 is also likely to fail the TCLP threshold and has been included for removal as lead concentrations in this DU range between 9480— 10,200 mg/kg. DU2 is approximately 2,444 sq ft. (See Table 5-5). Annual operation and maintenance costs are not expected to be high for this alternative and would fit in with the park's current budget. The primary maintenance item would be cutting grass and addressing any erosional issues to the grass cover over the new layer of imported soil. 38 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 6 Proposed Remedy Based on recommendations from the site environmental consultant, as well as a review of the site investigation and remedial alternatives reports (Table 4), and public comments, HDOT has selected Option 5b as the long-term solution. Specifically, the HDOT has chosen to implement soil removal and offsite disposal of all soil in the areas which exceeds HDOH Tier 1 Unrestricted Land Use Environmental Action Level of 200 mg/kg for lead, and replacement with clean fill.This option will achieve substantial risk reduction, remove the source of contamination, eliminate the need for an environmental hazard management plan, and remove the possibility of lead-impacted soil or sediment from becoming exposed during flooding/erosion in the future (Table 6-1). 39 mINC o c9 v ro +-, 2 • Ero O .O ba J 0 v, v, N V) N VI 0 .0 O i. z } >- } CU +-, >- } } +� L r^ II O v) a) O c N a C C 4L,, U a) C 0 C U Li, W U u < bA roC C •C o a) ro 1111 ++ o▪ a) 111111111111 .+7, C .., bA by p u0., M1• Z a) a) } r.. a) . -0 C c Q co io ro C 0 a) o C C (0 ro U U Z a) Ua) 0 0 as a) U ate--, V1 L aJJ C L Q7 p F C a-- a) is cU o a) C ,n O a) .§ C LO .0 - C CD 000 c C — o a) 0 a) C co u p ro a)E a) C _a 7 .0 vvi O O N 0 '+7, 0 0 CI) i0 aJ C N 7 I. O V L Z c Z +a), Z Z CU O O 4-, O 0 U U U b.0 d -0 Q i .' C bA d L x to • C co X U O aJ C cc 0 a) L C o o a o 0 a) O 0 U 0 .� U1 c to U N z N S S CU L L Q — `n -0 4-.(1:1O 0 O -0 asOr^ O a) w v a) a) t U ca a co 4-' x 3 ++ co a) a) o a) a"' 0 0 0 0 L +, 0 0 0 0 [a > CIO U Z L r0 Z Z Z Z (a Z Z Z Z a a L C• o U — 0 a„ Q Q) C -t-do Q t C 4-1 c C s_ C vi v1 rl lfl in N c6 v a) N ' a) a) Q7 p N N 72Q Q Lc, I— L U v a) a) U ro . as+� C C `� �^ ro w U C C U o U ro O C O O C a) N a) ro a) a) (9 a) (9 a) a) n a) 0 ao u > +-, v +J +_, C +J 22 > z +J Z Z Co C E 3 b\A ra cs s d q- r° 0 q- 0 q- co 00 co 0 0 ro O x `n ,n ul .'L, U 2 00 a) .) s +-, +� a) a) a) O O L o C C C S CD CO C 0 RI RS RS CO v7 co a) C a•, a•, *.P �+ a•, •a•, •a•, C E a) N0 C C C C C C C a) a) a) a) a1 a) a) O o CL } Z O O O O O O O iD ro +f°•, U a a a a d a a ro0 o O +_ u1 .L U VI rA E' . 0 0 0 W L 0 L ro v1 O L v 0 ro i 0 a) a) To i a c Q a) U v 0 i U 0 u U p i U 0 .o d L -C j co vUi o aa) i ,Un o 4E-', }' C > -a o U +'' -0 0 U m 3 ro vs c aaJ w , c 4-' 2 w rY — 0 0 to 73 v � . U J U to E vi cr) H I- =CC a cc 2 \ \ ro , D 0.0 \ ) Z Z \ / ) \ \ m j j . C C •U $ 3 U ± < OA \ � \ C C C 0 o ro \ 2 ƒ 3@ 2 • m Z Z w / \ { } \ 2 2 2 5 U ± Z C on / \ /lac / \ C Q_ 0 [ { 41 / \ / E \ 0 0 0 z § u o u » m } / ƒ / \ u co = CO co / \ / \ u ... \ E 3 \ \ \ _c kc e E — © k / x o k \ > / bD u J 0. ] Z Z Z ro E / 7 » » J R E @ c d \ \ \ \ \ \ u � / a o Q ) u cu \ j \ » U k Z o Z ‘.7) = E \-, k ' • / \ ° E 2 \ - — # 7 = a) t / / u 2 S ) \ a) / 2 C i 0 ® ro / co / E \ Z c \ 0 2 7 \ % \ \ L2 CO = § _ _ _ ro/ 0 u \ 5 .1,-.–. c \ ® ? K } u / 0 - k \ § = 2 ) R 0 3 & o_ \ 2 ® 3 \ \ U ( s ( \ } _ CG , E P Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Table 6-2: Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, and Volume through Treatment Comparison 5b. Removal of Sc. Removal of all 6b. Institutional and 5a/6.On-site isolation all soil which 6a. Institutional and Engineering soil which exceeds and containment. exceeds 200 Engineering Controls: Partial 800 mg/kg for lead, Grass cap on Park area. mg/kg for lead Controls: Entire Site Reopening and Hard cap on areas of and containment,and Restricted, No Restricted Access to replacement with 800 mg/kg exceedances. replacement Action. Areas of Highest with clean fill. clean fill. Contamination. Toxicity No change- Toxicity:No Change- Toxicity:No Change- contaminants are still contaminants are still contaminants are still present for present for ecological present for ecological receptors, receptors, construction/site Toxicity: Toxicity:Reduced. maintenance crews maintenance crews workers. Impacts are Eliminated and any potential and any potential reduced for maintenance construction/site construction/site crews,the public and workers. Reduced for workers. Reduced for ecological receptors. the public. the public. - Mobility:Contaminant is Mobility: Mobility:Reduced Mobility:No change Mobility:No change potentially mobile during Eliminated but potentially mobile contaminant is contaminant is extensive erosion and Contamination is during extensive potentially mobile potentially mobile damaging storms. no longer present. erosion. through erosion and through erosion an surface runoff. surface runoff. Volume: Volume: Volume:Reduced—all Volume: Volume:No reduction in Eliminated:all No reduction in volume of contaminant contaminant soil above 800 mg/kg No reduction in volume of removed. removed contaminant volume of conta ' 6.1 Long-Term and Short-Term Effectiveness Alternative 5a: Offers short-term effectiveness. The Hakalau Beach Park reopens without soil removal disposal costs. Site work is still needed in terms of applying mirafi, soil, and re- vegetation/stabilization of the site. The park is located in an area that can experience torrential rains and associated flooding, increasing the potential for long-term exposure risks.The site will need to be maintained to ensure that the containment soil cap is not breached. If breached, the park will likely require closure, repairs, and extended period of time out of use for the public. Costs associated with future repairs will need to be considered due to the frequent flooding and scouring in the valley and stream mouth. See Table 6-2 for Treatment Comparison. Alternative 5b: Repairs to the site will take longer, and the park will not open as quickly as under scenario 5a. This alternative has long-term effectiveness. Sitework will include scraping soil, disposing of soils (off-island), laying clean soil, and stabilization. All work will be completed, and additional work is not anticipated. The source should be removed from direct contact for all users. An EH MP will not be needed for the affected area of the park under this alternative. Construction and Landscaping crews would not require additional Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) while working in these DUs after soil removal. Other sources of lead may be present in the park, and areas outside of the DUs may need soil testing. See Table 6-2 for Treatment Comparison. Alternative 5c: Repairs to the site will offer long-term effectiveness. Site work will take as long as alternative 5a but less than 5b and will require additional materials (mirafi). Soil disposal costs 42 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum and soil disposal work will remain high. Sitework will include scraping soil, disposing of soils (off- island), applying mirafi, laying clean fill, and stabilization. An EHMP will also be required as lead- impacted soil will remain on-site in the park area. The removal of soils with total lead greater than 800 mg/kg will mean that construction/trench workers will not require additional PPE while working on the site. Lead-impacted soil may be present in the upper steep gulch slopes and could migrate to the park space below. See Table 6-2 for Treatment Comparison. 6.2 Implementability Alternative 5a is implementable using equipment and supplies from Hawaii County or shipped to Hawaii County. This alternative will require excavators, work crews, clean fill (from Hawaii County), and EHMP document production. See Table 6-2 for Treatment Comparison. Alternatives 5b and 5c are implementable using equipment and supplies from Hawaii County or shipped to Hawaii County. However, both alternatives require off-island disposal costs and shipping. Immobilization using TSP or Portland Cement could be used to eliminate the need for offsite disposal but the uncertainty in the time need to gain regulatory and public acceptance pose a risk to using this approach. These alternatives will require excavators, work crews, topsoil, and clean fill (from Hawaii County), and alternative 5c will require EHMP document production. The source of the topsoil and clean fill will need to be documented that the source is free of chemical and biological contamination (e.g., chlordane, little fire ants, etc.). See Table 6-2 for Treatment Comparison. Alternative 6a will be the easiest to implement. This alternative requires fencing installation and EHMP document production. This alternative will require the County of Hawaii to maintain an EHMP and conduct periodic inspections of the engineering controls (e.g., monthly inspections) reports documenting the results of the inspection (e.g., annual reports). See Table 6-2 for Treatment Comparison. 6.3 Estimated Costs A summary cost table of the alternatives is found below in Table 6-3. All alternatives are assumed to have the same costs for the planning component including project management, permitting, and public meeting support. The planning component is estimated at $44,818 and is included in all alternative costs. For alternatives that consider a soil cap, the thickness of the soil cap can vary from 18 to 24 inches depending on HDOH requirements. This can have an impact on total costs which are summarized in the table below. 43 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum Table 6-3: Cost Summary Table 5c.Removal of all soil 6b.Institutional and 5a.On-site isolation and 5b.Removal of all which exceeds 800 mg/kg 6a.Institutional Engineering containment. soil which exceeds for lead,containment, and Engineering Controls: Partial 200 mg/kg for and replace with clean Controls: Entire Reopening and lead and replace fill. Site Restricted, Restricted Access to Grass cap on with clean fill. No Action. Areas of Highest Park area. Grass cap on Park area. Contamination. Planning Costs Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes EHMP Needed Yes No Yes Yes Yes Soil Removal No Yes Yes No No 300 additional CY clean soil for Yes Yes Yes No No drainage grading. Archeological consultation and Yes Yes Yes No No monitoring Mirafi/Geotextile defined boundary Yes No Yes No No Total Cost including $1,807,166 8,100,000 $3,812,916 $102,171 $252,997 24 inches soil cover O&M Cost-30 years $120,000 $0 $120,00 55,000 55,000 Notes: 1) A standard three(3)percent(%)escalation factor per year should be considered when estimating the cost.Current rates present remedial alternative cost in 2022 dollars. 2) These are rough order of magnitude budgetary estimates(+50%/-30%level of accuracy). 3) There is no cost difference between 18-inch and 24-inch soil cover cost for Alternative 5b.This remedy does not require any additional soil cover beyond the soil needed to replace the volume removed. 44 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 7 Final Remedy Selected The final remedy selected is the proposed remedy: alternative 5b which is the removal of all soil which exceeds 200 mg/kg for lead and replacement with clean fill. This is the final remedy selected because it will achieve substantial risk reduction, removes the source of contamination, eliminates the need for an EHMP, and removes lead-impacted soil or sediment from becoming exposed during flooding/erosion in the future. This remedy costs more than capping or selective removal due to the requirement for off-island disposal of soil that exceeds 800 mg/kg. Costs are estimated at $8.1 Million due to the need for off-island disposal. However, Option 5b offers a permanent reduction of toxicity, mobility, and completely reduces the volume of contamination at the site. It provides the most long-term effectiveness, and the park will not need additional controls. Moreover, the park can be opened for use by the public, site workers, and construction/trench workers with no additional monitoring or maintenance stipulations. 45 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 8 Responsiveness Summary The public comment period on the proposed remedial action described in the Draft RAM was accepted during the 30-day public comment period from June 30, 2023, to July 29, 2023. Eight individuals identified their preferences via email sent to the HDOH HEER office project manager, Mr. Thomas Gilmore, which are included in Table 6 below. Six of the eight supported Option 5b. One supported Option 6a, and one supported 5c. A public notice including the accessibility of the Draft RAM, contact information, and commenting period was published in the Hilo Tribune-Herald on June 30, 2023. The public Factsheet and Draft RAM was available to the public through the HDOH HEER Office website (http://hawaii.gov/doh/heer) during the public comment period. Table 8-1: Public Comments Submitted During Public Comment Phase Public Comment Individual Supports Option 5b Jeff Pereboom Supports Option 5b John Kocol Supports Option 5b Susan Melow Supports Option 6a Randy Simpson Supports Option 5c Paul Landau Supports Full Cleanup Michael Stolp (this is Option 5b) Supports Option 5b Cortney Okumura Supports Option 5b Susan Forbes 46 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 9 References AECOS. 2019. Avian Habitat Survey Kapue Stream, Hamakua District, Hawaii. Feb. Environmental Science International (ESI). 2016. Environmental Assessment, Hakalau Stream Bridge, Mamalahoa Highway (Route 19), Hakalau, Hawaii. ESI Project No. 115064, May 18. Environmental Science International (ESI). 2016b. Work Plan and Analysis Plan for Hakalau Stream Bridge Additional Assessment, Hakalau Stream Bridge, Mamalahoa Highway (Route 19), Hakalau, Hawaii, ESI Project No. 116046, October 3. ESI. 2017a. Addendum to Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan for Additional Assessment at Hakalau Stream Bridge Additional Assessment, Hakalau Stream Bridge, Mamalahoa Highway (Route 19), Hakalau, Hawaii, ESI Project No. 116046, February 1, 2017. ESI. 2017b. Additional Assessment, Hakalau Stream Bridge, Mamalahoa Highway (Route 19), Hakalau, Hawaii, ESI Project No. 116046, February 24. EnviroQuest. 2020. Sampling and Analysis Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan [and Addendum] for Supplemental Lead-Impacted Soil Response Assessment at Hakalau Beach Park, Hakalau, Hawaii. Gene, Fabian. 2008. Treatability Study Report for In SITU lead Immobilization Using Phosphate- Based Binders. U. S. Army Environmental Command Aberdeen Proving Ground. Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). 2007. Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response. Use of laboratory batch tests to evaluate potential leaching of contaminants from soil. April 2007. HDOH. 2012a. Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, Volume 1: User's Guide, Hawai'i Edition, Fall 2011. HODH, Environmental Management Division. Fall 2011 (Revised Fall 2017). HDOH. 2012b. Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, Volume 2: Background Documentation for the Development of Tier 1 Environmental Action Levels, Appendices 2-9. Fall 2011. Prepared by: HDOH, Environmental Management Division. Fall 2011 (Revised Fall 2017). HDOH. 2012c. EAL Surfer. Prepared by: Hawai'i Department of Health, Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response. Fall 2011 (Revised Fall 2017). HDOH, 2016. Public website Clean-up Action: Hakalau Bridge & Beach Park Lead Contamination Fact Sheet. Prepared by: Hawai'i Department of Health, Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response. October 20, 2016 47 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum HAR 11-451. Hawai'i Administrative Rules, Department of Health. Title 11, Chapter 451, State Contingency Plan (SCP). August 2, 1995. Hettiarachchi GM, Pierzynski GM, Ransom MD. 2001. In situ stabilization of soil lead using phosphorus. J Environ Qual. 2001 Jul-Aug;30(4):1214-21. doi:10.2134/jeg2001.3041214x. PMID: 11476498. KPC. 2022. Final SAP for Additional Lead Delineation Environmental Site Assessment and Treatability Study Workplan at Hakalau Beach Park. Hakalau HI. Februar 48 Hakalau Beach Park October 2023 Final Response Action Memorandum 49 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX C ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDY An Archaeological Study in Compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA and HRS Chapter 6E- 8 for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project TMKs: (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 080, 999 and (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, and 999 Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e ahupua'a North and South Hilo Districts Island of Hawai`i DRAFT VERSION Prepared By: Amy Ketner,B.A., Lauren M. U. Kepa'a, B.A., and Matthew R. Clark,M.A. Prepared For: WSP USA A � • 1001 Bishop Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Y r, �. March 2024 ASM f' affiliates ldt.1114 Archaeology•History•Anthropology•Architectural History Hilo Office.(808)969-6066 Fax (808)443-0065 507-A E.Lanikaula Street,Hilo,HI 96720 ASM Project Number 41250.01 Honolulu Office:(808)439-8089 Fax (808)439-8087 820 Mililani Street.Suite 700,Honolulu.HI 96813 An Archaeological Study in Compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA and HRS Chapter 6E- 8 for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project TMKs: (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 080, 999 and (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, and 999; Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e ahupua`a North and South Hilo Districts Island of Hawai`i ASM cf4361 affiliates 1,c1 C Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of WSP USA, Inc., on behalf of the State of Hawai`i Department of Transportation (HDOT), ASM Affiliates (ASM) conducted an archaeological survey for the proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge Project in Kama`e`e and Hakalau Nui ahupua`a,North and South Hilo Districts,Island of Hawaii. The purpose of the current study is to aid HDOT in their efforts to identify historic properties in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)and Hawaii revised Statutes(HRS)Chapter 6E-8 within a roughly 15-acre area where the proposed project will occur that includes portions of several Tax Map Key parcels (TMKs: [3] 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 080, 999 and [3] (3) 3-1-001:001, 022, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, and 999). The project involves the rehabilitation of the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State), which carries Hawai`i Belt Road (Highway 19) over Hakalau Gulch at milepost 15.3, and remediation of the lead contaminated soil beneath the bridge. The Agency has been awarded funds by the United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for this project. As such, the project has been determined to be an Undertaking subject to Section 106 of the NHPA of 1966, as amended (2006), and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800). The project is also subject to review under HRS Chapter 6E-8, and the current study was conducted in partial compliance with 36 CFR 800 and in compliance with Hawai`i Administrative Rules(HAR) §13-275. Portions of five previously documented historic properties were identified within the APE as a result of the current survey. These sites include the former Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070),Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) along Highway 19 (Site 50-10-16-09090), the remains of the old Hakalau Mill and Plantation infrastructure (Site 50-10-16-26591), a section of the Old Mamalahoa Highway aligmnent (Site 50-10-16-30187), and the Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) along the Old Mamalahoa Highway Site 50-10-16-XXXXX), which is documented in the Hawai`i State Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation as Bridge Number 001290001100003 (MKE and Fung 2013:6-2223),but does not yet have a Statewide Inventory of Historic Places site number, and has been designated Temporary Site 1 (or Site T-1)for the purposes of this study. Although the TMK parcel on which the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070) is located within the current APE, the actual house is not and will not be impacted by the proposed project and is recommended for no further work. The Old Mamalahoa Highway alignment(Site 50-10-16-30187)is unlikely to be impacted by the proposed project(see above)and is recommended for no further work. Portions of the Hakalau Mill and Plantation infrastructure site (Site 50-10-16-26591) that are located within the soil remediation area could be impacted by the proposed project, but those impacts should be minimal and the portion of the site within the APE is recommended for no further work. The Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) (Site 50-10-16-XXXXX; T-1) will not be impacted by the proposed project, and no further work is recommended for the current undertaking, however it is recommended that the bridge be recorded by an architectural historian if future projects will have an adverse effect on it. The rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge(State) (Site 50-10-16-09090)will alter and effect that significant historic property. It is recommended that the FHWA and HDOT prepare a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to stipulate measures that will adequately mitigate the impacts of the proposed undertaking. AIS for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Remediation Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama` ,North and South Hilo,Hawaii Table of Contents CHAPTERS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE UNDERTAKING 1 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE) 5 2. BACKGROUND 11 CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT 11 The Legacy of the Mahele Aina of 1848 13 Government Land Grants 14 Land Acquisition in Hakalau and Kama`e`e Following the Mahele 16 Hakalau Sugar Plantation and Railroad Development 16 The Tsunami of April 1, 1946 29 Rebuilding of the Hakalau Mill 32 Construction of the Hawaii Belt Road (Highway 19) and Hakalau Stream Bridge 35 Hakalau Plantation During the Second Half of the Twentieth Century 37 PRIOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 40 3. PROJECT AREA EXPECTATIONS 43 4. FIELDWORK 44 FIELD METHODS 44 FINDINGS 44 Site 50-10-16-09070 46 Site 50-10-16-09090 48 Site 50-10-16-26591 52 Site 50-10-16-30187 75 Site 50-10-16-XXXXX (Temporary Site 1) 78 5. NRHP ELIGIBILITY, HRS CHAPTER 6E SIGNIFICANCE, AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 81 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES ELIGIBLITY 81 HRS CHAPTER 6E SIGNIFICANCE 81 DISCUSSION OF SITE EVALUATIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS 81 Site 50-10-16-09070 82 Site 50-10-16-09090 82 Site 50-10-16-26591 83 Site 50-10-16-30187 83 Site 50-10-16-XXXXX (Temporary Site 1) 85 ANTICIPATED IPACTS AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 85 6. DETERMINATION OF EFFECT 85 REFERENCES CITED 86 APPENDIX A. NRHP REGISTRATION FORM FOR THE HAKALAU PLANTATION MANAGER'S HOUSE (SIHP SITE 50-10-16-09070) 93 APPENDIX B. NRHP REGISTRATION FORM FOR HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE (STATE) (SIHP SITE 50-10-16-09090) 116 11 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i Table of Contents APPENDIX C. HAWAII STATE HISTORIC BRIDGE INVENTORY (MKE AND FUNG 2013) SDOCUMENTATION OF THE HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE (COUNTY) 129 FIGURES Page 1. Location of APE. 2 2. TMK parcels included in the APE. 3 3. Google EarthTM satellite image showing the APE(outlined in red). 4 4. Oblique aerial view to the northeast of the of the Hakalau Stream Bridge(HWY 19) 5 5. Geological units in the APE(Sherrod et al. 2007) 6 6. Soils within the APE(Soil Survey Staff 2019). 7 7. Old Mamalahoa Highway accessing the southern edge of Hakalau Gulch,view to the west. 7 8. Stone stairs accessing the southern edge of Hakalau Gulch,view to the northeast. 8 9. Recreational users on the beach at the outlet of Hakalau Stream, view to the east. 8 10. Gravel access road on the north side of Hakalau Stream,view to the southwest. 9 11. Reinforced concrete ford crossing Hakalau Stream along the access road to the old Hakalau Mill,view to the east. 9 12. Former Hakalau Mill site (current county beach park), oblique aerial view to the southwest. 10 13. Hakalau Beach Park pavilion,view to the northeast 10 14. Informational sign commemorating the history of the Hakalau Mill, view to the east 11 15. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map 2060 by J.M. Donn(1901) showing the APE within Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e ahupua`a. 12 16. Hawaii Registered Map No. 1092 by Lyons and Wall from 1882 showing land grants in Kama`e`e 15 17. Hakalau Mill and gulch,pre-1911 (Hawai`i State Archives,PPWD-4-7-018). 17 18. Hakalau covered bridge and gulch laborers camp, in the mauka portion of the APE, sometime between 1911 and 1929 (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 18 19. Portion of Hakalau Plantation field map from 1900 (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 19 20. Detail of 1903 Registered Map 2225 by Walter E. Wall showing Hakalau Village and the main Government Road that crossed Hakalau Gulch. 19 21. Hawaii Consolidated Railway Map of November 1923 (Hawaii Consolidated Railroad 1926). 20 22. Construction of trestle bridge over Hakalau Gulch ca. 1911 with mill in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023).Note large pile of sediment deposited within the gulch inland of the new bridge. 21 23. Construction of trestle bridge over Hakalau Gulch ca. 1911 with gulch labor camp in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 22 24. Train crossing Hakalau Gulch with mill in background ca. 1911-1920 (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 22 25. View of Hakalau Mill between 1911 and 1915 (State Archives,PPWD-4-7-029). 24 26. View of Hakalau Mill in 1920 (from https://www.facebook.com/farleyohana, accessed February 8, 2023) 24 27. Workers sitting on tramway at the top of Hakalau Gulch, ca. late 1940's (Forbes and Forbes 2023) 25 28. Workers on tramway descending into Hakalau Gulch, ca. late 1940's (Forbes and Forbes 2023) 25 29. 1919 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map of Hakalau Plantation showing details of roadways and buildings. 26 30. Aerial photograph of Hakalau point and bay ca. 1925 (USAAF 1925). 27 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i iii Table of Contents FIGURES Page 31. Construction of new smokestack ca. 1925 (Forbes and Forbes 2023) 28 32. Hakalau Stream Bridge(County) carrying the Mamalahoa Highway across the Hakalau Stream with mill smokestack and railroad trestle in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023). This bridge replaced the covered bridge in 1930. 28 33. Overview of chute leading to mill and the crane below(Forbes and Forbes 2023) 29 34. Hakalau Mill during the April 1, 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 30 35. Flume crossing Hakalau Gulch following the 1946 tsunami (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 30 36. Hakalau Mill in the wake of the 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 31 37. Workers surveying damage at Hakalau Mill following the 1946 tsunami(Muffler and Museum 2015:57). 31 38. Hakalau Mill under construction following 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 32 39. View of Hakalau Mill in 1951 illustrating railroad bridge and flume in foreground and chute in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 33 40. Ca. mid-1950s photograph showing the tramway and repaired flume crossing Hakalau Stream (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 33 41. Hakalau Sugar Mill and Support Facility shown on an annotated version of a 1966 Sanborn map. 34 42. Hakalau Mill in ca. 1974-1979, after it closed(Forbes and Forbes 2023) 34 43. Repurposing of Hakalau Railroad Bridge during the early 1950s (left), and opening of new highway bridge on April 22, 1953 (right) (Forbes and Forbes 2023) 35 44. Hakalau Highway Bridge with cane flume in background(Kanemori 1953) 36 45. Substructure of the Hakalau Highway Bridge (The Honolulu Advertiser 1953) 36 46. Public notice of the indefinite closure of a portion of the old Mamalahoa Highway within Hakalau Gulch(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1978). 38 47. Removal of lead-based paint from Hakalau Bridge in 2002 (Bishop 2002). 39 48. Previous studies conducted in the vicinity of the APE. 41 49. Site location map 45 50. Photograph of the Hakalau Manager's House, ca. 1920s/1930s(Forbes and Forbes 2023) 46 51. 2024 photograph of the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House,view to the southwest. 47 52. Plaque outside the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House 47 53. Hakalau Stream Bridge(Site 50-10-16-09090) crossing Hakalau Gulch,view to the south 49 54. Hakalau Stream Bridge, showing driving deck, oblique aerial view to the southwest. 49 55. Hakalau Stream Bridge supports, view to the north. 50 56. Hakalau Stream Bridge columns and trusses,view to the north. 50 57. Underneath of Hakalau Stream Bridge deck,view to the southeast. 51 58. Hakalau Stream Bridge, view to the southeast. 51 59. Plan view of Site 26591. 53 60. Plan view of the features of Site 26591 documented within the APE. 54 61. Site 26591 Feature J, stone slab staircase,view to the east. 55 62. Hakalau Mill Tramway in use in 1972 (Forbes and Forbes 2023).Note stairs to the left. 56 63. Tram rail track remnants currently used as the base of the staircase, view to the east. 56 64. Site 26591 Feature K,former flume supports crossing Hakalau Stream,view to the west. 57 65. Site 26591 Feature K concrete flume blocks on north side of Hakalau Stream,view to the east 58 66. Site 26591 Feature K, concrete flume supports on the south side of Hakalau Stream,view to the north. 58 67. Site 26591 Feature K, elevated concrete pier in Hakalau Stream, view to the northeast 59 68. Site 26591 Feature K,metal drum with rocks, view to the southeast. 59 69. Site 26591 Feature L,the former location of the Hakalau Mill, aerial view to the northeast. 60 iv Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawai`i Table of Contents FIGURES Page 70. Overview of mill site, ca. 1940's and present, view to the south 61 71. Location of sugar hopper, ca. 1940's and present, view to the northeast. 62 72. Site 26591 Feature L, concrete foundation and sea wall,view to the northwest. 63 73. Site 26591 Feature L, concrete foundation of former machine shop, view to the south 63 74. Site 26591 Feature L, sea wall,view to the northeast 64 75. Site 26591 Feature L, concrete pillar, oblique aerial view to the southeast 64 76. Site 26591 Feature L, concrete foundation wall of former evaporator/crystalizer room,view to the southwest. 65 77. Site 26591 Feature L,portion of former mill crusher wall, view to the northeast. 65 78. Area of mill crusher, ca. 1940's and present,view to the southeast. 66 79. Site 26591 Feature L,remnants of the former crane, view to the west 67 80. Site 26591 Feature L,underneath the former machine shop foundation,view to the east. 67 81. Site 26591 Feature L, sea wall and broken concrete foundation,view to the southeast. 68 82. Site 26591 Feature L,park pavilion and shipping container currently on the foundation of the former Hakalau Mill, view to the southwest 68 83. Oblique aerial view to the northeast of Hakalau Gulch showing the route of the mill access road as a dotted red line. 69 84. Aerial view of raised concrete roadbed and culverts crossing Hakalau Stream. 70 85. Raised concrete ford crossing Hakalau Stream, view to the northwest. 70 86. Portion of 1916 USGS Honomu Quadrangle map showing the APE and the road leading to the gulch laborer's camp along the Hakalau Stream. 71 87. 1954 aerial photograph showing the mill access road crossing the stream(note the runoff from the mill clouding Hakalau Bay). 71 88. Site 26591 Feature N, smokestack in 1946 and present,view to the northwest. 72 89. Site 26591 Feature N, smokestack flue,view to the northeast. 73 90. Site 26591 Feature 0, view to the north. 74 91. Site 26591 Feature 0,view to the west. 74 92. Site 30187,portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway in southern portion of the APE, oblique aerial view to the southeast. 75 93. Alignment of the Old Mamalahoa Highway(Site 30187)through APE, ca. 1911 and present, view to the east. 76 94. Site 30187 retaining wall added in 1931 along a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway within the APE, view to the south. 77 95. Waterworn cobble and mortar guardrail along northern edge of the Old Mamalahoa Highway (Site 30187). 77 96. Concrete posts along the northern edge of the Old Mamalahoa Highway, view to the east 78 TABLES Page 1. Government Land Grants in Kama'e` 15 2. Prior archaeological studies conducted in the vicinity of the APE. 40 3. Archaeological sites located within the APE. 44 4. Features of Site 26591. 52 5. Site significance and treatment recommendations 81 6. Site significance and treatment recommendations 85 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i v 1.Introduction 1. INTRODUCTION At the request of WSP USA,Inc., on behalf of the State of Hawai`i Department of Transportation(HDOT;referred to hereafter as the Agency), ASM Affiliates (ASM) conducted an archaeological survey for the proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge Project in Kama`e°e and Hakalau Nui ahupua`a, North and South Hilo Districts, Island of Hawai`i (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The purpose of the current study is to aid the Agency in their efforts to identify historic properties in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and Hawaii revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-8 within a roughly 15-acre area where the proposed project will occur that includes portions of several Tax Map Key parcels(TMKs: [3] 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 080, 999 and[3] (3) 3-1-001:001, 022, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, and 999; see Figure 2). The project involves the rehabilitation of the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State), which carries Hawaii Belt Road (Highway 19) over Hakalau Gulch at milepost 15.3, and remediation of the lead contaminated soil beneath the bridge. The Agency has been awarded funds by the United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration(FHWA)for this project.As such,the project has been determined to be an Undertaking subject to Section 106 of the NHPA of 1966, as amended(2006), and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800). The project is also subject to review under HRS Chapter 6E-8. The scope of the Section 106 Undertaking and the HRS Chapter 6E-8 Project are identical, and are referred to as "the Undertaking" in the remainder of this report, except where statute-specific language is required. Similarly, the Section 106 Area of Potential Effect (APE) and the HRS Chapter 6E-8 Project Area are coterminous and are referred to collectively as"the APE"except where statute-specific language is required.A detailed description of the Undertaking and the APE are provided in the following section. The current study was conducted in partial compliance with 36 CFR 800 and in compliance with Hawai`i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-275. This report is divided into six chapters. Chapter 1 includes a description of the Undertaking and the APE. Chapter 2 provides background information for the APE, including a culture- historical context followed by a summary of relevant archaeological, cultural, and prior consultation conducted within the APE and surrounding area. Chapter three summarizes archaeological expectations for APE. Chapter 4 presents a description of the archaeological fieldwork methods and results. Chapter 5 presents recommended National Register of Historic Places and HRS Chapter 6E significance evaluations. Chapter 6 presents recommended mitigation measures for the project. DESCRIPTION OF THE UNDERTAKING The Undertaking consists of two components: (1) soil remediation and (2) bridge rehabilitation, and (3) road resurfacing of the Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road. Lead paint was removed from the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) in 2000 and can no longer contaminate the environment, however, prior to the lead paint removal, lead paint flaked and chipped off, thereby contaminating the soil beneath the bridge. The soil remediation involves the removal of up to 24 inches of contaminated topsoil within areas of high lead concentration and the replacement of clean fill material, the depth to be determined by the amount removed. The contaminated soils will be disposed of off-site at a permitted facility either on island or off island. The area will then be regraded to match pre-construction conditions. The purpose of the soil remediation is to restore public use of Hakalau Beach Park and surrounding areas. After the soil remediation work is complete, HDOT proposes to rehabilitate the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) which carries Hawai`i Belt Road (Highway 19) over Hakalau Gulch (Figure 4). The brides steel trestles are deteriorated, and the bridge foundations have been undermined by stream scouring. The proposed rehabilitation involves the replacement of seven existing steel trestles with new, entirely concrete trestles and installing new bridge foundations. The purpose of the bridge rehabilitation is to allow continued unrestricted operation of the bridge and to make it more resilient to extreme natural hazards. Following all of this work, the currently accessible portions of the Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road within the APE will be resurfaced to repair any damage caused by the undertaking. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 1 1.Introduction ,-enrin 2'can0 I I N eQ A AN 0 Area of Detail 0 200 Km I I I I I ,4 c, t 4 I 19 \ 6 1IN \ ,fi _ _\ !. `� 3 �` Ba ii S•trectill ) 7'''l �i) 10i --/ I 4.1, ,00 PO ���.-Tit rroo_ Ha .lau ' \ i Stl C i 200 - . .:,,, /,...,: ,___., i op ri 0 ri:,v.- . \ , . a___ „),:.)) k v ,, ., ,,, 7 _,,,,,-.: .7 Ash* „, i ., ,,. , , . _ , . --,„„ _ , ----,,, : , _,)_ "3°9 1, _.; \ c, ,p .e ' . 1 Ail er y �° `9 Woilea J� Portion of USGS 7.5 Quadrangle Papaaloa,2017 Bal — - 00 .00 200 400 0 APE ', ---1." (\'Ictcr, IV �. 1 it / 1/ 1 6,101 Figure 1.Location of the APE. 2 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction r* N 9. oQ Q s 1z,:z, Area of Detail .,,0 200 Km 1 i I i I • i 11 O'r, J , ( -1-001:006 M4II-001:003 ter' 3)3ori oq 4 ''+* d �, 00 (3)2-9-002:080 el •00. 1AN. t . OA-001:002 40)2-9-0,02:039 �Vw V , r ^ 4.-9-‘ :n %a te' 11 (3)2-9-0021023 ::$.4iiiik 110 ,t " 11 1 , oi PE o 50 100 Meters NII O ax Map Key (TM ` Figure 2. TMK parcels included in the APE. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nut and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 3 1.Introduction �. . t AIca of Detail 3o .r 0 I I I 200 Km 4, Of'11, +e +4 .S r� �, am ,.:. ,,„ 44"d • \. r rr T fi+ if *.failikke011411101" Ph lott f h y "Jifo' , i1e� '. � Nrr ' ' { b9" NS . Pt L , � i •" ,, R 4,'' y Pe' &'G0.. ,, Mq' ` ♦ i .l C pb A g "p',... it‘ 4,.,A)r,,,, 4 ,,ilt:',4« ',..,,,,a" , ,A.K,: '''.,A, y ' 'A, . '', ,•4.. l''. *.'' ' ', .t. ` 1 r r1wP fi ‘b`g �J r u 50 100 1.'. Meters Figure 3. Google EarthTM satellite image showing the APE(outlined in red). 4 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama.` ` ,South Hilo,Hawaii 1.Introduction -11v_ 44 �• fix-# !,, tea n - ,..itk 'p ". , y } � � i • ! -1 �a -;-•"_-_.•• T' a dt �1y ! T _ 7 • • ' t h, ------ -----L'''.:1:'.. �.,. ti d.a �� � r \S� r { r ..0.T . . �S ; � '4 . *� \ ma '.-Z6!`", ti' n;_ -. l : . •q i 4.A%n '11 t/ 4t- ' t , : w. � ,.. ,,,,,r, .._-_,...,,, , ,...--,„,, , :, ..7 t•-•::- --4" .1;"-t; ' 4.r..4" 7 z $• ' I 4, f 414s `,411, -t rro �-,-r 'tT r" ,;;;4,-..,,:•4:,,A,,..-,,...111 :r a.SEy ' *--°11.--4.'•°5s, am iv4,-. i pS - K itktrAft, F'a'S. f '\"X . 44 � ;^ . r!, 1 'il '� i. Y) `�r YgC�lilfi.� Y f �A30 lip, �' -;:t,,,i•"•,,,,;•‘' , •-•'..-.A' ''' •1'44•3Por.:4•'' ''.••-.'t � r '; � ^ t' - r,""' + . 'y' ,� a • + pk -.y N' F i,Y- s„�. -! . ,-.....,..--",r, •,- ''ii`. 2 k. x,36 rn #cam r •6 '1' a". 1` yy -;41,, .y, I Figure 4.Oblique aerial view to the northeast of the of the Hakalau Stream Bridge(HWY 19). AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE) The roughly 15-acre APE (multiple TMK parcels; see Figure 2) encompasses the entire length of the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) plus an additional 100 feet on Hawaii Belt Road at either end of the bridge, plus approximately 600 feet mauka and makai of the bridge within the gulch, and a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway and Old Mill Access Road(see Figures 1 and 3).The APE is situated along the boundary between Hakalau Nui Ahupua`a and Kama`ee Ahupua`a and the Districts of North and South Hilo. Elevations within the APE range from sea level at the outlet of Hakalau Stream within Hakalau Bay to roughly 134 feet(41 meters) above mean sea level (amsl) at the top edges of the gulch. Geologically, this area is comprised of lavas flows of the Hamakua Volcanics Series (labeled"Qhm"in Figure 5) that erupted from Mauna Kea roughly 64,000 to 300,000 years before present (B.P.) (Sherrod et al. 2007). Soils within the Hakalau Gulch portion of the APE,which were created as waters of Hakalau Stream eroded through the underlying lava flows (Soil Survey Staff 2022), are classified as Hilo-Rock outcrop complex on 35 to 100 percent slopes (labeled "909"in Figure 6). Deeper soil deposits found on the less steeply sloped tablelands to the east and west of the gulch are classified as Hilo hydrous silty clay loam on 0-10 percent and 10-20 present slopes respectively(labeled"901"and"903"in Figure 6). The terrain on either side of Hakalau Stream is relatively flat, consisting of alluvial deposits of sand, gravel, and waterworn pebbles,cobbles,and boulders flanked by the steep,nearly vertical gulch edges to the north and south. The climate in the vicinity of the APE is moderately warn,with a temperature that typically ranges between 72 and 77 degrees Fahrenheit throughout the year(Giambelluca et al. 2013). This area receives a mean annual rainfall of approximately 3,615 millimeters (142 inches), with the highest rainfall occurring during March, and the least amount of rainfall occurring during May and June(Giambelluca et al. 2014). Trade winds usually blow from east to west across this region, except when kona winds are blowing (typically during the summer months), and the wind pattern is reversed. Owing to the warm weather and ample rain, vegetation cover within the APE is fairly thick, consisting of a ground cover that consists primarily of grasses, weeds, vines. fiddlehead ferns (ho`io; Diplazium sandwichianum), and elephant's ear (`ape;Alocasia macrorrhizos) interspersed with stands of coconut(niu; Cocos nucifera), ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia), pandanus (hala; Pandanus tectorius), bamboo (Bambusoideae sp.), hau (Hibiscus tiliaceus), banana (Musa sp.), mango (Mangifera indica), banyan (Ficus sp.), miconia (Miconia Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 5 1.Introduction calvescens), and African tulip (Spathodea carnpanulata). Ornamentals and planted tree species such as kukui, avocado, and breadfruit are present in the northeastern portion of the APE near the former location of the Hakalau Sugar Mill and the current County of Hawai`i Beach Park. The APE can be accessed from the southern side of Hakalau Gulch via the Old Mamalahoa Highway(Figure 7) and a set of stone stairs leading to the former Hakalau Mill site (at the coast along the southern edge of Hakalau Stream; Figure 8). The Old Mamalahoa Highway alignment is currently gated at the top of the gulch to prevent unfettered vehicular access, but the stairs and the old roadway both allow for easy pedestrian access into the gulch, and frequent recreational use of the shoreline area at the outlet of Hakalau Stream was noted during the current fieldwork (Figure 9). The alignment of the Old Mamalahoa Highway, which crosses Hakalau Stream, formerly continued up the northern side of Hakalau Gulch,but that section of the road washed out and was closed in 1978. The old highway now terminates at a gravel road that provides accesses to the coast on either side of Hakalau Stream. The northern fork of that road extends straight to the coast (Figure 10), while the southern fork, which formerly provided vehicular access to Hakalau Mill, crosses Hakalau Stream via a reinforced concrete ford before extending to the coast(Figure 11).Both forks of the road pass under the Hakalau Stream Bridge(State). The former site of the Hakalau Mill, which closed in 1974 and was dismantled in 1979, is now marked by a concrete seawall, a series of large concrete foundations, and other industrial remains perched against the northeastern edge of the gulch between the ocean and Hakalau Stream(Figure 12). The mill foundations are now the site of a pavilion and a shipping container associated with the County of Hawai`i's Hakalau Beach Park(Figure 13), which was created in 2006 when the County acquired the Mill parcel. A few picnic tables meant for park users are also present along the southern edge of the stream between the bridge and the mill site, and an informational sign commemorating the history of the Hakalau Mill is present at the bottom of the stone stairway that provides pedestrian access to the park (Figure 14). That history is expanded upon in the Culture-Historical Context for the APE provided below. , Qhnr lC IFC; yr Qhm Urn `r. Qhm 01121 Qhm O APE — Ql 11,000-64,000 yr Laupahoehoe Volcanics Qhm 64,000-300,000 yr Hamakua Volcanics 0 Meters Sherrod.I).0.,Sinton.JAI..Watkin;.S.I..and 13mn K.M.,2007.Geologic Map of the State of I Iawat'is I'.S.Geological Surges Open-File 0 200 400 '.<anort?ow_louo g3 p.,5 plates.scales I'1 nn ntut and I 'zn ono alp datahrt,e Accessed: z 5.2022 Figure 5. Geological units in the APE(Sherrod et al. 2007). 6 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction N it it c--1 '''. --"' 7,'„. '''''NI*, f, . t . r) . . 1. -"r4k" IV ,,• ,�►; ,y. . ,:• .a ,` MD •'43 909 'K .. r rc'4111.- %tel t" • ,o / _.2„,,..` :... ,, Ji«-.'- _'rte,. ` ▪ .'..... 0 APE 901-Hilo hydrous silty clay loam.0 to III percent slopes 903-Hilo hydrous silty clay loam.10 to 20 percent slopes 0 Metrrs 909-Hilo-Rock outcrop complex,35 to 100 percent slopes o s„ lao Figure 6. Soils within the APE(Soil Survey Staff 2019). ,. .,Y Mill `� I r '.II -jam #JY l� 6a.Ik^ . 'r', -i I L tI . 4 �� � ii..l.. a /.11 ` '''1 !1 51/4 ......milmi "•P'' : .: ' Niglirli: :. .-. N-4- -Sf." ..-* '--' . -:- ' 'Ca.'t'L.-- '-'. ''.-,Z. -..'''..-'..1 '+' .0,:. lg. • e to�—, -� 1'..7,..'.,-,;-:!....-t; / F 4 . , x 'r - *l aG'"1k 1 - .. - A . �`. / ,. ",dial yh. r r r a •.. 11hila. I a 1 T ...„ t_ ..p•,..1)1 1 if: ,...;-...A, . :- . . ' l'''Ia.:C.-A' VitiEl :) ' I l' ,Ot,-,.., - r1 Figure 7.Old Mamalahoa Highway accessing the southern edge of Hakalau Gulch,view to the west. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 7 1.Introduction ��yy,�? I9 ,, `` 11 h ' „ . 4 .).4147,,! / ':,,,,,,!..‘-.."1 r 9, ,'m fi`- p �,�I W,14....,....,, _ .,,, , , . „ I 'I i 9 - t , J. +t .; � �t 1 �� 0 1. I I I ,c ?"� .. '$'''.,.' r ,`y[ T. til !:� �..L i� '11 a 4_ a. • X.'''„,,k, ,, . ,,,,,,,,,,,_ P. *04 ' -,i J ylcs ii� Yii ' I': ` E,, ,. „4-412,,,-, k ! ii. ' „I''',: 'i4 >+ ”` � r � ; , /DnY _ t!� 1 'r �� r d A I rL^/ '1TZ. /d.Fh I # ,, ,, E y • — r! t: - �w.i" NllZt� rI 4 ik4,,4*-- is x .1',41,,"''':',;", ,--i.';,,a / ,,,., ,.,,,,..,..,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,, ,,,, ,,,, :‘,„:,._ . , ,,,,,,,,„,_ ,,, ...„.,,,,,:Q , -,_:_ ._ ,,,,,, ,,,,,,, ._.,, ,,„,,,,,_-, ,,,,,„ ,,.....„..,„„,„,_ .,.,,,,,,...„: , : ,,,.,., - , ‘,,,;,; . ,,,..,.,„,..k ,.;' , t'-.Z-1.'fft,..141e, '.-.:- � f ,f4''''''':',-„,' � 4i A ', p`4 y A4?t y . 5v � `yrt/� rte"p, �.: ,-.'.._--- —f...,:-.: 7+ ,.'�.r At' r�o ' ,�E".'. . t,1�Qc� �. -_ �= ' '"d ------,,,k1.--_ yew ,. pto, 0 ,,,,,,,70,,,,,;„-- (L-,„--,0„<:.y�1.-...-r- Y ,fir- _ - ,,,_..i"." 3U'''' ' s.e '' p100 — ' __ .._ _ _"„ __ ,.;10.....„--i,-;-•-`4rr -' s e_74, ....' 4*- , F - , 7, /', ra�jj 6= /'{< 7'�� liielt — 4 -� ''., ler - ' i ' .--i,-4 .".,,,,tc.-- -c:4--.v.,- :' ---,4-,.---0,..7;,-.7.,,,„ :t giv,-.3,4, ,,,,.,,,, ..,,, .,, ,....- ,, Figure 8. Stone stairs accessing the southern edge of Hakalau Gulch,view to the northeast. 'y ,, _ . • � _ t 9 7 .e.4rs., rl„r . + .- "`" .%` +" ,tea a .... Figure 9.Recreational users on the beach at the outlet of Hakalau Stream,view to the east. 8 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 1.Introduction ,.0• . , . , ,,. . . ,..„._,... ' , -44.' --; -1-',-i" . :.6.-,•'..r '4 -4.,...;4`. ,,,, •;',* '-'°"1"-,,-,,4.' ,,J ,41 7.4,„,,,-", • i. , le".;'''''-6 ^. k-r•-c----7-1,_. ' ',N.-,:i...• 7,4- ' '' ..'s4' 4 ' - • ' 2.. ^, i :".i -- --1' *.kr,'''•••` i.t '^'..,.---,_. '' I .....„ , . *i.e.?, . • si v.. 1 • •,, .:,- ,. ..?., t, - - . . ' 1:-.:- - ,...• ....4„,e,4-4, 7,.•• V• \ ,:<,' ,. '• , t • '.''' f zil,k,i, .74.:,:.1....... : ,,,:te...7, 7.:vii:$0.*.k...:-* .,,---, = . -,- 1/4,. ,i=N4q- . I i . • ,-...- :,,f--,.. .,..----_-',„ ,, ---,....,..--,-,.., - - .;•• • --... 1 i ' ' 'frt=4' -- a_, 1 ,/,;" I 1., :,, ,• .k.4.-. i 7 4., 1 . . '' --'"1,7-:2 '',"..,,,7,, f41.,, -'.• III ' • , • - I,'.'''''.i.r;,;,'" 'k-r...P. ----.----. '...'"tt.'- 4,, "•,., ,,**,e4-0, -, ,74, .,..4A....',*itt,,"---::, - -,,',,",.. ''.."." . 44. .. ---_4,,,,,, , '74.0.4.to„,„--7,,:,• ',. - . • „ , -,:,.-x, .,:., , 4' • . a:114hoo'v--...-110-- -IfigNalltA6- INW44111444"0".'40444' - ,-;',... '- ' s . . .„.r.: : ,;:',kt_.. .„:,,,,:...0_,.......r....e..,.' .....lor,•,,,,r.,,, ;.2.1:4,--:(1'..,_ - , " • Figure 10. Gravel access road on the north side of Hakalau Stream,view to the southwest. - :4:1;,-- -- • 44 -: ' , 1.' ''''-‘1.' ', ' 7''''. --, '.,:%' ' A; ,,,....."".....,"7-, _'1,1.k,,,,,4'.,„ ' '.''„,,i- -4, 17.-' -,...,i 'ile'., - il;• ... •..''• .(.41:-,4' ..',' ......-- .. ..- - ...-...,"„.00•6 , • - , - ‘-. ,...,.,.4,' , .t-:., -;`,0,,,' , - - ,' "-if.ls'ct...,7" .--%A*4441'4 r;.$7,-1_ ,••.- L-- • ; 4-4 ; • 7': ,, -!..ili' ‘• 'i-t - , , 2 s.,:Y:,.70'1114i',1 :,,-4,1,?' ..,y:-,'-, ',.,1().,:41...,,e,ie'r,=-4-,,, ...jap, ., ''.-4.'i. IV4t Ai. ;,' ' ' -••,. •` ' ". .-'f al'4' 44.k:";.‘ 47'VC.'` ,' ' r.„. ,....„. - „:,-- f.1 Pl.' •/ ' ,-- ,• , 1 • ""'"'- -- . - -,--"-% h,..^,..".. ri i' :)U.:2:-•-' ,,..'.7. '...?•':' 414:e i f..„ ',.`,V' ,'-'7"; .. '' :0,--.-t;:1..i-..e. .----,r .4,"' ';', ;.,./...,`4,.., ,-. ' , .'..-"'',.-.. ' -4;'A, .4',:,`•'..iiiit, ..., y.. . r'-: '43i-::'-4,7 . •---,#:'".%%?,-,,y;'.-..,,--_4 -4.0,..-,.;c.---!?i'-..•,,ii,-• ,"s. .0* 41.' '(` iAtWf"-,-•' - -A.; -.-.I , ,,,, '. iie... •114.-SVile.-,"7-7. .... if; - ..‘- to... \ :- ' • r'' 4i.t.....---- ,4-n ..., . -.14.- - . ....a.t.is.,,.. ..-, 2- ,-,,„, .....- itifer- -..-_---- _ _ , , ------ --,,,.- _.' _ .:-.1_ '-',--,-,„,, • , . _ • - ' -7-..-----47,--1.:,.-- - .....,_,..., — . ' ,.-Y...„11?;,,:r-'',-.7-4".•_..._.1-4/ii. 1111111110--,".- ' ....1 " - --''... ,,,I,-,;•-.!. - - -'...*'' lir . ,,,...,. t -• ..., ,,,. , • .,<. . ' Figure 11. Reinforced concrete ford crossing Hakalau Stream along the access road to the old Hakalau Mill,view to the east. 4• 9 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai1 1.Introduction M i„ ,... - T7? ..I_y sr N ,. . '. iY� Cr ,, Figure 12.Former Hakalau Mill site(current county beach park),oblique aerial view to the southwest. , , -7E `,,4.e ,a,� YJ ti':"'' ff ., ' U - rte, dd'' ( i l q,-d-- --. y �n R • .I ! EY _. - h - b r, __ . Al.,..y :... 'I; - .i --h..44e 04, �1�'c�' � E1"`µ1{I`u'�`�1' ?Ate IF," �L/�`1 L�4 � r^:�!Y' —_ ��.�,il.+�. ;ti : �j@ K.,,S _.'. " { 1ti AAte� ' L /.. 4 I- 1 , it1 9 1+...'}54, (59 . -: - -iK ';' .', Figure 13. Hakalau Beach Park pavilion,view to the northeast. 10Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background l , "Itt :i* w a * a -, ,.6 p COVE* / it. iv d 1. :r. .10 Figure 14.Informational sign commemorating the history of the Hakalau Mill,view to the east. 2. BACKGROUND To generate a set of expectations regarding the nature of archaeological resources that might be encountered within the APE, and to establish an environment within which to assess the significance of any such resources, a general culture-historical context that includes specific information regarding the known history of Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e ahupua`a is presented. This is followed by a discussion of relevant prior archaeological studies conducted in the vicinity of the APE. CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT The APE extends across the ahupua`a of Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e(Figure 15) and straddles the Hakalau Stream, which serves as the boundary separating the modern judicial districts of North and South Hilo. However,prior to its separation in 1886,North and South Hilo were simply known as Hilo—a vast district that extended from Waiakea in the south to `O`okala in the north (King 1935). Pukui et al. (1974:35) translated Hakalau as "many perches" and Maly(in Rosendahl 2009:A-5)noted that its meaning is "descriptive of openings in the cliff face."Although Pulcui et al. (1974)do not provide a translation for Kama'e`e, Maly(in Rosendahl 2009:A-9)interpreted this place name to mean "Contrary Child."A closer review of the words kama and `e`e reveals other possible interpretations including to bind the yellow feathers of the `o`o (Moho nobilis) bird (kama meaning to bind, tie, wrap and e`e meaning yellow underwing feathers of the `o`o bird) or child/person wrapped in yellow 'a'a feathers (kama meaning child, person). This interpretation of Kama`ee is plausible given the historical abundance of native birds in the upper forested regions of Hilo, as well as the numerous mentions of bird catchers in the district as recorded in the proceedings of the Commission of Boundaries in the mid to late 19th century (see section titled Boundary Commission). Traditionally, the district of Hilo was divided into three `okana (sub-districts). Beginning in the north is Hilo Paliku, an area that extends north of the Wailuku River to Ka`ula Gulch, characterized by its upright and densely vegetated cliffs and broad kula (plains)lands (Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation 2012). The Hawaiian proverb,Hilo iki, pali `ele`ele (little Hilo of the dark cliffs) describes this sub-district noted for its greenery, rain, and mists (Pukui 1983:107). The second `okana is Hilo One, or"sandy Hilo," famed for its black sand beach that extends along Hilo Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 11 2.Background Bay between the Wailoa and Wailuku Rivers. The final `okana is Hilo Hanakahi, which extends south of Wailoa River to include Keaukaha(Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation 2012). Hakalau and Kama`e`e are located in the `okana of Hilo Paliku, a name that aptly describes the precipitous bluffs carved by the numerous stream-cut gulches that are characteristic of this region. The cliffs span along the northeastern coastline of Hawai`i Island running north from the mouth of the Wailuku River and broken only by a string of relatively narrow gulches extending down the slopes of Mauna Kea. The larger gulches and kula (broad plateaus) regions were lush, fertile lands, well suited for agriculture. The traditional staple crop, kalo (taro), was cultivated in irrigated terraces along stream edges while `uala (sweet potato), mai'a (banana) and ko (sugarcane) were grown in the wet kula lands of the lower forest zone (Handy et al. 1991). The region had an abundance of kukui (candlenut), `ulu (breadfruit), and niu (coconut) groves and was also rich in marine resources. Although settlements were prominent in these areas, with the increase of population and agricultural production, settlements spread into the upland kula regions. King David Kalakaua also provided a concise description of this region's rough geography and commented on the density of the population there in his book The Legends and Myths of Hawaii: The northeastern coast of the island of Hawaii presents an almost continuous succession of valleys,with intervening uplands rising gently for a few miles, and then more abruptly toward the snows of Mauna Kea and the clouds. The rains are abundant on that side of the island, and the fertile plateau,boldly fronting the sea with a line of cliffs from fifty to a hundred feet in height, is scored at intervals of one or two miles with deep almost impassable gulches, whose waters reach the ocean either through rocky channels worn to the level of the waves, or in cascades leaping from the cliffs and streaking the coast from Hilo to Waipio with lines that seem to be molten silver from the great crucible of Kilauea. In the time of Liloa, and later, this plateau was thickly populated, and requiring no irrigation, was cultivated from the sea upward to the line of frost. A few kalo patches are still seen, and bananas grow, as of old,in secluded spots and along the banks of the ravines;but the broad acres are green with cane, and the whistle of the sugar-mill is heard above the roar of the surf that beats against the rock-bound front of Hamakua. (Kalakaua 1888:284) Hakalau Nui Ahu ua a . / ° a v .. .t1...."... N Clla p t 'S.r��r f /�(7,,,_,4‘..,....,.,4,77,11:71,1%. !„ .0 F l,; 110110 IHakalau Iki Ahupua a @ °. .., ,,, • ®Kama'e'eAhupua'a '/ ; '! }�� ' r, i . ,•. Projeet areal • ... ....• 0— I�"^ fit}"` ,\ L• n.r,... " U N A K.,, E Al- - „.4._ .„,r.i..l..�..H A �`P� ' / I t. `I \ li \ 11 \ \ \ ,. 11 \ ` • f �I . q. co � 1 1.. \ t. , i li1�I\ /. e k , ?Ip.. a u,�,n �,; lfjl l I 4 . '''., : " ,\,': /. \ ` ,� , Figure 15.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map 2060 by J.M.Donn(1901)showing the APE within Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e ahupua`a. 12 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama'a'a,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background The Legacy of the Mahele `Rina of 1848 The arrival of Western explorers in Hawai`i in 1778 signified the end of the Precontact Period, and the beginning of the Historic Period. With the arrival of foreigners, Hawai`i's culture and economy underwent drastic changes. Foreigners very quickly introduced the concept of trade for profit, and by the time Kamehameha I had conquered O`ahu, Maui and Molokai, in 1795, Hawai`i saw the beginnings of a market system economy(Kent 1983). By the mid-nineteenth century, the Hawaiian Kingdom was an established center of commerce and trade in the Pacific, recognized internationally by the United States and other nations in the Pacific and Europe(Sai 2011). As Hawaiian political elites sought ways to modernize the burgeoning Kingdom, and as more Westerners settled in the Hawaiian Islands, major socioeconomic and political changes took place, including the formal adoption of a Hawaiian constitution by 1840, the change in governance from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy, and the shift towards a Euro-American model of private land ownership. This change in land governance was partially informed by ex-missionaries and Euro-American businessmen in the islands who were generally hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands that could be revoked from them at any time. Moi (Ruler) Kauikeaouli (Kamehameha III), through intense deliberations with his high-ranking chiefs and political advisors, separated and defined the ownership of all lands in the Kingdom (King n.d.). They decided that three classes of people each had one-third vested rights to the lands of Hawai`i: the Mo'f,the ah'i and konohiki,and the native tenants(hoa'aina). In 1846, King Kauikeaouli formed the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles (more commonly known as the Land Commission) to adopt guiding principles and procedures for dividing the lands, grant land titles, and act as a court of record to investigate and ultimately award or reject all claims brought before them(Bailey in Commissioner of Public Lands 1929).All land claims,whether by chiefs for an entire ahupua`a or 'ili kupono(nearly independent land division within an ahupua`a, that paid tribute to the ruling chief and not to the chief of the ahupua`a), or by hoa`aina for their house lots and gardens,had to be filed with the Land Commission within two years of the effective date of the Act(February 14, 1846)to be considered.This deadline was extended several times for chiefs and konohiki, but not for native tenants(Soehren 2005). The King and some 245 chiefs spent nearly two years trying unsuccessfully to divide all the lands of Hawai`i amongst themselves before the whole matter was referred to the Privy Council on December 18, 1847 (King n.d.; Kuykendall 1938). Once Kauikeaouli and his chiefs accepted the principles of the Privy Council, the Mahele Aina (Land Division) was completed in just forty days (on March 7, 1848). The names of nearly all of the ahupua`a and kupono of the Hawaiian Islands, as well as the names of the chiefs who claimed them,were recorded in the Buke Mahele (Mahele Book) (Buke Mahele 1848; Soehren 2005). As this process unfolded, King Kauikeaouli, who received roughly one-third of the lands of Hawai`i, realized the importance of setting aside public lands that could be sold to raise money for the government and also purchased for fee simple title by his subjects. Accordingly, the day after the division when the name of the last chief was recorded in the Buke Mahele, the King commuted about two-thirds of the lands awarded to him to the government(King n.d.). Unlike Kauikeaouli, the chiefs and konohiki were required to present their claims to the Land Commission to receive their Land Commission Awards (LCAw.). The chiefs who participated in the Mahele were also required to provide to the government commutations of a portion of their lands in order to receive a Royal Patent giving them title to their remaining lands. The lands surrendered to the government by the King and chiefs became known as "Government Land."The lands personally retained by the King became known as "Crown Land." Lastly, the lands received by the chiefs became known as "Konohiki Land" (Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). To expedite the work of the Land Commission, all lands awarded during the Mahele were identified by name only, with the understanding that the ancient boundaries would prevail until the lands could be formally surveyed. As the Moi and ali`i made claims to large tracts of land during the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the native tenants. To address this matter, on August 6, 1850, the Kuleana Act or Enabling Act was passed, allowing native tenants to claim a fee simple title to any portion of lands which they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved (Garovoy 2005). Additionally, the Kuleana Act clarified rights to gather natural resources, as well as access rights to kuleana parcels, which were typically landlocked. Lands awarded through the Kuleana Act were and still are, referred to as kuleana awards or kuleana lands. The Land Commission oversaw the program and administered the kuleana as Land Commission Awards (Chinen 1958). Native tenants wishing to claim land were required to register their claim in writing (either in the Hawaiian or English language)by submitting a register to the Land Commission who assigned the claimant a number, and that number was used to track the claimant through the entire claims process. Subsequently, the claimant had to get supporting testimony from two individuals (typically neighbors) to confirm their claim to the land. The document generated as part of this process was known as a Native or Foreign Testimony depending upon the language used by the claimant. Upon successful submittal of the required documents, the Land Commission rendered their decision, Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 13 2.Background and if successful,the tenant was issued the LCAw.A total of 13,514 kuleana were claimed by native tenants throughout the islands,of which 9,337 were awarded(Maly 2000). Disposition ofHakalau Nui andKama'e'e As a result of the Mahele, the entirety of Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a was claimed by the high chiefess Miriam Kekau`onohi, who was subsequently awarded these lands as parcel forty-two of LCAw 11216 (Royal Patent Grant No. 7541). Hakalau Nui was one of eight ahupua`a in Hilo that was awarded to the chiefess (Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). Kekau`onohi was the granddaughter of Kamehameha I and at the time of the Mahele was the second largest landholder after the Moa Kauikeaouli. When Kekau'onohi died in 1851, her land went to her second husband, Levi Ha'alelea. Concerning Kama`e`e, based on a review of the Buke Mahele (1848), it appears as though this ahupua`a was divided into three, possibly four sections, with three different ali`i laying claim to each, namely Eseta Kipa, Kalaimoku, Kaaiawaawa, and Kaunuohua. Despite their claims, they each had likely relinquished their interest in their claims as Kama`e`e,in its entirety,was transferred and incorporated into the inventory of Government Lands. As the King and his ali`i and konohiki made claims to large tracts of land via the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the native tenants. To resolve this matter, on August 6, 1850, the Kuleana Act (also known as the Enabling Act)was passed, clarifying the process by which native tenants could claim fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved(Garovoy 2005). The Kuleana Act also clarified access to kuleana parcels, which were typically landlocked, and addressed gathering rights within an ahupua`a. Lands awarded through the Kuleana Act were and still are,referred to as kuleana awards or kuleana lands. The Land Commission oversaw the program and administered the kuleana as Land Commission Awards (LCAws.) (Chinen 1958). No records indicating a claim or award of kuleana lands were found for either Hakalau Nui or Kama'e`e. Government Land Grants In conjunction with the Mahele,the King also authorized the issuance of Royal Patent Grants to applicants for tracts of land, larger than those generally available through the Land Commission. The process for applications was clarified by the "Enabling Act," which was ratified on August 6, 1850. The Act resolved that portions of the Government Lands established during the Mahele of 1848 should be set aside and sold as grants ranging in size from one to fifty acres at a cost of fifty cents per acre. The stated goal of this program was to enable native tenants,many of whom were not awarded kuleana parcels during the Mahele, to purchase lands of their own. Despite the stated goal of the land grant program, this provided the mechanism that allowed many foreigners to acquire large tracts of Government Lands.Unlike in the kuleana claims, where claimants stated their use of the land, the grant records are silent regarding the grantees' intended use. The Royal Patent deeds and survey notes do contain some limited information about geographical features, vegetation, and survey markers, but they generally do not say anything about improvements to the land or land use. No government land grants were sold in Hakalau Nui,however, in the neighboring Kama`e`e,nine grants were sold which are listed below in Table 1. The grant lands extended from the coast to about the 700-foot elevation contour or roughly 1.6 miles inland of the coast and situated on the north side of Hakalau Stream. Except for a grant purchased in 1854 by loela,the remaining grants in Kama`ee were purchased in 1852 and ranged in size from 4.12 acres up to 131 acres (see Table 1). Hawaii Registered Map No. 1092 (Figure 16)prepared by Lyons and Wall in 1882 shows the location of all grants except the one purchased by Ioela (Grant No. 1350). A review of historical maps including the 1925 Hawaii Registered Map No. 2728 by Hockey plots Ioela's grant within Kama'ee between Hakalau Stream and the base of the valley's northern face with the eastern portion of the grant extending into the APE. The 1882 map also shows the route of the Government Road entering Hakalau Gulch and meandering across Hakalau Stream(see Figure 16). 14 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Table 1. Government Land Grants in Kama`e` . Grant No. Grantee Year Acres Notes from Boundary Survey 909 Kapueuhi 1852 16.0 Vegetation noted included niu and puuhala 910 Manuhoa 1852 23.23 Vegetation noted included niu,puuhala, alani as well as built features including an alanui and kahua hale kula. 911 Kahookaamoku 1852 4.75 n/a 912 Kawaikini 1852 19.87 Vegetation noted included `alani,niu,and puuhala. 913 Lau 1852 31.0 Noted vegetation included niu and puuhala. 1056 Keawe 1852 22.20 Noted vegetation included niu. 1057 Manuhoa et al. 1852 131.0 Other grantees named for this property included Puhi, Aikane,Kalua,and Mahiki. 1058 Kekahiko 1852 117.12 Noted vegetation included niu,puuhala, `alani,and Laila (Pride of China;Koelreuteria sp. )as well as built features including an alanui and kahua hale kula. 1350 Ioela 1854 4.12 lila ,. m r N illAPE ' ,...'-' A - , . — y / Grant 913 to Lau �-y� y \_.,c) ,J ■Grant 911 to Kahookaamoku �. 0. , S ;1 �� rk lW r - 1 i -- Grant 909 to Kapueuhi $ , c3 Grant 912 to Kawaikini � / A1-,, ° rs sis I Grant 910 to Manuhoa �" : / r vo.3`` .g ,>-,. 1`-''S'.. % ` _;,o v 1 z 1 Grant 1057 to Manuhoa et al. 1..� i / �'""z�`' V' arsCz ,' .' • Y..': ,.�7- ".0 1i aY - -.� Grant 1056 to Keawe �yA ''a �..5'�' �.1 / :.u,z-loss ,, ,�`' ■Grant 1058 to Kekahiko :y � � % k- ��� Government Road ' �'' Kama e`e School Lot , 1-r y,,,,,-iasy y: ^^ 3p 1 I 4,,„7„„5 a d.&'- } .S,. + a I .� ii z,„;40, R / . '{ ,,,,,,„4-011.:,,,,,!:N!,,,,,, Ye1.ri IA" e a _ -y-- f .. # �I §`_fir .k- r.i- m�l'e.�ka 'a" .y , - uarn,M�:,.i..-, e Cti Figure 16.Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1092 by Lyons and Wall from 1882 showing land grants in Kama`ee. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 15 2.Background Land Acquisition in Hakalau and Kama`e`e Following the Mahele In the decades following the Mahele, Hakalau Nui was retained by the high chief, Levi Ha'alelea until his death on October 3, 1864. Born in 1822 in Lahaina, Maui, Ha'alelea was the son of the chief Ha'alou and his wife, Eseta Kipa, who relinquished her claim to a portion of Kama`e`e during the Mahele of 1848 (Ka Nupepa Kuokoa 1864). As noted by Kame`eleihiwa (1992:307), by the time of Ha'alelea's death, he had accrued some "$40,000 worth of debts,part of which he owed to Bishop & Co."To repay his debts,the courts auctioned many of his lands, including those in Hakalau. An advertisement showing the public action of Ha'alelea's lands appeared in the March 10, 1866 edition of the Pacific Commercial Advertiser. The advertisement notes that the lands of Hakalau were favorable for cultivating sugar cane,raising cattle, and harvesting timber from native hardwood trees. Three years later, William Lowthian Green began placing advertisements in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser and The Hawaiian Gazette to sell 9,357 acres of land in Hakalau. Green would advertise the sale of Hakalau until 1875. As for Kama`e`e,which became part of the inventory for Government Lands through the Mahele,it appears that by 1881, the government had set up a 15 year lease at an annual rate of$200 for unsold lands within the ahupua`a (Daily Honolulu Press 1881). In the August 26th, 1871 edition of the Pacific Commercial Advertiser, a travelling correspondent under the pen name Quirk wrote about their journey along the Hilo coastline. The description of Hakalau presented in that article provides a glimpse into the life of the people residing within Hakalau Gulch prior to the establishment of the sugar industry: HAKALAU GULCH Opens up beautifully, filled with trees, conspicuous amongst which are the cocoa-palms, overshadowing the school-houses and native cottages that nestle close to the shore. From this point the cliffs decrease in height, honey-combed as usual with caves, giving a wild look to the coast line... (The Pacific Commercial Advertiser 1871:3) By 1874, Hilo already ranked as the second-largest population center in the islands and within a few years the fertile uplands,plentiful water supply, and port combined to make Hilo a major center for sugarcane production and export. After earlier failed attempts to secure a treaty with the United States, in 1875, King David Kalakaua signed the Treaty of Reciprocity, which established a free-trade agreement between the Hawaiian Kingdom and the U.S. (Kuykendall 1967). The signing of this treaty,which guaranteed a duty-free market for Hawaiian sugar in exchange for special economic privileges for the United States, drastically increased sugar production in the islands and forever altered the political, economic, and socio-cultural fabric of the islands. Although sugar production was already occurring in Hilo, within a few short years after the signing of the treaty and in an effort to cash in on incoming sugar boom, a slew of plantations sprung up around the islands, one of which included the Hakalau Sugar Co. Ltd. The arrival of large scale commercial sugar would, throughout the remainder of the 19th and 20th century, radically transform the lands in the APE and neighboring vicinity. In April of 1877, following the passage of the 1876 Act "to aid in the development of the resources of the Kingdom" the Royal Commissioners on Development of Resources toured different areas of Hawaii Island including Hakalau. The commission reported on their findings and provided recommendations regarding improvements and prospetive land use. In presenting their findings for Hakalau,the commission reported that: The landing at Hakalau was examined. An iron pier to connect the beach with a point of lava on the east side of the bay, would give a fair landing, but the expense would be great; as well as connecting roads up the palis. If mills were put in the gulch it would be adviseable to make the landing available for surf boats. The Government have about 1500 acres of good land in the vicinity,and there is a larger quantity of lands beloging to private parties. (Carter et al. 1877) Hakalau Sugar Plantation and Railroad Development In 1878, California sugar mogul Clause Spreckles, with W.G. Irwin & Company as his agent, established the Hakalau Sugar Plantation. By 1880,the plantation employed 300 men and was cultivating sugar cane on 430 acres, with 1,480 extra acres available for planting (Bowser 1880:417). The fields were planted on the broad plateaus between gulches. Rainfall provided ample water to naturally irrigate the vast fields and fill the extensive network of flumes used to transport cane to the coastal mill site. Water was also sourced from "mountain gulches in the forest belt with a system of ditches to carry water where needed" (Star-Bulletin 1935). The long flumes, some as high as 125 feet, and supported by tall trestles, were constructed to span the gulches. At the time, Hakalau Sugar Plantation was one of the most modern sugar plantations in the islands: 16 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background All the modern improvements, both as regards the mill and the plantation, are of the very best character; and the appearance of all the surroundings denote that all is done in the best possible manner by the managers to forward the interest of their employers. No expense is spared to cany on the work as it should be. The mill and buildings are now (April, 1880) drawing toward completion; and the mill, when completed, will rank first on the list with any on the Hawaiian Islands. The facilities for transporting the cane to the mill is of the very best description, and Mr. Claus Spreckels is proving himself to be the right man in the right place, as an A No.1 sugar planter. (Bowser 1880:417-418) In 1882, Spreckles organized the charter for Hakalau Sugar Co. Ltd. Following the formal creation of the new sugar company,announcements were published in local newspapers conveying the purpose of the company: The purposes of the company are the raising and cultivation on the Hawaiian Islands and elsewhere of sugar cane, and the purchase and sale of its products; also, the acquisition by lease and otherwise, of such lands and water rights as may be necessary to properly carry on the business, and the making of such contracts and obligations as are essential to the transaction of its affairs. (The Pacific Commercial Advertiser 1882) The company's mill was nestled on the southeastern base of Hakalau Gulch just a few feet above sea-level and was surrounded on its remaining sides by Hakalau Stream and the Pacific Ocean(Figure 17). The first two mills at Hakalau were constructed between 1879 and 1881 by engineer and agriculturalist John Alison Scott(Honolulu Star- Bulletin 1925). In addition to the mill, a small house can be seen in Figure 17, on an island in the stream and under the flume. This small building was used as a schoolhouse until it was abandoned in 1894 in favor of a location a across the Gulch on the Kama`e`e side(Hilo Tribune Herald 1940;Hughes 1981). _ r` F, ".:.. ^.. 1 a,, w .x Figure 17.Hakalau Mill and gulch,pre-1911 (Hawai`i State Archives,PPWD-4-7-018). A description of the mill was published in the Daily Honolulu Press on August 1, 1885, noting its location in the gulch and near the shoreline: "Hakalau mill—at least the one that was being operated when I was there—is in the bottom of one of those incomparable gulches, so low that the tide washes its foundation walls, and the spring freshets threaten it. . ."(Daily Honolulu Press 1885). The close proximity of the mill to the ocean meant that damage caused by stormy weather and high surf occurred periodically. As an example, the mill was damaged in 1892 following a winter storm that swept through the area: Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 17 2.Background Hakalau probably received the worst damage, as there the sea, running dead on, broke with appalling force. It carried way the landing and trash house and stove in the sides of the lower mill, filling the lower story with rocks and sand. (The Honolulu Advertiser 1892) Between 1895 and 1896,the original mill was torndown and replaced with a new mill that was imported from Scotland (Capellas 1925; Evening Bulletin 1909; Hawaiian Gazette Co. 1895). An 1898 account of the plantation and mill reads: At Hakalau, another town on the island of Hawaii, is the large sugar plantation owned by Messrs. Claus Spreckels&Co. This is about fifteen miles from Hilo, and everything is carried on in a very extensive way. All the modern improvements as regards the mill and plantation are of the finest, and everything denotes from the appearance of the surroundings that all is carried on in the best manner possible. Mr. Spreckels has proved himself to be the right man in the right place, and stands in the foremost rank as a sugar planter. (Hall 1898:95) Although the plantation employed its own laborers which were housed in labor camps spread throughout the plantation's landholdings, it also favored the policy of shareholders growing cane on a contract basis—a policy that has been attributed to the amicable relationship between the plantation and workmen. Most of the plantation's shareholders who grew cane for the mill lived in the upper elevations on homestead lots which they owned,whereas many of the contract laborers lived in camps situated near their workplace. Multiple labor camps were formed near the APE. One of the earliest camps was the Hakalau Gulch Camp,nestled in the gulch along the Government Road, in the mauka portion of the APE(Figure 18). By the early 1900s, Hakalau had expanded enough to produce 11,932 tons of sugar and employ 800 workers (Husted 1902:479). Hakalau Village, the primary hub of the Hakalau Plantation,was relatively small,consisting of a few buildings built along the main Government Road on top of the cliff plateau (Figures 19 and 20). The Government Road descended into the gulch, followed the contour oft the cliffside,passed over the Hakalau St eam by way of covered bridge (see Figure 18), and continued up the other cliffside into Kamla`e`e. In the beginning processed sugar was loaded onto ships waiting at the mouth of Hakalau Bay, but it wasn't long before sugar export transitioned from steamer to rail. v� xv � uquy 'v r , 4,-;-44‘,k,, , -.7 ..,,a0,,:,1k.'14611‘,14 „ -.::'',!1:,,,ir, . gyp ` +1 u , , »� , ��"" I., ` . . 1 , da a 0;s,,. -= ' a d° a 'S'' aIli mo ,yp t r" r � ,M 4w . : w ,: 4,. ." vit.Ale ' a .:. rA'm:'ma am Ap"..•� ... - '�rak mal� � �w't mS1,`rf k,, a., ,,, Figure 18.Hakalau covered bridge and gulch laborers camp,in the mauka portion of the APE, sometime between 1911 and 1929(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 18 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background s NI ■ ��yy, \ Vii' ?` .,4,,'\ a*Aad ,,� r� _ 1 iy ' i ' 11 • es; ",.. \ , C:$4< IN t 1 1 4 n d'1y 4 8 , '" , ` « t li i Figure 19.Portion of Hakalau Plantation field map from 1900(Forbes and Forbes 2023). ,,, "ori`% N ,X. 4-11;:; A • L .444 x " ,mw gyp. °—„ c .7.,,,--4„e_. i-f r H .rqF'" .0 .fib ...F �5,4':+`r'^�`s" irtk ,. '.� '' nre " AIM I T .''�ti dpa 4111K II ,11. ,.. i a gyp` �.. n0' 0',.-a\Ih. o pllu •yinn° 6 ,�,�^'. .�A`" n a b 06.4"- . or., NAlxi. YIN G a • n.. aiWn ,..AY.✓{': 1,.! ,'K a T .0" y .f CI APE ' s• 0 Meters e ✓, r ' _ 0 100 200 - Figure 20.Detail of 1903 Registered Map 2225 by Walter E.Wall showing Hakalau Village and the main Government Road that crossed Hakalau Gulch. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 19 2.Background Hawaii Railroad Company During the years of growth and expansion in Hawai`i's sugar industry,modernizing transportation infrastructure was necessary to efficiently transport goods and materials. By the turn of the century,plans to install a railroad between Hilo and Honoka`a were being actualized. Railroad construction was one of the most important elements of governmental and private sector planning following the Treaty of Reciprocity, as crops and product were still being transported by animal drawn carts (Dorrance and Morgan 2000). On the Island of Hawaii,the first major line to be constructed was in the North Kohala District,which operated as the Hawaiian Railroad Company(HRC). The North Kohala line,however, was envisioned as only the first step toward a much larger system connecting the cane fields of Kohala, Hamakua, and Hilo with Hilo Harbor, the only protected deep-water port on the island. The initial twenty-five mile track of the HRC was completed by April of 1901, with an extension being completed along Hilo's bayfront to the Wailuku River later that year(Thurston 1913). Just two years later,the HRC constructed a wharf at Waiakea and completed a branch line connecting it to the waterfront line. The rail not only provided a means to get sugar from the mill to port,but also served as passenger transportation. The commercial sugar industry provided most of the cargo transported by HRC, but suffered a sharp decline between the years of 1904-1907,which caused a halt of development in Hilo (Thurston 1913).Tn response,the HRC worked with `Ola`a Sugar Company to send a representative to Washington D.C. in 1907 to secure funding for the construction of a breakwater that would allow Hilo Bay to accommodate larger ocean-going vessels. Construction on the breakwater began in 1908 and was ongoing for the next 21 years. In exchange for the construction of a breakwater in Hilo Bay,the HRC was required to build a new wharf, a one-mile rail extension from Waiakea, and a 50-mile rail extension north to Honoka`a Mill(the Hamakua Division). The funding of the breakwater by the HRC resulted in the extension of the railroad through the populated section north of Hilo all the way to Hakalau and eventually to Hamakua(Figure 21). 'any,./ `;e C.,iv-. ��` - •aa • a: - �::� •+.' "� K o a iic L .;.'�` o'n ��\7 I4., 1 .' aGt. • •./� t' a c.o.. • %. ,,t . .. • ;( *`-:,,A,• ter"`` j': �ti , .: .. • ...i •. 1114 I - l e,1/1. • ZI ' • 7::. the : ..*1/,',"('''4� . r A. / 1q '_ �. , ......-..1' trook; e ,,, 'fly . Nna+ e / 1 ' •/3, ' As 52;,yr.• ,A V, IP "-•••,,'•• 7. w•' totd ii "t/ � `1 S ' / i/ 4" i ,., ,• ,, A✓.JM4'J•tilll / OM..wi •(� !1•1 wy,� �.. ors. N..w I .41:1"."-. f v �. , oror H � d f'• � /I fill� :� , �� .� u.. '••7.. ti NwM�. /) \ }I. 1.• '.111' ,��/; , • ,./ ", './".\l,.1..1S1'•110N, //• R , c.w.o. ,. " 0. / . oma.,loots, M� a...T..� s�•/` . ��/\''-`�^" •aro� ;+ � �.�.-a,., �,'�',•r,• �;r-- ' ,,, �— • f��(.-/ «..I. a w.1 ." r 1 N 1 spa�W �• �Y"'r�»+. ...}...a'7 • ,,,,,c, .." a. . , '''"X " ,ti , '-......, . _., ''cv,,, ..• ....yi. . AK 1• • R; 11* 'r AVIA ". w.,00ar • M" !.-f'-n-r* Approximate project area location i'.71111111111111 y0. ' •. `V\P 17". I1 O o C a M '•D..f. ;rya•„ /�«� n- o` PART or THE ISLAND OF NAWAry as•. / d 13 SHOWING THE ONES OF THE1 w'w' �' • HAWAII OhSOIIVATED AILWAY• , 44ciA,:w ,�, NOrartaq u HAWAIIAN ARCHIPELAGO. Aa aa. .r'p;.a.a7 .a R ` 41. 414 C Figure 21.Hawaii Consolidated Railway Map of November 1923 (Hawaii Consolidated Railroad 1926). 20 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Between June 1909 and December 24, 1911, the HRC built 12.7 miles of rail extending from Hilo to Hakalau Mill, crossing many deep gulches and valleys along its route (Figures 36 through 38). This was followed by the construction of an additional 21 miles of rail that connected Hakalau with Pa'auilo to the north, which covered a total distance from Hilo of roughly 34 miles and was known as the "Hamakua Division" (Thurston 1913:146). The rail spanned the Hakalau gulch by means of a steel trestle girder bridge that measured 775 feet long and 261 feet tall. The Hakalau rail bridge was considered the second longest bridge on the line. Lorrin A. Thurston,who according to Thrum had "been connected with the enterprise from its initiation" (Thurston 1913:142), wrote an article upon the completion of the railroad from Hilo to Pa'auilo, Hamakua in May of 1913 entitled"Railroading in Hilo"which was published in Thrum's Hawaiian Annual and Almanac for 1914. Thurston defined the objective of the Hamakua Division as: The principal object of the extension is to give adequate transportation facilities between Hilo and the fertile and well-settled territory extending for 50 miles north of the town of Hilo, and averaging three to four miles in width. This district produces nearly one-fourth of the entire output of sugar of the Territory and is, including the town, the home of over 30,000 people. The only means of access to this section has heretofore been by wagon road, almost impassable in rainy weather, and by derrick and cable landings over bluffs rising from 50 to 300 feet sheer from blue ocean.There are no harbors. (Thurston 1913:147) A _��¢.s�,✓� , • • e . .. !t .,r .4 .. 3 f1``, • A 17 :*R l ,4'?, `,,�� `Y 11 s.. / CIA _, '. d— y yYx,. '..i:,..,.......,,t r�'•. ...o/�� r..t,! 3} Y � • :4',,s''t� r t '�1 "N' •:",,A1';'.', � y a lr .. '1.� ",'v� .� i' 3 "�"" . r .t s I- • ti•• �'^ \ice . ,,... A •• s -IA t 1l,�A ;,-,...;$^... ,,,,54,-`" }4,.'" � S d<, •W \'�• S rq y • "1° y A,4 ;lrv. P,( % `'/ oto. V.0 t r�„i "i 7 °ki', �' -�fi: env i,sx - R M, J ro W it `klct ' ,,,46.. 1"� L � °Its r' � �iuhi ,��'^r's` . �Cf �.:r....' 4`.: t�i� ,� � , • • ,+ ,,>v' ' a , xF .." 1 F�, I ,+�p�. 4 l,.tk r.-"' t.Ist _ 'l > + .�....ya. , .,ap,ys'�' gib.} Figure 22. Construction of trestle bridge over Hakalau Gulch ca. 1911 with mill in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023).Note large pile of sediment deposited within the gulch inland of the new bridge. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama'e`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 21 2.Background • R r ' q".1,4' }"t �� s" ,-'f� i ' . 1. Yom, r . . ., p f . 1 . r p+j,,- +r �'j 1' • 0011 .4 Figure 23. Construction of trestle bridge over Hakalau Gulch ca. 1911 with gulch labor camp •in background (Forbes and Forbes 2023). `. r �� vl,'MIMI ,,,,/, at p 0 1 R • 1 fir � MI --....-4 .... .....-=' _,,, .4,',77.-• ., : '. — 1 9 1 v!Y ti q d � k .v' 4 .. f. .il t.,. : � wek 1 : '. .. ,. • Figure 24. Train crossing Hakalau Gulch with mill in background ca. 1911-1920(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 22 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Expansion of Hakalau Plantation A little more than a decade later, the plantation continued to grow, and in 1909, the Honolulu-based Evening Bulletin published a detailed description of the company and their activities. The article provides information regarding the machinery used in processing the sugarcane and the ethnic makeup of the plantation employees: The property of the Hakalau Plantation Company is in the Hilo district, about fifteen miles from the town of Hilo. The plantation embraces 26,600 acres, 6,000 of which is planted and several varieties of cane. The Yellow Caledonia predominates. The plantation maintains ten miles of main and lateral V flumes through which the cane is conveyed to the mill and delivered direct to the twelve-roller mill, operated by steam power and with a capacity of seventy-five tons of raw sugar in twenty-four hours. The company operate their own electric light plant, driven by a 24-inch Pelton water wheel,which furnishes light to the mill, store, manager's house, etc. The mill is located in a picturesque spot at the bottom of Hakalau Gulch close by the sea,a sea-wall built of cement and stone, surrounding it upon the ocean side. The sugar, when sacked and ready for shipment, is hauled up over a steep incline tramway to the landing warehouse, where it is shipped on board the Inter-Island steamers by a wire cable arrangement from warehouses to the deck of the steamers,without damage or breakage. The grinding season at Hakalau usually lasts about six months. The average yield of sugar to the acre is about 3 '/4 tons. The total output of the mill during 1908 was 12,832 tons. The estimate for 1909 is 11,000 tons. The present mill,which is most complete,was erected by the company in 1897,the steel structural work being supplied by the Judson Manufacturing Company of San Francisco. The working plans were furnished by the Honolulu Iron Works. Its Big Smokestack. Because of the situation of the mill it was necessary to construct a brick flue surmounted by a smokestack 120 feet high and having an elevation 235 feet above the mill site. This tall smokestack gives the furnaces in the mill a better draught. The mill is quite complete in all its departments, being supplied with sixteen 30-inch centrifugals, two Standard triple effects, ten open clarifiers, two 8 and one 5-ton vacuum pans, besides much other machinery. The four 3- roller mills and Krajewski crusher are driven by two powerful Hamilton-Corliss engines while the centrifugals which make 1,300 revolutions per minute, are driven either by steam or water power. An immense twelve-ton overhead traveling crane is used in the mill for handling the ponderous machinery when making repairs or changes. The sugar is dropped from the centrifugals to the floor of the sugar room whence it is elevated into two large bins, and there it is allowed to cool before being bagged. The various cane fields are intersected by good roads. Plowing is done with Secretary disc and ordinary molboard plows drawn by mules, while the cultivation is carried out by Deere disc bedders, Crescent disc cultivators, Homer ratoon plows and Homer cultivations, the Homer patents proving highly satisfactory. The soil is fertilized with 1000 pounds of high grade fertilizer and 1800 pounds of lime to the acre. The company maintains a large number of stock upon its property, there being 210 mules and 41 horses in use. Percentage of Working Laborers There are over 1200 laborers on Hakalau plantation, 38 skilled; 51 Portuguese, 800 Japanese, 83 Japanese Women, 60 Porto Ricans, 30 Spanish and Porto Rican Women, 144 Chinese, 4 Hawaiians, 39 Koreans and 26 Spaniards. Nearly all the work is performed under the day labor system. The machine shops are at the mill, while at Hakalau proper are the spacious plantation stables, carpenter and blacksmith shops and the large general merchandise store run in connection with the postoffice and plantation offices. The blacksmith shop has been recently kept busy while the steamer lies but a short distance off shore. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 23 2.Background John M. Ross, who has been connected with the Hakalau Plantation Co. For fifteen years, has been its manager since September 1st, 1905. (Evening Bulletin 1909:31) Panoramic photographs taken between 1911 and 1920 (Figures 25 and 26) show that plantation infrastructure along the southern interior portion of Hakalau Gulch included the 1897 mill structure and ancillary buildings, flumes, a tramway, and a smokestack. The tramway was mainly used to transport workers from the plateau above to the mill below (Figures 27 and 28), although it also hauled cane down to the mill and sugar up to the plateau. The mill, nestled along the southeastern base of Hakalau Gulch nearly at sea level, encompassed various rooms for the processing of sugarcane including one for the roller mill and crusher, a machine shop, a mud press room, a fuel room, a room for crystalizers and evaporators, and a sugar bagging room, as illustrated in a Sanborn fire insurance map from 1919 (Figure 29). Adjacent structures situated directly to the west of the mill included a general supply warehouse, laboratory, and an oil tank foundation, as well as a smokestack and a small unidentified building to the east. A concrete spillway extended along the southern edge of the mill building, crossed by a cane flume extending from the mill/crusher room along the toe of the slope towards the northwest into Hakalau Stream. Additionally, a concrete flume extended south from the fuel room southwards towards the toe of the slope, beneath an east-west oriented cable tramway extending along the southern portion of the mill building. Railroad Smoke Stack. • Warehouse \ aeilE �I Landing . - • ��.. Tramway I Iumc Figure 25. View of Hakalau Mill between 1911 and 1915(State Archives,PPWD-4-7-029). : ~ ., fir V1 _, w,Y / / , a 8 L7 ® j- 4.0•p ®R 1• �- +irrrrtM-TrTn�Rrq*r `. -.4 v_ SCJ ® S4?�p Figure 26.View of Hakalau Mill in 1920(from https://www.facebook.com/farleyohana,accessed February 8,2023). During the next two decades,the Hakalau Plantation Company steadily grew its operations, extending the fields to around the 1,500 foot elevation contour and for nine miles along the coast, extending north and south of the APE across the broad plateaus. An aerial photograph taken in 1925 shows the mill and numerous plantation buildings on the plateau above (Figure 30). In 1925, during the closing of the mill for off season repairs, the old smokestack was taken down and a new one was installed (Figure 31) (The Honolulu Advertiser 1925). During the latter part of the 1920's, improvements to the plantation included installation of"six shower baths with hot and cold water. . , and a large dressing room with 36 individual lockers"on the mill premises (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1926), construction of a new office,department store,and a new athletic hall for indoor sports(Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1927;The Honolulu Advertiser 1928). The 1930's saw construction of a new hospital, theater, and Jodo Mission. The upper coastal plateau of Hakalau grew into social hub,supporting the many plantation laborers. 24 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background Yid •rr ,,e,r.41; '1' 4k... 1:1,.... ; 1( '''."*.:'''''' ,,4.,," li 417'4'1'' ',." ';,-.4, � :7' 1" 4, - a th, , t Y7 - a ...il. '71' e1' a -' ;:Vb ` Figure 27.Workers sitting on tramway at the top of Hakalau Gulch,ca.late 1940's(Forbes and Forbes 2023). ��.�t; " . , �t .., d. �pw- My fit,,,.7 , �,; r+. � e !Mw'. . .4,--/rsu',t`aa •,, �-..t V - - v ^; 4 c: r:G t .a � � o ' '` tJ �V .`7'.. R: . \ ...fro: Figure 28.Workers on tramway descending into Hakalau Gulch, ca.late 1940's(Forbes and Forbes 2023). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 25 2.Background .w..w,w fro 6* 25 r NANACAU FutHr„rwv ai .2car Ni.[. /1 ,14 ole u b e y • sq, 'T,4 F, s w s' ,... /Pp m�_ :: C _ GVEOVERR NMENT ROAD ,0 , 1 • e 9 s __________—`1 • __- , -Th2 a+ -�1 �.. , \ . l i I.QNq 144,, U PLNTmu, ::C te \,. A. .\''\ Figure 29. 1919 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map of Hakalau Plantation showing details of roadways and buildings. 26 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background d ' '''.'" -- ...... -. ---../...:Wic, , a; *......-.•. j,1/4,.. ' -1,ti.41`,J 4.,,,0',1•41, V ",' 1,7. . I -,,:."." ..--:. .., •-•ater,- •e 4. * lyyn J .. ‘ ..I:.41i'I te,. i -jam q 1 2 vi , ""' �'* aVv' • '7!yr i.,.P.,- �. ,v rs - f.i ws ^- .. - :- 4-,i._._ ;' ,._ r ... • . rpt,. �., �;,, / "" .. Ra - . . '4*- ". _ 38458A.C. Figure 30.Aerial photograph of Hakalau point and bay ca. 1925 (USAAF 1925). In addition to plantation improvements, the Government Road that traversed Hakalau Gulch was improved as well. The covered bridge that once spanned the Hakalau Stream was replaced in 1930 with a steel frame and concrete bridge(Figure 32) and in 1931 work began on a "solid stone wall" on the outside edges of the road on the Hilo side of the gulch to"facilitate traffic and make the side permanent"(The Honolulu Advertiser 1931). All of the improvements to the plantation contributed to a rich community, that was described in a 1935 article published in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin as: Hakalau plantation is particularly distinctive in its social aspects, having a reputation for drawing people from all the surrounding plantations. Labor conditions have been particularly good, a general contentment prevailing. Excellent houses are provided both skilled and unskilled employees and numerous recreational facilities afforded, including club houses, tennis courts, basketball and volleyball courts, baseball and football grounds, motion picture theatre. (Star- Bulletin 1935) A description of the Hakalau Mill and adjacent lands found in the Honolulu Advertiser from 1941 reads: The mill is at sea level, down at the mouth of Hakalau Gulch, notable because the smokestack rises adjoining the main highway several hundred feet from the fireroom. It is built at an angle following the slope. If you want to go to the mill, they lower you on a flat car down a steep inclined railway, or let you stand on a platform that is dropped over a still steeper incline. I took the mill on faith. The railway right-of-way is the old original wagon road of only 45 degrees. . . The big storage flume and its by-pass are built around the toe of the north cliff and the mill at the foot of the south pali. The old Hakalau landing was on the north side of the stream. It was the first "port"north of Hilo, in the Old Days when pulu was a chief item of export,along with cattle hides and tallow. The sailing ships anchored offshore. Hawaiians waded out to the small boats with freight, or passengers pick-a-back. They were paid five cents a package, whether it was large Hawaiian lady, a bag of sugar or a spool of thread. They got five cents for landing a mill roller or piece of heavy machinery floated ashore on a scow, or for a bolt of cotton goods, or a new hat. (Smith 1941) Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 27 2.Background A 4r z% 4 4 ,i 1:„..: - ...yw erg~ 0d^.. Figure 31. Construction of new smokestack ca. 1925 (Forbes and Forbes 2023). y t;; ti r 0 ""; _ Figure 32.Hakalau Stream Bridge(County)carrying the Mamalahoa Highway across the Hakalau Stream with mill smokestack and railroad trestle in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023). This bridge replaced the covered bridge in 1930. 28 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background Operations at the plantation slowed down during the early 1940's because of shortages in labor and supplies due to WWII, and in 1943 the Hakalau Sugar Plantation merged with the Wailea Milling Company. However,by 1944, the plantation was on the upswing and had produced an all-time maximum yield of over 26 tons of sugar. By 1945, the tramway(also known as a trolley)was no longer used to bring cane down to the mill and instead a dry chute was installed (Hawaii Tribune Herald 1945) (Figure 33). The chute was made of steel and was used to deliver cane directly to the mill.A crane at the bottom of the chute was used to move to the pile of cane into the mill. 4114 M :., .141P � r• l "F e " +k • • I • Figure 33. Overview of chute leading to mill and the crane below(Forbes and Forbes 2023). The Tsunami of April 1, 1946 On April 1, 1946, a series of waves (tsunami) triggered by an earthquake in the Aleutian Islands slammed into the north facing shores of Hawai`i. The tsunami caused upwards of$25 million dollars in damages and the deaths of at least 150 people(Shepard et al. 1950). At Hakalau Gulch: . . . the water reached 37 feet above sea level on the south side of the valley mouth, and 23 to 29 feet on the north side. . . The Hakalau Sugar Company's mill,which stood less than 10 feet above sea level and near the water's edge,was badly wrecked. A large clarifier tank, small steel girders, and sheet-iron roofing from the mill were carried 800 feet inland. Steel girders in the railroad trestle, inland from the mill, were bent by the impact of the debris-laden water. Fourteen noticeably large waves, at intervals of about 10 minutes, were counted at Hakalau Mill, the seventh or eighth wave being the largest. (Shepard et al. 1950:439) The tsunami destroyed the mill's boiling house and laboratory, damaged multiple engines and various other pieces of machinery and equipment infrastructure, and washed away the Hakalau Gulch labor camp (Hilo Tribune Herald 1946). Historic photographs(Figures 34 through 37) show waves flooding Hakalau Gulch and damaging the mill. Following destruction of the Hakalau Mill sugarcane was routed to the Pepeekeo Mill for processing. Stretches of the railroad used by the mill to transport sugar to the port in Hilo were destroyed by the tsunami as well. Railroad tracks along the Hilo waterfront were entirely washed out and the Hilo Station was destroyed. To the south of Hakalau, the railroad bridge spanning Kolekole Gulch lost its center span from the massive inundation of water (Klein et al. 1985;MKE and Fung 2013). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 29 2.Background I 5 „.` "' - w z w t a tom,. . s.......Ili '..." v.. V + 4- Ma �,• t. " �id ,i, r.,,,," ,9: a gyp" } a. , ''" -, : 7s�Y. • "2,, .77" *. " W v' ,. 4... ,,... - .. ,.v. $ - 4 Figure 34. Hakalau Mill during the April 1, 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 1 I � � i , 1YI t ` 7. di g �b< c "w A --,,,:-7,;:. ' ' , ":‘,....,,,t:tt .., .., '; , .ip,,. ...t 1'e ,I 4 yy 1 _ Ef +r at• fir°ems�+/ :,:. N<' V • v' P+ 11 ;1� / ;* , # 'r/ V ' , ', , ,*M/yr"r"; n� Ijt:.7.--::.".•414.41,1;':+' oma% .';0, \I„ it '0,1k z: la far �¢111" t IV �1 r 7A► ,at„ 1 � ! +Y 'w 4 , r .4•4 ` . 16 , + .; :-' . •,. IIi.' ;t d! ' * ' R :.. «' e Figure 35.Flume crossing Hakalau Gulch following the 1946 tsunami (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 30 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background • •L, ;t •V, .• - 4‘.,•72**- • 1f i ,..I , 4 b q •.A✓S� ,r. . "n . - ., ..!)-, '�, • .. fir. • 41.111::V* •'• • ., Ilk Figure 36.Hakalau Mill in the wake of the 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 'F p 114,' y ,,.,b! d n 1 ,.. �' I, '...'."'---�, 44 �.. may{ ^J « G 1164tsJ v t. .� . s i w• Aiiiii o ry 1 ue 4 e+i d .A. N dtA Figure 37.Workers surveying damage at Hakalau Mill following the 1946 tsunami(Muffler and Museum 2015:57). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 31 2.Background The destruction from the tsunami was so catastrophic to the railroad that the HRC filed for abandonment soon thereafter,receiving permission to do so in December of 1946: . . . the railroad asked shippers to determine whether they would use the line if it were rebuilt or were intending to ship their raw sugar by truck. Only Theo H. Davies Ltd. voted to retain the railroad; the rest voted to use the existing highways, despite their poor condition. Hawai`i Consolidated Railroad then offered its entire right-of-way,including all bridges and tunnels,to the Territorial Highway Department and to the Hawai`i County supervisors. Both agencies declined the railroad's offer. (MKE Associates LLC and Fung Associates,Inc. 2013:E8) The entire railroad was sold as scrap to Gilmore Steel & Company of San Francisco for$81,000. About the time the scrappers had finished pulling up the rails and begun dismantling the steel bridges, the Territorial Highway Department changed its mind. They decided to improve the Hawai`i Belt Road, along the Hamakua Coast by relocating it to the railroad right-of-way and to utilize the railroad trestles as highway bridge supports. They bought the bridges still in place, as well as the parts of bridges already trucked to Hilo, for $303,723.53 — nearly four times the amount Gilmore Steel & Supply Company had paid to Hawai`i Consolidated for the entire railroad. These railroad bridge elements were used for the Hawaii Belt Road. . . (MKE Associates LLC and Fung Associates,Inc. 2013:E8) Rebuilding of the Hakalau Mill Although the tsunami damage to Hakalau Mill was serious, the mill and destroyed flumes were reconstructed and put back into operation less than a year later (Figures 38 through 40); an endeavor that cost more than $600,000 (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1947). An article in the March 7, 1947 edition of The Honolulu-Star Bulletin reported that the Hakalau Mill had resumed operations that week on a test basis and that the total damages to the plantation were in excess of 1 million dollars. The article also mentions that the boiling house and boilers had been completely destroyed and were replaced. Very little information on the configuration of the rebuilt mill was discovered as part of this study, but an annotated version of a 1966 Sanborn map for the Hakalau Mill found online (Figure 41; https://eha-cloud.doh.hawaii.gov/iheer/api/documents/11272/download), shows the layout of the mill and its relationship to the plantation buildings perched above, along the edge of the gulch. This new mill continued to operate in Hakalau Gulch until 1974 (Figure 42). 0 4, ♦ I ' r • lipia*,,,r4:':. , .W.... aitZt *' '''1. Aire:4,1i . ..x a ! x a R r � Figure 38.Hakalau Mill under construction following 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 32 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background 1` kl '►4 A ♦R.f »Y1 Il 1. -..L` - • ' 4.• t _ .. x bi . ..,, ♦ ',, Ott s� '_7..„,.. = 1\ t' #y *� �,y` V ♦ � .1 '• fh �R ♦ 9 4 r .X11 r �'t Ar. r * • '1 ♦ .41 a • 1 a / / y. s jlp, r1✓"� ..�r�s�""" ®F� � � 'ilk, Fla'"" " ^� � . � � ,_ ` :�r`i' � i , ti { ti Tye,; tc 4 .i{ f /lliC , /..•/: Cd ; a� r 1 t . �.C"E . IA' rj,a J " .•:---.- jE • y;, . 4 r R o - it , :t ..fit; R.?.. - 1 - "4i 1 ,r1, / XA,i ''i' 4, I 111 • 1.., Figure 39. View of Hakalau Mill in 1951 illustrating railroad bridge and flume in foreground and chute in background(Forbes and Forbes 2023). p ._--- ,7-,---- ...-, li;i0-1.14.-4-71 !-„il,i, . ,r.„ ,,ri,, ,,, . .. . „.. 4. ..r. '11,....".\ -rip. i• r ♦ . 'vv" 1 i4 j rte' , ,,. N !C A :"1J. -'` 104111 '' , ,,'.Ji ir"r '`; A �(� Y i' re »t� v;14,40-.A/t t i 1,7,`. ,t t`4:, •. .i¢'ra r r ''F x,. '+� 3Ouoiii�1 r r 2 • c., I ' t!!' , ` 1 .r 4T' � wiy „',r w' r } 7 Via. ,.tF �: X11 `r.,. -, """` ,- 4 F1 .(.4 .' . % � ' + 1 ' . . . . • '' '441 i 1'' •''.Nt i...tZ;filt , ' )--,._ \::" `, " RSr. " / 1 • Figure 40. Ca. mid-1950s photograph showing the tramway and repaired flume crossing Hakalau Stream(Forbes and Forbes 2023). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 33 2.Background / Officecliff �"'�'� Sugar I lopitt, w.... n.... It.tr r.1lnr%C it Aali[.ers ,,I rt'l ' liwiwifuel Rnnm -� .\i.tthinr shop 11111C ni-ier "' �%���'+T.��W�� ,„„,kv stacl: �ti. r •'f ' Cablr Rail s5�,} .„,.......,v,,,rr.1'. J, •�{�r.� yti r - -CatitTlti me--0`•' A:.i. ....1• ,,•.., ` 1��, • • . .........__Ii; _.. ....... —ice~~ ~ I• , Olii.-- 0.,,,, r ��j,„ �. wwr.ru utu(p / Scale House ,')(`t ,,Mr , ^j Oil/Gas Storage Arca 1(l1 I'estiride N1iNin g Area •"�� Y Salt age Parte Storage �71�i - ' S '�, .. ' ferlili7er/Oil Sti,g Worohouse :4-. � "�' i�'�". -• '\ 1'lechie Shop I �' t, _ \K,r Carpenter Shop t�t �� Stable �ZfJ . tl �\ / GeneraI Warehouse Figure 41.Hakalau Sugar Mill and Support Facility shown on an annotated version of a 1966 Sanborn map. n a , .. dry+ , y 1" y r '... p�'�r ,r "'. , '� uv '''':i p r� d" .l 4 + " ;36',+ .. r• ,M •,y �"*, �'. , y"�r F;a +`fi r , �- r "� 19 �JI4/..-- a ,600 i,,.. t • M f ' -4`,w 1N I-' Y•'\,4•• 4 .i` +. b JRIp { t t " J 4 i .�:\ m •'"..,.,•-c'•„7" 1"Y -:^y ,. a Pr ,. 41°4)7' ,,�,,g, ..0,414 11-,.:„..t.:;"-, ` b,. y ,44. i' � dr .t7 IN-- 1," - •'•••41."'„4..."::;:-..,':,. • 'a •- - ii.,;,,4.k tam'," 8i A- ' Eurri ,,.,z , ,,..,_,,,...„,... .-„, .4 , , ,. . , .,.., _ .„_. ‘,„.„ .„,- , . 7r,, al 1 ivi Figure 42.Hakalau Mill in ca. 1974-1979,after it closed(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 34 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Construction of the Hawaii Belt Road (Highway 19) and Hakalau Stream Bridge Following the destruction caused by the 1946 tsunami, the bridge-laden Hamakua Division of the Hawai`i Consolidated Railway was appropriated by the Territorial Government, who converted the railroad bridges to highway bridges; a process that was both economical and made vehicular travel more efficient in this part of the island. The converted railroad bridges became part of the Hawai`i Belt Road(Highway 19). Conversion of the rail bridges to vehicular traffic also helped ensure that sugar could be more easily trucked to the port at Hilo than it could along the old Mamalahoa Highway. Prior to this conversion"[a]utomobile and truck traffic was limited by the narrow, winding road running through the deep gulches that mark the coast" (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1953), including through Hakalau Gulch. James W. Glover, Ltd. was hired to do the general contracting for Hakalau Bridge, while K. Morishige was contracted to paint the bridge using "Dutch Boy red lead and Dutch Boy black bridge paint" (The Honolulu Advertiser 1953). On April 17, 1953, the Hakalau Bridge opened to vehicular travel (Figures 43 to 45) (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1953). With the opening of the new highway traffic on the old Mamalahoa Hawaii lessened. t or "" a 1, t.), — 1 /,. ., -.?„.... i.,,,-: ,_;,,,,,,,.. -,. r ,.. , . .,.. ,, ,,F., j ^' „._ �c yew ! F .::. . - M1 a fp '�� � — 6 k . ” 4 ''''' ' -e ' -'- 1 a^"` H • � , ^ d �� ,` r 'W' � t it v�A �` i 1. • '" r5wa . Figure 43.Repurposing of Hakalau Railroad Bridge during the early 1950s (left),and opening of new highway bridge on April 22, 1953 (right)(Forbes and Forbes 2023). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 35 2.Background • if y 4 k - °-n' +�� L wr _•.rd y & ,�, ^•...i, a ,t� ?'' 44,,,,.. t wx,i t M 1"' . s.. s i,4., s ' � vxa r kd' C d : 4 .fir: ' „ . -,........i.-i,i4":„.,k,i,;::::.. . 2 .1 " IMP 0 ii.,4. i 7 : .4, ' --..,,,,,T -....,.)41.., ; "I:':9,t, �' :k, a .1,;',t.;'..• :. *i§; • k ,' n' biGGEST EilklOGE—Tbe.Hakalau Gulch bridge on the new Ha- highway bridge was constructed by strengthening the sup- makua coast highway, is the longest highway bridge in the ports under the old railroad bridge, then placing a new, territory,totaling 772 feet.It eliminates the long, winding de- wider deck. Structure in background is a cane flurme.—Photos scant in and out oN the !atich followed b the old road. the by P. T.tfonemori, Modern.Camera Center. Figure 44.Hakalau Highway Bridge with cane flume in background(Kanemori 1953). Hakalau Bridge • f r i Rebuilt. Given �► ,{ t,, is Iw 1 1— New Paint Job ia"� ,irl is ,, .s..,1,,/ ti. i One of the highest and long- d' r, est bridges in the Hawaiian Is-11 0 ,-,,, i' "' j lands is the old Hakalau rail- ' '+.a road bridge. recently rebuilt in, r„,, ,. r 44 order to fill the transportation • needs of the modern and pro- •• • r, "� 'A- .t �"` gressive Big Island. ' . . . (4.•a .• 4 £ J TO MEET THE growing de- :,f L. ,•f t,,•' 4, , - mands for more convenient and • — t safer crossing facilities for of �• • ' ...0-',: tourists and the sugar industry, 4'?'i , , ' ` x. the Territory established this "" f.,M 4 reconstruction program which '* • 4 f ` e,s S' or ;included the rebuilding of a se- ries of eight bridges along the "`�" �• A ,. �' i Hamakua coast from Hilo to x ••• . Honokaa, and a new highway .R,+. w,,t r, 1 which is still under construe- ° ' tion. ( +f 1 _' ' The Hakalau bridge is 210 feet • r i.1 high and 1,000 feet long. Gen- r a4 fi t,r s 1, >'a eral contractor on the recon- .4 • ,.,; I- ti struction job teas James W. `s ��1 R ' '�, • - Glover, Ltd. I Ai..-rr» V.,, It • 4' if PAINT CONTRACTOR was• . K. Morishige of Honolulu. who i .3 lame used Dutch Boy red lead and' i,�� r' 'r i l Dutch Boy black bridge paint ' y y; , .. on this and all other bridges re-1- • °, constructed along the Hamakual ' coast. NEW LOOK FOR BAKALAU BRIDGE _ Figure 45. Substructure of the Hakalau Highway Bridge(The Honolulu Advertiser 1953). 36Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Hakalau Plantation During the Second Half of the Twentieth Century The second half of the twentieth century was a time of immense changes and challenges for many of the sugar plantations throughout the Hawaiian Islands. Although sugarcane was, for many decades,the primary form of sugar that dominated markets globally, the development of the beet sugar industry, which was much cheaper to produce than sugarcane, meant that sugar plantations in Hawaii needed to adapt if they wanted to survive. Furthermore, the increasing costs of labor, the need to mechanize cultivation and production, as well as the high manufacturing tax for sugar and pineapple, resulted in many plantations either closing down or consolidating their companies and activities (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1961). It was also during this time that the Hakalau Plantation Company began to sell homes in their plantation camps, ranging from $50-$100 USD, "on a removal basis" to plantation employees (The Voice of Hakalau 1962 IN Forbes and Forbes 2023). In 1962, Hakalau Plantation Company merged with the Pepe'ekeo Sugar Company and ceased to be a separate corporate entity. This was not the first time that either company merged with another company;in 1944,the Hakalau Plantation Company purchased Wailea Milling Company, while the Pepe'ekeo Sugar Company merged with the Honomu Sugar Company in 1946 (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1962). The merger between the Hakalau and Pepe'ekeo companies included the continual operation of the Hakalau Mill, which was threatened with closure months prior and would have resulted in the lay-off of 75 employees(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1962). The 1970s continued to witness the gradual decline of the sugar industry along the Hamakua and North Hilo coastline. In 1971, Pepeekeo Sugar Company, along with other companies in Wainaku and Papaikou, were consolidated into a processing cooperative led by C. Brewer Company. "Under C. Brewer's ownership the sugar companies combined with hundreds of independent sugar growers to create the Hilo Coast Processing Company which processed all of the sugar cane for their plantations as well as used a by-product,bagasse,to create 25%of the electric power for the island of Hawaii"(Forbes and Forbes 2023). Simultaneously in 1972,US Congress passed the Clean Water Act, establishing "the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters" (Environmental Protection Agency 2022). This piece of legislation meant that sugar companies would be forced to abate the pollution that sugar operations generated, especially with regards to coastal discharges of sugar processing byproducts. Months prior to the passage of the act, C. Brewer Company announced their committment to spend more than$5.5 million USD"to improve the quality of ocean water adjacent to its five Hamakua Coast mills" (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1971a). Additionally, plans were made to close the Hakalau Mill and related facilities, and send crops to the mills at Papaikou and Pepeekeo for processing,as conveyed in the article excerpt below: Pepeekeo Sugar Co. Site clearance has already begin at Pepeekeo to make way for a giant$6.4 million boiler and turbo power complex that will consume all trash and bagasse produced at the Pepeekeo and Papaikou factories. Power generated by a 20 megawatts turbine generator at the plant, scheduled for completion in September, 1973,will be sold to the Hilo Electric Light Co. By that same date,the Wainaku and Hakalau factories will be closed down,and their crops will be processed at the Pepeekeo and Papaikou mills. To facilitate this increase, Pepeekeo's processing capabilities will be doubled and Papaikou will undergo modifications to meet the State's ocean water quality requirements.(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1971b) In 1973, Pepeekeo Sugar Company merged with Mauna Kea Sugar to form the Mauna Kea Sugar Company, becoming the fourth largest sugar company in the state at the time with over 18,000 acres of cane (Campbell and Ogburn 2004). "Upon the final merger,the plantation offered houselots for Hakalau sugar workers and their families at Kulaimano Subdivision in Pepeekeo.Perhaps 75 per cent of the 300 to 400 who left Hakalau moved to homesites there..."(Rood 1975). A year later,the Hakalau Mill was closed after 92 years of operation. A special ceremony was held in December 1974 to commemorate the closure of the mill. The ceremony was attended by Hawaii County Mayor Herbert Matayoshi, John Farias Jr. (director, State Department of Agriculture), Robert Hughes (chairman of the board of directors, Hilo Coast Processing Company), William Kenda, (president, Hilo Coast Processing Company), Joseph Garcia Jr. (former state representative), and several retired employees (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1974). The events during the last day of operations at the mill were described as: Ceremonies began at 9:30 a.m.when Corsito Santiago, senior cane truck driver, delivered the last load of cane to the Kamaee Station. As the last piece of cane passed through the mill rolls at 10:30 a.m., Antoku Kobashigawa, a 28- year Hakalau veteran and acting assistant factory superintendent, tossed his hat into the mill Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 37 2.Background grinder, symbolically ending the grinding season, and Larry Iwani, former factory superintendent and presently superintendent,manufacturing,for HCPC,poured champagne over the rolls. At 11:00 o'clock William Kenda, president of HCPC, closed the valves shutting off the mills roll—officially ending the factory's long career. (C. Brewer and Company Limited 1974) The consolidation of Hakalau Plantation Company with Pepeekeo Sugar Company(followed by the merger of the latter with Mauna Kea Sugar Company),the modernization of other facilities along the Hamakua Coast, and the closure of the Hakalau Mill effectively contributed to the departure of numerous former plantation employees and their families, as well as the dismantling and demolition of many of the buildings and structures associated with the Hakalau Plantation and the communities surrounding it. As stated in the title of an April 1975 newspaper article printed in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald, Hakalau was a"dying town"(Rood 1975). Lands that were previously owned by the sugar companies were subdivided into smaller agricultural lots that were then sold on the open market. In 1978, the County of Hawai`i Department of Public Works publicly announced the indefinite closure of a portion of the old Mamalahoa Highway (Government Road) on the Hamakua side of Hakalau Gulch (Figure 46). The purpose of the closure was to "allow for the utilization of portion of the old road as a drainage way" (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1978). In 1979, a year after that section of the roadway was closed, the Hakalau Mill structure was dismantled,leaving only the foundations and other unwanted industrial debris. The flume structure crossing Hakalau Gulch,also appears to have been removed by that time. PUBLIC NOTICE I CLOSING Of PORTION Of OM MAAIALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HAKALAU GULCH The portion of the Old Mamalahoa High- way beginning nt a point npproxinnatelyTwo Hundred and Thirty (2301 lineal Feet north of the Sokolov Gulch'.bridge and extending northeasterly (Hannakua direction) For One Thousand Vase Hundred and Tweautyfln ) . (1,725)lineal Feet,will be closed indefrnitety to all traffic mtinlernent effective February 1, \\I ` 9578 to allow utilization of portion of the e old rood ae a drainage way. Appropriate upas will be posted and nateri.tt ore advised In observe the posted ant, 1L,.lMi TS CP. Kew. To sew cLwao \ ;er lir AurifirOf/ 4 .1 f.' Siltdi II am +tiw,sa Mr!/ %,ilia rw t DEPARTMENT Of PUBLIC W01K3 COUNTY OF HAWAII EDWARD IIABADA,Chief Engineer x .,a,..-HawaiiTrihu .6faeald. '.uu r y i$s Z4r V.19781PI Figure 46.Public notice of the indefinite closure of a portion of the old Mamalahoa Highway within Hakalau Gulch(Hawaii Tribune- Herald 1978). 38 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background In 1989,James W. Glover,Ltd.was awarded a contract totaling$313,986 USD to resurface three bridges along the North Hilo/Hamakua coast, including Hakalau. The work consisted of"removing the existing bridge surface, installing a new asphalt-concrete surface...[and] constructing a level connection to the bridge from the existing roadway," as well as "routine improvements on bridge expansion joints" (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1989). In following years, further improvements and renovations were made to the bridge, including the removal of the lead- based paint on the girders and repainting in 2002(Figure 47). In 2003,following complaints of access issues to the beach within Hakalau Gulch,the County of Hawai`i began considering establishing a Beach Park down at Hakalau Bay(Armstrong 2003). The landowner at that time, Mauna Kea Agribusiness Co. (formerly Mauna Kea Sugar Company), wanted the county to assume ownership of the 5.9- acre property(old mill site)as well as several roads in Papa`ikou and Pauka`a.An agreement could not be reached at that time however, and sometime between 2003 and 2006 the property was sold to Atlanta-based developer Continental Pacific LLC, who in 2006 gave the parcel to the county for use as a public park (Armstrong 2006). According to the informational sign currently in place at the park, in 2007 a group of concerned Big Island surfers banded together to organize a clean-up of the overgrown mill site. A pavilion was later added to one of the mill foundations in ca. 2011-2012. Tn 2017, the park was closed due to foundation issues with the 1930 bridge along the Old Mamalahoa Highway leading to the beach park(Johnson 2017). It was also at this time that lead contamination of the soil under the Highway 19 bridge over Hakalau was identified (Callis 2017). Hakalau Beach Park has officially remained closed to the public since 2017. While vehicular access to the Gulch is restricted, pedestrian access is still frequent. ''''''*t, '1 $ OP,appsd ...4 ,:4 :„.* Miiii Iv '�# 2111421e4.4111 Vis: '0 n OMor p art 41i /� '.air's: ..' ry -04 w )•r;,=r::ra r ys WIrI9rn frig Scaffolding and shr .4 1 material on the 755•lao4•icng Hakalau Bridge a.• qdrealive of the ongoing removal r.• ,sad-basad palm irgrn the massive s. ...:t..re.The slate Department of Transportation has contracted California-based Certified Cs r;Ic, r,;.;c va the cI J paint and lu .u-paint the bridge. Figure 47.Removal of lead-based paint from Hakalau Bridge in 2002(Bishop 2002). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 39 2.Background PRIOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES Among the earliest archaeological work to be done in East Hawaii was that of the early twentieth century heiau researchers Thrum and Stokes (Thrum 1908, Stokes and Dye 1991). Neither investigator was able to identify heiau within the APE or the immediately surrounding ahupua`a. In the early 1930s,A.E. Hudson,working under the aegis of the Bishop Museum, also conducted archaeological investigations in East Hawai`i (Hudson 1932). While surveying between Waipi`o and Hilo, Hudson remarked that few archaeological sites were to be found due to the "extensive development of sugar plantations" (Hudson 1932:182). Within the upper part of Hakalau Gulch, Hudson noted the presence of a .25-mile square area of taro terraces, and in the bottom of the gulch, a former konane board (Hudson 1932:218). Hudson(1932:218) also quoted Kinney(1913:29), saying that the gulch was used as a robber's stronghold in ancient times. More recently,nine studies (Table 2) have included portions of Hakalau and Kama`e`e ahupua'a (Haun and Henry 2014; Hommon et al. 1974; Maly 1994; Rosendahl 2001, 2009; Walker and Rosendahl 1994a, 1994b). The location of these studies is shown in Figure 48. And, while not archaeological studies, Don Hibbard completed a National Register of Historic Places Registration Form in 2009 for the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House located at TMK: (3) 2-9-002:039 (Appendix A) and Spencer Leineweber completed a National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (Appendix B)in 2009 for the Hakalau Stream Bridge(State)(both are discussed in further detail below). In addition to these studies, during the Hawaii Island portion of the Statewide Survey of Historic Places (Hommon et al. 1974)conducted in the early 1970s, a single archaeological site,the Hakalau District(SIHP Site 50- 10-16-07392), was established that included a portion of the APE (see Figure 48). Although the site record is missing from the DLNR-SHPD files, a brief description of this district was provided by Forbes and Hibbard (2018:60) in a National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form for the Hakalau Jodo Mission. Forbes and Hibbard (2018) state that the Hakalau Historic District (SIHP 50-10-16-7392), recorded in the State Inventory of Historic Places(S1HP)in 1973, extends south from the old mill site adjacent to Hakalau Bay and includes the site of Hakalau School, adjacent to Wailea. The district is also said to include the Hakalau plantation manager's home (built in 1897, HRHP No. 10-16-9070), two plantation warehouses on Hakalau Point (built in 1920), the Hakalau Jodo Mission (built in 1904;current structure 1936), the Hakalau Theater (now the post office, built 1931), the Hakalau School Gym(built in 1941)and the Hakalau School(built at various dates beginning in 1882). In addition to the archaeological studies described below, the Hawai`i State Historic Bridge Inventory (MKE and Fung 2013) documented the Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) as 001290001100003 and the Hakalau Stream Bridge(State)as 001000190308410. Table 2. Prior archaeological studies conducted in the vicinity of the APE. Year Author(s) Type of Study Ahupua`a Findings 1973 - Statewide Inventory Hakalau Nui Hakalau Historic District 1994a,b Walker and Rosendahl AIS Hakalau Nui None 2001a,b Rosendahl Archaeological Hakalau Nui Historic cemeteries 2007 Hammatt and Uyeoka Monitoring Report Hakalau Iki None 2009 Rosendahl AIS&CIA Hakalau Nui Structural remains of Hakalau Plantation; cemetery 2009 Hibbard NRHP Form Hakalau Nui Hakalau Plantation Manager's House 2014 Haun and Henry AIS Hakalau Nui Plantation hospital;former cemetery 2018 Forbes and Hibbard NRHP Form Hakalau Nui Hakalau Jodo Mission Walker and Rosendahl (1994a, 1994b) completed a study within TMK: (3) 2-9-002 and 004, Hakalau Nui Ahupua`a, South Hilo District, Island of Hawai`i, located mauka of the APE (see Figure 48). This project involved the survey of some 595 acres between Hawaii Belt Road and the 1,500 foot elevation mark. Low-level aerial (helicopter) survey was conducted on some uncultivated portions of the area. Other uncultivated areas were inspected using "variable-coverage (partial to 100%) variable-intensity ground survey" (Walker and Rosendahl 1994b:2). Walker and Rosendahl reported that their project area had been extensively modified in historic times for sugar cane cultivation and therefore no "significant cultural materials of any kind" were found (Walker and Rosendahl 1994b:2). 40 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background Nom' . ° ' A Area of Detail A . ';� 'I'. 0 200 Km , 0 lk- ' ''''.''''' ' ''''s "' '7,4**.'„''. '',:"''''''''''i,i,,, . .. ' .. r ; } A.Hakalau Historic District 3°.. � f ',' ` �-`/ PrujecC oi�,t j SIHP50-10-16-7392 • �s .11,'4',,1°.`,1 Rosendah12009 .' aun and Henry 2014 Rosendahl 2001a Leineweber 2009 '"' �' ' ' 40p:,,i,..:- ito P ( p Walker and Rosendahl I 994a, I 994b .„,„„,•;... .,,,,,,s,,.. ..`Rosendahl 2001 b N- ' ilk .001\101lt:',.:r% •,-- ,—...... , 11.., 4 , . ,. „. - , ........ , im, ,,,,, - 7 ,, ... T /- --- Ilibbard 2009 Forbes and Hibbard 2015 '.-. tee. \� :&,. �,,,-r•"'. ��i / 4 ",6 , 00 Haimnatt and Uyeoka 2007• s VIM Il ., , ,... digik,„ Q APE ',,:�i4'eIlia� D Tax Map Key (TM K) ` . {'r 0 l00 IIO Meters Figure 48.Previous studies conducted in the vicinity of the APE. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 41 2.Background In 2001 Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. conducted a study of former Historic cemeteries located within TMK: (3) 2-9-002: 083-Lot 5 (Rosendahl 2001a) and TMK: (3) 2-9-002: 088-Lot 10 (Rosendahl 2001b), located to the southeast of the APE along the coastal bluffs (see Figure 48). The purpose of their study (2001a) was to determine the status of the cemetery and its potential impact upon the sale of the residential property. As a result, they determined that the cemetery (locally referred to as the "Japanese Cemetery") was an informal plantation era cemetery associated with the Hakalau Jodo Mission. It was principally used during the first third of the 20th century and contained possibly as many as 200 individuals. The graves were disinterred in the early 1970s by Homelani Memorial Park, Inc. Most individual internments consisted of deteriorated wooden coffins and skeletal remains. The grave monuments were generally reburied in the excavated pits after the remains were removed. The study on TMK: (3) 2-9-02:088-Lot 10 (Rosendahl 2001b)was conducted in two stages: research and field inspection. The purpose of the field inspection was to confirm the boundaries of the cemetery (the "Catholic Cemetery"). They determined that the cemetery was an informal plantation era cemetery with an overall total area estimated between 1 to 2 acres and held possibly 200 to 250 internments of individuals of several ethnicities (Filipino, Portuguese, Puerto Rican), all of whom were likely plantation employees and/or family members of the Catholic faith. They found that the cemetery was primarily used during the first half of the 20th century, and,while a few of the graves were disinterred in the late 1970s by individual families;most of the graves remain in place. Some of the graves within the cemetery probably date to the end of the 19th century or early 20t11 century. Hammatt and Uyeoka(2007)prepared a monitoring report for Hakalau Elementary School,Hawai`i Inter-Island DOE Cesspool Project in TMK: (3) 2-9-002:005, located to the southeast of the APE (see Figure 48). The purpose of the excavations at the school was to install a new 2,000 gallon septic tank and leach field to improve the schools wastewater system. They conducted two trench excavations, one at the leach field and the other at septic tank. The leach field trench measured approximately 50 feet long by 40 feet wide and extended to a depth of 5 feet. The septic tank trench measured approximately 20 feet long by 11 feet wide and extended to a depth of 10 feet.All excavations were completed without encountering any significant subsurface deposits. They recommended that if any subsurface activities are conducted in the future that an on-site archaeological monitor be present. Rosendahl (2009) prepared an archaeological inventory survey and cultural impact assessment for an 8.7 acre Hakalau coastal property(TMKs: (3) 2-9-002:079 and 81),located to the southeast of the APE on the plateau above Hakalau Gulch(see Figure 48). The purpose of their work was to determine the general nature, extent, and potential significance of any archaeological-historical remains present, the historic preservation implications of any such remains for the feasibility of proposed residential development, and the general scope of work and level of effort for any subsequent archaeological-historic preservation work that might be needed. During their survey, two archaeological sites were identified: SIHP Site 50-10-16-26591, which consists of two warehouses (Features A and B) and foundation remnants (Features C thru I) associated with the Hakalau Plantation; and SIHP Site 50-10-16- 26592,the site of a former Japanese/Korean cemetery. In 2014, Haun&Associates (Haun and Henry 2014) conducted and archaeological inventory survey of a 2.33- acre parcel(TMK: [3] 2-9-002:083)in Hakalau Nui Ahupua`a, to the southeast of the APE along the coastal bluffs (see Figure 48). A portion of this parcel was also investigated by Rosendahl(2001a). As a result of the study,Haun and Henry (2014) identified the remnants of a plantation hospital (SIHP Site 50-10-16-30085), a concrete culvert that extended over a ditch(SIHP Site 50-10-16-30086)and the former location of the Japanese cemetery(SIHP Site 50-10-16-30087) previously documented during the Rosendahl(2001a) study (but not given an SIHP number) that existed within their project area prior to reinternment.Preservation was the recommended treatment for the cemetery location(Site 30087)and no further work was recommended for Sites 30085 and 30086. 42 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 3.Project Area Expectations 3. PROJECT AREA EXPECTATIONS The culture-historical context presented above for Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e ahupua'a, combined with the previous archaeological research conducted in the vicinity of the APE, provides a basis for predicting the type and location of archaeological resources that may be encountered during fieldwork for the current study. During the Precontact Period,the bottom-lands of larger gulches, such as Hakalau,where fresh water was easily obtained,were well-suited to both traditional habitation and agriculture. Although Hakalau Gulch is not an entirely sheltered bay, it afforded relatively easy access to marine resources and may have been a preferred location for early habitation. Houses of Hawaiian families would have been clustered inland of the rocky beach, and the staple crop kalo (taro) was once likely grown in watered terraces(lo'1)adjacent the stream's edge, along with uala(sweet potatoes),mai'a (bananas), and ko (sugarcane), kukui (candlenut), `ulu (breadfruit), and niu (coconuts). The early 1900 survey conducted by Hudson (1932) indicated kalo production in the back of the gulch. The traditional coastal foot trail through the South Hilo District(the alaloa) would have wound through Hakalau Gulch in the vicinity of the APE, providing access to the adjacent tablelands, and points of interest to the north and south. Traditional residency and cultivation may have continued within the APE during the early Historic Period. By the late nineteenth century,however,the lands surrounding the APE,like much of the arable land in the Hilo District, were planted in sugarcane by commercial sugar growers. The Hakalau Sugar Plantation started with 230 acres of planted cane spanning Hakalau and Kama`e`e ahupua'a. The plantation installed a mill at the base of Hakalau Gulch, towards the mouth of the bay, and constructed water flumes to deliver cane from the fields to the mill. A rail tramway was installed along the southern steep slope of Hakalau Gulch to bring processed sugar to the plateau above. Modern/Historic development of the lands in and around the APE began during the 1880s, but rapidly accelerated during the middle Historic Period as the commercial sugar industry expanded, and associated railroad infrastructure was developed to spur that economic growth. By the early twentieth century, a railroad had been built from Hilo to Hakalau and beyond that included a bridge crossing Hakalau Gulch. The railroad not only moved processed sugar to the Hilo port but provided an easier way for people to travel the district. Before this, travel to Hakalau from Hilo was by way of the Government Road. This road wound up and down the steep southern and northern slopes of Hakalau Gulch and crossed the Hakalau Stream via the Hakalau Stream Bridge(County). The Hakalau sugar mill and associated infrastructure, including a laborer's camp further upstream, were destroyed during the 1946 tsunami.Although the railroad bridge across Hakalau Gulch was not destroyed during the tsunami, the neighboring railroad bridge at Kolekole to the south was, along with other sections of the rail in Hilo, causing the entire stretch of railroad to be abandoned. The former Hakalau railroad bridge was repurposed and reopened for vehicular travel along the Hawaii Belt Road in 1953, replacing the old Mamalahoa Highway as a direct route, and remains in use to this day. The Hakalau Mill was rebuilt within a year following the 1946 tsunami and continued to operate until 1974,when it was closed for good. The mill buildings and machinery were removed from the mill foundations in ca. 1979. Given the history of construction activities associated with the Hakalau Mill and Hakalau Bridge (as well as other related infrastructure) combined with the tsunami damage that occurred within Hakalau Gulch in 1946, the likelihood of encountering Precontact or early Historic Period sites within the APE (surface or subsurface) is extremely unlikely. While no previous archaeological studies have occurred within the gulch, studies conducted on the surrounding plateaus indicate a lack of Precontact Period features. These same studies have documented numerous Historic Period features related to sugar production and the railroad. It is expected that remnants of the Hakalau Mill,including the sea wall,building foundations,flume foundations,the smokestack,and tramway,will be found within the APE, as well as a section of the Old Mamalahoa Highway, Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) and the Highway 19,Hakalau Stream Bridge(State). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 43 4.Fieldwork 4. FIELDWORK Fieldwork for the current study was conducted on February 7 and March 16, 2023 by Lauren Kepa`a, B.A., Amy Ketner,B.A., and Manuel Lopez, B.A., and Matthew R. Clark, M.A. (ASM Principal Investigator). Follow up work was conducted on February 28 and 29, 2024, by Amy Ketner, B.A., and Robynn Namnama, B.A., under the direct supervision of Matthew R. Clark, M.A. (ASM Principal Investigator). A total of 64 person hours were required to complete the fieldwork. FIELD METHODS Fieldwork consisted of an intensive(100%)coverage survey of all accessible portions of the APE,which essentially included the gulch bottom on either side of Hakalau Stream where fieldworkers walked systematic east/west pedestrian transects spaced at 5-meter intervals. Handheld tablet computers (Apple iPad minis-5s generation) running ESRI's Field Maps Application(Field Maps App)connected to EOS Arrow 100 Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)receivers with sub-meter accuracy (set to the NAD 83 Zone 5 North)were loaded with APE shape files prior to the commencement of fieldwork and were used to guide and plan the field survey. The alignments of the Old Mamalahoa Highway and the Highway 19 Hakalau Stream Bridge were also inspected as part of the pedestrian survey, but the steep side gulch edges on both sides of the gulch could not be accessed and were not subject to pedestrian survey. Instead, a DJI Mavic 2 Pro Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) operated by a licensed pilot was used to inspect the steep sides of the gulch, as well as to take photographs of the APE and the identified sites. All archaeological features encountered during the survey were mapped and documented using the handheld tablet computers and standardized field forms in the field maps. FINDINGS As a result of the fieldwork, portions of five previously documented Historic Period sites were identified and recorded within the APE (Figure 49; Table 3). These sites include the former Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070), Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) along Highway 19 (Site 50-10-16-09090; 1953-present), the remains of the old Hakalau Mill and Plantation infrastructure (Site 50-10-16-26591; 1880-1974), a section of the Old Mamalahoa Highway alignment(Site 50-10-16-30187; 1931-present), and the Hakalau Stream Bridge(County) along the Old Mamalahoa Highway Site 50-10-16-XXXX; 1930-present),which is documented in the Hawai`i State Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation as Bridge Number 001290001100003 (MKE and Fung 2013:6-2223),but does not appear to have yet been assigned a Statewide Inventory of Historic Places number,and has been designated Temporary Site 1 (or Site T-1) for the purposes of this study. Detailed descriptions of the five sites documented within the APE are presented below. Table 3.Archaeological sites located within the APE. Site No. Site Name Period of Use (50-10-16-) 09070 Hakalau Plantation 1897-present Manager's House 09090 Hakalau Stream Bridge 1911 to present (State) (Railroad bridge opened in 1911;converted to highway bridge post- 1946;reopened for vehicular use in 1953; still in use). 26591 Old Hakalau Mill and 1880 to 1974 Plantation Infrastructure (Original mill completed in 1880;destroyed in 1946;new mill at same location completed in 1947;operated from 1947-1974). 30187 Old Mamalahoa Highway 1930 to present (Road opened in ca. 1930;traffic shifted to Highway 19 in 1953; section along north side of Hakalau Gulch closed in 1978; south section still in use). XXXXX Hakalau Stream Bridge 1930-present (T-1) (County) 44 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i u 0 3 I u p iv r- 1 O t. O J 1 x 1 2 Jilt ^ p G 1 Vl 0 I • \ 1 I I ',Id .S 0%• 4 y- •• • ' L 0 ' ' $;-1 "'•,.4..40 —' %\\7'' ct KS r \ S t -o ez \ C c5 Q G i xc3 J \ ,n 1 �. J O \ \\ bA A O r� \ VNO' „k, - it v \ . o \ .n c'7' x % N o LL D, p up v 4.Fieldwork Site 50-10-16-09070 Site 9070 is the SIHP designation for the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Hibbard 2009) located at 29-2301 Old Mamalahoa Highway, Hakalau, Hawai`i 96710 on TMK: [3] 2-9-002:039 (see Figure 49). The house was constructed ca. 1897 by a carpenter named Jack Gertzy, and is associated with John Munro Ross who served as the Hakalau Plantation manager from 1905 to 1946. The house is an asymmetrical, two-story, wood frame dwelling (Figures 50 and 51) situated on 3.15-acres perched on the tablelands above the steep southern wall of Hakalau Gulch. Other buildings on the TMK parcel include a fernery, a tool shed, two garages, and a cottage. Only the western portion of the TMK parcel,nearest to one of the garages, is located within the current APE(see Figure 49). The Hakalau Manager's House is outside of the APE. The property is privately owned and was not accessible during the current fieldwork, but the house and related structures were nominated for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in 2009 (Figure 52; Appendix A), and is currently listed in the Hawai`i Register of Historic Places (HRHP).According to Hibbard(2009): The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is architecturally significant at the state level as a good example of a late nineteenth century plantation manager's house in Hawaii. It is typical of its period in its design, craftsmanship, use of materials, and methods of construction (Criteria C). In addition,it is significant for its associations with the history of Hakalau Sugar Plantation(Criteria A), and also for its associations with John Munro Ross, who managed Hakalau Plantation from 1905-1946(Criteria B). The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House continues to be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under the Criterion described above. With respect to HRS Chapter 6E significance, the house is considered significant under Criteria a, b, and c for the same reasons listed above. A more detailed discussion of NRNP eligibility and 6E significance is provided in Chapter 5 below. a a k a'4 I • ° Iwo+a (II .11 Ift"' • ; a 3 r,,C-• I aka'"' • r 4`�4 n * ".-... ... �_..., t sa •,r ..�x,:; .•.. „ + w • .01141 ,'tlM Figure 50.Photograph of the Hakalau Manager's House,ca. 1920s/1930s(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 46 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork # 91� ,F �+ k f ' A - ,., j ,,t, ?M�,' ,b _ - — •, n x I p - I _ &, "" , ,, \,,,,. . :„,,, „,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,. 0 . �N •y,•,•,;;;.-0' 1tiI' ` M it��. �' -tip - h... 0 . Figure 51.2024 photograph of the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House,view to the southwest. li. 4 ,i, I. ki . , \ ' ;' .r w J b - .y T F'iyg � t ' 'Y'� 4IAJAGPRS RFSIDLN(L ''Y k _g,., �n A HAKAI All SUGAR PLANT4iIt7N � N' -` ` Y' 4 '' 1 G } •1 l � be L bpr A l IB'IN P d E p L. Jp.9( 8. IIY(I.C4) 1 H k 1 `C� � miitlen I F S I M1 hl H (I -tet a RISTORIC 9-4> a I H. a a. . ,° , A '4 RESIDENCE ^ 1,i °a n e u 1 °fe ee M 6 R:.S i III 11 J i (..t9 /1/I .]." 4 ' Y ._ kS -- . • 9[:IIT 1497 Eln L M1 .nmY�n� 1 [I [I C Rn/. rg '-.. f JACK(]hQTZS ^ . B II ll4 II RNn I CII I 4 • q ) M1 3 I 1 1 ''-' `' V ; •� ,r-,,0-a '.t 'may f rr .--r, ,,„ . l• 'SI 7 t S Figure 52.Plaque outside the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 47 4.Fieldwork Site 50-10-16-09090 Site 9090, as previously documented by Leineweber(2009), encompasses six steel trestle bridges that cross gulches located along Highway 19 and the North/South Hilo coast.These bridges include Hakalau,Kapue,Kolekole,Nanue, Pahe`ehe`e, and Umauma. The Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) is within the current APE and within the Hakalau Historic District (see Figures 48 and 49). The bridge, also known as the Hakalau Highway Bridge, was originally designed by John Mason Young and constructed in 1911 by the Hilo Railroad Company to support railroad tracks (see Figures 22 through 24). It measures 775 feet long and 261 feet high and was constructed of steel trestle supports with masonry (basalt lava rock) abutments. The steel trestles sit on concrete pier blocks, some of which are within Hakalau Stream. Following the tsunami in 1946, many of the stream bridges along the Hamakua coast were damaged,as well as the railroad within Hilo Town.It was not feasible for the rail company to fix all of the damaged rail and bridges, so they were abandoned and repurposed. The Hakalau Stream Bridge was one of five bridges along the coast that sustained minor damage were able to be repurposed. Following damage to the railroad caused by the 1946 tsunami,the Hakalau Stream Bridge was appropriated by the Territorial Government, and they began the process of rerouting the main highway(Hawaii Belt Road;Highway 19) and converting the railroad bridges into bridges that could accommodate vehicular traffic. The Hakalau Stream Bridge was redesigned by William R. Bartels and was widened to a width of 28 feet. It was fitted with a concrete deck, sidewalks, and guardrail, along with steel girders and concrete abutments. The conversion utilized steel girders from the Kealakaha,Laupahoehoe, and Kaula trestles and the steel bents were taken from the Maulua Bridge(MKE and Fung 2013). The Hakalau Stream Bridge, which opened in 1953, has remained much the same since, although the lead paint that was once applied to the trestles and girders was removed in 2000-2002 and the bridge was repainted at that time.A National Register of Historic Places Registration(NRHP)Form(see Appendix A)was filed for the Bridge by Leineweber (2009), and although the bridge was not added to the NRHP, it was added to the Hawai`i Register of Historic Places on August 15, 2009. The bridge was later recorded as part of the 2013 Hawai`i State Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation(MKE and Fung 2013). Recently, HDOT has identified the need to repair the bridge foundations due to scouring by the stream, and replace or rehabilitate columns and trusses in order to keep it safe, and in good working order. Photographs of the bridge taken during the current study are presented below as Figures 54 through 58. Despite needing the repairs mentioned above, the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State), as an historic architectural property, is in generally good condition, and retains sufficient integrity to be assessed for its significance. The NRHP form assessed the bridge as significant under Criteria A, B, and C. Under Criterion A, the bridge is significant for its association with the Hilo Railroad Company (Hawai`i Consolidated Railway) and use during the early days of the sugar plantation era in Hawai`i and for its reconstruction as a highway bridge providing modern transportation for Hawaii Island. Under Criterion B, the bridge is significant because it is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past, such as the Hilo Railroad Company Founders. Under Criterion C, the bridge is significant because it is one of the last remaining steel girder and trestle bridges in Hawai`i and is representative of early twentieth-century engineering technology. Based on observations made during the current study, the Hakalau Stream Bridge(State)continues to be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A, B, and C. With respect to HRS Chapter 6E significance, the bridge is considered significant under Criteria a, b, and c for the same reasons listed above. A more detailed discussion of NRHP eligibility and 6E significance is provided in Chapter 5 below. 4& Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 4.Fieldwork y V ;-.,,f',- .4+�r �. t ,.4.:.;',. ..1"- 1. E: x ,:�Sjuw FY., .. ; -4r"^ �+ 4.'.fir y + 4C` x#q :''' 4'. a °2% .,y" .- ,:a ; "' v� car Figure 53.Hakalau Stream Bridge(Site 50-10-16-09090)crossing Hakalau Gulch,view to the south. rC11 Ac - ;*-47-'./.. - r xn Y rEt } " d r --___�� .v� .fes 1c `t to . 1 w `.� s '''S..- ,�'`��! "-•, { --^yrs �"-- ---- »r,;�df p=ry � � ,• a _�.°' �"k ��' �;4 v`+�i:, F 'i - _ 11 . �° SR 144, l• • �{ 'i.' r-,. i t a ----7------.-4.---_---- `�4 i. XV.1., legr,,,t•4•,-,,t, .,-..t,-;•,=,' .it,11c,§4-ty. . .,;;A t.....,' ic ', , .4. •I.,,I;747 ..,". 7 , , „........... ,.., ,.„, . ,,,„ ,... - .c - f 1'w ' .' 312•'----. R ��+-' ! f 3 ;ft:- �jy i. r, ,pt 7 4.w /�, ' 9' ii s Figure 54.Hakalau Stream Bridge,showing driving deck,oblique aerial view to the southwest. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 49 4.Fieldwork a !i d, s m i ,prs, a � �• -�^�u max- aE - t.Fii ':4'4 '‘ir., . •r r-t- !:' '-----7:,--7. 7-7,'''.---,--,i7---,—':7 01 , ' 't.'' . 't4449--Illr' .\ :* * \ t 1—' —I "'" S'.•.--t—f---- -----f—'--.7•*4--!--7---,7-----_---, tit .. , ., , Figure 55.Hakalau Stream Bridge supports,view to the north. - ,.,;•-•_-7,-..:;-------':,'7:"...' . \• 131;4''';'''''':-.7-70-'1:-.''''7":i . . '' 714::.'.-It::v::::,,s jg .@ ri;, .tth.f'4:14,'*".,'41j,,''..tr,lg(.il:'''',.,'...4:..'ll,41:.::411fg:tIL:'-:'4'-..''''',.,,v:‘:--''13*.'"n '#.':-L'1:::I::'''''' it Figure 56.Hakalau Stream Bridge columns and trusses,view to the north. 50 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork w '•••.7';t", ',,,,,, glilliiirr . -- : . 0. Of,,,,,44;t4:',:,, -e-,. . '..•",•!r'.'#'II. Lc ig, ['s r:'5. -":''''•• - -" •7i'W"..1.: " -- 1e-'` ''- -i' '•;, le I 1 -•-‘ - • ;2'147, A,4,„,, .• -.Alit,, f,,:•1 :• •, , • • 1r",, ....., ' ., ,,!----i.'..v 0-• . ;‘-- ''''- f..;t1.0 • 11' -,•,--. -•':,&.' - '''''',-. 0.5 ,,,: - -• ?.f7,-"'S:r ,„40'."' ,._.* . C).. . •."..%,,,Ter4, wrf ---',.,.., ,, 4,--;••,. :, •,,„....., ''''. ....'4•'•-..1 , i .,... ,• ti,,,,47„.•„ ., ,----::, .„. . --. ' i, '• . , 4'• - ,-NI';2 d.' r` ts . -404Y--- .-•-• ,.. -fr----• is„-,„.,..•-••,- • ,, /. .,.,,, ..,.A -.- -...--,-*,.. 1 , ft • .7-,. .•••A, ..mr. ._...i -- ' . , •,' 1"1 4- r,' _ *: •—' _ 4 '.7 'T••,-,-, 4.• ' ( r : . -*- ' -- - , ' , . .05. 1 7' 7 ''. •! 4!li,:- • ...••• • - • c _E"- _ ,• .1t•''' ,• 1, r4 .00,-.' ,,.....----/ \ , .. .. .- - _ _ ' ----z• ' - '4 '444.'• ....0: --- :;,.. .4" -- • sr '...?•••1*.' , •-• . -' ,S4' •'" ''.-- -'.- / l'441 - ' ' i '11; ' ' :P:44. .--40,,,,4 '4,.,, 44 ,,- ,',!•40•;'' ' ''- .. .-','•si,,,';-4?' -..a,,,,A, - ,,,_44,,,v.,,,-,t,„ ,- I•A 7.fr,*••,,,g)..-0 a'..% ..- ''' c---04,....N.7 —,' , re,-,-, . —,...,;.„,,,,*,, Figure(57.U:derneath7rof.Ha.1z1au,,S;;;:eam Bridge deck,view to the southeast. 'gig SV,,,;:•,- ' :'," . .. .'" ..2.,44;r?•••s'' ' AINLY61:'Pr •-•''. ‘ • . ' ' ' ...‘ • - ,• 3,- 4es• . .••• • - ,-.--- -' -=..0..,:o •0,. • •••;,,,, - • " •.. •- -, -.."-',„.......;-..., -- -,'" " " ' ' . mei', „..--- 4 -..," ;...1., ),... , - - . . .. ." e • '4•3, ' . 1.4.".-S -- r' ,, „it • -.„. ..,,i,..,%Vtil „f:F4.. IN.4,:i4 i;:,-,.;:. ' 'd4i ..- ... . ,, ,... . .„ , .7..•....,: • 4 ::), '.*.,1;,, ; ittPlilv.. -',-:,-.' .. iti; v4 - "i'' o. - ' ' - ; 1,;,','' '0, 4t " 14 , *.: , . .v 4,441 .. ,-.74 . • , ,..,..4. ,,,,-,\-,,,,,,r!...47- , . _. i it4.."..s.,,,jo. 44;7. --..7,,--:-",,i,,,f• c:t..,: - - -;,. ,, '.*„:.,..'. lti" ..., ,.-'`‘ 4 VI.,.#'• ......' .':‘ .Iiiii, '..., . 44.,.... • - • ,„ . ''',. .` 21.*41/.' ** 1.'''' ,,,......., . , 44.-,....,_e _ , ms.., . s : •„ ,,..,..4,--.°,.. , ,- ., .1* ..F-'''S, ".• t `, ilve -"Tr.., •.::. '-'41,:r.c,,4".•1-^.., - 0167,.4 ...lilt '' '11 ..' . • ' +,,,,,,,i e, ,,• ;. --i1;2"4" . -- ' - . • 1-..* k.. '104 ' 'I '7:` ''4' :'''''' - . r..V47:;. lti . "* '.., ., T . 1- S t , '.„ k ,, `,,,," t •':',. v,P.,.. .. •'")-5%, . .. , .. . . Z -, . - . ., ....... 1,-...;'14,i......7;!-' .--'--._,-.--- • . Figure 58.Hakalau Stream Bridge,view to the southeast. 51 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 4.Fieldwork Site 50-10-16-26591 Site 26591 is the SIHP designation previously assigned to nine features of the Hakalau Sugar Mill and Plantation by Rosendahl (2009). Those features (Features A-I; Table 4), which included 2 warehouses and several concrete foundations related to the former sugar plantation, are located to the east of the APE on the tablelands directly above the old Hakalau Mill, along the southern edge of Hakalau Gulch. As a result of the current study, six additional features related to the former Hakalau Sugar Plantation (Features J-O) were documented and added to Site 26591 (see Table 4). All of the features of Site 26591 are shown in Figure 59,while the features located within the APE are depicted in Figure 60. Descriptions of Features A through I can be found in the Rosendahl(2009)report. Features J through 0 of the site, which include the remnants of the former tramway and stairs (Feature J), the supports for the flume that once crossed Hakalau Stream (Feature K), the foundation of the former Hakalau Mill (Feature L), the access road to the mill site (Feature M), the base of the old smokestack (Feature N), and an old pipe stanchion (Feature 0), are described in more detail below. For additional information on the Hakalau Mill and its history, the reader is referred to the Culture-Historical Background section of this report. Table 4. Features of Site 26591. Feature# Type Feature# Type Feature documented by Rosendahl(2009) Feature documented within the APE A Warehouse(general use) J Tramway/stone staircase B Fertilizer/oil storage warehouse K Flume supports C Molasses tank foundation L Hakalau Mill foundation D Concrete foundation(unknown use) M Mill access road E Lumber yard/storage foundation N Smokestack base F Repair shop foundation 0 Pipe stanchion G Shed foundation(shed) H Cement trough(unknown use) I Concrete slab(unknown use) All of the features of Site 26591 located within the APE are currently in poor condition, but retain sufficient integrity to be assessed for their significance. Rosendahl (2009)previously assessed the portions of the site located on the bluff above the gulch as significant under Criterion a for its association with the Hakalau Sugar Plantation and its association with the history of sugar cultivation in the Hawaiian Islands, as well as under Criterion d for its information potential. Two of the warehouses (Features A and B) documented by Rosendahl(2009),which are still standing,were additionally assessed as significant under Criterion c for their architectural value. The features of Site 26591 contained within the current project area are all partial foundation elements and do not possess any architectural integrity, but are considered eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criteria A and D. With respect to HRS Chapter 6E significance, these features are considered significant under Criteria a and d for the reasons discussed by Rosendahl (2009) above. A more detailed discussion of NRHP eligibility and 6E significance is provided in Chapter 5 below. 52 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i 4.Fieldwork ilk X 'J u _ ;d— Cl] Li Ilk,.. it r ir, C W W —III _~ O t w 7 J .. 21. U y '6�., F�' ❑ ❑ ❑ co °-• NA . q • .,..,,,.$ , a 'I", iiiit,,,,, CG ,w C. I� C. ^-) ,.//fi RI--1 ' , , ,,,,„ . ,,, ., LL' z ° C\ �; y,, y w ■ , �., c rN w i` ... rE W Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 53 4.Fieldwork bA - c C. r - 0 U vi U .� O v; o — U g Y — — = w P. p .0 = — v v G 1 = 2 _ •V .-.. rte^ M - I•' w v Aa uw 1 •1 • • p . :o 1 ac Z czst .: L ,. G*oaoa N to a " o7g^ aJ 9 w L ti Te CU P --1 c 1 '5 U . O a" GW y 0 / / -0 /i a) / r N CS i / CA ! ca ii . `E i, ZF� �akalau��grvaay$ c SA r.41 d A iA L. \\ A bl) w 54 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork Feature J Feature J consists of a stone staircase built into the southeastern side of Hakalau Gulch(see Figure 60). The staircase (Figure 61) is associated with a tramway cable car that once paralleled the stairs to the north. The staircase can be seen in photographs taken in the late 1940's alongside the tramway (see Figures 27 and 28). Tramway tracks are shown on a Hakalau Plantation field map from 1900 (see Figure 19) and it appears that that both the tramway and stairs likely date to the 1880s when the mill was first constructed. Mill workers traversing the steep sided gulch utilized both the tramway and stairs to get to the Hakalau Mill at the base of the gulch. The tramway was in use until the mill closed in 1974 (Figure 62). Only a small section of the tramway's rail tracks were observed at the base of the gulch wall during the current study, however, and it appears that the tramway may have been dismantled following closure of the mill in 1974. The remaining tracks were used to form the treads at the base of the stairs (Figure 63). The stairs still extend from the top of the gulch to the base and are constructed of cut basalt slabs set into the slope of the gulch wall. Vegetation has encroached on the stairs making the pathway narrow and some of the slabs have lifted or are broken,but overall,the staircase is in good condition and is still used by pedestrian visitors to the County's Hakalau Beach Park. llik , L . I, , w 4 ', % ', ', .' .�%. :fir.,k . . G t ! a r 1i if 4, LA 1. gip•' I #111, i , _e- 7671,. 1PPd� - .� , . ` '' �' ` f, tlf r ),4* t f, AP �- s / '. tr "awl 8". - �. ,.. r r�i _7Af .. Y :. s a ..`7 - Y' a# .4th 1 t —.+' -fir: . `! ..k cl�]. Figure 61. Site 26591 Feature J, stone slab staircase,view to the east. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama'a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 55 4.Fieldwork -ii;;' •r '-'%;.. ! -1‘.-- • , , . 1-11,-. 4. .1 ''.-...,..1, 4 4„ 4 . .. " „I` ,..,.......- 4, 4,n 114'.. kjfk:S.. . r. .&4',.'''''''''.- " 'Y-‘106416'fi'Y '' ... ': ,..#*:4,. -• i',;;;*„..,..47e,..*:,..ire,,i o.'Yf...,r. .......,„,,t:,,, -04 A'.47.'10,'‹. . ,'.j kill - '7'...'''.;.0",..'T;. 4."'' *', ' ' . ,t,•!Id. . ,,..,,-,.:' ' r.7 • . !';'",- .0.4- 4 . 1‘ , . „Tit,: 't '•'-''..' .rtf l-'. _ i_......- ,4•4 ,„.- ,77.• , - f, • ,,,,„o•, , . ,,- • 1. t ' 'In- . . i.„'..P. . ., I,: • letfil ' ' i .74,1 *ii I, '. , ' -- , ,.,?.. • • + . ' : ilin .‘ ifl •I . , \ 111111r7 , . , • , ,.., ' 1:'; _ -1 ----... ' r n. * ''-'..; •.r: , , ' ',,. ;. / )' , Ifirr- ,,... •..,1;.i „ .,..71. •• ,. ,, , t., ,1:,,,,...,,..,,if ,„: ,,,,.•• ,' •'.:, '''' ';, •?It?: . .0?.• ?it A -..g.t...,• , - r •••,.:, :„ ',. ;,7!-;; '-, ..,,g4,14„..,,,L,..) .....- --. k. - N. , .; s•i- t.,4- :;,1,,,,sit3/4,,,,,$tc.-It - fi,..% .•.:-,p,,--- -••;..,7 , Figure 62.Hakalau Mill Tramway in use in 1972(Forbes and Forbes 2023).Note stairs to the left. -) .17,4111c.'- r:.a;I{. • L i''i '' -At'4)4- '..4 ,......,,,,,'' •.."'' ; • -441 k — '`..1.m/ 41.:• ."'C.' _ . ,, '—.,,. Ls,. K, ittir.-11,. .- 2 0. f ,,[-...."„4„ ..: . . td , :,•,,,. ,, s.- .4„.• ,,, 84, ,,,,. ,. ..__ :s.,-4-;...',Ilk .: A.••••4 ..10, 1, ,,.., ca, ,• ',,i . ,., # , r- -- --;'. -.......-..- ' ''' ..," •--'' ::,?,,,,;e0 : :ie, ' ,,*'', 11, -1111, ••• ' .,43.14. ,t. ,....1.,...z,„ , ss .. ,-,--i . -",-,...„-':',,•*-,''',":-=-*' , - ' ' . '''' , 9r, , .., - - - .... ,_ ...... , ,... , zfr••••1-4ED, 1,.. '. '• _ ' — .4'4441','„,s "-_ ,'' * ' ' 1P-;.."4-!'''''V ''''j- • - , ,.,.r,, . ,,, _ , , • 141,' 1-' . ' . ..44 I A, ...\''Ilr:„.4 „.,-ar.,.•.; rt.:- ,......4)i ,r I''‘ ,. / 4 I, , •Iibitt.1 ' li t 4 . ,,,, i ' • ''4'.'"-- -,-..cA,.-.,i; ' I.,,.4,,..'. ,- , . .,,, ,, • , * ..-, -,,,,; *Pik i ....... ..., \ ' - -. . J. -7-_Arit:-•,- I . '• ..-..r ...., • voks. ,,,,ikr., ,,,-- , . . .. r .....' ; . )0, ',w.. . .14104,4k a ..., '`‘r.:" ."- ' ' '011,' " , r 11,-. ." " „.„. , - 114, • ' /48 , , , t. -; • . "L'A..j.'.* ) ''''.. ,,:i:' ,'.-,.-•• ' ':;171' "' . iii-.&;:ik..... -.—,---_''' ' "..'f'- - ,,: • .,,.'.-. ' ' , %. ., 110 "'I0Mb .`1110 t _ - '.- .= • --.J'. .,a .:,7; ,. " -- \ "0000je*.. Figure 63. Tram rail track remnants currently used as the base of the staircase,view to the east. 56 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork Feature K Feature K consists of seven concrete pier blocks and one elevated concrete pier that were all used as foundational supports for the flume trestles that formerly crossed Hakalau Stream (Figure 64). They are located on the makai (eastern) side of the Hakalau Stream Bridge (Figure 60), with three blocks on the north side of Hakalau Stream (Figure 65), four blocks on the south side of the stream(Figure 66), and the elevated concrete pier within the stream between the two groupings (Figure 67). Depending on the stream and ocean fluctuations, all of the flume blocks may at any time be within the stream. The elevated concrete pier sits on four metal legs and has rusted metal protruding from the surface. Along with the three concrete pier blocks on the north side of the stream are two large metal drums, one in the stream and one on the stream bank (Figure 68). They appear to be concrete, and cobble filled. The flume was constructed in the late nineteenth to early twentieth century to carry raw sugarcane from the fields to the Hakalau Mill for processing. Following the tsunami in 1946,the trestles were damaged and rebuilt(see Figures 17 and 40). In 1976, after the closure of the mill, the flumes and support trestles were removed (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1976),but the concrete pier blocks were left in place. The eight elements comprising Feature K are in relatively good condition with only minor cracking. ;.: 4" �: z «.e.f Y 1 ), ' p �: �a7 :.. • f ac 7.Jr.,,,,, 4 R�,►,'G, n.,;{ if;:. t � � }y�-���Y . ti, `6/ t • � )7-!,,f;.- ''..-F');,, -J Tom' • ,,.. , -lt` lie; .' �, .4- ', — 'sr, t d'ttr i' „ ,Ar`L' _-W. '/:",,�+ t .e,'� ,, ', :11.-4.-;:i.,; r. •• t 'z-,--"i'..-;. / y.Y t 7 f t r. _.r 1.*1 aspii - .a .i . v Y Y v i, .,U. j.4 ,,,r ; , ),';:11;;;,,1:44, y¢ • �P� A, -�. t `t i� .*' .. -74:-..- -+, .. J t�,1.` t t ta -�h xtt� ' _;k ..� . 's s r ou - < Y�r n, tai i .-.-Ar,' t;' .- ?t ` Figure 64. Site 26591 Feature K,former flume supports crossing Hakalau Stream,view to the west. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 57 4.Fieldwork >•� f 4 i ,.. ._ • .F is Y .}l'i vim. � 4 iF - Figure 65. Site 26591 Feature K concrete flume blocks on north side of Hakalau Stream,view to the east. 1l ' '-' '.'s kms" • _. ` *�F,-,, ,,`' , Ni,�`II �l S It f,; :�'t�"h k ^h...f .,,,,f ,z' 1 'l y R 4 �{ jM 1 i^` SAS -'." R r.f•J \ • ( �1."." ,i f E -�.a� ",...,;,'"1„,4,'4.4'.7.4i Er r rj yyy�y, r .r, yrs .w - A; \ a 3 0 • if:. . ' 1 l i • s y a : r e f aX A 9 -< N\•&:,' \, 1� Y i; 'I' Sf,/t, 'may" nx n + � g S _ x 3: _J . 0: -y,`.-,--.:4,. - . :- . --_12,-_-;-----_: -,---,- --7--=-_, ;Ifi`ni't,.-....--..:-.--- -.. - 'J -4 ` , air x Figure 66. Site 26591 Feature K,concrete flume supports on the south side of Hakalau Stream, view to the north. 58 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork rrr . ac d; t' F l.� legal( Ir ; ... r IC' • fN . Figure 67. Site 26591 Feature K,elevated concrete pier in Hakalau Stream,view to the northeast. a 4 �� 41.111t„ .'` !r 5 .alit T �}Y"• '� �, d4 .rte. %tea Y. , • 'Jr .+, 1 :_'-: A,` C t jr I V.Alli .•'..--s.10:4,' s ;set...—.'.-...;f";.•''''''... iE.a'F • .__ ~_ t:+ -t ti'.+! !S- �t - ws { • �_ -�`.:.s,. *--"'":74,- om� � .� t .^.*—; Vra. _ "1stjlC1" •..t' 'r�,.,�+' ,. W ;y..., - 9�r`a., �. } L ar. *' ,. :ar. Figure 68. Site 26591 Feature K,metal drum with rocks,view to the southeast. 59 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork Feature L Feature L consists of foundational remnants of the Hakalau Mill located at the mouth of the Hakalau Stream, along the southeastern edge of Hakalau Gulch (see Figures 59 and 60). The mill foundations (Figure 69) are those of the mill constructed after the 1946 tsunami,which closed in 1974 and was demolished and removed in 1979. According to the 1966 Sanborn map(see Figure 41),the mill that operated at this location between 1947 and 1974 contained ed of a sugar hopper, an evaporator and crystallizer room, a boiler/fuel room, a machine shop, and a crane that loaded raw sugarcane into a mill crusher room. The area in which the former mill was located looks very different today than it did when the mill was still present (Figures 70 and 71). Currently all that remains of the mill are the concrete foundation fronting the sea wall (Figure 72) and that of the former machine shop (Figure 73), the sea wall (Figure 74), a concrete pillar(Figure 75), the northern foundation wall of the evaporator and crystallizer room (Figure 76), portions of the mill crusher wall (Figures 77 and 78), concrete fragments, and heaps of rusted metal including remnants of the former crane that was used to move sugarcane from the steel chute into the mill for processing (Figure 79). There is an opening on the north side of the former machine shop foundation that allows entrance underneath that foundation (Figure 80). All of the remaining elements of the Hakalau Mill are in poor condition. The concrete foundation fronting the sea wall is broken in many places allowing the ocean waves to crash through(Figure 81). The County of Hawaii acquired the mill site in 2006 and established the Hakalau Beach Park,which officially opened in 2009. Hakalau Beach Park elements currently present at the former mill site include an informational sign at the base of the Feature J stairs, a pavilion and large steel shipping container(located on the former machine shop foundation),picnic tables,and concrete barricades delineating driving and parking areas(Figure 82). MI ' .' r ,-,,,,,/.. , --' ' 1`'''''''''' - '-‘' 7 S r Ya +� fr,�� j �.� e y. x,,; Figure 69. Site 26591 Feature L,the former location of the Hakalau Mill,aerial view to the northeast. 60 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork .fit "'ill° : ...\" v ,mo ..• �g^• .. -. Sri t .....4j 1 % r, ' .•.I '" I. F~ 4 M a1/4 `„ + �_+ f %� r n yR 7k+.4if F Sc = l aP'VUf , . .. . '.. 5F F'`• '� ,l r 1,4 'r , rf -1, ; am R� _4,I, /" .r,11 ,,,,,, . ., ,, •••-.L .� . J ,4 fit-L • ...,...„....,,,,.„..,... .3A„......_ ••.„......•:r.••,0.,,,.. , . • , .. . -,3p, - , . „ i 6 t ;)e4 •'�.':! i is s. ' ,e..- � "'"�. .�� > +�. Figure 70. Overview of mill site,Ca. 1940's and present,view to the south. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 61 4.Fieldwork I _ lit 1 : I i t1 111 tP�`4�d a4wm3° 1.. .' ..,,,,,,,,...1.4.11/11..,..,1_,„ : ,,••' 1,,'.. silett,''.."a,/:.ii'llx::: ' L L I{{I11 I , �� ' t ` f \`�' q ,`l �x " 'Alt -..., �x 1 fir "II; .1 i .. x \114a1t 1 Y , .. *len ... . to ': ,'',3 m " r r .- e ( p, y ,,,,,,, ,,,,.,„. t } Y .ao a f L ° to :44'- Figure 71.Location of sugar hopper, ca. 1940's and present,view to the northeast. 62 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork 1. 1 " ' 1 i 4 11';,1 • .� '' ) 12 4 ren ' „,. g���,, ' 1IQ fir, 1 "`w . 4 ' r1a s. • ,,ry.A r r��cyJ .:, 7jR I ',�1 t ' i, ,, _ 4 c e , ,# ' +t� '5V V tit - 1 R' b.. ..'.1 -i-s-... ., 3 R `4. * J.— _ N ,.5 ',r..kN._, Figure 72. Site 26591 Feature L, concrete foundation and sea wall,view to the northwest. •I 1 D' -`� ''':4 -a,1 C { ,-r` o-y'r, ?-- y .4 ` 'fir '. �'-�L it ,,,-,;,,,--.1 v',..7.7:.', ,,...11,;;,.',...1,-: - 4 :*,,,t,v, /,)„ 1,' 6T.*,,,', .. '., ' ,.:> , 1 r,f. A f ..,,,,...,,,,,,, -„,,,,,.......,,„.„...t,,,„4„, i-iv.,,;.,,,,,,... .,,, , ,r,. 4, 4 - . . ,, „,...,, ,,,, 1 . . . . .tc...,. . :. , , ..... „iiii '.'". I'1'14' , ',,,,,, 4„,.: '` ,< ", r s c � kx , % �. - ,, a, �. M ti .. R ,� VPg _ r• 1 ,9'- ' lc' 1. 7`�, n , "+^ -JR _ y I4' - `3 fit" �.n /d \'�f^ -S:.` Figure 73. Site 26591 Feature L,concrete foundation of former machine shop,view to the south. 63 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 4.Fieldwork d ,, ,,44 i Ors--s' '�fic its ` !'" / w� -‘,,.-.i-7,-1, {('� - Ii�. , ma P 24r .r ,iea y kAVAV ,, :.ii-.....; !:;:,,...,."..;,;--.----':7's-li,,-i, = ',•*V:&,ii.414;14-1J.i.t.i'fr, i t k--44* i Mt•-,!...4...;.,''---, `!:;t4:7,. ';'''.rf,;--;',4,-'-':7. '''."N'-...,'' ''''''"'-, \\•,,,. d i , /431-'-;.‘„•..,':',"tj.7.'-.1.,'Ir 1,-140.:;:, '''.-''.'fP...i- '::::, '''.0';':',,likN ip..!ii: Ofi w •- i $ ,1,..-'j� u'y k `�� _ . :"`` k ' t I 1 L %f,,,,4'`.- .1.44,1(' F�€ t. .• $+-W ':,,,' W; �� .-14'', , y S '4 ,' rte . , s 4 " �n` :�6 `'S " a Al�C figs �i } 4 � `--'''''''''F'-'.0.'-'W,..- Q0. - "F 4' /1-7.7-,--.<_:14,,--,..•, id .. -,!L Tb. 4S4 4'� t s+ .i�a �._ Xsy.,', •,-• ,..s..~� Cl' �yv r.•a „'�'.,_.+�."=zs' '."�:� a '; Figure 74. Site 26591 Feature L, sea wall,view to the northeast. x mA Figure 75. Site 26591 Feature L,concrete pillar,oblique aerial view to the southeast. 64 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork .' 'tZ. `{ r :'r'A l"r.\ 41F R``.l1 r^Cit C11 10,1114 -.�•y -.' ,��,.,, t ' t r�r .f ,,a ' • 1 '1. // • n r 1: ,' 4��AM "«.,`. tit ;�� � 4''V. ! .,41,:k';61,..7.'-1pt4F ` �6`"t'!, �' AR~ 4 A A{+k c�, ,• .,t'�.4' q• p �S1 ilio - '4 __ lS �t- � '.;✓h` °W } 1 i +{'t`,, 1 ..,..-000-.4 - r u "ham•/ "., 'Y. ' ( nye..,' ,yr:' 3c� "' x.. , � ,. 6.. .t xis s ' `�"/' a sr,[ �: , a. n, t r y '' etV;`. ,. '7.— fj, r' +ii t' f t 7, "'�}'r4 1 ' ..r.-14.',.: ' f,r`'q� '1 f''''' hi �"� " {,, r �` a ,F c J y a� .- .�x rt r $ ?�x .o nyd t ss '''''.i - P 4-,,N.-:-74:•-•-•e•-•;� ?.qty »- � r. F��� ri t �`,'.7",'.f4.,-0'4:-.;:-.19',ati ��� ;:: � ,�a,��s- .77- : m ''..,.,;,:.,..-,1',..,:;,,,..„,,,<,,,,1 . , �, j *�e�T Hyl r i % ' xr 'r "v '',•' 1.4';',7,-;,',..,f.': .f l� r �r^' z.-c i�a„''Ft F i.. 'i':42.,..,-:i--„, ',,_;_• �`'„vol ��.y ` t.1: ya' .�y f ,•,:i-::Y,'",. r, L ••.,,,...4i..- 1'Y i "•,‘,....,,,,,,,,P, m " ,, $.k• � R ,w7 It.'. 1fn} + ' ` } F.i4�' r ! .t ,ti," A'Ty 'y�. • yyl ,t '`''/ 1,c�,r }`- - 1. i A�.' 1t 2 9� ',-vt t'd.'... ,of— y'` r;.r ;.1.2k�� ` .`•� .�� sty','-''''' •• 4,(/,-,- ,- .1. �,�'j;� \�` Figure 76. Site 26591 Feature L. concrete foundation wall of former evaporator/crystalzer room, view to the southwest. & '4":F :lip 7 \ • ly�r Y yr s' ,. ,v.y � I�i'e,1 �!! ')SII �Yj . e 4,c--, W 1 I !�i f� .11Yr { � .�') 1. ;7,„:7-,,,x„ .-,--:-,,T.,4,„vt-,-,r,, LI , .-, ,,itr.pe,-5 d„, ,,,, q,,,,,/ o 4 } s'2 r',•'� ., 6 e, t X t r i a drr ,w�.�y�} A'a �q 'yya�k; *, •4'..4z.-.4q::. `�' � a t� ,t ,,h \5 .3'1, grad ;a+ :.�kgy CFC'�P.�S4.. d1 '"i�-e.`1 Mil ,.„,, > P. S y:: ,. Figure 77. Site 26591 Feature L,portion of former mill crusher wall,view to the northeast. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 65 4.Fieldwork y I At it. .a. �^YY ..i.,..„-"r:Arigivo "" ~ a M y -pM ��yy y..- ti A .F rv/!iI I ,j •`OS €,+ '..l��••'. N .t - 1 f "w t y y, ' / �.. l r` 'AV +k"vim. I .W+., 7 . T-., , n'` ,. titin w T ., -7t .. ''}',.":4.- t tax • - y �� t � .4-: 4 11' Figure 78.Area of mill crusher,ca. 1940's and present,view to the southeast. 66Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork „cirr. P9 '� ,,, , ... rpt,. 1, q , ,' 1•41",-4--' I 1 ., 4`7 1 .,-"" N i4 • � � � ~..�� ,, . y ' _ A.', .. IIIA '. ^ _ { IIek A',. / S W s - i: : Figure 79. Site 26591 Feature L,remnants of the former crane,view to the west. -_ lt..w' ..>:...wr M� _._—.m."--rF--' elarme""•A�5w`e"'s`. 'TM�Piq'�65rr • . .. .c- ,1. .... ,..�,. a , is 1I ! /. _-F.._---ate .r ... Vie. *. ''' Figure 80. Site 26591 Feature L,underneath the former machine shop foundation,view to the east. 67 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama'e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 4.Fieldwork • m,,,.. }IM" Figure 81. Site 26591 Feature L, sea wall and broken concrete foundation,view to the southeast. rl sr � 6 X14 �!� I d ��,�Q�]ty� I.11�gqYt AI �' td�.jjl�+i� f I,, �Y tt 3 rtd 1 f ' / �I ' ' i A + 7 .� �� • .. . .-7 P . 1� 1 . ,III, f�/i'h�I 1 1A r f x 4 A, ._.., ,„,. .„,.,..,,,,,„. ,,_ 0 Pte•• .p q o �z� L �� � 'ta rig i `t'""it fi011N -�1►+ - II Via_ -7,!—.., .,. -.1 rb 0414.. a O - Jwy, y i. Figure 82. Site 26591 Feature L,park pavilion and shipping container currently on the foundation of the former Hakalau Mill,view to the southwest. 68 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork Feature M Feature M consists of the mill access road that extends east from the old Mamalahoa Highway at the northern base of the Hakalau Gulch (see Figure 49) and immediately forks (Figure 83), with one spur continuing east along the base of the northern gulch slope and one spur turning southeast and crossing the Hakalau Stream in two places before continuing under the Hakalau Stream bridge and ending at the former mill site at the mouth of Hakalau Stream. The road is unimproved except where it crosses the stream. The road spur that crosses the stream does so on a raised concrete ford (Figures 84 and 85). Feature M appears in early historic photographs and maps as only extending into the gulch laborer's camp (see Figures 18 and 86). The road spur that crosses the stream was likely added sometime between 1930 and 1954 as it shows up on an aerial photograph from 1954 (Figure 87). It's possible that the road over the stream was added following the 1946 tsunami when access to the mill to rebuild it necessitated a stream crossing that could be made safely by vehicles. -11.11 • ,.,,,r- .. 1,. ' . y l .. f yr J G lnx .ky '4,1 4.', tt ^�.. x x - if� : p . , ^ry C d ,- 44„{ e ^► 71 II „..:,,.. ,. ,3 ..,t,,. „;,.,.. „......,,..... ..,v7„:..., ..,;.,...7..,,. ...wie.: . „ ..A._ .,,..„ .1..,..„,.....7. ..,: , , 1 c*. i..,146„,.:,,, , ,, r 2, .10 .":„.„4: ;—.4%,.."7:.',.r.r--,,,,.-k42!7..!!'..-' ...:4_,,,,,r;42 . s li• •, e - ' ^ it- m h f iiik. ..- 'N„r -.. - --_*., .34% -4•' i v *, � "mss•v� y,• • �r r•• 1 r ,.V ,3•t M ry, .1 .,i'a, i -01",.'� ..,40,,,„$,,,„., `r"t .k Y,.2,. `6' : � .4y.nZ,1 , /.--).;,',C-----) ,!�+'"' ..v i, , • ., R "':Vi&,r�iP .� 1•-. r Figure 83. Oblique aerial view to the northeast of Hakalau Gulch showing the route of the mill access road as a dotted red line. Feature N Feature N is the smokestack that was associated with the Hakalau Mill (see Figure 25). The smokestack remnants are located above the former mill site along the old Mamalahoa Highway(Site 30187),perched on the steep side of the gulch wall(see Figure 60). In 1909,the smokestack was described as "a brick flue surmounted by a smokestack 120 feet high and having an elevation 235 feet above the mill site"(Evening Bulletin 1909:31). The smokestack was rebuilt in 1925 (see Figure 31),but presumably the flue stayed original.All that currently remains of the smokestack is the brick flue (Figure 88). The flue measures 9 feet square and 9 feet tall. It is constructed of red fire brick and mortar supported by iron girders. Some of the plaster that once covered the surface is still visible(Figure 89). Vines and roots cover the flue,and the slope has deteriorated and eroded around the structure. Overall,Feature N is in poor condition. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 69 • + 1 ' a +`t S4.Fieldwork L3.* k. t.,:-. r 1e _ fE k y� t .j'°; aA _ R 4y • • ,t y �'. = „,,.--- ,:t ,,,,-.5",-;-, � r�am_ , e ,•* � ri.: -.. , t R y� � T� , pyxs rE i.� Illt,4 �y a ,r ✓ P �. C� k !, B raf i ' -..«,..:.a;xt-, s, r Yelf riTr LS'� F} t` Figure 84.Aerial view of raised concrete roadbed and culverts crossing Hakalau Stream. 1 e¢ as% erfw C is -�` _� �. v � � T 1 R71 - i q1 ` ' E. a4g.,.):40-4 es Cfy�w� • � y�' j'v } !` .. +dim- z . 4Pr ! • ri . . �*w-:. ter. y' .nom. C -x y' t s. , Y .. ,-',,' '1.',„.",.'• -, :- *§;;” : .. ' C--- - ' el"t41.1?!'- 4 a d - • ' 14"� .,- v o£ �Xx k a I r - ss^G"% .s.: �t-- tCTitV • Figure 85.Raised concrete ford crossing Hakalau Stream,view to the northwest. 70 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork , ,'atItill ) ,-■Afr- V . ))•• It `_,,,,,A,,\ \I ,,,..,_\'' ,:hi\N Ar'''' 1' � ' ' � 2 \:'\1").44.—":":"s'*4-1. ''' ~\�_' "_ may'. yam+ � 1 I 'r �, ,, l .41(..'C: fillrbr. ----241 .:, ,.- - , ‘‘:, t :.:,1 °h asci k, il'*1*;11,04W_ j*"It ) kt—jj * 1" v.f .6.4 ir ,-- "--, ..,I.; - • ...•"*. , jj,,,,,, -,-,---.....,„/, , --- - . ,,,,,.. ....,;, ,,,,..,..-- „....,,,74. i cr.:__, a . , „00.441.1 ' .,_....iiti,.,), ..,,0 1 yr . fte.... vrer . '- 7-= I, --).--, ,A )--s-, r ,'-' , Ej- APL lof Ilif ii.V 4 , , )4., .1' -- - 4.11211PMFIN:ek., . ...„:491;.') 1 / Allik -.0' Tlitilill' _ ‘ .1.18 )1 ;:III: r 1 40115111r . 1141.111. ..1Figure 86.Portion of 1916 USGS Honomel. u Quadrangle map showing the APE and the road leading to the gulch laborer's camp along the Hakalau Stream. Fd” p.. °4 .. h ww"h apa ,r" ,,, G, ",' .', 1 * ° ,tk ° ; F" ate,, �. "t' "r.,.,. �` A„. cd$P .. uA pg, i 0. \# ' ' * .”, *"= 1°a " ' ,, 44 qtr ' ,'S � fir• • 4 i n ' 1 ' \e '" r" • , .,A . .•070A1A 000. 414 t fie " '' ' r �m . , �� , ut arae _ � � "� '7 l " V "" r ( 5 �' �P r I API ork Figure 87. 1954 aerial photograph showing the mill access road crossing the stream(note the runoff from the mill clouding Hakalau Bay). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 71 4.Fieldwork 1 1 1' , i \t i° , . !:,,i',„ i *A n, ,1 a „ , o- - Yet ,. 8��'k '"`o A )1 .. . .4., ,r.l' 0.' "" . v , > • fil w -- ‘-. ... .....,._ ; \'. , ,:,,t,. , . .. " . , ( ''.' � ' Y '"'''-:7'—'-; ',:pt. ‘. / •• • 44 tx.... ' . ..: ...,„.„,..., ,,,,,,,,,,,.,...,.--,, , , , , ,... - _ , . - ' s 44— w .,,,„..—:.......,..,,,, yj �- 4 y A Figure 88. Site 26591 Feature N, smokestack in 1946 and present,view to the northwest. 72 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork . , r„M ,�.. y�I l. �� ' ti q , 1 s : ,,,c,;:,_,, ,, ,. , --7-,,,,, . .. „ ., ..:. ,„. _ ,,,.. . _ ,..... ., ,.,,,,, , ,._./. . ,.. i , ,..,,,,,, ... 4,„,._ ., . _ ,. , , t : „. „wi , , :,.,..,,, . , „ ,,...„ ,,, „, _, i ,, ,, , ,,,,„ . -,, ,1 , „,,,... ,...,.,, 4;4 ..,444 - ,. ..., .„ ,.,,,, „ . -A,f.,..: N f~ ,y W I !`:-7f-. (l, ' - .."'-' - i'-\ I .._.....iyi. 1 r ^ 5 � ?la \"am ,Iii _ 1 F� - I11 -,1. ` l. 4. 'r a ` a,` `,I i { > I f`41 iddi c 1 : fi '7 � ` fwri 7 �? th ,I 'k w% ;j 45� ; e h1IA ri.+'' a/ �. �tj , ' "1: 1. q‘ a ;,k,. ' , .al r 41,1 I" ) �” S , , r '�._ _ t, ',/_:":`.‘ V 1 ./te r i',,, 4 l } t , p� ,� !� ” �I( � lifi , , _ ii 4 4,- . , '.,..L...1),,,Y.4..?.:.-)kiiiik, ,,4.--..:) ,,,.;_... r 1•` Ot :i k tT: A.r t ' J r *y , 1---0;Ylr. .../. '.„',v,(!,•i .''''',,, ,) l,., , . , ' isli ..,,,..,:,..._ .: „,,,,,,Aiii": "...II---. -;1/41 Figure 89. Site 26591 Feature N, smokestack flue,view to the northeast. Feature 0 Feature 0 consists of a pipe stanchion located above the former mill site along the old Mamalahoa Highway (Site 30187), approximately 75 feet southwest of the Feature N smokestack(see Figure 60). It measures 9 feet tall and is roughly rectangular in shape with a wider base and a narrower top. The top is molded into a halfpipe shape. It's constructed of cut basalt cobbles and mortar(Figure 91). Figure 31, a photograph showing the reconstruction of the smokestack in ca. 1925, shows a pipe extending across the old Mamalahoa Highway in roughly the same location as Feature O. It's unclear what the specific purpose of the pipe held by the stanchion was,but the Feature 0 stanchion is in good condition. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 73 4.Fieldwork ---. IP' . tg .,1 ot . ., • n \ ,F'j -• —r :< ''dal ac;, + c�ln n �. �' wit " � 4 rte , t,. 0 ri ;•,r- - I! 'r f a-_ a��k•• 1, A.,.,,—s-'- x I4 p Y ♦; 'a'l .i-') ' ..? � i7"..t'„''r,. ,�,y �} � *gr, .nom n d. :!- Figure 90. Site 26591 Feature 0,view to the north. i . , kt.. I, ,,.!. '',, ! , lillity �y ... 4 *, 0. • .... �e.. ? ti w� .. k > a` h 4- ' � NV,: ,.__. . :�-M w. & Y ' b `q } "--",::—M" p=3,'• qT •!: ! •t ;.4. ;'s. .F, _`'f.d T .0. .. � .� • ."'r- ' ' Z `0- , ,yt --N • l' ,' � .�,yf a, It • <, x r V 'c3 4'ql• y ti 1 a ! ` am" ` ��:�� Figure 91. Site 26591 Feature 0,view to the west. 74 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork Site 50-10-16-30187 Site 30187 is the SIHP designation for the Old Mamalahoa Highway (Belluomini and Hammatt 2017; Clark et al. 2014; LaChance et al. 2017; Yucha and Hammatt 2017). A roughly 1,835 foot (559 meter) long section of Site 30187 is present within the current APE (see Figures 59 and 60), traversing the southern slope of that Hakalau Gulch in an east/west direction before crossing Hakalau Stream and terminating at the access road that leads to the old Hakalau Mill site (Figure 92). The road was closed to the public in 2017 and is currently gated at the top of the gulch to control vehicular access. Originally opened in ca. 1930 when the current bridge across Hakalau Stream was built to replace the older covered bridge that was once present there (see Figures 18 and 32), the wider and paved Mamalahoa Highway through Hakalau Gulch replaced an older, narrow, dirt road (the old Government Road) that followed essentially the same route (Figure 93). In 1931 a "solid stone wall" on the outside edge of the road on the Hilo side of the gulch was built to "facilitate traffic and make the side permanent" (The Honolulu Advertiser 1931). This retaining wall, built of basalt cobbles and concrete, can be seen in Figure 94. After the Hawaii Belt Road (Highway 19) opened in 1953, the alignment of the Old Mamalahoa Highway ceased to be the primary route through Hakalau Gulch. The section of the road that traversed the northern side of the gulch closed in 1978 (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1978) and was converted to a drainage way (see Figure 46). Currently the alignment of the Old Mamalahoa terminates at the access road to leading to the old Hakalau Mill site. The portion of the road that closed in 1978 (traversing the northern slope of Hakalau Gulch) is covered by soil and dense vegetation and is only accessible from the top edge of the gulch. The intact portion of the road within the current APE(traversing the southern slope of Hakalau Gulch)is paved,but is poorly maintained at the moment, and has rocks and vegetation strewn across its surface. In addition to the aforementioned retaining wall, this section of the roadway is also lined along its down slope edge by sections of a waterworn cobble and mortar guard rail and modern metal guard rails (Figure 95). Three concrete posts that may have once held a metal guide wire are also present(Figure 96). The upslope edge of the wall consists of a vertical cut in the gulch face. Despite the neglect of routine road maintenance in recent years due to its closure in 2017, the section of the Old Mamalahoa Highway crossing the APE is in good condition.With respect to its HRS Chapter 6E significance,this site has previously been determined significant under Criterion a for its association with a establishing regional transportation network in the islands and under Criterion d for the information it yielded (Belluomini and Hammatt 2017; Clark et al. 2014; LaChance et al. 2017;Yucha and Hammatt 2017). Site 30187 is also considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A and D. A more detailed discussion of NRHP eligibility and 6E significance is provided in Chapter 5 below. lir . kyr t, .- - :: . pr yT _? i . a .:i yy � P'��. — ^ d :*%:, ::---'-7.,,;,,,,,.4.: ,. . ."li sigs.`3 -rte e• sra T fir- e';' _ zt#.r er'�t ! y x� fa '4.t " .O. b,. .r ''..;!.L, - t r I, .* s s Figure 92. Site 30187, portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway in southern portion of the APE, oblique aerial view to the southeast. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 75 4.Fieldwork m794 ft a1 ..40.,,,-- r .mitulitoilittimis .,,sijr.ir.,..i.. „,,.. :/...fiii1; AIIIIIIIIMIR E. X41 't om+6,- L 4' '/1 f4;0` .., '; r. .),,r 1 4.i, e.,.., 7 4,... ,. ' , oi '; , )4 y ,40,tf,,.,, - _ „ _,,,.,, , ,- --, „., ....fr,„,,,,,,, ....... _ ',, , ..; , ,e. - , . ,.„ , , , . P . , .....,,,,:.,„,4".''' '447.;'"" I* Figure 93.Alignment of the Old Mamalahoa Highway(Site 30187)through APE,ca. 1911 and present,view to the east. 76 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork r ¶ .''"y.. c t r' t- ie f yr;vac'. %, • i'- -';,'a h ' 7 514 ��' Figure 94. Site 30187 retaining wall added in 1931 along a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway within the APE,view to the south. `, .„ 3 • .t g i'.� �1• , ' r S f�?"r , vYrL y�. o'- 4,4 « . r ne _. a ..1.. .. r �.- r:,i; - #. 1"! -ft. .tea ,. -� i�. —'.-,x` ...,. moi. - ,. ,-.-. ... --..e: ,. Figure 95.Waterworn cobble and mortar guardrail along northern edge of the Old Mamalahoa Highway(Site 30187). Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 77 4.Fieldwork 14 .,y T5 .U., +I� . i •lir ' >Sri a '� .4; •r IA ',• ', j'''''''- .. . �.? T. is „ ` , 14' -.I, ° \_ ` k 3i. / IC' ',r -„,; ti .. „,...t,;...._ ' r-..frp4-1/4_ ' - :Air' W ;0/,''''',,;-' ✓ �/, V�4.N�1• ar' A . kt r ,:; y' I , Figure 96. Concrete posts along the northern edge of the Old Mamalahoa Highway,view to the east. Site 50-10-16-XXXXX(Temporary Site 1) For the purposes of the current study,the temporary site designation T-1 was assigned to the Hakalau Stream Bridge (County),which was constructed in 1930 and is located in the mauka portion of the APE where the alignment of the Old Mamalahoa Highway crosses Hakalau Stream (see Figure 49). This bridge (Figure 97) is described in the Hawai`i State Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation as Bridge Number 001290001100003 (Appendix C), a "concrete closed spandrel arch” measuring 67 feet long by 22.4 feet wide (MKE and Fung 2013:6-2223), and is described as a contributing element to the "proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District" (ibid.:2-19). The Hakalau Stream Bridge was assessed in the bridge inventory as eligible for the NRHP under Criteria A and C as part of the proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District. The following discussion of that proposed district,which was never formalized,is presented below: The bridges in the proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District are significant for their contributions to engineering and transportation in Hawaii. The development of the Old Mamalahoa Highway contributed to the economic development of the island by linking the small towns and sugar plantations along the Hamakua coast with the island's principal port in Hilo. The bridges in the proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District are eligible under Criterion A as prominent products of the Republic of Hawaii and representative of Territorial and County public works efforts. The construction of the bridges was a deliberate investment in permanent public works improvements requiring the mobilization of skilled labor and significant public funds. Thus, these bridges were often constructed at important crossings along major transportation routes. The bridges served as important links in the circum-island transportation system, aiding in the commercial and residential development of Hilo and the Hamakua Coast. Reinforced concrete arch bridges were constructed to replace earlier timber and metal bridges. Many of these bridges were visually prominent, both in style and location, and made significant civic statements regarding the technical and aesthetic sophistication of the communities in which they were built. Concrete deck bridges are eligible under Criterion A for their associations with of the first use of formal engineering expertise in bridge making by the new county governments 78 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Fieldwork shortly after the annexation of Hawaii by the United States. These road bridges played a major role in the development of County of Hawaii's belt road plan by connecting previously isolated communities with a paved highway. The bridges are eligible under Criterion C since they represent a visual timeline of bridge construction technology in Hawaii. Nearly every historic bridge type remaining in the islands is represented along the Old Mamalahoa Highway. The masonry arch bridges are notable examples of the use of vernacular building materials and local craftsmen.Masonry and concrete arch bridges often evidence a high degree of detailing and workmanship and the few remaining examples are rare survivors of these once common bridge types. Furthermore, the reinforced concrete arch bridges constructed along the Mamalahoa Highway are among the earliest examples of reinforced concrete bridge construction in the state. Concrete deck bridges, including flat slab, girder and tee beam spans, are representative of the most common historic bridge type found in the islands. The majority of county built bridges, such as the Maili and Kaiwiki Bridges,were of this type as were the subsidiary spans on Mamalahoa-Honolii Bridge. Moreover, many of the bridges are examples of exceptional work by important local builders (the "work of a master") such as Louis M. Whitehouse, Johnny Wilson, Peter and Charles Arioli, and Hisato Isemoto. Prominent designers include William H. Chun and En Leong Wung. The fifty-seven bridges and culverts that make-up the proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District are evaluated as a group. Together these bridges form an area encompassing the entire sixty miles of the Mamalahoa Highway. Individually, the bridges in this proposed district range from technologically simple timber and masonry arch bridges to the more complex concrete deck girder and flat slab bridges. Together these bridges form a cohesive group built in a relatively short time period that document the evolution of style,methods and bridge building technology in Hawaii. This group of bridges played a critical role in the development of belt road transportation for the island of Hawaii. Based on observations made during the current study, the Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) continues to be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under both Criterion A and C. With respect to HRS Chapter 6E significance,the bridge is considered significant under Criteria a and c for the same reasons listed above with the added significance under Criterion d as well. A discussion of NRHP eligibility and 6E significance for this bridge is provided in Chapter 5 below. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 79 4.Fieldwork 1 l e,i 6k k it P N `r v4,4(.",.'am t . ,.�rd ♦ ,�, ' „ ',, 'a ..z,,,-,.-.'n",4-'0' j ^. Y'iJ' , �- v,,� 9� 1�.1•� fie ` - .. .Y I I .;” ' a, w 44 w 4,N411C �r 0 \ i f�� y it �i �,y �' /; �; y } � r. l T 4.^ t ' , I -k J 1 i d '.{. `V73w � ' , ,17,- — i K~ktom. .0E4- .Lft � y, \ V 49 I ♦', . 4,r,e, dam«�, � „ k , 1 °.� f:. ,.jd. ms � La� l I ''xL .e , Ji li Y Figure 97.Hakalau Stream Bridge(County),view to the northeast. 80 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nut and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii 5.NRHP eligibility,HRS Chapter 6E significance,and Treatment Recommendations 5. NRHP ELIGIBILITY, HRS CHAPTER 6E SIGNIFICANCE, AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS To determine the effects that the proposed undertaking will have on historic properties, the sites recorded within the APE are assessed for their eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and for their HRS Chapter 6E significance. Effects of the proposed undertaking on the historic properties are then considered, and treatment recommendations are presented. NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES ELIGIBLITY The criteria for NRHP evaluation are contained in 36 CFR 60.4, and their application is discussed in National Register Bulleting No. 15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (NPS 1997). For a resource to be considered significant, and thus a historic property, it must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,workmanship,feeling,and association and must be characterized by one or more of the following criteria: A It must be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; B It must be associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; C It must embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; or represent the work of a master; or possess high artistic value or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;or D It must have yielded,or may be likely to yield,information important in prehistory or history. HRS CHAPTER 6E SIGNIFICANCE Under HRS Chapter 6E,the evaluation of significance is based on criteria established and promoted by the DLNR- SHPD and contained in the Hawai`i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-275-6. For a resource to be considered significant it must possess integrity of location,design, setting,materials,workmanship,feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: a Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; c Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; or possess high artistic value; d Have yielded,or is likely to yield,information important for research on prehistory or history; e Have an important traditional cultural value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. DISCUSSION OF SITE EVALUATIONS AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS The NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance for the five documented sites are presented in Table 5 and discussed in further detail below along with any potential impacts that may be caused by the proposed undertaking. As can be seen in Table 5, the period of significance for the documented sites extends from when they were first constructed to 50 years before the present day(or 1974). Table 5. Site specific NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance evaluations. Site No. Property Period of NRNP HRS 6E significance (50-10-16) significance eligibility 09070 Hakalau Plantation Manager's House 1897 to 1974 A,B,C a,b,c 09090 Hakalau Stream Bridge(State) 1911 to 1974 A,B,C a,b,c 26591 Old Hakalau Mill 1880 to 1974 A,C,D a,c,d 30187 Old Mamalahoa Highway 1930 to 1974 A,D a,d T-1 Hakalau Stream Bridge(County) 1930 to 1974 A,C,D a,c,d Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 81 5.NRHP eligibility,HRS Chapter 6E significance,and Treatment Recommendations Site 50-10-16-09070 Site 9070 is the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House. Significance evaluations for the house, which is listed in the HRHP and has been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, were previously prepared by Hibbard (2009). Under Criterion A, the house was assessed as significant for its association with the Hakalau Plantation. Under Criterion B, the house was assessed as significant for its association with John Munro Ross, who managed the Hakalau Plantation from 1905-1946. Under Criterion C, the house was assessed as architecturally significant as an example of a late nineteenth century plantation manager's house in Hawai`i. The integrity of the house could not be assessed during the current project because it is located on private property. The full significance evaluation for the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House from the NRHP nomination form is presented in Appendix A. With respect to its HRS Chapter 6E significance, Site 9070 is considered significant under Criteria a, b, and c for the reasons discussed above. Although a portion of the Tax Map Key parcel that is coterminous with the boundary of the site (TMK: [3] 2-9-002:039) is included within the current APE for the proposed project, the house and associated buildings are located on the upper tablelands of Hakalau Gulch and will not be impacted by the proposed undertaking. Site 50-10-16-09090 Site 9090 is the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) located along State Highway 19. Significance evaluations for this bridge, which is currently listed in the HRHP and has been determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, were previously prepared by Leineweber(2009). The significance evaluation for the bridge from the NRHP nomination form (see Appendix B) is reproduced here: Criteria A The Hakalau Stream Bridge is significant for its contributions to the fields of engineering and transportation in Hawai`i. The bridge is eligible under Criterion A for its associations with the Hilo Railroad Company,later called the Hawai`i Consolidated Railway,which played a major role in the development of the Hilo and the Hamakua Coast by providing transportation to the harbor for the island's sugar production. The railroad and its numerous bridges together have been called the"greatest engineering feat in Hawai`i."Another commentator noted that the completions of the railroad marked nothing less than "an era in the development of the islands." The steel railroad trestles and truss spans from the original bridge remain intact with minor modifications for seismic upgrading and bolted connections. The new highway and reconstructed bridges bypassed and straightened-out the old Mamalahoa Highway and the more irregular parts of the Hawai`i Belt Road (FAP 19) providing modern transportation facilities for the island of Hawai`i, thus greatly contributing to its commercial growth in the latter half of the twentieth-century. Criterion B The bridge is eligible under Criterion B for its association with figures significant in the history of the Hawaiian islands: the Hilo Railroad Company founders- Benjamin Dillingham, Lorrin Thurston,and Mark Robinson. Benjamin Dillingham was a noted businessman who drew up plans for a large sugar mill at `Ola`a, eight miles south of Hilo in the previously uncultivated Puna district. Lorrin Thurston was the minister to Washington during the former Republic of Hawai`i and a former Interior Minister under the monarchy. Mark Robinson worked as the former Foreign Affairs for Queen Liliuokalani. Criterion C The bridge is eligible under Criterion C as a representative example of early twentieth-century engineering technology. The bridge is a rare remaining example of steel girder and trestle construction and was, for many years, the longest span in the state. The bridge represents the "work of a master": John Mason Young, designer of the original railroad line and bridges; as well as William R. Bartels, of the Territorial Highway Department, who engineered their conversion from railroad to highway use in the 1950s. The analysis of the structure may provide information about early twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction, as well as information regarding the only standard gauge railway in the islands. Leineweber(2009) With respect to significance under HRS Chapter 6E, the bridge retains integrity in all categories to consider it significant under Criteria a, b, and c. Under Criterion a, the bridge is significant for its association with the Hilo 82 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawaii 5.NRHP eligibility,HRS Chapter 6E significance,and Treatment Recommendations Railroad Company (Hawai`i Consolidated Railway) and use during the early days of the sugar plantation era in Hawai`i and for its reconstruction as a highway bridge providing modern transportation for Hawai`i Island. Under Criterion b,the bridge is significant because it is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past, such as the Hilo Railroad Company Founders. Under Criterion c, the bridge is significant because it is one of the last remaining steel girder and trestle bridges in Hawaii and is representative of early twentieth-century engineering technology. It is anticipated that the historic characteristics of this bridge will be impacted by the proposed undertaking, and that the replacement of the historic streel trestles with concrete bents will result in a loss of character-defining features and historic integrity of design,materials,workmanship,and feeling. Site 50-10-16-26591 Site 26591 consists of 15 features associated with the Hakalau Plantation that are located both above Hakalau Gulch to the east, and within the APE. Six features of the site, including the remnants of the former tramway and stairs (Feature J), the supports for the flume that once crossed Hakalau Stream (Feature K), the foundation of the former Hakalau Mill (Feature L), the access road to the mill site (Feature M), the base of the old smokestack(Feature N), and an old pipe stanchion (Feature 0), are present within the APE. Rosendahl (2009) previously assessed this site under HRS Chapter 6E as significant under Criterion a for its association with the Hakalau Sugar Plantation and its association with the history of sugar cultivation in the Hawaiian Islands and under Criterion d for its information potential. Two of the warehouses (Features A and B) were additionally assessed as significant under Criterion c for their architectural value, which was viewed as temporally distinctive and exemplifying a type,period(1920s), and method of construction. The features of Site 26591 contained within the APE, since they are all currently in ruins and in poor condition, lack the architectural value to be considered significant under Criterion c, but they do retain enough integrity of setting,location, and association to be considered significant under Criteria a and d, as discussed by Rosendahl (2009). The portion of Site 26591contained within the current APE is also considered eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criteria A and D for the same reasons discussed above. While portions of Features L and M (the former mill site and access road) could be impacted by the proposed lead remediation activities (compare Figures 98 and 59), those impacts will be limited to soil areas containing the highest lead concentrations, and as long as clean soil is returned to the surface following the excavations, the concrete foundation remnants of the former Mill building are left in place, and the Feature M road routes are re- established after the remediation activities are completed, the adverse effects to the site as a whole should be negligible.With respect to visitors to the County Beach Park at Hakalau,where the Feature L mill site is located,the effects could actually be beneficial,and will help make the area safe once again for recreational use. Site 50-10-16-30187 Site 30187 is the SIHP designation for the Old Mamalahoa Highway. This site has previously been determined significant under Criteria a and d with respect to HRS Chapter 6E(Belluomini and Hammatt 2017;Clark et al. 2014; LaChance et al. 2017; Yucha and Hammatt 2017). The 1,835 foot(559 meter) long section of Site 30187 contained within the APE retains integrity of location, setting, and feeling, and its integrity of association with important late nineteenth and early twentieth century events in establishing a regional transportation network that has its roots in antiquity qualifies it as significant under Criterion a. Character-defining elements of the road that convey its significance under Criterion a are limited to the road alignment, which has not changed since the 1930's, and the cobble and concrete retaining wall. Under Criterion d the road is considered significant for the information it has yielded during prior studies (Belluomini and Hammatt 2017; Clark et al. 2014; LaChance et al. 2017; Yucha and Hammatt 2017). Character defining qualities of the historic road have included the pavement(road surface) within the travel way, the alignment, and structures such as dry-stacked stone revetments, retaining walls, embankments, and culverts. Site 30187 is also considered eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criteria A and D for the reasons discussed above and also potentially as part of the proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District (MKE and Fung 2013). This site will be used to facilitate access to the APE during the proposed undertaking, but the anticipated impacts to the site itself are considered negligible and will be mostly related to normal wear and tear caused by the continued use of the roadway for the purpose for which it was originally designed. Those minor impacts to the road surface can be easily mitigated by the repaving of the road surface that is already proposed at the conclusion of the undertaking. It is not clear at this time if more severe impacts to the road could be caused the plan to facilitate construction access to repair the Hakalau Stream Bridge that carries Highway 19 across Hakalau Gulch (Figure 99), once additional details regarding those plans are available, the SHPO should be consulted regarding any additional anticipated impacts to the historic roadway. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 83 5.NRHP eligibility,HRS Chapter 6E significance,and Treatment Recommendations Logo rid a` a.' I'rgecl Arta Q"We Map keys . ,'•.".`" 1°. r E]aentm sal Tesringior ie art f' i ri, Hakalau ///f ProodwilRems:a.Nee r Say dd; Roadways ',g»n:; -. N a .,.a, PP1Ctl Raid+e Y. C b l w • i1•l utht Park(Farmer SugarLin •,• ei dO _ a`a° /s /. ._ _. ..,.._ Z 54 A 0 10O 200 400 J \ Feet Figure 98.Hakalau soil remediation plan. II 1 I ; i,11 , 4 4 T . T R- d \ 9,, 0,r '$, '. .-$. .......ei I - !I • I ., \ \ '', $' 4$'1 , 1, ,,,.., , • , 1 . : . 1 ,...„ ,1 ,,,... I t (.,,1 ,,„ _ ;R1 0 is -. m Is F » r'L.I ,. : Iii T—, w.N. CI. r fi ` 1 r , I n, 1Exlst. ;DOW sre, F.... Ii. 1, See Nat • • CONSTRUCTION ACCESS PLAN LEGEND, NOTE: CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AN E K m fr Ikinrng s n, a u.r a .re,�na.,,Ea ,..no• HARD BELT ROAD pJJJf7 Trosfb Brlape Constrcton NNINAII Pro!. BflXXX XX-XX RATIO Y/�//A narocs Prol.Ma XXX-XX-XX Figure 99.Hakalau Stream Bridge(State)construction access plan. 84 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii 6.Determination of Effect Site 50-10-16-XXXXX(Temporary Site 1) The Hakalau Stream Bridge (County) that carries the Old Mamalahoa Highway over the Hakalau Stream (Bridge Number 001290001100003;Appendix C),was previously assessed as eligible for listing in the NRHP under Criteria A and C as part of the proposed Mamalahoa Highway Historic Bridge District (MKE and Fung 2013). Under Criterion A, the bridge is considered significant for its association with the Old Mamalahoa Highway which established a regional transportation network in the islands and under Criterion C,the bridge is significant because it represents an unusual architectural bridge type (concrete closed spandrel arch). With respect to significance under HRS Chapter 6E,the bridge retains integrity in all categories and is considered significant under Criteria a and c for same reasons given for the NRHP eligibility. This bridge will be used to facilitate access to the APE during the proposed undertaking,but no impacts to the site itself are anticipated. ANTICIPATED IPACTS AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The current project proposes to rehabilitate the deteriorating substructure of the Hakalau Stream Bridge(State), and to remediate lead-contaminated soils found within Haklalau Gulch, beneath the bridge, by removing all vegetation and roughly 24 inches of topsoil within portions of the APE that contain concentrations of lead(see Figures 98 and 99). This work would occur within a roughly 15-acre area that includes portions of several Tax Map Key parcels (TMKs: (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 064, 080, 999; (3) 2-9-006:021; and (3) 3-1-001:001, 022, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, and 999) located on both sides of Hakalau Stream in Kama`e`e and Hakalau Nui ahupua'a, North and South Hilo Districts, Island of Hawai`i. Five significant historic properties are present within the APE for the proposed Hakalau Stream Bridge Project including the Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) (Site 50-10-16-09090), the former Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070), the remains of the old Hakalau Mill and Plantation infrastructure (Site 50-10-16-26591), a section of the Old Mamalahoa Highway alignment (Site 50-10-16-30187), and the Hakalau Stream Bridge(County)(Site 50-10-16-XXXXX;T-1). Although the TMK parcel in which the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 50-10-16-09070) is located within the APE,the actual house is not and will not be impacted by the proposed project and is recommended for no further work. The Old Mamalahoa Highway alignment (Site 50-10-16-30187) is unlikely to be impacted by the proposed project(see above) and is recommended for no further work. Portions of the Hakalau Mill and Plantation infrastructure site (Site 50-10-16-26591) that are located within the soil remediation area could be impacted by the proposed project, but those impacts should be minimal and the portion of the site within the APE is recommended for no further work. The Hakalau Stream Bridge(County)(Site 50-10-1 6-XXXXX;T-1)will not be impacted by the proposed project, and no further work is recommended for the current undertaking, however it is recommended that the bridge be recorded by an architectural historian if future projects will have an adverse effect on it. The rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge (State) (Site 50-10-16-09090) will alter and effect that significant historic property. It is recommended that the FHWA and HDOT prepare a Memorandum of Agreement(MOA) to stipulate measures that will adequately mitigate the impacts of the proposed undertaking. Table 6.Anticipated site impacts and treatment recommendations. Site No. Name Anticipated Recommendations (50-10-16) impacts? 09070 Hakalau Plantation Manager's No No further work within project area House 09090 Hakalau Stream Bridge(State) Yes Prepare a Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement to mitigate impacts 26591 Old Hakalau Mill Indeterminate No further work within project area 30187 Old Mamalahoa Highway Indeterminate No further work within project area XXXXX(T-1) Hakalau Stream Bridge No No further work for current undertaking; (County) Architectural recordation if future projects have adverse effects 6. DETERMINATION OF EFFECT The HDOT will be rendering its own HRS Chapter 6E-8 and Section 106 effect determinations and mitigation recommendations(if applicable)in an HDOT letter addressed directly to the Hawai`i SHPO/SHPD. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 85 References Cited REFERENCES CITED Armstrong,J. 2003 Old Mill Site Eyed for Hakalau Beach Park: Land Donation Possible if Firm Can Unload Rural Roads. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 10 January: 1 & 6. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/,accessed April 18,2023. 2006 Hakalau Beachfront Property Gift: Owners of Land Want it to Become a Public Park. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 09 May: 1. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/, accessed April 18,2023. Belluomini, S.A. and H.H.Hammatt 2017 Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for the HIlea Bridge Replacement Project, HIlea Ahupua`a,Ka`u District, Hawai`i Island,Federal Highway Administration/Central Federal Lands Highway Division(FHWA/CFLHD) contract DTFH68-13-R-00027 TMKs: [3] 9-5-017: 007 por., 008 por., and 9-5-017 Hawai`i Belt Road/Mamalahoa Highway Right-of-Way. Cultural Surveys Hawai`i, Inc. Job Code HILEA 2. Final. Revised 2017. Prepared for Federal Highway Administration Central Federal Lands Highway Division. Bishop,H. 2002 Hakalau gate sparks clash.Hawaii Tribune-Herald[Hilo, Hawaii]. 15 August: 1 and 8. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com. Bowser,G. 1880 Hawaiian Kingdom Statistical and Commercial Directory and Tourists' Guide George Bowswer & Co., Honolulu and San Francisco, CA. Electronic document, http://ulukau.org/elib/collect/polk1880/index/assoc/DO.dir/book.pdf,accessed October 8,2021. Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia iwaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana,Hale Alii,Honolulu. C.Brewer and Company Limited 1974 Vets pay Final Tribute to Hakalau. Monthy Letter III (12). Electronic document, in www.haka lauhome.com. Callis,T. 2017 Hakalau Beach Park Bridge Repairs Corning But Fix Doesn't Guarantee Reopening. West Hawaii Today [Kailua-Kona]. 04 September: Al. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Campbell, S. and P. Ogburn 2004 Pepeekeo Sugar Company History. Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association Plantation Archives Collection. University of Hawaii at Manoa Library Hawaiian Collection. 2004. Electronic document,https://www2.hawaii.edu/--speccoll/p_hilocoast.html,accessed January 20,2023. Capellas,E. S. 1925 North of Hilo Bay. Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. April 30: 9. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/259014841/?terms=north%20ofu/o20hilo%20bay&match=2, accessed February 6,2023. Carter,H.A. P.,J.M.Kapena,and J.Makee 1877 Report of the Royal Commissioners on Development of Resources. Pacific Commercial Advertiser [Honolulu]. 5 May. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed December 6,2022. Chinen,J.J. 1958 The Great Mahele:Hawaii's Land Division of 1848.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii.Privately published. 86 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawaii References Cited Clark,M.R.,J.D.Nelson,and R.B.Rechtman 2014 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of Sections of the Mamalahoa Highway and Napo`opo`o Road Rights-of-Way (and Portions of Adjacent Parcels) for the Construction of the Proposed Mamalahoa Bypass Interchange Portions of TMKs: (3) 8-1-06: 062, 074, 188; 8-1-08: 003, 004, 005, 020, 021; and 8-1-09: 006, 007, 010, 011, 012, 013, 050, 057, 999, Ka`awaloa Ahupua`a, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii. ASM Affiliates 22590.01. Revised 2014. Prepared for the County of Hawaii,Hilo,HI. Commissioner of Public Lands(Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands of the Territory of Hawaii) 1929 Indices of Awards Made by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Star Bulletin Press,Honolulu. Daily Honolulu Press 1881 The Sale of Leases and Lands at Ali[i]Iolani Hale. Daily Honolulu Press [Honolulu]. 10 September:2.Electronic document,www.newspapers.com, accessed December 6,2022. 1885 Hakalau Mill.Daily Honolulu Press [Honolulu].August 1: 2,accessed February 7,2023. Dorrance,W. and F.Morgan 2000 Sugar Islands: The 165-Year Story of Sugar in Hawaii.Mutual Publishing,Honolulu. Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation 2012 Ethnohistorical Study of Honohononui, Hilo, Hawaii Island. Honohononui Kalaninuiiamamao. Revised 2012. Prepared for Kamehameha Schools, Land Assets Division, Honolulu. Environmental Protection Agency 2022 "Summary of the Clean Water Act". Electronic document, www.epa.gov/laws- regulations/summary-clean-water-act,accessed January 20,2023. Evening Bulletin 1909 Hakalau Plantation Company, LTD. Evening Bulletin [Honolulu]. March 25: 31. Electronic document, https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82016413/1909-03-25/ed-2/seq-31/, accessed February 6,2023. Forbes,K. and S. Forbes 2023 Hakalau Our Home.Electronic document,www.hakalauhome.com,accessed April 18,2023. Forbes, S. and D.Hibbard 2018 Hakalau Jodo Mission National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Revised 2018. Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service. Garovoy,J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii.Harvard Environmental Law 29:523-571. Giambelluca,T.W.,Q. Chen,A. G.Frazier,J.P.Price,Y.-L. Chen,P.-S. Chu,J.K. Eischeid,and D.M.Delparte 2013 Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii.Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94(3):313-316. Giambelluca, T. W., X. Shuai, M. L. Barnes, R. J. Alliss, R. J. Longman, T. Miura, Q. Chen, A. G. Frazier, R. G. Mudd,L. Cuo,and A.D.Businger 2014 Evapotranspiration of Hawaii. Revised 2014. Prepared for Water Resource Management, State of Hawai`i. Hall,A.D. 1898 Hawaii. Street & Smith, New York. Electronic document, https://www.google.com/books/edition/Hawaii/EUXK 1 M09ejIC?h1=en&gbpv=1. Handy,E. S. C.,E. G.Handy,and M.K.Pukui 1991 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 87 References Cited Haun,A.E. and D.Henry 2014 Archaeological Inventory Survey TMK: (3) 2-9-02:083 Hakalau Nui Ahupuaa, South Hilo District,Island of Hawaii. Haun&Associates 1035-041514. Revised 2014.Prepared for Chad and Jennifer Walker,Pearl City,HI. Hawaii Consolidated Railroad 1926 Annual Report of the General Manager. Vol. For the year ending December 31, 1926, Headquarters of Railway,Hilo,Hawaii. Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1953 "Hakalau Bridge Opening Ceremony Next Friday". Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawai`i]. 12 April: 1. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. 1962 "Lay-Off of 75 Men Averted. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 13 April: 1. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1971a Brewer Will Spend$5.5 Million. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 11 July: 61. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 197 lb Firms Report Progress In Pollution Abatement. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 11 July: 61. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1974 Hakalau Factory Ends Cane Milling. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 29 December: 10. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1976 Traffic Notice. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. September 12: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1978 Department of Public Works. County of Hawaii 1978. Public Notice: Closing of Portion of Old Mamalahoa highway at Hakalau Gulch. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 24 January: 10. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1989 Motor Vehicle Safety Checks Are Up to $10.75. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 07 August: 5.Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Hawaii Tribune Herald 1945 Hakalau "Trolley" Replaced by Steel Flume. Hilo Tribune Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 20 August: 3. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Hawaiian Gazette Co.,L. 1895 Bright Skies At Hilo. Hawaiian Gazette [Honolulu]. December 10: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/49693173/?terms=Carpenters°%20are°%20busily%20engaged &match=1,accessed February 6,2023. Hibbard,D. 2009 Hakalau Plantation Manager's House National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form.Revised 2009. Prepared for U.S.Department of the Interior National Park Service. Hilo Tribune Herald 1940 John M. Ross Relates the Growth of Hakalau School. Hilo Tribune Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. October 20: 10. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/555585682/?terms=hakalau%20gulch%20camp&match=1, accessed February 6,2023. 1946 Hakalau Damage Over $500,000. Hilo Tribune Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. April 2: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/555631850/?terms=hakalau%20mill&match=l, accessed February 7,2023. Hommon,R.J.,A. Sinoto,I.P. Gordon,and P. C.McCoy 1974 Statewide Inventory. Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum Project 090. 88 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i References Cited Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1925 Pioneer Builder of Hawaii, John A. Scott, Dead. Prominent Figure In Industrial Life of Territory Passes Away In Honolulu. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. November 13. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com. 1926 Hakalau Mill Has Showers Installed. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. May 25: 5. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/274854168/?terms=hakalau%20mill&match=1, accessed February 7,2023. 1927 Hakalau Plans $40,000 Store: Concrete Structure will be Erected to Blend with New Office. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. 09 April: 11. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1947 Hakalau Mill, Tidal Wave Scars Erased, Resumes Its Operations. Honolulu Star-Bulletin. March 7: 12. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/282705311/?terms=hakalau%20mill%20tidal%20wave%20s cars%20erased&match=l,accessed February 6,2023. 1953 Hamakua Railroad Bridges Made Part of Road System. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. 29 April: 32. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1961 Isle Sugar Industry Fights for Survival:HSPA Chief. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. 12 June: 2. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Hudson,A. 1932 The Archaeology of East Hawaii, Bernice P Bishop Museum. Hughes,M. 1981 Hakalau School's 100th Jubilee.Hawaii Tribune-Herald[Hilo, Hawaii].August 16: 24. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Husted,F. (editor) 1902 Husted's Directory of Honolulu and Territory of Hawaii.Hawaiian Gazette Co.,Honolulu. Johnson,K. 2017 'A Very Real Threat' Foundation Erosion Prompts Hakalau Bridge, Beach Park Closure. West Hawaii Today [Kailua-Kona]. A5. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa 1864 Honolulu, Okatoba 8, 1864. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. October 8. Electronic document, www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed December 6. Kalakaua,L.D. 1888 The Legends and Myths of Hawaii. The Fables and Folk-Lore of a Strange People. Charles L. Webster & Company, New York. Electronic document, https://archive.org/details/legendsmythsofha00kala/page/n9, accessed 2019/01/24. Kame`eleihiwa,L. 1992 Native Land and Foreign Desires: Ko Hawaii Aina a Me Na Koi Pu`urnake a Ka Po'e Haole, Pehea Ia e Pono ai?How Shall We Live in Harmony?Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Kanemori,R.T. 1953 Biggest Bridge. Hawaii Tribune Herald [Hilo]. 20 September: 1. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Kent,N. 1983 Hawaii:Islands Under the Influence.University of Hawai`i Press,Honolulu. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 89 References Cited King,R. 1935 Districts in the Hawaiian Islands. In A Gazetteer of the Territory of Hawaii, pp. 214-230. Edited by J.W. Coulter.University of Hawaii,Honolulu. n.d. Hawaiian Land Titles. n.d. Electronic document, https://ags.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads, accessed May 15,2020. Kinney,H. 1913 The Island of Hawaii.Hilo Board of Trade,Hilo. Klein,G.,M.Koob,and D.Lee 1985 Load Capacity and Service Life Study of Hamakua Coast Steel Trestle Bridges HI-HWY-82-1. Revised 1985. Prepared for State of Hawaii Department of Transportation, Highways Division- Design Branch,Honolulu. Kuykendall,R. 1938 The Hawaiian Kingdom 1778-1854. Foundation and Transformation, vol. 1. 3 vols. University Press of Hawaii,Honolulu. 1967 The Hawaiian Kingdom: Volume III: 1874-1893. The Kalakaua Dynasty,vol. 3. 3 vols.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. LaChance,F., S.Wilkinson,and H.H. Hammatt 2017 Archaeological Inventory Survey for the Mamalahoa Highway(Route 19)Widening(Mud Lane to Mand Road) Project, Waikoloa Ahupua`a, South Kohala District, Island of Hawaii TMK: [3] 6-4. Cultural Surveys Hawaii, Inc.Job Code WAIKOLOA 10. Revised 2017. Prepared for R.M.Towill Corporation. Leineweber, S. 2009 Hakalau Stream Bridge National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Revised 2009.Prepared for U.S.Department of the Interior National Park Service. Maly,K. 1994 Appendix A: Historical Documentary Research. In Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chin Chuck Road Project Area, Land of Hakalau Nui, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-9-02:23 and 2-9-04:56),edited by A.Walker and P.H.Rosendahl.PBR Hawaii,Hilo,HI. 2000 Na Kuki`o Ma Ka `Aina Kaha: A Collection of Traditional and Historical Accounts of Kuki`o at Kekaha, North Kona. Kumu Pono Associates Hiku38b(030300). Prepared for Steven S. C. Lim, Hilo,HI. MKE and Fung(M.K. E.Associates LLC and Fung Associates,Inc.) 2013 Hawaii State Historic Bridge Inventory And Evaluation. MKE Associates, LLC and Fung Associates, Inc. Revised 2013. Prepared for State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Highway Division,Honolulu. Muffler,B. and T. P. T.Museum 2015 Images of America Hawai`i Tsunamis.Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina. NPS (National Register Branch,Interagency Resources Division,National Park Service) 1997 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulletin 15. U.S. Department of the Interior,National Park Service,Washington,D.C. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database.Electronic document,http://kipukadatabase.com/kipuka. Pukui,M.K. (editor) 1983 'Olelo No`eau:Hawaiian proverbs&poetical sayings.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 90 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i References Cited Pukui,M.K., S.H.Elbert,and E.Mo`okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii.Revised and Expanded ed.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Rood,J. 1975 Portrait of a Dying Town. Hawaii Tribune Herald [Hilo]. 09 April: 12. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Rosendahl,P.H. 2001 Archaeological-Historical Assessment, Lot 10 — Hakalau Estates Subdivision, Land of Hakalau Nui, North Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-9-02:Por.1). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. 2174-092301. Revised 2001. Prepared for Mauna Kea Agribusiness Company, Inc. 2009 Archaeological Inventory Survey and Cultural Impact Assessment, Hakalau Coastal Parcel. Land of Hakalau, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-9-79,81). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.2684-070908.Revised 2009.Prepared for Jeffery Melrose,Island Planning. Sai,D.K. 2011 Ua Mau Ke Ea Sovereignty Endures: An Overview of the Political and Legal History of the Hawaiian Islands.Pu`a Foundation,Honolulu. Shepard,F.P.,G.M.MacDonald, and D. C.Cox 1950 The Tsunami of April 1, 1946. Bulletin of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of the University of California 5 6,Berkeley and Los Angeles. Sherrod,D. R.,J. M. Sinton, S. E. Watkins,and K. M. Brunt 2007 Geologic Map of the State of Hawai`i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. Open-File Report 2007-1089. Electronic document, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1089, accessed Apr 27,2018. Smith,J. G. 1941 New Canes Being Tried at Hakalau: Plantation has Shown Caution in Replacing Old Varieties; 1063, 1389 Shows Promise. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 09 July: 1 & 9. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Soehren,L. 2005 A Catalog of Hawai`i Place Names Compiled from the Records of the Boundary Commission and the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Title of the Kingdom of Hawaii.Part 1:Puna and Hilo. 2005. Electronic document,http://ulukau.org/cgi-bin/hpn?,accessed September 14,2016. Soil Survey Staff(United States Department of Agriculture,Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document,http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Star-Bulletin,H. 1935 Hawaiian Sugar Plantation History No. 26-Hakalau Island of Hawaii. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. August 24: 3. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com, accessed December 6,2022. The Honolulu Advertiser 1892 Hilo Budget. Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. December 1: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/256280832/?terms=Hakalau%20probably%20received%20th e%20worst%20damage%2C%20as%20there%20the%20sea&match=2, accessed February 6, 2023. 1925 News of the Other Islands from Advertiser Correspondents: Hakalau. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 03 November: 8. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18, 2023. 1928 Hakalau Local and Personal. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 24 July: 7. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 91 References Cited 1931 Bridge Work at Pohakupuka Now Near Completion. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 13 March: 5.Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1953 Hakalau Bridge Rebuilt, Given New Paint Job. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 05 July: 25. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser 1871 Letters from Hawaii-No. 1. The Pacific Commerical Advertiser [Honolulu]. August 26: 3. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed December 6,2022. 1882 News of the Week. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser [Honolulu]. November 4: 3. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/174892670/?terms=The%20purposes%20of%20the%20comp any%20are%20the%20raising%20and%20cultivation%20on%20the%20Hawaiian%20lslands%20 and%20elsewhere%20of/o20sugar%20cane%2C%20and%20the%20purchase%20and%20sale&m atch=1,accessed February 6,2023. Thurston,L. 1913 Railroading in Hilo. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual jro1914. Edited by T. Thrum. Thos. G. Thrum,Honolulu. USAAF(United States Army Air Forces) 1925 Hakalau, Hawaii, T.H. National Archives and Records Administration.Aerial Photograph 18-AA- 37-5. Airscapes-Hawaiian Islands. Electronic document, https://catalog.archives.gov, accessed February 6,2023. Walker,A. and P.H.Rosendahl 1994a Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chin Chuck Road Project Area, Land of Hakalau Nui, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-9-02:23 and 2-9-04:56). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph. D., Inc. 2174-092301.Revised 1994.Prepared for Mauna Kea Agribusiness Company,Inc. 1994b Interim Report: Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chin Chuck Road Project Area, Land of Hakalau Nui, South Hilo District, Island of Hawai`i (TMK:2-9-02:23 and 2-9-04-:56). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph. D., Inc. 1563-102894. Revised 1994. Prepared for Mr. Eben Dale, C. Brewer Homes,Inc. c/o PBR Hawaii. Yucha,T.and H.H.Hammatt 2017 Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for the Ninole Bridge Replacement Project, Ninole Ahupua`a, Ka`u District, Hawai`i Island, Federal Highway Administration/Central Federal Lands Highway Division(FHWA/CFLHD)Contract DTFH68-13-R-00027 TMKs: [3] 9-5-019:011,016, 024, 035 por., 9-5-027:020 por., and 9-5-019, 9-5-027 Hawaii Belt Road/Mamalahoa Highway Right-of-Way. Cultural Surveys Hawaii, Inc. Job Code NINOLE 3. Final. Revised 2017. Prepared for CH2M HILL and on behalf of the Federal Highway Administration Central Federal Lands Highway Division. 92 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A APPENDIX A. NRNP REGISTRATION FORM FOR THE HAKALAU PLANTATION MANAGER'S HOUSE (SIHP SITE 50- 10-16-09070) NPS Farm 10.9m 1Mh No i024.00ts United Stales Department of the Interior National Register of Historic Places Registration Form - ,,rse In seminar - determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin,How ..,•National Reg,.- '''.cors Registration Fore). It any nem does not apply to the property being documented,enter'NWA'for • • , h nction.- r ��,ruon n u��als .,ot i55 of significance,enter only categories and subcategories from the Piace additional certdficatton comments.entries and err,urce items on continuation shaets a needed(NPS Form 10.9000. 1. Name of Property historic name Hakalau Plantation Manseets HeUx other names/site number TMK: (3)2.9-002-039 • 2. Location street&number 29-2301 Old Mamalahoa Highway ❑ not for publication city or town Hakalau,Hawaii ❑ vicinity state Hawaii code HI county Hawaii code 001 zip code 96710 3.Stat&Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act,as amended, •I hereby certify that this _nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion.the property_meets does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s)of significance: national X statewide local Signature 91,eafp.,,t97ng official / Date Title State or Federal agencyibuieau or Inbar Government In my opinion,the properly_meets does net meet Inc National Register criteria Signature of commenting official Date Title State or Federal agencylhureau or Treat Government • 4. National Park Service Certification i I.hereby cerin.Inv lets pt-perty is enterro n.tt t-Sai44�a�17eys..� _eetemneeo eligible for the National Register _determined not Rfysier _removed from the National Register _other(explain) I Signature of the Keeper Date of Action Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 93 Appendix A Hakaiau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii .iProperty County and State 5. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property as apply) (Check only one box) (Do not include previously listed resources in the count.) Contributing Noncontributing X private X building(si 1 1 buildings public-Local district sites public-State site 4 structures public-Federal structure objects building(s) buildings object 5 1 Total Name of related multiple property listing Number of contributing resources previously I Enter'N'A'A propene is not pan of a multiple property listing) listed in the National Register NA 0 6.Function or Use Historic Functions Current Functions (Enter categories from instruclIonsi (Enter categories from instructions) Domestic Domestic Single Dwelling Single Dwelling 7.Description Architectural Classification Materials (Enter categories from instructions) (Enter categones from instructions) Late le&20th Century Revivals foundation: Wood: post and pier walls: Wood: shiplap Colonial Revival roof: Corrugated metal other: 94 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property C0 r'O State Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance of the property. Explain contributing and noncontributing resources if necessary.Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property,such as its location.setting,size,and significant features.) Summary Paragraph The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is an asymmetrical,two-story.wood frame dwelling sited on a knoll that presides over the town of Hakalau and the site of the former sugar mill. From the property,views are afforded of the ocean and the summit of Mauna Kea. The house is characterized by a corrugated metal hipped roof and an outset porch that wraps around the left side of the house. The porch protects the walls of a shallow front wing,that adds a visual dynamic to the composition. A centered porte cochere breaks up the massing of the house,as does a right of center enclosed,single story lanai. The intersecting hipped roofs have closed overhanging eaves with tongue and groove soffits,and a prominent gabled dormer accentuates the left of center wing's roof. Narrative Description The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House sits on a hillside above the Old Mamalahoa Highway. A white picket fence sets the lawn of the deep front yard apart from the street. A pair of lava rock posts herald the entry to a circular drive that leads up to the house and its porte cochere. A lava rock fountain,which has been reconstructed and features a contemporary whale sculpture is located in the middle of the lawn in front of the porte cochere. The porte cochere appears to have been rebuilt in the past twenty years. 11 has a low-pitched, front facing hip-gablet roof,which is supported 6"x 6"corner posts with brackets and diagonal bracing. The posts stand on 18"high concrete piers with panels in their faces. Thirteen concrete steps lead up to the front porch. The porch is 8'-6"wide and its ceiling and floor is made of 4"tongue and groove. It features a simple 2"x 2"balustrade and four 8"x 8"posts with scrolled bracketing at the top along the front,and eight similar posts carrying the roof down the left side of the house.. A centered double glass doorway,with each door having fifteen lites, provides entry to the house. To the left of the entry are a pair of t x 1 double hung sash windows with transoms above. All the wood double hung sash windows throughout the house are new,having replaced similar windows in poor condition. The entry opens onto a very large,flowing open space. A pair of Tuscan columns serve as a focal point and form an imaginary entry hallway that directs the eye towards the rear of the house,where a koa stair leads to the second floor. The living room runs across the front of the house and flows into the the dining behind it on the right side. The living room's front wall opens on the enclosed lanai on the right side. A now screened in, once open,side lanai runs down the right(east)side of the living and dining rooms. The rooms have Douglas fir floors with six inch baseboards,which are found in all major rooms throughout the house. The two Tuscan columns demarcate the large open,public space. Thus the living room,although running the length of the front of the house,reads as two distinct spaces on either side of a non-existent entry hall. Similarly the right side Tuscan column stands at the corner where the dining room,living room and"hall" intersect. The ceilings are not original,and reinforce this spatial conception as indirect lighting.running from front to rear,has been placed on either side of the imaginary hallway and around the peripheries of the rooms. By this device the space is totally open,but reminds a viewer of the more traditional floor plan. The dining room IPd',uioo d Ch,iiideIier. The west . :. :t ! living room illuminates the interior via a pair of double glass doors,each of fiteen Ines, which are flanked by double hung sash windows. Transoms are above all the openings. On the east side living room flows into the front,enclosed lanai,or sunroom. The room has three pairs of original sliding windows,each with four panes,running the length of Its front wall,and two pairs of similar windows on its side wall. A new aluminum sliding door in the rear wall opens the enclosed lanai to the screened-in side lanai. The side lanai's balustrade and posts follow the design of the front porch. Three,near Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 95 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State floor to ceiling,plate glass windows look out onto the screened lanai from the living room,while a set of four historic pocket doors with large singel pane windows access the dining room from the side lanai. At the rear of the dining room a swinging door opens into a former butler's pantry. This space retains some of its historic cabinetry with rounded corners. The butler's pantry has been opened up so that it flows into the kitchen,which retains its beaded tongue and groove walls and ceiling.but its cabinets and counters have been remodeled. Two double hung sash windows in the rear wall of the kitchen provide light and air. A west side door exits the house onto a concrete sloop with five concrete steps leading down to the rear yard. A breakfast nook adjoins the butlers pantry to the east. A pair of modern single pane casement windows in the breakfast nook open on the side lanai,and a large plate glass window dominates the east wall of the breakfast nook. A modern aluminum sliding door in the rear wall leads outside and down eight wooden steps to the back yard. The central hall leads to a koa stairway. To the west of the stair is a bathroom and laundry room. Across from these two small rooms,a door leads into a downstairs,rear bedroom. The windows have been removed from this room's west wall,and in their stead is two sliding aluminum doors,which lead out to the side porch. Between the bathroom and the stairway is a rear door that leads into a mudroom. It appears this was a rear wrap-around continuation of the side porch which at some point was enclosed,as its one interior wall is the same as the house's exterior shiplap walls. The double dogleg stairway,with its koa treads.leads up to the second floor. Six steps lead up to a landing, and then a run of eleven steps leads to a second landing. From the second landing four steps lead to the second floor. A wrought iron railing with a linear,geometric infill graces the stair. Off the second landing is a rear sun porch. This appears to have been added after the completion of the house,as its interior wall is shiplap.similar to the exterior walls of the house. All three exterior walls of the sun room are glazed. The two side walls each contain a pair of four pane sliding windows,and its rear wall features two sets of three 1 x 1 double hung sash windows. The room has a 4"tongue and groove ceiling and a 6"tongue and groove floor. The second floor has twelve foot high ceilings and contains three bedrooms and two baths. An original central hall,that runs front to rear,services the three rooms. The rooms have been remodeled,but contain their original fenestration.which is comprised of all double hung sash windows,grouped in singles,pairs and triples. The windows replaced in kind the original windows. It appers originally there may hve been at least four bedrooms upstairs.however,the master bedroom and its bath now occupies the entire east side of the second floor_ A large sloping lawn surrounds the house,with a lava rock retaining wall forming a terrace on the east side yard. From the edge of the east yard views of the ocean and coastline are readily available,before the yard drops down a steep embankment. On the west side of the property is a small road that services the two garages and other houses. Behind the plantation managers house are a fernery,a tool shed,two garages,and a cottage(see site map). The two car garage that services the main house dates from some time prior to World War II. It sits to the northwest of the main house almost immediately on the side road,with a very short driveway. The garage has a lateral running,corrugated metal and plastic gable roof and sits on a concrete foundation.which is 3'high on the downslope side. The walls are made of 8"vertical tongue and groove boards. A set of double sliding doors mounted on an overhead curvilinear metal track serve as the automotive entries'doors. These doors are made of 8"tongue and groove boards,and each has six hinged panels. In addition to the garage space,a tool room is also under roof and is situated at the north end of the garage. A doorway connects the two spaces. Two doorways exit the rear of the building,one from the garage,the other from the tool room,with five concrete steps extending down to the yard for each. 96 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Properly County and State To the northeast of the garage is the rectangular shaped fernery. It has a 2'x 4"frame with screened walls and a corrugated,transluscent plastic gabled roof. It sits on a lava rock foundation,and a sliding door on the north side provides access. The fernery's dirt floor is on two levels,with the north end 18"higher than the south. A lava rock wall demarcates the break in elevation and two concrete steps lead to the lower level. The roof is carried by 2"x 4"Fink trusses with the bottom chord 11'6"above the level of the higher floor. To the east of the fernery the tool shed sits on a 30"high concrete foundation,has 7'tongue and groove walls, and is capped by a front facing,corrugated metal gable roof. The shed has an outset front lanai with two 4"x 4"posts supporting its flat roof. The cottage at the rear of the property dates from prior to World War II;however,it has vinyl siding and has been dramatically remodeled,and does not contribute to the historic significance of the property. The garage for the cottage does retain its integrity and does contribute to the premise's historic significance. It is a single car garage with corrugated metal walls and front facing gable roof. Sliding windows are in both sidewalls,and there is no door to enclose the space. It sits on a concrete slab foundation. The Hakalau Plantation Manger's House retains its historic Integrity. The house sits on its original spacious grounds,elevated above the former belt road,lording over the lands its occupant oversaw. The exterior of the house and the grounds retain their historic appearance. Much of the historic interior fabric remains intact,with some alterations. Major alterations include the opening up of the interior living spaces on the ground floor and the placement of indirect lighting around the ceiling at an unknown period. These changes were handled in a sensitive manner,respecting the original spatial configuration,which the trained eye can still readily recognize. Other alterations include the remodeling of the kitchen,parts of the butler's pantry,and the upstairs bedrooms. These are all secondary spaces,which are less character defining than other areas of the house. The double hung windows and main exterior doors have all been replaced,but this was done with in-kind windows and doors. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 97 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State 8.Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria Areas of Significance (Mark'et in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the properly (Enter categories from instructions) for National Register listing) architecture ` x1 A Property is associated wish events that have made a agriculture r _.. significant contribut - ,,.a broad patterns of our history. X B Property is associated v 1115 lives of persons significant in our past X C Property embodiesn�..�I __..,_1.:,Jcteristics of a type.period.or me!,t..,r .1 construction or represents the work of a f iter.or possesses high Period of Significance artistic values.or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack 1897,1959 individual distinction. D Property has yielded,or is likely to yield,information important in prehistory or history Significant Dates 1897 Criteria Considerations (Mark's in all the boxes that apply) Significant Person Property is: (Curnpietc. t. C Bis m,rrcd aoove) owed by a religious institution or used for reigious John Munro Ross A purposes. Affil B removed from its original location. Cultural cation C a birthplace or grave. D a cemetery. E a reconstructed building,object,or structure. ArchitectlBuikter Builder: Jack Gertzy F a commemorative property. G less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years. 98 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Period of Significance(Justification) The period of significance extends from the time the house was constructed to cover the life of the house until 1959,at which time the period of significance concludes in accordance with national register guidelines. Criteria Consideratons(explanation,if necessary) NA Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph(provide a summary paragraph that includes level of signhcance and applicable criteria) The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is architecturally significant at the state level as a good example of a late nineteenth century plantation manager's house in Hawaii. It is typical of its period in its design,craftsmanship,use of materials,and methods of construction(Criteria C). In addition,it is significant for its associations with the history of Hakalau Sugar Plantation(Criteria A).and also for its associations with John Munro Ross,who managed Hakatau Plantation from 1905-1946(Criteria B). Narrative Statement of Significance (provide at least one paragraph for eat.,.,' of significance) The Hakalau Plantation Manager's house well exemplifies a sugar pi: aahon manager's house in Hawaii by way of its siting,scale and double wall construction In addition,it is typical of its period in the use of shiplap siding,its craftsmanship,and methods of construction. The manager's house on sugar plantations in Hawaii represented the seat of authority and as such was the most imposing residence on the plantation lands. The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is no exception to this rule. Sited on a knoll above what was then the main highway,the house literally oversaw the comings and goings of plantation life. A white picket fence and lava rock entry posts further demarcates the realm of the manager from that of the rest of the plantation,over which he presided. The plantation town of Hakalau.most of which no longer exists,lay along the Old Mamalahoa Highway within easy view of the house,a short distance from the residence. Also from the grounds of the house the no longer extant Hakalau mill,located along the shore in the valley below,was visible. Like most plantation manger's houses in Hawaii, the Hakalau house rose two stories in height and was of a more substantial double wall construction,as compared to the single wall residences of the workers and most of the plantation's professional staff. With 4,485 square feet under roof,it was by far the largest dwelling on the plantation. The house's use of shiplap siding was typical for its period,as similar siding is utilized in the plantation manager's house at Honomu and the James Hind residence in Hawi,both of which are contemporaneous with the Hakalau house. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 99 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawau Hawaii Name of Property County and State The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is one of approximately thirty historic plantation manager's houses to remain standing in the state. Several of these have already been placed in the Hawaii Register of Historic Places,including Grove Farm Homestead and the stone manager's house at Kilauea on Kauai;the plantation manager's houses for Honolulu,Waianae and Ewa plantations.and the supervisor's house at Kahuku,on the island of Oahu:the Hind residence in Hawi,the Union Mill manager's house,and Paauhau and Honokaa plantation manager's houses on the island of Hawaii. The Hakalau Plantation Managers House is also significant for its associations with Hakalau Plantation. Situated fourteen miles north of Hilo,the plantation was established after the enactment of the Reciprocity Treaty,which allowed Hawaii's sugar to enter the United States duty free. The 9.010 acre plantation was established by Claus Spreckels in 1878,with William Irwin&Company as agent. Spreckels was the major figure in the sugar industry in Hawaii during the nineteenth century. By 1890 the plantation's mill, located on the shore at the base of a two hundred foot bluff,produced five thousand tons of sugar a year. The plantation's maximum production was 26,509 tons in 1944, following the 1943 merger of the neighboring Wailea Milling Company into Hakalau. Hakalau continued in operation until 1962.when C.Brewer closed the mill and merged the plantation into Pepeekeo Sugar Company. The mill was dismantled and all that remains along the shore are the concrete foundations. Most all the plantation's operations buildings also have been removed,and little remains of Hakalau town,with the poorly maintained former theater serving as the post office. As such,the well- preserved Hakalau Plantation Manager's house stands as the preeminent reminder of the former plantation. The house is also associated with John Munro Ross(1868-1946),who was recognized as one of Hawaii's foremost agriculturists. Ross was born in Kincardine,Ross-Shire, Scotland and engaged in farming and railroad work before migrating to Hawaii in 1895. Upon his arrival he immediately went to work at Hakalau Plantation,which was managed at that time by George Ross(relationship.if any,unknown). Starting as a tuna,John Ross succeeded George Ross as plantation manager in 1905,a position which he held until shortly before his death in 1946. Along with overseeing the plantation,he was very active within the community and strongly encouraged the education of plantation youths. The Ninole public school,the largest in the North Hilo District was renamed the"John M. Ross School"in 1932 in his honor. Both this school and the one at Honohina placed a strong emphasis on agriculture in their curriculums thanks to his influence. In addition. Ross served as president of the Hawaiian Insurance&Trust Company,the Hilo Electric Light Company,and Hilo Gas Company. Developmental history/additional historic context information(it appropriate) The January 23, 1897 Hilo Tribune reported."Carpenter Jack Gertzy has the building intended for manager Ross'Hakalau residence well advanced. The house when finished will be quite an imposing ornament to Hakalau village."The manager's house remained in the hands of the plantation and C.Brewer until 1998,when the chairman of C.Brewer,John W.A. "Doc'Buyers purchased the property. In 2005 the property was sold to the present owner. 100 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography(Cite the books,articles,and other sources used in preparing Mrs lone on one or more continuation sheets) Dorrance,William and Francis Morgan,Sugar Islands,the 165 Year Story of Sugar in Hawaii,Honolulu: Mutual Publishing,2002. Hilo Tribune,January 23,1897.page 1. Nellist,Earl,Men of Hawaii,Honolulu:Star-Bulletin, 1930,page 425 "Services Today for John Ross.Sugar Veteran,"Honolulu Advertiser,August 28, 1946, page 1 "John Ross Dies,"Hilo Tribune-Herald.August 27, 1946,page 1 Previous documentation on file(NPS): Primary location of additional data: preliminary determination of individual lnstrig 136 CFR 67 has been X Slate Historic Preservation Office requested Other Slate agency previously listed in the National Register _Federal agency previously determined eligible by the Naounal Register _Local governmem designated a National Historic Largmz'w _UmversIty _recorded by Historic American Buiklings Survey it Other recorded by Historic American Engineeru,n Record a Name of repository. Historic Resources Survey Number(if assigned): 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property 3.15 acres (Do not include previously listed resource acreage) UTM References !Place additional UTM references on a continuation sheet) 1 05 15507675 1953920 3 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing 2 4 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing Verbal Boundary Description(describe the boundaries of the property) This nomination includes all the lands owned by Ron Smith In 2009 as described by Tax Map Key 2-9- 002:039. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 101 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Boundary Justification(explain why the boundaries were selected) This is the property historically associated with the Hakalau Plantation Managers House. 11.Form Prepared By name/title Don Hibbard organization date May 12.2009 street&number 45-287 Kokokahi Place telephone (808)-542-6230 city or town Kaneohe stale Hawaii zip code 96744 e-mail Additional Documentation Submit the lonow,ng nems with the completed form: • Maps: A USGS map(7.5 or 15 minute series)indicating the property's location. • Site Plan • Floor Plans • Photo Key 102 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager s House Hawau Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17.2009 Description of Photographs)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House as seen from the northwest. 6 of 17. ZT ��4 � n ?.C ° ., 0. w . II : 9 ! x• �� ,Y 1 •' , +• M! Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 103 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's Hou-e Hawaii Name of Property County and St, USGS MAP: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Papaaloa Quadrangle. 1992 1:24,000 NAD 83 1 ..;...„9.. „,:.,,,, ,,,..,.. .,, , ,,,,„,, s, .. „., • . ,r, STT."' , .....,,,,,,,,,,o,,,,,,,,,12. �'" �& r , ,. ,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,„.„:„: ,,. „ .., , , .,, ...,, ..,,,, ti. ,„:„ , ,,,,,,..,,„ .,, , Iti *1,P 1 4 ,,,,,-, ,, ,,,,, ,, ,,t,i,.-. .,,,, ,,;g, ),'74' 0041401 '0Y N�YM< 4'<.,_' • ,.,gyp �.: t.�!� M 104 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Managers House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Properly County and State Hakalau „ ,,,,..$„„...,no Plantation Managers House: Photo Key IL ,1 2 6-:-. :.'239 � a - �, it tl' ��. �aH�� W�,ew:a ,��.” � A Yt1 fW w..w. �f^'Sr \ ..,..,,,,.;: „.4 ,u i^ - e / i, t II 44/474j, 12 9 l f 1: 44:, ..'!. w Alik 411/414 ,K /P ,. r:°�o 7! } i ,--4,----,nryt' Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 105 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Photographs: Submit clear and descriptive black and white photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels at 300 ppi(pixels per inch)or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17,2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House as seen from the road. View from the south. 1 of 17. nYr• • , -11111111., IIS I►I1Illlilic 1,111, 106 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17,2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House as seen from the south. 2 of 17. • } � r; t s �. t e k6 r lit„y. . • u1, i '14 '• ' • •"••- 'k ', "*"y a . ! a r LL Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 107 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and Stale Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17.2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House as seen from the southwest. 3 of 17. 7': 1.'.• .tllt way ,.k s-. 7 � � m, 108 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17,2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House as seen from the southeast. 4 of 17. Gp ` s ,NNS ,• � �� J , A f( Y bn ;. `re+.. wMYnM14 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 109 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17.2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House as seen from the east. 5 of 17. • 110 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17.2009 Description of Pholograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House front porch as seen from the east. 7 of 17. liffi 1. 1 1dA II , ,V vrp 4 K Cr I'' A• 1 ! t ' r Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 111 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Managers House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17,2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House grounds behind the house with tool shed in foreground fernery to right rear and garage to left rear, as seen from the northeast. 13 of 17. 1. • • 1Y ti,. •f " 112 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17,2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House tool shed as seen from the southeast. 14 of 17. '' .... ' .4t- '14 11,4' .• -,.44,,,''' , , *,*-- . ,,,,, ,*,,, y• s a ,?,� , , r. ,. mrt' � f 7 •tY e • ;f+'ro' L ' `fir ` fA 4 .....,,,, ,,... .,...... . , ,,, , ,,,,,, ,-1, - ,,:,...,7,•'-' . ' ' / � ' .alt ,�+P'4 ,.;•,V• ' ',r -. ' • :2 ,r ,i M/ .4.17" � Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 113 Appendix A Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawaii Hawaii Name of Property Stato County and Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17.2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House fernery as seen from the east. 15 of 17, 4M• :• r "t tr.y, • fy 4.-, f" 2t , �`'i, 4r.G' ., ,may,, 'FF • ,4 r # r '7° ';'' _ .��RY^a, �. ,,, gym,.. } ter .,,,o '.4 a .?;• " s ., I:- f row " wt et ).0':_{{ y . -;;fesI I X . SIN ry _V♦ 114 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix A Hawaii Hakalau Plantation Manager's House Hawau Name of Property County and State Name of Property: Hakalau Plantation Manager's House City or Vicinity: Hakalau County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: February 17.2009 Description o1 Photograph(s)and number: Hakalau antation Manager's House main garage's sliding door on metal track,as seen from thePlnorth. 16 of 17. / .. 4 nb:, �P` .,.wii {.a �. .2 o,b. l ,,,, w., + °'' ...' ‘ ''''' r,,, ; 0� N�k I k' r °1k 1 rti r R i xi: ^ Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 115 Appendix B APPENDIX B. NRHP REGISTRATION FORM FOR HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE (STATE) (SIHP SITE 50-10-16-09090) NPS Farm 10-900 OMB No.1029-00Ie United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form mating or requesting determinations'- s:dual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin,How National Register of Historic Places Regrstrvr,:.. n If any item does not apply to the property being documented,enter'WA'for '.apol-.ar.,e For functions.architectural classification miler als.and areas of significance.enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions Place additional certification comments,entries,and narrative Items on continuation sheets IMPS Form 10-900a). 1. Name of Property Historic name HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Other names/site number _Hakalau Highway Bridge(structure number 001000190308410) 2. Location street&number Hawaii Belt Road ❑ not for publication city of town Hakalau(TMK 3-2_9-02) ❑ vicinity State Hawaii code HI county Hawaii code 001 zip code 3.State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act,as amended, I hereby certify that this nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion,the property,meets_does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s)of significance: _national _statewide _local Signature of certifying official — Date Title State or Federal agency and bureau In my opinion.the property_mats_does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official Data Title State or Federal agency and bureau 4. National Park Service Certification I,hereby.certify that this properly is: Signature of the Keeper Dale of Action entered in the National Register _ determined eligible for the National Register --- _determined not eligible 1w the National Register _removed from the National Register _other(explain') 116 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State 5. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property (Check as many boxes as apply) (Check only one box) (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing private building(s) 0 0 buildings public-Local district 0 0 sites x public-State site 1 0 structures public-Federal x structure 0 0_ Objects private building(s) 0 0 buildings object 0 0 Total Name of related multiple property listing Number of contributing resources previously (Enter"N1.41'it piope.ly is not part of a multiple property listing) listed in the National Register Steel Trestle Bridges on the Hamakua Coast 6.Function or Use Historic Functions Current Functions I Enter categories from instructions) (Ent,:.ctiQyor rs Nom instructions) TRANSPORTATION:rail-related TRANSPORTATION.road-related(vehicular) 7.Description Architectural Classification Materials (Enter categories from instruclioes) (Enter categoria'rur-I tnelruatans) OTHER:steel girder and trestle bridge foundation: N/A walls: N/A roof: N/A other: METAL Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 117 Appendix B HAKALAU STREA_G.',dk l.) l_ Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical Explain contributing and noncontributing resources if necessary.Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property,such as its location,setting,size,and significant features.) Summary Paragraph The Ilakalau Stream Hridee is a steel girder and trestle bridge kith the total length of 775 feet,a 261-feet height es er the stream bed,and a roadway width of,ti feet.It is built mei I lakalau Stream along the Hamakua ('oast of the Island of Hawaii and the rural setting of the bridge remains uneh,mrtei.The superstructure of the bridge is composed ofa concrete deck on steel girders.and the substructure is composed of c.1911 steel railroad trestle supports with masonry ilas a-rocklabutments.Open hotiiontal concrete rail,concrete cap and concrete end piers with incised bridge name and date of cnn,truetion:ire portions added in the 1950s rehabilitation. Narrative Description I he Hakalau Stream Bridge carries the I :11',;11.1 Belt Road(FAP 191 0i er llakalau Stream along the Hamakua (east of the Island of I law:ai'i.The present Ii plu sis bridge is as reconstructed from older railroad trestle and girder spans.In 191 1-1'f 1 2,tlwrteen steel trestle girder hridges is ere erected along the IiBmakua Coast to support railroad tracks lir the I lila Railroad Ccnnpaus. All el the rail bridges alum the line were devastated by the t;imam'til'I941i,and nine of the steel trestle bridges were disassembled and sold ars;crap.The remaining five bridges(I lakalau,Nauwe,Pahe'elte'e,hmauma,and hapueI were retained and modified as territorial highway bridges between 1950-53.Kolekole Bridge was assembled using parts of other demolished railroad trestle bridges. the railroad bridge remains in its original location:however.the Ilawai'i Belt Road.the primary transportation :trier\ lin the inl;ual.wan re-routed in the ctrl. I950s in order to utihic the ahandnned railroad alignment and railroad brtripe 0eslle s\stent.The setting has experienced little.if any.chane.In Int 1,the bridge was widened lar use as a hiJnnn bridge isith menthes lion the di,asemhled taihtrail hedgesthe reconstruction lolluws the original trestle design,him escr boiled rather hent ri eted eonneetion.;were uuliicd.A concrete deck, sidewalks and tail w etc added to Meditate automobile and pedestrian traffic.The integrity of the original substructure remains intact and is a remainder of the only standard-gauge railroad constructed in the islands. The bridgc's substructure can be hewed from the old Mamalahoa Ii ghwas which runs under the highway bridge.The bridge's historic association;are readily apparent to all ob,cncrs:the bridge retains its historic Ieebng due to its unusual construction tope. Interpretation is aided b} the presence ofa plaque on the substructure which reads: Hamilton&Chambers Contractors for Steel Structure New York.l'.S.A. 1912 The I lakalau Stream Bridge has recently undergone seismic retrofit modifications.The project included addition of hinge restrainers.;eat extenders at hinges and abutments.longitudinal struts at abutments,and the upgrade of pier footings. 118 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawai'iCounty,Hawaii Name of Property County and State 8.Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria Areas of Significance (Mark'x in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property (Enter categories from instructions) for National Register listing) ENGINEERING A Property is associated with events that have made a x significant contribution to the broad patterns of our TRANSPORTATION history. B Property is associated with the lives of persons _- significant in our past. _..._._ _._...._ x C Property embodies the distinctive characteristics _ of a type,period,or method of construction or represents the work of a master,or possesses high Period of Significance artistic values.or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack 1911 individual distinction. 1953 D Property has yielded,or is likely to yield,information important in prehistory or history. Significant Gabs 1911 1953 Criteria Considerations (Mark"x"in all the boxes that apply) Significant Person Property is: (Complete only if Criterion 8 is marked above) Dillingham,Benjamin owed by a religious institution or used for religious Thurston,Lorrin A purposes_ Robinson,Mark B removed from its original location. Cultural Affiliation C a birthplace or grave. !TA D a cemetery. E a reconstructed building,object,or structure. Architect/Builder F a commemorative property. l uun Ir tin \l,i rm G less than 50 years old or achieving significance 33:1t�1;,A\llliant R. within the past 50 years. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 119 Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State Period of Significance(justification) The Hakalau Stream Bridge was built in 1911 as a railroad bridge during the railroad's second pha:e of construction to the:trey north of llilo.In 1953,the Territorial Highway Department.under the direction of William R. Bartels.raeomtructed I lakalau Stream Bridge as a part of the I lanai i Belt (toad I I Al' 19)uub/i114 members of the original railroad trestle support system and additional materials front other railroad bridges. Criteria Consideratons(explanation,if necessary) Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph(provide a summary paragraph that includes level of signficance and applJcahIc criteria) The Hakalau Streams Bridge is significant under Criteria A.13,and C.Criterion A is applicable for the bridge's association with the I Iilo Railroad( snipanc (riterion Ii is applicable for the bridge's association with three thunder,of the Hilo Railroad Comp m). ('ritcnnn('is applicable since the bridge is a representative example of early twentieth-century engineering teehnologs as Hell as a source fur nrfimnation about early twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction. Narrative Statement of Significance (provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance) Criterion A The Ilakalau Stream Bridge-is significant for its contributions io the fields of engineering and transportation in Ilawai'i.The bridge i;eligible under Criterion A lir Its associations nnth the Ilila Railroad Company.later called the I lawai i Consolidated Railway.a Inch pltped a major role in the des elopincnt of the I its and the I Iiimilkua Coast by providing transportation to the harbor fir the island's sugar production.The railroad and les numerous bridges together h;ise been called the"greatest engineering feat in I la ai'i."I Another commentator noted that the completion of the r.lilioad marked nothing less than"an era in the des elopment of the islands." The steel railroad trestles and truss spans from the original bridge rennin intact with minor modifications for seismic upgrading and bolted connections.the nevi lughuas and reconstructed bridges bypassed and straightened-out the old\I5nrdahoa I lighway and the more irregular parts of the I l:nca(i Belt Road(FAP 19)prosiding modern transportation facilities for the island of I lass 01.1.thus greatlt contributing to its commercial growth in the latter half of the to entieth-century. Criterion B The bridge is eligible under Criterion B for its association with figures sn,nitieant in the hlstors of the I Iawaiian islands:the hits Railroad l'oni1r urs founders-Benjamin Dillingham.Lorrin Thurston.and Mark Robinson Benjamin Dillingham as a noted businessman 3s Its drew up plans for a large sugar mill al'Ola':1.eight rules south of Hilo In the pies ion*.uneultis;Ucd Puna district.Lorrin Thurston was the Minister to\\ashinglon during the former Republic of I lauaii and a former Interior Minister under the monarchy. Mark Rsbuxsn worked as the former Minister of Foreign Affairs I'ur Queen Liliuokalani.3 Criterion C Paradise ogles Pacific.(December 19241:14. 2 Thomas Thrum.Hauauan Almanac and Annual l Honolulu.Hawaiian Gazette Company.19141,142 a Gerald M Rest.Railroads of Haw ail Ilan Manna.Califon, .Golden Wes;Books.197711.123-124 120 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix B HAKALAU SIRLAM BRIDGE Haw,; I he bridge is eligible under Criterion(.as❑representati‘c cvample ofcarp trsinuith-icntut cue itt..•,ling teehnoIoe Hie bridge is a rare re111,1ininn c.vantple of steel Birder and trestle nai re tion;u�l .i u . t,•i i�:.�n years.the longest span in the state. I he bridge represents the"work of a nt:ut;i- 1,0,11 l 01111y- Of the original railroad line and bridges;as well as W illitun R Bartels,of the'let in n 1.11 II n_Inu.i, I)...1).0 u ho engineered their conversion from railroad to higlnnar use in the I95(k 1 the sunet e may provide information about earls twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction.,is richt as information regarding the only standard gauge ratio o in the islands. Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 121 Appendix B HAKALAU S1RLAM BRIDGE Hawai'iCounty,Hawaii Name of Properly County and Slate United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE H,awal i County,Hawaii Historic Concrete and Steel Trestle Bridges along Hamakua Coast on the Island of Hawaii unt'd=r 4 � Developmental history/additional historic context information(if appropriate) The Hakalau Railroad Trestle Bridge was built in 1911 by the 11i10 Railroad(ompan} during the railroad's second phase of construction to support the plantation indust} of the islmuf.lobo Mason Young drew the specifications and design of the bridge.Young Nis the founder of Pacific linemaermg(iumlrutc of I Ionolulu and a pioneer faculty member of the College of Agriculture and klccltanic Arts(later the University of I lawai'i)4 The bridge's annponents were ordered from the New York ftma of Hamilton and Chambers(ns ho also fabricated the steel of the I lan;alei River Bridge on Kauai the same year).It was erected by W.W.Beers.described by the Filo I rrbtine as a sCNN York engineers Hakalau Railroad Trestle Bridge was one of the most impressive bridges built by the Hilo Railroad.At 775 feet long and sitting on ses en steel tow en.the Hakalau Stream iiridge v.as the second longest bridge on the line. outdistanced only by the\laulua Bridge at more than I(Bill feet.Alter the \Endue Bridge as taken doiin. I lakalau heeame the longest highway bridge in the ternton for set oral tears.' It was also among the tallest.ttnh a height of 261 feet,only 25 feel shy of the tallest bridge mer\';tour Stream. In 1946,the railroad line were dei astated by a tsunami. Hakalau Stream Bridge and lino other bridges stere mauled and reconstructed when the rest of the steel trestle bridges is ere disassembled. .\sintli bridge itis issenibled from remaining parts from other bridges. The I larvae i Belt Head 11 AP I9)V. re-routed in Ilk:early 1950s to utilize the abandoned railroad alignment since the original Belt Road itis too Harrow and 11 finding for the large strucks used h1 the plantation industry in lieu of the devastated railroad In 1953.I lakalau Stream 13ridge etas widened for use as a hipht.ac bridge atilt members from the dis:rssemhled railroad bridges.The reconstruction foils s the original trestle design.how ciLir bolted rather than niteted eonnedtrons were uuhted- A concrete deck.sidenalks and rail iscre added to facilitate automobile and pedestrian traffic. John William SiddaS 11,r..t Hawaii(Territory of Hawaii:Honolulu Star Hullehn.19211.451,and George Nellist.Mon of Hawafi. I Honolulu.19351.487-453 s Hrio Tribune.III Apn1 19111:3. 6 Hawaii(Stare I.Department of Plannmp and Economo•De.clopment,The State of RawmS Data Hook.1982.A Staom i:al Abstract 1 Honolulu:Depanmcm of Planning and Economic Dm elopmcm,1983),414. Patricia Al,arc,'A Hntury of Road and Bridge Development on the Island of Ilawat'i"in Historic Bridge Inventory and ENaluation Island of Hawaii,prepared for Me State of Hawaii.Iepanmcnt of Transp,n:rlion.Highways Dn Iden rn cooperation with the i'S Department of I-ransprntation.rcdcral Highways Administration. (Honolulu.1987x).58 122 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Properly County and State 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography(Cite the books.articles.and other sources used in prepanng this form on one or more continuation sheets) See Continuation Sheet. Previous documentation on file(NPS): Primary location of additional data: preliminary determination of individual listing(36 CFR 67 has been Slate Historic Preservation Office requested n Other State agency prevrously listed in the National Register Federal agency previously determined eligible by the National Register Local government designated a National Historic Landmark University recorded by Historic American Bulldings Survey N Other recorded by Historic American Englneenng Record a Name of repository: Historic Resources Survey Number(if assigned): 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property Less than one acre. (Do not include previously listed resource acreage) UTM References (Place additional UTM references on a continuation sheet) 1 5 277032 2201749 3 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing 2 4 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing Verbal Boundary Description(describe the boundaries of the property) The nominated property is a rectangular shaped parcel measuring 772 feet by 28 feet,which is centered on the L.Ni point Ii.tcd above.Included within this parcel are the bridge's superstructure,substructure,floor system.and approach spans. Boundary Justification(explain why the boundaries were selected) The quill Ina led,Iructurc includes the bridge's superstructure,substructure,floor system and appropriate spans and the Irroperl\ upon cc hick they rest.These boundaries encompass,but do not exceed,all of the property that has been h nturiodh .isso:toted with rht.In'Lige. 11.Form Prepared By name/title Spencer Leineweber.FAIA Professor organization Heritage Center.University of Hawaii at Manors date August 15,2009 street&number 2410 Campus Road telephone (808)956-4704 city or town Honolulu state HI zip code 96822 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawaii 123 Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State Additional Documentation Submit the following items with the completed form: • Maps: A USGS map(7.5 or 15 minute series)indicating the property's location. A Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map. • Continuation Sheets • Additional items: (Check with the SHPO or FPO for any additional items) Photographs: Submit clear and descriptive black and white photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels at 300 ppi (pixels per inch)or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Name of Property:Hakalau Stream Bridge City or Vicinity:Hakalau County:Hawaii State:Hawaii Photographer:Spencer Leineweber,FAIA/Professor Date Photographed: August 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Photo#1: Approach Photo#2: Name Photo#3: Trestle Substructure. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement:This information is being collected for applications to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate :• ;-rgibikty for listing,to est properties,and to amend existing Wings. Response to INS request$required to obtain a • .. National Historic Preservation Act,as amended 116 U S C 460 et seq). esnm.,ted Burden Statement Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 18 fours per response including time for reviewing - lions.gait' - maintaining data,and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of n�. m to the C",c'i,s'anistrative Services Division,National Park Service,PO Box 37127,Washington.DC 200137127,and the Office of Management and Budget,Paperwork Reductions Project(10240018).Washington.DC 20503. 124 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Properly County and State --r.',-."-°•..1- - ,,--—--- -•-,...... , ,.....- ......,, -,,,,.„... Is.; goltio _ .. Location:1411131310.1-1:maii tTINI Zonc-1 .'**1;`,1, , Listing:2770132 1-,e/' ;".4,... . . e• Northing:2201749 ., , r':, 171 7/ ' /—* ,. .. - ' -,',."1:,:- .'. ,' ./ „, „ 'N. , • • : , , ... , J, ,11,... • . , , 1::-,°:,,?,-, 7 ...' . „." : \ • ' ' 4 -.1 .. e, ,, IV!' ':: '' •(._:00.J,.'i .• ",,' 01.,-,; 4 • . , -,,,„3.:(0,;\t';'''•, ,, •,•'''k— ' :0; . . -si.y'1 , • 4b . . 0' ' • '••':•,,. ''' 4:%"'1 • `0.• - ' . • • ;`, ‘• ''` / • '.'20*''' '' '' r;::' -C ::://' • '• ' '••' .. , . 0"0",,. .• / , ‘,.....„.." .- N. '-'?-J' \ _._' ''' , -'''''''•'''''',,:t -- ;,-.";,"-':lf "' -, '':1's`,. =:. • S. ..`'..7;.. ,c^-•' ' C,:..- • 0.,,Al. f S .f. ...1'.'',4 ., . . .. ,- --7.,:".A`',43. :-A',#t"I;4,4 , .,,,,,,,i. , .f.,,-, ' • - - „. .„ •.7„„.....- ,j- •" •" N —.— ..0:,...,...... Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`a`a,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 125 Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State Skean Nap .110.•-.t.\ \\ �hakwpwka r'°� "s Strum 8rid3c ' •uman. ' lila 5irYpM 1: • 1 f c.,kre s I14kalau t' •. )." Hakalau (,1 v Flantaflen PAP Sr4f- 0. 1 i Ftr10 Y r 126 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM Bk,i Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and Stale Photo#1;Approach tri . f • Photo#2:Name tit `� � .411\* • . A, , l A V A :,a. .� t Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 127 Appendix B HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State Photo#3:Trestle Substructure .__"" - - " '. fir: % r,4 s; • , A* tet• G H.l a r„ ' �i tt �.t' .: i ..4N.11, k ? a .'(1t: i 111 Ott 7,—,' •i :41 lor ilkt' , Vinay • ,vae. },. ,, ,�� 128 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama ,South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix C APPENDIX C. HAWAII STATE HISTORIC BRIDGE INVENTORY (MKE AND FUNG 2013) SDOCUMENTATION OF THE HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE (COUNTY) InventorryForm (County ate) General Information Bridge Number: 001290001100003 s :a Popular Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge • j •Feature Crossed: Hakalau Stream ?6 Feature Carried: Old Mamalahoa Highway Milepost: County Private: Hawaii {1Y Longitude: 155d-07m-56.19s Latitude: 19d-53m-49.06, 7� Location: TMK: 2-9-002:025 Historic Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Designer/Engineer: Builder/Contractor: Location Map: �µe • • l " kdw Re z ' Kol.M&le Beach pa,k 2000 ft 1km i Honunw 001290001100003 Hakalau Stream Bridge 6-222 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 129 Appendix C Construction Information Bridge Type: Closed Spandrel Arch Construction Date:1930 Replaced? No Altered? No Alteration Date(s): Alteration Type(s): Alteration Description(s): Bridge Information Number of Spans: 1 Max Span: 67.0 ft. Total Length: 67.0 ft. Deck Width: 22.4 ft. Superstructure: Concrete Closed Spandrel Arch Substructure: Concrete Abutment Wall Floor/Decking: AC Pavement Parapets/Railings: Concrete Open Decorative Setting: Other Features: Historic Association Eligibility Status: High Preservation Value Criteria: A,C State/National Registered? No Current Function: Bridge Historic Function: Bridge Area of Significance: Transportation,Engineering Narrative Description: See Mamalahoa historic district description. 001290001100003 Hakalau Stream Bridge 6-223 130 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e` ,South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix C Significance Statement: This bridge is an arch bridge which is an uncommon bridge type. See Mamalahoa historic district description. 001290001100003 Hakalau Stream Bridge 6-224 Arch Study for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e,North and South Hilo,Hawai`i 131 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX D CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Cultural Impact Assessment for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project TMK: (3) 2-9-002 and (3) 3-1-001 various parcels Hakalau Nui & Kama`e`e Ahupua'a North & South Hilo Districts Island of Hawaii DRAFT VERSION Prepared By: Kau`i Lopes,B.A., Halena Kapuni-Reynolds,M.A., _- _ and ( Lokelani Brandt,M.A. Prepared For: WSP USA 1001 Bishop Street - Honolulu, HI 96813 K<�r March 2024 ASM f' affiliates !4.tt� Archaeology•History•Anthropology•Architectural History Hilo Office:(808)969-6066 Fax:(BOB)443-0065 507-A E.Lanikaula Street,Hilo,HI 96720 Honolulu Office:(808)439-8089 Fax:(808)439-8087 ASM Project Number 41250.00 820 Militani Street,Suite 700,Honolulu,HI 96813 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project TMK: (3) 2-9-002 and (3) 3-1-001 various parcels Hakalau Nui & Kama`e`e Ahupua'a North & South Hilo District Island of Hawai`i ASM affiliates !v_: Table of Contents CHAPTERS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION 5 Geology, Soils, Climate, and Vegetation 11 2. BACKGROUND 13 RESEARCH METHODS 13 CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT 13 Overview of Traditional Hawaiian Land Management Strategies 14 Intensification and Development of Hawaiian Land Stewardship Practices 15 CULTURAL HISTORY OF HAKALAU NUI AND KAMA`E`E AHUPUA'A 16 Traditional Mo`olelo of Hakalau and Kama`e`e and the Greater Hilo Paliku 23 Hakalau and Kama'e`e During the Early to Late 19th Century 36 Mahele Aina of 1848 37 The Kuleana Act of 1850 38 Government Land Grants 40 Boundary Commission Testimony(1875) 43 Land Acquisition in Hakalau and Kama`e`e Post-Mahele 46 Hakalau Sugar Plantation 47 Hakalau Plantation Post-1946 59 From Railroad to Highway 65 Post-Plantation and Creation of the County-Owned Hakalau Beach Park 72 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL STUDIES 73 3. CONSULTATION 78 Outreach Efforts 78 INTERVIEW METHODOLOGY 80 SUSAN FORBES 80 BLAKE MCNAUGHTON 81 KEITH "BRADDA SKIBS"NEHLS 82 CARMELITO "LITO"ARKANGEL 83 4. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL IMPACTS 84 SUMMARY OF CULTURAL-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION 85 IDENTIFICATION OF TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY PRACTICES, VALUED CULTURAL RESOURCES 87 Forest Resources and Practices 87 Botanical Resources and Horticultural Practices 88 Waterways 88 Avian Resources 88 Marine/River Practices and Resources 88 Recreational, Access, and Subsistence Uses 89 Historic Era Resources (Hakalau Plantation Company, Old Mamalahoa Highway, and Hakalau Stream Bridge [County and State]) 89 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 89 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i v Table of Contents CONCLUSION 90 REFERENCES CITED 91 APPENDIX A. HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NOMINATION FORM 103 APPENDIX B. K4 WA/OLA PUBLIC NOTICE 117 APPENDIX C. COUNT OFHA WAI`I CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION(CRC) COMMENTS 119 FIGURES Page 1. Project area location 2 2. Tax Map comprising the project area. 3 3. Google EarthTM satellite image showing project area location. 4 4. Aerial view of Hakalau Bridge, Hawai`i Belt Road,Hakalau Stream and the project area, view to the east. 5 5. Waterways that feed into Hakalau Steam. 6 6. View of Old Mamalahoa Highway, view to the east. 7 7. Aerial view of portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway included in project area traversing the south face of Hakalau Gulch 7 8. Hakalau Stream(County) constructed in 1930, view to the north. 8 9. Aerial view of raised concrete road crossing Hakalau Stream 8 10. Concrete sections of road that cross over the Hakalau Stream twice,view to the northwest. 9 11. Aerial view of unimproved road traversing under Hakalau Bridge to the former Hakalau Sugar Mill site 9 12. Unimproved road traversing underneath Hakalau Bridge,view to the southeast. 10 13. View of the makai section of the project area, note remnants of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill on the southern embankment,view to the west. 10 14. Aerial view of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill site,present day Hakalau Beach Park. 11 15. Geological units in the project area 12 16. Soils in the project area. 12 17. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map 2060 by J.M. Donn(1901) showing project area within Hakalau and Kama' `a Ahupua`a 17 18. 2021 aerial photo showing Hakalau Gulch in Hilo Paliku,photo by ASM. 18 19. Hawai`i Registered Map No. 20 prepared by H.M. Lyman in 1853 showing extent of Hakalau Nui. 40 20. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1092 by Lyons and Wall (1882) showing land grants in Kama`e`e 42 21. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No. 2728 by Hockley and Murray(1925) showing portions of the project area in Grant 1350 to Ioela (shaded purple) and Grant 1057 to Manuhoa et al. (shaded yellow) 43 22. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser(1866)public auction notice advertising the sale of Levi Ha'alelea's Hakalau lands. 47 23. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No 344 by C. J. Lyons (n.d.) showing project area. 48 24. Portion of Hawaii Registered Map No. 2225 by Morange (1903) showing Hakalau Village and the main government road meandering through Hakalau Gulch. 49 25. Hakalau Mill and gulch,pre-1911 (Hawai`i State Archives,PPWD-4-7-018). 51 26. Panoramic view of Hakalau Plantation showing the landing,mill, flume, and other built vi CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Table of Contents FIGURES Page features,post-1911.Image source: Hawai`i State Archives,PPWD-4-7-029. 51 27. 1919 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map of Hakalau Plantation showing details of roadways and buildings. 52 28. Hakalau Plantation Company Field Map annotated to indicate the various camps in the region. Original field map is courtesy of the Edmund Olson Trust Archive (Forbes and Forbes 2023). 53 29. Hakalau Gulch Camp. Photo courtesy of Steve Sutter(Forbes and Forbes 2023). 54 30. Aerial photo of the Hakalau plantation community taken on January 23, 1925 (USAAF 1925). 55 31. Portion of County TMK(3) 1-01 map showing the project area during the 1930s. 55 32. Incoming tsunami wave inundating Hakalau Mill on April 1, 1946 taken by Waichi Ouye (Forbes and Forbes 2023-mill site photos). 56 33. The 1946 tsunami battering Hakalau Mill,note the steel trestles and the tops of the coconut trees in the background(Forbes and Forbes 2023- the 1940s). 56 34. Hakalau Mill in the wake of the 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1940s). 57 35. Workers surveying the damage at Hakalau Mill following the 1946 tsunami(Muffler and Museum 2015:57) 57 36. Reconstructed Hakalau Mill post-1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1940s). 58 37. Photos published in The Honolulu Advertiser(1947:9) showing the Hakalau Mill during the 1946 tsunami(right) and the reconstructed mill in 1947 (left). 58 38. Portion of County TMK(3)-1 map from the 1950s showing the project area. 60 39. 1954 aerial photograph showing the project area, the sprawling Hakalau plantation community (note the runoff from the mill clouding Hakalau Bay). 60 40. Aerial photo from 1977 showing the project area and Hakalau plantation community 61 41. Photos published in the Hawai`i Tribune-Herald of the last cane haul and processing of sugarcane at Hakalau Mill (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1974). 62 42. Images of derelict and demolished buildings accompanying an article published on April 9, 1975 in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald about the"Dying Town"of Hakalau. The photographs were taken by Paul Miyasaki 63 43. Public notice of the indefinite closure of a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway within Hakalau Gulch(included in project area) (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1978:10). 64 44. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No. 339 prepared by(Cabot 1879) showing the preliminary route of the railroad. 65 45. 1915 USGS map showing the HCR alignment over Hakalau Gulch. 67 46. Hawaii Consolidated Railway Map of November 1923 (Hawaii Consolidated Railroad 1926). 67 47. Steel trestles installed across Hakalau Gulch(ca. 1911)with the mill in the background(Forbes and Forbes 2023-railroad) 68 48. Railroad bridge being installed on steel trestles across Hakalau Gulch(note labor camp on the mauka side of the bridge in the gulch) (Forbes and Forbes 2023-railroad). 68 49. HCR train crossing Hakalau Bridge ca. 1911-1920 (Forbes and Forbes 2023-railroad). 69 50. Photo published in The Honolulu Advertiser(1953:25) showing the newly lead painted Hakalau Bridge. 70 51. Dedication and opening of Hakalau Bridge on April 17, 1953 (Hilo Tribune-Herald 1973:22) 71 52. Hakalau Bridge following reconstruction efforts with cane flume in the background(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1953). 72 53. Map showing the extent of the Hakalau Historic District and Wailea Village Historic District both of which were designated in 1973 (Forbes and Hibbard 2018:61). 74 54. Location of prior studies conducted in the vicinity of the project area. 75 55. ASM site map of archaeological features recorded in Hakalau Gulch(in Prep). 77 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i vii Table of Contents TABLES Page 1. Inoa `Rina in Hakalau and Kama`e`e 20 2. `Olelo No'eau associated with the famed rains of Hilo 21 3. Rain Names Associated with Hilo Palikti 22 4. Wind names associated with Hilo Paliku 22 5. Government Land Grant in Kama'e` 41 6. Community members contacted for consultation. 79 viii CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction 1. INTRODUCTION At the request of WSP USA on behalf of the Hawai`i Department of Transportation(HDOT)for Project No. HWY- DS-ENV2020-01, ASM Affiliates (ASM) has prepared this Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) for the proposed Hawai`i Belt Road Hakalau Stream Bridge Project. The project area extends across Kama`e`e and Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a and straddles the boundary of the North and South Hilo Districts,Island of Hawaii(Figures 1, 2, and 3). The project area is comprised of roughly 15 acres and includes portions of the following Tax Map Keys (TMK) (3) 2-9-002:023, 025, 039, 080, 999 and (3) 3-1-001:001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 777, and 999 (see Figure 2). The HDOT has found that the Hakalau Bridge, which carries Hawai`i Belt Road (Highway 19) over Hakalau Stream at milepost 15.3 was once painted with lead-based paint which has contaminated the soil around the bridge extending into Hakalau Beach Park. Remediation could involve removing contaminated soil and/or capping the contaminated soil with a concrete layer. This work would entail removing all vegetation and disturbing roughly 24 inches of topsoil. Contaminated soils may also be removed and disposed of at a permitted facility or stabilized and left in place. In addition to the lead remediation work, HDOT intends to do structural rehabilitation of the bridge by replacing the steel bents with concrete bents. This CIA,which is intended to inform an Environmental Assessment(EA) conducted in compliance with HRS Chapter 343, is being prepared pursuant to Act 50 and in accordance with the Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, adopted by the Environmental Council, State of Hawaii,on November 19, 1997(OEQC 1997:417).Act 50, which was proposed and passed as House Bill No.2895 and signed into law by the Governor on April 26, 2000, specifically acknowledges the State's responsibility to protect native Hawaiian cultural practices. Act 50 further states that environmental studies ". . . should identify and address effects on Hawaii's culture, and traditional and customary rights" and that"native Hawaiian culture plays a vital role in preserving and advancing the unique quality of life and the `aloha spirit' in Hawaii". Articles IX and XII of the state constitution, other state laws, and the courts of the State impose on governmental agencies a duty to promote and protect cultural beliefs,practices,and resources of native Hawaiians as well as other ethnic groups." The current report is divided into four main chapters. Chapter 1, the introduction, includes an overview of the proposed project as well as a physical description of the project area. To provide a cultural context of the project area, Chapter 2 includes cultural-historical background information specific to the project area and the broader geographical region of Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e, and at times the greater Hilo Paliku, a traditional region of Hilo that extends north of the Wailuku River and is characterized by its upright cliffs and broad plateaus. This chapter also includes a summary of prior archaeological and cultural studies that have been conducted within or near the project area. The methods and results of the consultation process are then presented in Chapter 3. Lastly, Chapter 4 includes a discussion of potential cultural impacts as well as actions and strategies that may help to mitigate any identified impacts. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 1 1.Introduction 2-enru1 2'cann I ! N eQ A N 9(11), A Area of Detail 0 200 Km 11 0" lilt ] �� ` J IA ' 1 ' ' ) 1 \ r—'26 �o o I, 300 -' .200. I 19' \ 61N A _ 1 i ���/ Illr Iia t/ S•tr�Uill ) y_ i) C O /syn �1_ '♦' O PO ���.-Tit 1-1oo_ Ha .lau r. :\111111111:010\ \ 1 �tl C i zoo __ 7,,, ir-- ,I)) 7 . -17 7. 177 p, O ? � ad111y Y o 4 ' �� Wailea — _ �ql — (,� Portion of USGS 7.5'Quadrangle Papaaloa,2017 ` &tl 00 .0 0 200 400 / Q Project area `'-,, "--ti � 1 1 /l / // \ Figure 1.Project area location. 2 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction + N 66, o A , ,. ,,, Area of Detail a 1110. r'' "2 00 Km ' . ip. 41 06, or � r'_ (61-00 :006 M1-001:003 0 0�,7 o 41 y. t Zl, a ¢� 00 0)2-9-002:080 Ili of oa 3' 0`O Oil MI-001:002 tl {K3)2-9-002:039 ..." . • 9 0�•p° i 1lillik 131;y o¢, 10 .9 AO 0)2-9-0021023 Illlik 10X Project area 0 50 too a ,`., ,4 Meters Tax Map Key (TMK) „" ; ,,,,,,,4, ,*, ; �: Figure 2.Tax Map comprising the project area. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Karna`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 3 1.Introduction C3 A -„,„3„,,,„,„ \ �` . . t` . .,.. .. ;),.... Arca of Detail a 4. r ' ,_. . ; I1 200 Km �, +,. I I I A • ✓4 , r� . "dam .41 fir, l. �. 44"d t • fi+ 4. 1111 t • q IN gr , = r " its 2 �. }xuAi �•,'''`,4'''''.'. �`' �ui.n :i + w. r `-,, ; ..if l i • - 411111 X� 4 P 9 1)1(neCt �lfl'U �,:a „. r U 50 lOMeters Figure 3. Google EarthTM satellite image showing project area location. 4 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 1.Introduction PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION The roughly 15-acre project area encompasses Hakalau Bridge which carries Hawai`i Belt Road over Hakalau Stream plus the land area beneath the bridge (Figure 4) which includes both privately-owned parcels as well as a portion of the County-owned Hakalau Beach Park. Additionally, the project area includes the following roadways: the portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway that travels down along the gulch's southern edge and the portion of the Old Mill Access Road that lies north of the stream and leads to the mouth of Hakalau Gulch. The Old Mamalahoa Highway ties into the Old Mill Access Road on the northern bank of Hakalau Gulch,where it continues east into the project area(Figures 7 and 9). The permanently closed portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway,which traverses the northern edge of Hakalau Gulch, is not included in the project area. At the heart of Hakalau Gulch is the 29.9 mile long Hakalau Stream which is fed by at least three other primary streams including Kama`e`e, Wa`awa`a, and Kaulia(Figure 5) (Parham et al. 2008). The elevation in the project area ranges from sea level at Hakalau Bay up to roughly 134 feet(41 meters) above mean sea level (amsl) on the edges of the gulch. Access to the project area is from the Old Mamalahoa Highway, which begins above the southern side of Hakalau Gulch (Figures 6 and 7) and crosses the Hakalau Stream at a 1930's concrete bridge(Figure 8). A road spur along the northern road portion turns south and crosses Hakalau Stream via a raised concrete road (Figures 9 and 10) before traversing under the steel bridge as an unimproved road (Figures 11 and 12) and ending at the old Hakalau Sugar Mill site (present-day Hakalau Beach Park) situated on the southern embankment where Hakalau Stream meets with the Pacific Ocean (Figures 13 and 14). G., �1 ,I, .aY C. :4d+ . ,T4,-,4;-4,.:4030 ,..-_..cr-,x ,.--14`' 'ter - y:. .' ,T` d .{. 4 '' '9�,. .. 2:f.4 ,,'..' ,"'..1'.' ''T:A5'':5 *rf"Aif,,,,,yfa,,+„'L.i".''r .,::):'`‘.:::',C-r4r,4'''.4'*rl:*1.4.4''t,'-' '-:''''1''',i 4 0::: - ,.' ' 2 :j ' ''^.'": :7 1--..4 ,� mo'."� r 5s Z.�.hc _ .Z 44it .t?i .,� —.. - A en..; 5 ' ` i F n .'+n ms . 4�{'h'�S tk E "� 1t'rF' \".z - •,� jC \ais H1. -. , k --"• .,fit _ �� m !}�' �. V 1-144- +',` .' , Vie, # .,+a -1,-_-42,,-, i y �` r. , ';4',.,... st,,,. -it:, -; ..... ,..,- ,,,, ,.. k, ..%:,'''' tttre loop 4. i, x.'4.. A f ?_<m A7:a' --„: k.w i' .-et�Y_.::x' "^fi '_' : '4 i, y .a. _ •iJ.• :R\:...` Figure 4. Aerial view of Hakalau Bridge,Hawai`i Belt Road,Hakalau Stream and the project area,view to the east. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 5 1. Introduction • x , � �5e 10 �'. e .r"'�'4:•, .,gym, .Y '4§' Wa`awa`a Kaulia Kama`c`c Kama e e& Haka': ' Hakalau Ahuptii`a Project area Watery%ays Source maps:Hawaii Registered Map No. 0 I 2 4 1092(1882),Hawaii Registered Map 2728 ti Kilometers ;r (1925) Figure 5.Waterways that feed into Hakalau Steam. 6 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction ,, te15:',Ifartal v ,' F e / 1 , - _ .a. yd•w - � - y � Figure 6.View of Old Mamalahoa Highway,view to the east. ,moi e• .�� �q -x iirt 2., ,,,..7_4,,,,,,,,.„ ' L i" S `.` t --- - r x •+c` �a #tea 1 'y s rc y s� }Yq :;`,�'y' ?,, .•'' > - - _ S� ti 1 .. tY ,' 'Si 4: '47.7)11/4.-: V. �4 1'n' f"* 1 �- + s.1x1 y`e Y..' - � ; Irl+ qyy. K C ,rfiW, x ' ,, ,.,, � :� , Za.{ „i: r�xr $'.'. e ti 1,r �w r7,7v,'•7",, ., S {,l -:,'„f •--.41,,, b ! • N� 11A • - x1' ,} r� ,p r .44 y� �••4j _fid �IF Sc. ,I�aw§ t°`".�•.y t' . ` Figure 7.Aerial view of portion of the--Old Mamalahoa Highway included in project area traversing the south face of Hakalau Gulch. 7 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 1.Introduction u \ ..5iw� ' ,�'..' ,�.r+� J`. .t°� f d^ +^ C '_--..N I n• fro. 4 %,r , ' pii •' , 1 i r di r . . • t - __ i 4, .4.� . _ .✓ \, r te 1► • .. Figure 8.Hakalau Stream(County)constructed in 1930,view to the north. ��f j *tom t" x ro ,,, :s- - ..,,,h0,....',;„. ,,,, .,, :-....f.,...„,;-:,f..,- .4..,?... - 4 . 4:w.:',-...t.,,,,:•,...n e ".-..:',,,`,,,g,-- ,,,.„1,_ ,...„. , it., 4{_f 4.$10e-T'd- r'W,,,41° v°" r r � ors t..• •-,..4„. 'S.. +�t-£f4`" ° �°, o •tea? 1111FF ...a� t � �"v 1� .�ip , Hi. i . s 1, , + '' �.tr . 1 , ° o „, - � ,'„Y. `S 4t' g;. 1 k: t'k.„..: • Figure 9. Aerial view of raised concrete road crossing Hakalau Stream. 8 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama'e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction Ififilliftr • ,•A "0::: , • .., s. f 7-44 ?"` i . .s r',:.. ` 1 5 ',:,,ft,' �, ,-*,-..24,44u p;r' '.�i µms.', ' .. a« t 7 . p F _ .4,-4-7-.. r �\ - ••- •s ,� -_.0-Teel --•r- - i yY'. ' .'_..!'.a--yrl Cc+-- _. '-r ✓- r t ..*d -ren ...p ,,. .. ,.---1. .f ygyy, . gypqty , may •-• ! Figure 10. Concrete sections of road that cross over the Hakalau Stream twice,view to the northwest. y� r - ti ;'t • ', „ t y r ff - j J tr }. .' S'"'Vy. Q I: •-e._-..K. 4s* Figure 11.Aerial view of unimproved road traversing under Hakalau Bridge to the former Hakalau Sugar Mill site. 9 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 1.Introduction 7--- i. M ` ` �� �' n { �.. 'i, ,, 'I i 'I,k' 1 +,lv b......,,.S ,I/• {' a ' .aha • ii, . ft V v. \I, r," Ott, 4 ,1 , • 1 v cN u 4 ` g (r 1i yw 'W.' u1. * ,,, rs J A Figure 12.Unimproved road traversing underneath Hakalau Bridge,view to the southeast. ia r � •"•,-,•:,".."_1-.=, fi' r . r me K AX ,,,,, 'ce¢ , _,. .,4,,e..,„.. 7:::- '• ..',4_, '-i"-",-1.:; ' •. ... "..o. / .et"sS�'fxa t. i mil ,:. �• ` zr:=+ . M1 Figure 13.View of the makai section of the project area,note remnants of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill on the southern embankment,view to the west. 10 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 1.Introduction t bi ,a § ISy .'a # f,,yx ,� • ,..v. Ak �. . � r i -9 fr. • k ''1 ' * e ' k, 4 ;Nif?,q� r� .'1 •'fir. '. ; w; Tf -, _ rr� ,ter Y . , 1a mss. Figure 14.Aerial view of the former Hakalau Sugar Mill site,present day Hakalau Beach Park. Geology, Soils, Climate, and Vegetation The underlying geology of this portion of the Hilo District is generally formed of moderately deep to deep silty clay loam formed from volcanic ash that originated from Mauna Kea Volcano between 64,000 and 300,000 years ago between the Holocene and Pleistocene epochs. This soil type has been mapped in Figure 15 as"Qhm(Sherrod et al. 2007; Wolfe and Morris 1996). Well-drained andisol soils that have developed throughout the majority of the project area are classified as Hilo-Rock outcrop complex on 35 to 100 percent slopes and mapped in Figure 16 as "909", while a narrow pocket along the project area's southern boundary is composed of soils classified as Hilo hydrous silty clay loam on 10 to 20 percent slopes and mapped as"903"(see Figure 16)(Soil Survey Staff 2022). The climate at this elevation in Hilo is moderately warm, with a mean annual temperature between 72° to 77° Fahrenheit throughout the year(Giambelluca et al. 2014).The lands in the vicinity of the project area receive a mean annual rainfall of approximately 3,615 millimeters(142 inches),with the highest rainfall occurring during the spring month of March, and the least amount of rainfall occurring during the summer months of May and June (Giambelluca et al. 2013). Trade winds often blow from east to west across this region, except when kona (southerly)winds are blowing(typically during the summer months),which causes the wind pattern to reverse. Terrain in the central portion of Hakalau Gulch on either side of Hakalau Stream is relatively level, flanked by the steep,nearly vertical gulch edges to the north and south. Water flowing makai(east) through Hakalau Stream is interrupted by the occasional small fluvial island composed of alluvial deposits of sand, gravel, and waterworn pebbles,cobbles,and boulders of varying sizes. Owing to the warm weather and ample rain,vegetation cover within the project area is fairly thick,consisting of a ground cover that consists primarily of grasses,weeds,vines, fiddlehead ferns (ho`io;Diplazium sandwichianum), and elephant's ear (`ape; Alocasia macrorrhizos) interspersed with stands of coconut (niu; Cocos nucifera), ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia), pandanus (hala; Pandanus tectorius), bamboo (Bambusoideae sp.), halt (Hibiscus tiliaceus), banana (Musa sp.), mango (Mangifera indica), banyan (Ficus sp.), miconia (Miconia calvescens), and African tulip (Spathodea campanulata). Ornamentals and planted tree species such as kukui, avocado, and breadfruit are present in the northeastern portion of the project area near the former location of the Hakalau Sugar Mill and the current County of Hawai`i Beach Park. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 11 1.Introduction IP° 11'11111N o I A W Tht o u ' Ural larta x;, illi , CPTiik 1 O Project area Ql 11.000-64,000 yr Laupahoehoe Volcanics in Qhm 64,000-300,000 yr Hamakua Volcanics 0, 1 u Figure 15. Geological units in the project area. imp yon • -..w..�: 46 Y' 4 .o', yn.. s :.,. . ,,,,..:-,,,. ,.4.. fl 3� may.. ..,./ ' �q,�T,. y • -•"!; - �`:. { :' iY ..„....,46...,..,,. %` y,•t�i�yw i�9 �yT.,�,. .�.��5:r'" r. t.�!:'°^i!J� �_ e.3 ,. %,y ,S`� UW' yk' '.� t ^ f ' €' .'" A J M n. �•. ' , X 111 . - +" .arr„ - - ''''901,!' ,,,7,..--Pt. -- -, ti, "" I',:,icct area „ I I ,I, .1rous silty clay loam,0 to 10 percent slopes ',r,' -;I 0 hydrous silty clay loam,10 to 20 percent slopes O Meters yn:, 1 I,.0-Rock outcrop complex,35 to 100 percent slopes a so 100 Figure 16. Soils in the project area. 12 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background 2. BACKGROUND As specified in the OEQC Guidelines JroAssessing Cultural Impacts (1997:1), "...the geographical extent of the inquiry should, in most instances,be greater than the area over which the proposed action will take place. This is to ensure that cultural practices which may not occur within the boundaries of the project area, but which may nonetheless be affected, are included in the assessment." For this CIA, the ahupua`a of Hakalau Nui and Kama`ee are considered the `study area', while the location of the proposed development activities is referred to as the `project area'. To generate a set of expectations regarding the nature of cultural resources and customary practices that might be encountered within the current project area and to establish a context within which to assess the significance of such resources,the background section begins with a general culture-historical context. This is followed by culture- historical background information concerning the history of Hakalau Nui & Kama`e`e. Limited background information for the Hilo Paliku region, the broader regional designation in which Hakalau Nui & Kama`e`e are situated, also falls within the parameters of the OEQC guidelines and ensures that a broader set of cultural practices and histories are considered. Following this background section is a discussion of relevant prior archaeological and cultural studies that have been conducted within and in the immediate vicinity of the project area. RESEARCH METHODS The culture-historical context and summary of previously conducted archaeological and cultural research presented below are based on research conducted by ASM Affiliates at various physical and digital repositories. Primary English language and Hawaiian language resources were found at multiple state agencies, including the State Historic Preservation Division, Hawai`i State Archives, and the Department of Accounting and General Services Land Survey Division. Digital collections provided through the Office of Hawaiian Affairs Papakilo and Kipuka databases, Waihona `Aima, the Ulukau Hawaiian Electronic Library, and Newspapers.com. Lastly, secondary resources curated at ASM Affiliates' Hilo office offer general information regarding the history of land use,politics, and culture change in Hawai`i, enhancing the broad sampling of source materials cited throughout this CIA. CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT While the question of when Hawai`i was first settled by Polynesians remains contested, scholars working in the fields of archaeology, folklore, Hawaiian studies, and linguistics have offered several theories. With advances in palynology and radiocarbon dating techniques,Kirch(2011),Athens et al. (2014),and Wilmshurst et al. (2011)have argued that Polynesians arrived in the Hawaiian Islands sometime between A.D. 1000 and A.D. 1200. This initial migration on intricately crafted wa`a kaulua (double-hulled canoes) to Hawaii from Kahiki, the ancestral homelands of Hawaiian deities and peoples from southern Pacific islands,occurred at least from initial settlement to the 13th century. According to Fornander (1969), Hawaiians brought from their homeland certain Polynesian customs and beliefs: the major gods Kane,Ku,Lono,and Kanaloa(who have cognates in other Pacific cultures); the kapu system of political and religious governance; and the concepts of pu`uhonua (places of refuge), aumakua (ancestral deity), and mana (divine power). Archaeologist Kenneth Emory who worked in the early to mid-20th century reported that the sources of early Hawaiian populations originated from the southern Marquesas Islands (Emory in Tatar 1982). However, Emory's theory is not universally accepted, as Hawaiian scholars in the past and present have argued for a pluralistic outlook on ancestral Hawaiian origins from Kahiki (Case 2015; Fornander 1916-1917;Kamakau 1866;Kikiloi 2010;Nakaa 1893;Poepoe 1906). While stories of episodic migrations were widely published in the Hawaiian language by knowledgeable and skilled ku`auhau(individuals trained in the discipline of remembering genealogies and associated ancestral stories), the cultural belief that living organisms were hanau 'ia (born) out of a time of eternal darkness (po) and chaos (kahuli) were brought and adapted by ancestral Hawaiian populations to reflect their deep connection to their environment. As an example, the Kumulipo, Hawai`i's most famed ko ihonua (a cosmogonic genealogical chant), establishes a birth-rank genealogical order for all living beings (Beckwith 1951; Liliuokalani 1978). One such genealogical relationship that remains widely accepted in Hawai`i is the belief that kalo (taro)plants (in addition to all other plants, land animals, and sea creatures), are elder siblings to humans (Beckwith 1951). This concept of hierarchical creation enforces the belief that all life forms are intimately connected, evidencing the cultural transformations that occurred in the islands through intensive interaction with their local environment to form a uniquely Hawaiian culture. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 13 2.Background In Hawai`i's ancient past, inhabitants were primarily engaged in subsistence-level agriculture and fishing (Handy et al. 1991).Following the initial settlement period, communities clustered in the ko`olau(windward) shores of the Hawaiian Islands where freshwater was abundant. Sheltered bays allowed for nearshore fisheries(enriched by numerous estuaries) and deep-sea fisheries to be easily accessed (McEldowney 1979). Widespread environmental modification of the land also occurred as early Hawaiian kanaka mahi`ai (farmers) developed new subsistence strategies, adapting their familiar patterns and traditional tools to work efficiently in their new home (Kirch 1985; Pogue 1978). Areas with the richest natural resources became heavily populated over time, resulting in the population's expansion to the kona(leeward) side of the islands and to more remote areas(Cordy 2000). Overview of Traditional Hawaiian Land Management Strategies Adding to an already complex society was the development of traditional land stewardship systems, including the ahupua`a. The ahupua`a was the principal land division that functioned for both taxation purposes and furnished its residents with nearly all subsistence and household necessities. Ahupua`a are land divisions that typically include multiple ecozones from mauka (upland mountainous regions) to makai (shore and near-shore regions), assuring a diverse subsistence resource base (Hommon 1986). Although the ahupua`a land division typically incorporated all of the eco-zones, their size and shape varied greatly (Cannelora 1974). Noted Hawaiian historian and scholar Samuel Kamakau summarized the ecozones that could be found in a given ahupua`a: Here are some names for [the zones of] the mountains—the manna or kuahiwi. A mountain is called a kuahiwi,but mauna is the overall term for the whole mountain, and there are many names applied to one, according to its delineations (`ano). The part directly in back and in front of the summit proper is called the kuamauna, mountaintop; below the kuamauna is the kuahea, and makai of the kuahea is the kuahiwi proper. This is where small trees begin to grow; it is the wao nahele. Makai of this region the trees are tall, and this is the wao lipo. Makai of the wao lipo is the wao `eiwa, and makai of that the wao ma`ukele. Makai of the wao ma`ukele is the wao akua, and makai of there is the wao kanaka, the area that people cultivate. Makai of the wao kanaka is the `ama`u,fern belt, and makai of the `ama`u the `apa`a,grasslands. A solitary group of trees is a moku la`au (a"stand" of trees) or an ulu la`au, grove. Thickets that extend to the kuahiwi are ulunahele,wild growth.An area where koa trees suitable for canoes(koa wa'a) grow is a wao koa and mauka of there is a wao la`au, timber land. These are dry forest growths from the `apa`a up to the kuahiwi. The places that are "spongy" (naele) are found in the wao ma`ukele,the wet forest. Makai of the `apa`a are the pahe`e [pili grass] and `ilima growths and makai of them the kula, open country, and the `apoho hollows near to the habitations of men. Then comes the kahakai, coast, the kahaone, sandy beach, and the kalawa, the curve of the seashore—right down to the 'ae kai,the water's edge. That is the way ka po`e kahiko [the ancient people] named the land from mountain peak to sea. (Kamakau 1976:8-9) The maka`ainana (commoners, literally the "people that attend the land") who lived on the land had rights to gather resources for subsistence and tribute within their ahupua`a (Jokiel et al. 2011). As part of these rights, residents were required to supply resources and labor to ali`i (chiefs) of local, regional, and island chiefdoms. The ahupua`a became the equivalent of a local community with its own social, economic, and political significance and served as the taxable land division during the annual Makahiki procession (Kelly 1956). During the time of Makahiki, the paramount ali`i sent select members of his/her retinue to collect ho okupu (tribute and offerings) in the form of goods from each ahupua a. The maka ainana brought their share of ho okupu to an ahu(altar)that was marked with the image of a pua a (pig), serving as a physical visual marker of ahupua'a boundaries. In most instances, these boundaries followed mountain ridges, hills, rivers, or ravines (Alexander 1890). However, Chinen (1958:1) reports that "oftentimes only a line of growth of a certain type of tree or grass marked a boundary; and sometimes only a stone determined the corner of a division." These ephemeral markers, as well as their more permanent counterparts, were oftentimes named as evidenced in the thousands of boundary marker names that are listed in Soehren(2005). Ahupua`a were ruled by ali`i 'al ahupua`a or chiefs who controlled the ahupua`a resources. Generally speaking, ali`i `ai ahupua`a had complete autonomy over the ahupua`a they oversaw (Malo 1951). Ahupua`a residents were not bound to the land nor were they considered property of the ali`i. If the living conditions under a particular ahupua`a chief were deemed unsuitable, the residents could move freely in pursuit of more favorable 14 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background conditions (Lam 1985). This structure safeguarded the well-being of the people and the overall productivity of the land, lest the chief loses the principal support and loyalty of his or her supporters. In turn, ahupua`a lands were managed by an appointed konohiki, oftentimes a chief of lower rank, who oversaw and coordinated stewardship of an area's natural resources (Lam 1985). In some places, the po`o lawai'a (head fisherman) held the same responsibilities as the konohiki (Jokiel et al. 2011). When necessary, the konohiki took the liberty of implementing kapu (restrictions and prohibitions) to protect the mana of an area's resources from environmental and spiritual depletion. Many ahupua`a were divided into smaller land units termed `iii and'Hi kupono (often shortened to 'di ku). 7li were created for the convenience of the ahupua`a chief and served as the basic land unit which hoa`aina(caretakers of particular lands) often retained for multiple generations (Jokiel et al. 2011; MacKenzie 2015). As 'di were typically passed down in families, so too were the kuleana (responsibilities, privileges) that were associated with it. The right to use and cultivate 'di was maintained within the `okana, regardless of the succession of ali`i 'ai ahupua'a (Handy et al. 1991). Malo (1951) recorded several types of `ili, including the `ili pa'a (a single intact parcel) and `ili lele (a discontinuous parcel dispersed across an area). Whether dispersed or wholly intact, required a cross-section of available resources, and for the hoa`aina, this generally included access to agriculturally fertile lands and coastal fisheries. Ili kupono differed from other `ili lands because they did not fall under the jurisdiction of the ahupua`a chief. Rather,they were specific areas containing resources that were highly valued by the ruling paramount chiefs, such as fishponds(Handy et al. 1991). Ali`i `ai ahupua`a, in turn, answered to an ali`i `ai moku (chief who claimed the abundance of the entire moku or district) (Malo 1951). Hawaii Island is comprised of six moku (districts) that include Kona, Ka`u, Puna, Hilo, Hdmdkua, and Kohala. Although a moku comprises multiple ahupua`a, moku were considered geographical subdivisions with no explicit reference to rights in the land (Cannelora 1974). While the ahupua`a was the most common and fundamental land division unit within the traditional Hawaiian land management structure, variances occurred, such as the existence of the kalana. By definition, a kalana is a division of land that is smaller than a moku. Kalana was sometimes used interchangeably with the term `okana (Lucas 1995; Pukui and Elbert 1986), but Kamakau (Kamakau 1976) equates a kalana to a moku and states that `okana is merely a subdistrict. Despite these contending and sometimes conflicting definitions,what is clear is that kalana consisted of several ahupua`a and 'di aina. This form of district subdividing was integral to Hawaiian life and the product of advanced natural resource management systems.As populations resided in an area over centuries,direct teaching and extensive observations of an area's natural cycles and resources were retained,well-understood, and passed down orally over the generations. This knowledge informed management decisions that aimed to sustainably adapt subsistence practices to meet the needs of growing populations. The ahupua`a system and the highly complex land management system that developed in the islands are but one example of the unique Hawaiian culture that developed in these islands. Intensification and Development of Hawaiian Land Stewardship Practices Hawaiian philosophies of life in relation to the environment helped to maintain both natural, spiritual, and social order. ln describing the intimate relationship that exists between Hawaiians and `aina(land),Kepa Maly writes: In the Hawaiian context, these values—the "sense of place"—have developed over hundreds of generations of evolving"cultural attachment"to the natural, physical, and spiritual environments. In any culturally sensitive discussion on land use in Hawaii, one must understand that Hawaiian culture evolved in close partnership with its' natural environment. Thus, Hawaiian culture does not have a clear dividing line of where culture and nature begins. In a traditional Hawaiian context, nature and culture are one in the same, there is no division between the two. The wealth and limitations of the land and ocean resources gave birth to, and shaped the Hawaiian world view. The 'Cana (land), wai(water), kai (ocean), and lewa (sky) were the foundation of life and the source of the spiritual relationship between people and their environs. (Maly 2001) The `olelo no`eau (proverbial saying) "hanau ka `aina, hanau ke ali`i, hanau ke kanaka" (born was the land, born were the chiefs, born were the commoners), conveys the belief that all things of the land, including kanaka (humans), are connected through kinship links that extend beyond the immediate family (Pukui 1983:57). Aina or land,was perhaps most revered, as noted in the `olelo no`eau"he ali`i ka `aina; he kauwa ke kanaka,"which Pukui (Pukui 1983:62)translated as"[t]he land is a chief man is its servant."The lifeways of early Hawaiians,which were dependent entirely from the finite natural resources of these islands, necessitated the development of sustainable CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 15 2.Background resource management practices. Over time,what developed was an ecologically responsive management system that integrated the care of watersheds,natural freshwater systems,and nearshore fisheries(Jokiel et al. 2011). Disciplined and astute observation of the natural world became one of the most fundamental stewardship tools used by the ancient Hawaiians. The vast knowledge acquired through direct observation enabled them to detect and record the subtlest of changes, distinctions, and correlations in the natural world. Examples of their keen observations are evident in the development of Hawaiian nomenclature to describe various rains, clouds, winds, stones, environments, flora, and fauna. Many of these names are geographically unique or island-specific, and have been recorded in oli(chants), mele (songs),pule (prayers), inoa `Una (place names), and `olelo no`eau (proverbial sayings). Other Hawaiian arts and practices such as hula (traditional dance), lapa'au (traditional healing), lawai'a (fishing),mahi'al(farming)further aided in the practice of knowing the rhythms and cycles of the natural world. Comprehensive systems of observing and stewarding the land were coupled by the strict adherence to practices that maintained and enhanced the kapu and mana of all things in the Hawaiian world. In Hawaiian belief, all things natural,places, and even people, especially those of high rank,possessed mana or"divine power"(Pukui and Elbert 1986:235;Pukui et al. 1972).Mana was believed to be derived from the plethora of Hawaiian gods (kini akua)who were embodied in elemental forces, land, natural resources, and certain material objects and persons (Crabbe et al. 2017).Buck(1993)expanded on this concept noting that mana was associated with"the well-being of a community, in human knowledge and skills (canoe building, harvesting) and in nature (crop fertility, weather etc.)" (c.f. Else 2004:244). To ensure the mana of certain resources, places, and people, kapu of various kinds were implemented and strictly enforced to limit over-exploitation and defilement. Elbert and Pukui (1986:132) defined kapu as "taboo, prohibitions; special privilege or exemption." Kepelino noted that kapu associated with akua (deities) applied to all social classes, while kapu associated with ali`i were applied to the people (in Beckwith 1971). As kapu dictated social relationships, they also provided "environmental rules and controls that were essential for a subsistence economy" (Else 2004:246). The companion to kapu was noa, translated as "freed of taboo, released from restrictions, profane, freedom" (Pukui and Elbert 1986:268). Some kapu, particularly those associated with maintaining social hierarchy and gender differentiation were unremitting, while those kapu placed on natural resources were applied and enforced according to seasonal changes. The application of kapu to natural resources ensured that such resources remained available for future use.When the ali`i or the lesser chiefs (including konohiki and po'o lawai`a) determined that a particular resource was to be made available to the people, a decree was proclaimed indicating that kapu had been lifted, thereby making it noa. Although transitioning a resource from a state of kapu to noa allowed for its use, people were expected to practice sustainable harvesting methods and pay tribute to the paramount chief and the akua associated with that resource. Kapu were strictly enforced and violators faced serious consequences including death(Jokiel et al. 2011). Violators who escaped execution sought refuge at a pu`uhonua, a designated place of refuge or an individual who could pardon the accused (Kamakau 1992). After completing the proper rituals, the violator was absolved of his or her crime and allowed to reintegrate back into society. In summary,the layering and interweaving of beliefs,land stewardship practices, and the socio-political system forms the basis of the relationship shared between the Hawaiian people and the land. It is through the analysis of these dynamic elements that we develop an understanding of the complexity of place. CULTURAL HISTORY OF HAKALAU NUI AND KAMA`E`E AHUPUA'A The project area extends across the ahupua'a of Hakalau Nui and Kama`ee (Figure 17) and straddles the Hakalau Stream, which serves as the boundary separating the modern judicial districts of North and South Hilo. Prior to its separation in 1886,North and South Hilo was simply known as Hilo—a vast district that extends from Waiakea in the south to `O`okala in the north (King 1935). Pukui et al. (1974:35) translated Hakalau as "many perches" and Maly(in Rosendahl 2009:A-5)noted that its meaning is "descriptive of openings in the cliff face."Although Pulcui et al. (1974) did not provide a translation for Kama`e`e, Maly (in Rosendahl 2009:A-9) interpreted this place name to mean "Contrary Child." A closer review of the words kama and `e`e reveals other possible interpretations including to bind the yellow feathers of the '5'5 (Moho nobilis) bird [kama meaning to bind, tie, wrap and `e`e meaning yellow underwing feathers of the `o`o bird] or child/person wrapped in yellow `o`o feathers [kama meaning child, person]. This interpretation of Kama`e`e is plausible given the historical abundance of native birds in the upper forested regions of North Hilo, as well as the numerous mentions of bird catchers in the district as recorded in the proceedings of the Commission of Boundaries in the late 195'century(see Boundary Commission section). 16 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background { Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a .7 t '4/ °r'V/. ,k�' 4�' + N Hakalau lki Ahupua`a ' �. /�� �� ' o� t ` e' „.,, Kama'e'eAhupua'a ,/:0...;/f• ::. f ,,,` �. 'ro eel area *a / r ` i,, A P ' s l�,�tt 7 Li,..: ..' L.") , , . . .. • , 4' , ' - 4., - tY .�1. l 11:0 p „„.,-.11,,,,•,' 0'..k..1... 1I'� ” 1 } / \ 1. ` , uvrNJ ...... ...a P..I•.. I ! .,�,..f"„ t \ V.:j ' tix.•..,,„.Aa % A / • 4,.i,f/e'...,r P .1 1• K .1 1 ay ) . 1 r ' ^ t ;1 ti e,.....a . '\ O ' / v y � e s {` ..,.' et c � e •4 ! Y' tr.1�1 R w¢= / %(+ 1 '1-'.11 0' . d '-1'�r 1 v lu i. • 9 1. ` Pa 4qa 7_ r. ".4.\2 Vii.- f14‘-:0,"+ Figure 17.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map 2060 by J.M.Donn(1901) showing project area within Hakalau and Kama'6' Ahupua`a. A succinct general description of the Hilo District is provided by E. S. Craighill Handy,Elizabeth Green Handy, and Mary Kawena Pukui in their book Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life,Lore, and Environment: Hilo as a major division of Hawaii included the southeastern part of the windward coast most of which was in Hamakua, to the north of Hilo Bay. This, the northern portion, had many scattered settlements above streams running between high, forested kula lands, now planted with sugar cane. From Hilo Bay southeastward to Puna the shore and inland are rather barren and there were few settlements. The population of Hilo was anciently as now concentrated mostly around and out from Hilo Bay, which is still the island's principal port. The Hilo Bay region is one of lush tropical verdure and beauty, owing to the prevalence of nightly showers and moist warmth which prevail under the northeasterly trade winds into which it faces. Owing to the latter it is also subject to violent oceanic storms and has many times in its history suffered semidevastation from tidal waves unleashed by earthquake action in the Aleutian area of the Pacific. (Handy et al. 1991:538) Traditionally, the moku of Hilo was divided into three `okana (sub-districts). Beginning in the north is Hilo Paliku, an area that extends north of the Wailuku River to Ka`ula Gulch and is characterized by its upright and densely vegetated cliffs and broad kula (plains) lands (Figure 18) (Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation 2012). The Hawaiian proverb, Hilo iki, pall `ele`ele (little Hilo of the dark cliffs) describes this sub-district noted for its greenery, rain, and mists (Pukui 1983:107). The second `okana is Hilo One, or "sandy Hilo," famed for its black sand beach that extends along Hilo Bay between the Wailoa and Wailuku Rivers. The final `okana is Hilo Hanakahi, which extends south of Wailoa River to include Keaukaha(Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation 2012). The source of these `okana is found in the legendary account titled"Ka`ao Ho`oniva Pu`uwai no Ka-Miki"("The Heart Stirring Story of Ka-Miki")written by John Wise and J.W.H.I. Kihe and published in Hilo's Hawaiian language newspaper Ka HOku O Hawai`i between January 8, 1914, through December 6, 1917. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 17 2.Background d P' ,.�•.., P -�♦• _ - ABY r Y V y !. % --'..:74114- .� ,'IIi 1'Y .fes"Lry 'r ' 4- d* n . ——Hakalau Gulch Figure 18. 2021 aerial photo showing Hakalau Gulch in Hilo Paliku,photo by ASM. The study area ahupua`a of Hakalau and Kama`e`e are located in the 'okana of Hilo Paliku, a name that aptly describes the precipitous bluffs carved by the numerous stream-cut gulches that is characteristic of this region. The pali (cliffs) span along the northeastern coastline of Hawaii Island running north from the mouth of the Wailuku River and broken only by a string of relatively narrow gulches extending downslope of Mauna Kea. The broad and gently sloping plateaus, referred to as kula lands, between the gulches are fertile with deep soils. Both the gulches and kula lands and served as an ideal environment for thriving populations prior to Western contact. King David Kalakaua also provided a concise description of this region's rough geography and commented on the density of the population there in his book The Legends and Myths of Hawaii: The northeastern coast of the island of Hawaii presents an almost continuous succession of valleys,with intervening uplands rising gently for a few miles, and then more abruptly toward the snows of Mauna Kea and the clouds. The rains are abundant on that side of the island, and the fertile plateau,boldly fronting the sea with a line of cliffs from fifty to a hundred feet in height, is scored at intervals of one or two miles with deep almost impassable gulches, whose waters reach the ocean either through rocky channels worn to the level of the waves, or in cascades leaping from the cliffs and streaking the coast from Hilo to Waipio with lines that seem to be molten silver from the great crucible of Kilauea. In the time of Liloa, and later, this plateau was thickly populated, and requiring no irrigation, was cultivated from the sea upward to the line of frost. A few kalo patches are still seen, and bananas grow, as of old,in secluded spots and along the banks of the ravines;but the broad acres are green with cane, and the whistle of the sugar-mill is heard above the roar of the surf that beats against the rock-bound front of Hamakua. (Kalakaua 1888:284) The abundance of streams, valleys, and gulches in this region, although stunningly beautiful, made foot travel quite difficult and treacherous. The legendary account of Ka-Miki (mentioned above), published in the Hawaiian 18 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama'e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background language newspaper Ka Hart 0 Hawaii on March 30, 1916, poetically describes the difficulties faced by early travelers.Kepa Maly,a Hawaiian historian translated the account as such: 0 Hilo Paliku kaki i `olelo 'la ai; Pau ke Of Hilo Paliku it is said, one becomes short of aho i ka hele o Hilo, he lau ka pu`u, he breath traveling through Hilo, for there are mano ka ihona, he kini na kahawai, a e 'au many (400) hills, many (4,000) areas to no ho`i i ka wai o Hila a part ke aho, a`ohe descend, and many (40,000) streams, indeed e pau ka wai! while swimming through the waters of Hilo one becomes out of breath, but one is never out of water at Hilo! (Maly and Maly 2006:13) A similar sentiment was also reported in "Ka Huakaihele ike i na Makaainana o Hilo" (A Sightseeing Tour to Visit the Common Folk of Hilo),written by G.K. Mahoe(1876)of his travels throughout Hilo that was serialized in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka Lahui Hawai`i.Mahoe described Hilo Paliku thusly: ...ua pale ae au i ka loa o ke alahele, ua ...I am protected from the long path ahead, I manao ole ae hoi i na pali hauliuli o Hilo did not think twice of the dark cliffs of Hilo paliku, na piina, na ihona, na alu, na Paliku,the inclines,the descents,the ravines, kahawai, na kualono, a me na pupu, ua hele the streams, the mountaintops, and the hookahi is no e a'u, me ka manao ole i ka cleared fields, I moved alone, without luhi a me ka inea a ka hele ana, oiai, ma ka thinking much of the strain and discomfort of hoomaopopo ana i ka loa mai Hilo one a traveling, although, when I recalled the hiki i Laupahoehoe, me he mea la, ua length between Hilo One and Laupahoehoe, aneane no i ke kanakolu mile. A mai those thirty miles came and went. The reader kuhihewa hoi ka poe heluhelu, he papu a he should not be mistaken, the lands that are laumania hoi ke ano o ka waiho ana o ka passed along the way are not clear and aina, aole, aka, he putt kinikini, he alu, he smooth, rather, there are many hills, gulches, kapekepeke ke alanui. and twisting roads. (Mahoe 1876:1) The low-lying coastal areas of Hilo Paliku thrived with traditional Hawaiian habitation and cultivation sites. Within the larger gulches and kula regions were lush, fertile lands well suited for agriculture. The traditional staple crop, kalo (taro), was cultivated in irrigated terraces along stream edges while `uala (sweet potato), mai'a (banana) and ko (sugarcane) were grown in the kula lands of the lower forest zone (Handy et al. 1991). The region had an abundance of kukui (candlenut), `uiu (breadfruit), and niu (coconut) groves and was also rich in marine and river resources. Although settlements were prominent in these areas, with the increase in population and agricultural production during the late 19th and 20' centuries, settlements spread into the upland kula regions. Handy and Handy (1972),in drawing from a description given by early missionary William Ellis,provide yet another description of the fertile landscapes of South Hilo: The light and fertile soil is formed by decomposing lava,with a considerable portion of vegetable mould. The whole is covered with luxuriant vegetation, and the greater part of it formed into plantations, where plantains, bananas, sugar-cane, taro, potatoes and melons, come to the greatest perfection. Groves of cocoa-nut and bread-fruit trees are seen in every direction,loaded with fruit, or clothed with luxuriant foliage. (Ellis in Handy and Handy 1972:539) Place,Rain, and Wind Names of Greater Hilo Paliku The inoa (names) of wahi (places), ua (rains), and mak-ani (winds) within a particular ahupua`a or broader region evidences the long-term relationship of various communities to their immediate environment. Geographer Katrina- Ann R. Kapa'anaokalaokeola Nakoa Oliveira offers a concise description of the natural environment as it was understood by Hawaiians of the past: Ancestral Kanaka recognized the connection between the heavens, lands, and oceans and how all three were interconnected and interdependent upon one another. In spite of the interwoven nature of the sky, land, and sea, however, Kanaka of ancestral times did not have a term that directly translates to what we have come to know today as "environment." Rather, the Hawaiian Dictionary offers two phrases that approximate the notion of environment: (1) "`ano o ka nohona" and (2) "na mea e ho`opuni ana." 'Ano o ka nohona refers to the nature of one's relationship to one's surroundings or places. Na mea e ho`opuni ana relates to everything that surrounds or encircles a person. (Oliveira 2014:64) CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 19 2.Background Reacquainting ourselves with these inoa Willa (place names), inoa ua (rain names), and inoa inakani (wind names) allows us to appreciate the environment as it was once observed by ancestral Hawaiian populations. In Hakalau and Kama`e`e,a few inoa Willa are listed by Soehren(2005),unless specified otherwise, as markers for the boundaries of these ahupua`a. The inoa Willa for Hakalau and Kama`e`e are listed in Table 1 below. Note that the translations provided below should be treated as cursory interpretations rather than authoritative facts since further research is needed to develop more definitive translations of these place names: Table 1.Inoa `Nina in Hakalau and Kama`e`e Inoa `Aina Lexieology Ahupua'a Interpretive Notes Translation Awakee Awake'e Hakalau Bent harbor Boundary point at shore between Hakalau-nui and Hakalau-iki. Holei Holei Hakalau Native tree of the Boundary point between Hakalau-nui same name and Hakalau-iki. (Ochrosia compta) Honohina Honohina Hakalau Hina's Bay or Stream gray bay Kalepolepo Kalepolepo Hakalau The dirt One of two ponds estimated to be at about the 6,500 foot elevation. Kaloaloa Kaloaloa Hakalau The elongated Hill,triangulation station located about the 6,640 foot elevation. Kanepuu Kanepu`u Hakalau Kane's hill Prominent hill located about the 5,800 foot elevation. Kaoku Ka'AU Hakalau The decoy A cliff and boundary point between Hakalau and Kama'e`e. Kahoikua Kaho`ikua Hakalau The return of the Upland boundary point between god Hakalau-nui and Hakalau-iki. Kapahunui Kapahunui Hakalau The large Second of the two ponds estimated to drum/box be at about the 6,500 foot elevation. Kapihae Unknown Hakalau Translation Apo'a auwai(headwater)and undetermined boundary point between Hakalau-nui and Hakalau-iki. Kawelo Kawelo Kama'e`e The progency or Tributary stream and boundary point the setting sun between Hakalau and Kama'e`e. Kuamoohua Kuamo'ohua Kama'e`e Path along the A tributary ofWa`awa`a stream. edge Kukuinui Kukuinui Hakalau Great kukui tree Boundary between Hakalaunui and Hakalauiki. Lanikeha Lanikeha Hakalau Majestic heavens Old village site on the Hakalaunui/Hakalauiki boundary. Laniomaui Lani 0 Maui Hakalau Heavens/sky of Boundary point between Hakalau and Maui Kama`e`e in the woods. Lemupahupahu Lemupahupahu Hakalau Buttocks/Bruised A place along the coastal cliffs of buttocks Hakalau. (Kahapee 1867) Table 1 continues on next page. 20 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Table 1. continued. Inoa `Aima Lexicology Ahupua`a Interpretive Notes Translation Nakama Nakama Hakalau The children A hill and old village site in the uplands of Hakalau gulch that served as a boundary point between Hakalau and Kama`e`e. Napumaia Napumai`a Hakalau The banana stalks Boundary point between Hakalau-nui and Hakalau-iki. Waawaa/ Wa`awa`a/ Hakalau Furrowed Gulch, stream,and boundary Wawaa Wawa between Hakalau and Kama`e`e. Waiau Waiau Hakalau Swirling waters Stream and boundary between Hakalaunui and Kama'e`e.Also called Wailimu. Waihaka Waihaka Kama'e`e Watery perch A stream and po`o`auwai (headwater)in Hakalau-nui. Wailimu Wailimu Hakalau/Kama`e`e Algae water Stream that flows into Wa`awa`a. Also believed to be called Waiau. End of Table I. Although there are many inoa `aina that were collected for Hakalau and Kama`e`e, many of these names refer to places ma uka (upland) of the project area. The inoa Willa also reveals information regarding old village sites (Lanikeha, Nakama). Lastly, many of the inoa Willa evidence the numerous waterways and water sources found in Hakalau and Kama`e`e that served as boundary points between the ahupua`a (Honohina, Kalepolepo, Kapahunui, Kawelo, Kuamoohua, Waawaa, Waiau, Wailimu, Waimana). Prominent po'o `auwai(headwaters), used to manage the flow and level of stream waters,are also named(Kapihae,Waihaka). In terms of inoa ua, Hilo Paliku and the larger moku of Hilo is renowned in oral expressions such as mele (song), oli(chants), and `olelo no'eau (proverbs and poetical expressions) for its abundance of rain and fresh water. Numerous `olelo no'eau found in Pukui(1983)describe the characteristics of Hilo's many rains(Table 2). Table 2. `Olelo No`eau associated with the famed rains of Hilo `Olelo No`ean Literal/Figurative Translation Ele`ele Hilo,panopano i ka ua. Dark is Hilo,clouded with the rain(Pukui 1983:40) Halulu me he kapua`i kanaka la ka ua o Hilo. The rain of Hilo makes a rumbling sound like the treading of feet. (Pukui 1983:53) Hana Hilo i ka po`i a ka ua. Hilo works on the lid of the rain.Refers to the constant showers typical of Hilo district on Hawai`i. (Pukui 1983:54) Hilo 'am ua lokuloku. Hilo of the pouring rain. (Pukui 1983:107) Hilo i ka ua kinakinai, ka ua mao 'ole. Hilo of the constant rain,where it never clears up. (Pukui 1983:107) 'Au umauina o Hilo i ka wai. Hilo has breasted the water. To weather the storm. The district of Hilo had many gulches and streams and was difficult to cross. (Pukui 1983 28) Pau ke aho i ke kahawai lau o Hilo. One's strength is exhausted in crossing the many streams of Hilo. Said of or by one who is weary with effort.First uttered by Hi`iaka in a chant when she found herself weary after a battle with the lizard god Pana`ewa. (Pukui 1983:287) CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 21 2.Background Akana and Gonzalez (2015) in Hanan Ka Ua, a collection of Hawaiian rain names, describe the cultural significance of rain: Our kupuna[ancestors] had an intimate relationship with the elements. They were keen observers of their environment, with all of its life-giving and life-taking forces. They had a nuanced understanding of the rains of their home. They knew that one place could have several different rains, and that each rain was distinguishable from another. They knew when a particular rain would fall, its color, duration, intensity, the path it would take,the sound it made on the trees,the scent it carried,and the effect it had on people. (Akana and Gonzalez 2015:xv) Listed in Table 3 are a few of the rain names associated with Hilo Paliku and the northern portion of Hilo that can be found in Akana and Gonzalez(2015): Table 3.Rain Names Associated with Hilo Paliku Rain Name Literal/Figurative Translation `Awa`awa Translates as"bitter."Refers to a cold and dark rain or mist. He'enehu Translates as"sliding anchovy."Refers to a misty rain in the early morning off the coastline at a time when nehu fish are in abundance. Ho`olua Translates as"to do twice."Refers to heavy rains that fall during strong northerly winds(which are also known as ho`olua). Kinai Translates as"to quench or extinguish."Refers to a constant rain that continues for long hours. Kualua Translates as"repeating twice."Refers to rain over the sea that is accompanied by wind. Lanipili Translates as"clinging sky."Refers to cloudbursts or heavy rain that lasts for days. Lanipolua Translates as"very dark sky."Refers to misty rain that falls when forests are obscured by low- lying clouds. Lokuloku Translates as"pouring rain."A generic term referring to heavy showers accompanied by wind. (Lila 1872:3) Naulu Translated as"vexed."Refers to sudden heavy showers. Ulumano Translated as"growing exponentially."A rain that travels inland from the sea that is an indicator of the abundance of `ohua(juvenile fish). Whereas Hanau Ka Ua provides us with a comprehensive listing of inoa ua across the Hawaiian Islands, there is no comparable publication for inoa makani to date. Listed in Table 4 are wind names that can be found in an array of Hawaiian and English language primary sources: Table 4.Wind names associated with Hilo Paliku Wind Name Notes `A`alahonua Translates as"fragrant earth."A wind that carries the fragrance of soil and foliage after the rain. (Alvarado 2005) Kepia Translates as"dandruff."A wind associated with Hilo Paliku. (Nawaa 1904) Kolonahe Translates as"crawling slowly."A generic term for a gentle breeze(Lila 1872). Uluaunui Translates as"to grow increasingly."a strong northerly wind that makes landing by boat difficult. Uluau Translates as"to grow increasingly."Associated with Hilo Paliku in the mo`olelo of Kuapaka`a. (Kuapuu 1861:24) Ho`olua Translates as"to do twice."Refers to strong northerly winds that may include rain. (Malo 1903:35) Hau Translates as "ice."A wind that blows downward from the mountains(Malo 1903:35) Maluaki`iwai "Translate as"water-collecting seabreeze."A sea breeze accompanied by showers. (Alvarado 2005:5). 22 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Traditional Mo`olelo of Hakalau and Kama`e`e and the Greater Hilo Paliku Mo`olelo (accounts, stories, legends) are rich resources for understanding the cultural landscape, land use, and practices of an area. It is yet another indigenous source of information that informs our understanding of how peoples of the past expressed their relationships to their lands and environment. An exhaustive search through secondary sources and Hawaiian language primary source materials revealed a few mo olelo that specifically name Hakalau and Kama`e` . Additionally, an array of mo`olelo speaks of events that take place in Hilo Paliku the okana within which Hakalau and Kama'e`e and located. The following summary of mo`olelo begins with those that make explicit reference to the lands of Hakalau and Kama`e`e, followed by a selection of mo`olelo that speaks more broadly of the Hilo Paliku region. Hi`iakaikapoliopele,Malaeakini, and the Flying Ghosts The mo olelo of Hi`iakapoliopele is an epic tale that was published numerous times by several authors in Hawaiian language newspapers of the 19' and early 20th centuries. This mo olelo follows Hi`iakaikapoliopele along her journey to retrieve the Kaua`i chief Lohi`au for his lover, the fire deity Pete, Hi`iaka's eldest sister. This coming of age story traces Hi`iakaikapoliopele's movement across the archipelago,recounting the numerous places she visited as well as the beings—both human and nonhuman—that she encountered and at times battled. In the mo`olelo, Hi`iakaikapoliopele and her aikdne (intimate friend) Wahine`oma`o briefly pass through Hakalau and the famed lehua grove of Malaeakini as they made their way to Laupahoehoe. In a version of the mo`olelo published in the newspapers Ku`oko`a Home Rula between 1908-1911 by Hawaiian literary author Joseph Moku`ohai Poepoe, a brief explanatory note regarding Malaeakini is included. Poepoe (1909) states that Malaeakini was an ancient lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) grove that was frequently visited by travelers and po`e ho'olana ma`i (people with a specific form of sickness that is unknown at this time). The following excerpt of the mo'olelo is derived from a version of Hi`iakapoliopele authored by Ho`oulumahiehie and translated by Puakea Nogelmeier. Prior to arriving in Hakalau, Hi`iakaikapoliopele and Wahine`oma`o visited Makahanaloa(south of Hakalau)and the famed `ohe (bamboo)grove of the god Kane known as Homaika`ohe. After departing Makahanaloa, the pair approached Hakalau and observed a crowd of people including men,women,and children surfing in the bay. Hi`iaka questions whether the surfers were indeed human or if they were merely spirits disguised as humans. To test her conjecture, Hiiaka retrieves branches from Malaeakini, the famed lehua and tossed it into the sea at which point the surfers quickly vanished. That portion of the story relating the details of this event reads thusly: O ko ldkou nei hele id Hakalau i nd They went along until Hakalau, amid the lehua o Malaeakini, 'ike akula `o lehua trees of Malaeakini, when Wahine`oma`o i ka he`e nalu mai o Wahine`oma`o saw men, women, and kekahi po'e kane, na wahine, a me nd children surfing, and said to her kamali`i, a `olelo akula ia i ke aikdne, companion, "What a crowd of people "Makena wale ho`i ua pa'e e he`e surfing. Men, women, and children, all nalu maila. '0 kane, ka wahine, a me sliding along the waves." kamali`i ia e kaha maila i ka nalu." Hi`iaka then said to Wahine`oma`o, Olelo maila o Hi`iaka is "Those aren't actual people that you see. Wahine`oma o, "A`ole kela he Those are flying ghosts, from the biggest kanaka `i`o au e 'ike akula. He po`e to the smallest, all gliding along on the `ula lele kela mai ke nui a ka li`ili`i is waves." e ho`okikakaha maila i ka nalu." "How absurd, my friend, to say those "He keu no ho`i 'oe e aikdne, i `olelo people are flying ghosts. Don't they look maila i Icela po`e kanaka he po`e ula like real people?" Wahi`oma`o asked her lele. He po`e kanaka maoli no paha friend. kela?" wahi a Wahine dma`o i pane "Let us see the truth of our assumptions; aku ai i ke aikdne. now, I will toss a lehua from here in "E nand a`e kaua i ka pololei o kau a Malaeakini into the sea, and if those me ka pololei 'ole o ka'u, 'o is ho`i, e people do not disappear, then you are kiola a`e au i ka lehua o Malaeakini correct, but if they suddenly and nei i loko o ke kai, a i nalowale 'ole completely disappear from your sight, keld po`e mai kou mau maka aku, a then I am right." laila, ua pololei `oe; aka ho'i, i CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 23 2.Background nalowale honua keia pa`e mai na Heiaka then grabbed a branch of lehua lihilihi aku o kou mau maka, a lana, and tossed it into the sea. At that ua pololei ho`i au." moment, Wahine`oma`o saw the frantic '0 ko Hi`iaka lalau a`ela no ia i flight of all the people she had seen; big kekahi lala lehua a ho`olei akula i ia to little, they completely disappeared, mea i loko o ke kai. I ia wa i 'ike aku with Wahine`oma`o unable to figure out ai `o Wahine'oma`o i ka naholo pa`o`o where they had gone. Then Hi`iaka asked `ana a`e o ua po`e nei dna e `ike aku her, "Where did all of those surfers you nei, mai ke nui a ka li`ili'i, a nalowale just saw go off to?" a'eta, me ka maopopo 'ole id "They have all vanished. I do not know Wahine`oma`o o ko lakou wahi o ka where they disappeared to. Ah! What nalowale `ana aku. A i is wa i nrnau you said, aikane, was correct after all. mai ai 'a Hi`iaka Ia Wahine'oma`o, They were supernatural beings," said "Auhea akula ua po`e he'e nalu nei Wahine'oma`o to her friend. du i `ike aku nei?" Dear reader, in some people's version of Ua pan nui i ka nalowale. Maopopo the Hi`iaka epic, these folk 'ole na`e is`u ko ldkou wahi o ka Wahine'oma`o sighted surfing, from the nalowale `ana aku nei. E! Ua pololei large to the small, were actual people, `i`o kau, e aikane, i ha`i mai nei. He and because Hi`iaka tossed the branch of po`e `e`epa keia," i pane aku ai `o lehua from Malaeakini, which she'd Wahine`oma`o i ke aikane. broken and thrown into the sea, all of the E ka mea heluhelu, ma ka mana men, women, and childred died, tangled mo`olelo Hi`iaka a kekahi po`e, ua in the branches of lehua that sprouted `olelo `ia 'a keia po`e kanaka a from this one branch Hi`iaka had broken Wahine`oma`o e `ike aku nei, mai ke and tossed into the sea. nui a ka li`iti`i e he`e nalu ana, he If this were true, it would make Hi`iaka a po`e kanaka maoli no, a ma mull o ko senseless killer of those who brought her Hi`iaka ho`olei `ana i ka lald lehua o no harm, but you, the reader, should Malaeakini dna i haha`i mai ai a kiola weigh the truth of this for yourself akula i loko o ke kai, ua pau loa kela (Ho`oulumahiehie 2006a:102-103) po`e i ka make, 'a kdne, 'a ka wahine, 'a keiki, ma muli o ko ldkou hihia 'ana i nd ldla o ko ke kumu lehua i ulu a'e ai mai nei laid lehua a Hi`iaka i uhaki a'e ai a kiola akula i loko o ke kai. Ina o ka mea pololei keia, a laila, ua lilo `o Hi`iaka i mea pepehi kumu 'ole i kela po`e kanaka lawehala 'ole mai id Hi`iaka, aka, nau no no`e, e ka mea heluhelu, e kaupaona nou iho i ka mea pololei. (Ho`oulumahiehie 2006b:1108-1109) The Chief Hua And The Battle of Kani`auho`opio Although the story of the chief Hua is mentioned anecdotally as part of larger narratives of Hawai`i's ancient past, mention is made of that battle known as Kani`auho`opio, which took place in Hakalau. It was in this battle that many of Hawai`i's chiefs were slain by Hua. The translated excerpt offered below is pulled from an account published in 1908 by Poepoe in the newspaper he edited, Ka Na`i Aupuni. His serialized story, titled Moolelo Hawaii! (Hawai`i's History!), incorporated earlier accounts, such as those told by Hawaiian historians David Malo and Samuel Manaiakalani Kamakau,to convey the story of Hua and many other chiefs and chiefesses of Hawai`i's ancient past. The translated excerpt below offers some introductory remarks regarding Hua and the battle of Kani`auho`opio: In the Ulu genealogy(one of numerous genealogies that the high-ranking chiefs of Hawaii traced their lineages to), there are chiefs named Hua that can be seen. The first is Hua, the child of 24 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Pohukaina (m) and Huahuakapalei (f); the second Hua, who was known as Huanuikala`ila`i (Huanuikala-la`ila`i),was the child of Pau(m)and Kapohaakia(f). This [second] Hua,however,is a descendant of the first Hua that is shown above. These two Hua chiefs both were born in Hawaii(the archipelago). REGARDING THE FIRST HUA This is what David Malo reveals within his handwritten book"Moolelo Hawaii,"translated by Dr. N.B. Emerson into English and named"Hawaiian Antiquities,"pages 323,chapter 62,page 10: "Hua was a ruling chief,born at Kahona, Lahaina,Maui;he died at Kehoni,on the same island, and buried at`Tao. This is S.M.Kamakau's story for this chief: THE STORY OF HUA OF POHUKAINA Kupuaimanaku was another name for his father.Hua was born in Lahaina. This is not the Hua that built the heiau of Apahua in the uplands of Waine`e, near Kapoulu. This is a warring chief. This Hua is the one that built the heiau of Honua`ula and Kuawalu in Ka`uiki, Hana. And he [is the chief associated with] the war called Kaniauho`opio in Hakalau, Hilo, Hawaii. Hawai`i's people were slain in this battle. Kalaaualonomakauahi (spelled Kalaauaolomakauahi in the chant below) was the name of Hua's weapon.Here is the name chant of this chiefly Hua: '0 Hua a Kapuaimanaku Hua,child of Kapuaimanaku Ke'lii o Lahaina Chief of Lahaina I hanau no i Kahona i Kanaha Born at Kahona,at Kanaha '0 Lelenuikuakamau, Kahua Lelenuikuakamau is the seed '0 Waie`e ke Owe Waie`e is the sprout '0 Luakona ka piko Luakona is the navel '0 Kaua'ula ke a'a Kauaula is the rootlets I Haleili i Kahili At Haleili,at Kahili Noho i Wananalua Residing at Wananalua Haka kapu is Honua`ula Sacred platform to Honua'ula Hahau i ke kaua i Kani'auho'opio Smitten by battle,by Kani'auho`opio I haka i Hakalau [He who was]perched in Hakalau I pa is Kaona i Hikinaakala [He who was]hit by Kaona,by Hikianakala I ili is Kana [He who was] attacked Kana I pale `ia is Kalaauaolomakauahi [He who was]protected by Kalaauaolomakauahi I ka laau kapu a Hua The sacred weapon of Hua Hanle i Kehoni i Kiikewe [He who] fell at Kehoni,at Ki`ikewe I kapa i Niva ke'lii o Hua [He who was] called Niva the chief known as Hua Hoi no i uka ka waihona Returned to the uplands for safekeeping. (Translation by ASM staff, Halena Kapuni- Reynolds)(Poepoe 1908b:1) This chant,composed for this Hawaiian chief from Lahaina,Maui, clearly describes his birthplace. He lived in many places, eventually arriving [and living] in Wananalua, Hana. He lived there (at Wananalua), and he built a heiau for warfare in that place. He sailed to Hawai`i for battle, and when he returned victorious, he returned to Hana. When he was an old man, he was ridden with sickness. He left Hana and landed ashore at Ki`ikewe in Waihee. He died at Niva. His body was taken to the uplands of`Tao. (Poepoe 1908a:3) Adding to Poepoe's interpretation of Hua's mele inoa (name chant), the mele may also convey information about the battle that took place. Kaona (and his weapon Hikianaakala) and Kana may be two rivals that Hua defeated in the battle of Kafir auho`opio. This battle was highly significant for it to be remembered and memorialized in Hua's name chant. Ke Ka`ao Ho`oniva Pu`uwai no Ka-Miki—The Heart Stirring Story of Ka-Miki Hakalau and Kama`e`e are both mentioned in the heart stirring story of Ka-Miki, an account published in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka HOW o Hawaii by John Wise and J.W.H.I. Kihe between 1914-1917. Although CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 25 2.Background the mo olelo "used a mixture of local traditions, tales, and family histories in association with place names to tie together fragments of site specific history that had been handed down over the generations," it"...is not an ancient account" (Maly and Maly 2001:23). The following succint synopsis of the mo olelo is provided in Maly and Maly (2001:23): This mo olelo is set in the 1300s (by association with the chief Pili-a-Ka'aiaea), and is an account of two supernatural brothers, Ka-Miki (The quick, or adept, one) and Maka-`iole(Rat[squinting] eyes). The narratives describe the birth of the brothers,their upbringing, and their journey around the island of Hawaii along the ancient ala loa and ala hele (trails and paths) that encircled the island.During their journey,the brothers competed alongside the trails they traveled,and in famed kahua (contest fields) and royal courts, against `olohe (experts skilled in fighting or in other competitions, such as running, fishing, debating, or solving riddles, that were practiced by the ancient Hawaiians). They also challenged priests whose dishonorable conduct offended the gods of ancient Hawaii. Ka-Miki and Maka-`iole were empowered by their ancestress Ka-uluhe-nui- hihikolo-i-uka (The great entangled growth of uluhe fern which spreads across the uplands), who was one of the myriad of body forms of the goddess Haumea, the earth-mother, creative force of nature who was also called Papa or Hina. Among her many nature-form attributes were manifestations that caused her to be called upon as a goddess of priests and competitors. Maly in Rosendahl(2009)translated a portion of Ka-Miki centered on the lands of Kolekole, Kuhua, Hakalau, and Kama`e`e. Below is Maly's summary and translation of the mo`olelo. Any mention of Hakalau, Kama`e`e, and place names within these ahupua`a are bolded for emphasis: In summary, readers are told that lands that bear the names of Haka-lau (Many perches — descriptive of opernings in the cliff face)were named for the Hakalau chiefs, a priest and `olohe [skilled warrior]; Hakalau-lani-a-pi`i: and Hakalau-a-olo were the chiefs; Hakalau-iki was the priest (famed for his knowledge and cliff leaping skills); and Hakalau-nui was the kaula `aina (land administrator) and an `dlohe champion who served under the chief Kolekole (6/8/1916). (The excerpts below,are presented in the narrative form as written in the original Hawaiian.) Kuhua Kuhua can be translated as "Thicken" (cf. lepo kuhue clay); a land area that borders the valley of Kolekole. The land called Kuhua was named for the `olohe chiefess Kuhua-i-Halala, one of the daughters of Honomu, sister of `Ope`a-i-Honohina, Kuhua was also the guardian of the young warrior-chief named Kapahe`ehe`e(there is an area now called Pahe`ehe`e). While traveling along the ala loa (the main trail of this region that ran along the kula overlooking the coastal cliffs), Ka-Miki, Maka-`iole, and the chiefs Hilo Hanakahi and Keahialaka had been attacked by Kapahe`ehe`e (and the chief Honomu, who had tried to rescue Kapahe`ehe`e). Ka- Miki ma (Ka-Miki and companions) left Kapahe`ehe`e and Honomu securely bound near the trailside and continued their journey. Traveling a short distance,they met with the chiefess Kuhua- i-Halala, the daughter of Honomu and adoptive guardian of Kapaheehe`e. Now Kuhua was compared to the puhi kdpa (voracious eel of the ocean), and was a master of ha`iha`i (bone breaking techniques)and lila(rough hand-to-hand combat). Kuhua, her sister `Ope`a-i-Honohina (Honohina), and Honohina's husband Pele`au`au, regularly challenged travelers who passed on the ala loa near their residence. Those that were unskilled in fighting were killed along the trail, and those who could compete skill for skill with them were invited into Kuhua's house. Kuhua kept an `aha puluniu (sennit crab snare) in her pa`u and when entering the house, she would strangle her victims. Kuhua's house was built overlooking the cliff ledge of Kupoupo`o [presumably overlooking the Kolekole area], and the victims of Kuhua ma were compared to `a`ama crabs caught in puluniu crab snares. Seeing Ka-Miki ma, Kuhua asked in an `olelo no`eau (riddle): "Mama Hilo?" (Can one move swiftly through Hilo?). Ka-Miki responded, "Mama i ka wai 'ole!" (Yes indeed one may travel swiftly through Hilo, for there is no water in the streams!)(Meaning there were no `olohe upon the trail who could meet the challenge of stopping his group.) Kuhua then inquired how this could be so,and she said: ...How is it that Hilo is without water (`olohe)? There are many (400) hills, many (4,000) descents, and many(40,000)rivers in Hilo, one becomes breathless (is overcome) swimming 26 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background in the waters of Hilo, but one is never out of water in Hilo...Hilo is the land of rain,rain that goes on and on,rain that darkens the sun. Indeed the sun is darkened by the rains, and it is the Maluaki`iwai that pushes down the river debris (travelers) from the uplands. So is the stormy nature of Hilo known,and blocked are the trails that one would travel. (5/25/1916) Ka-Miki then answered Kuhua in poetic riddle phrase of his own: ...Hilo has no water. The water has returned and sits in the springs, along the dripping cliff faces, to the quiet pools. The rivers have receded,the rain trough of Hilo is placed in the heavens...we have come to see Hilo bound in the meshes of heavenly rains, Hilo in the long twined lines of the Malualua, which fetches the multitudinous waters (Olohe), those of skill, [wind] upon the mountain tops [adorned] with budding `ohi`a, and the mamane that droops in the cold, on the mountains that move overhead like birds soaring in the heights of the heavens. Hilo is consumed by the great wind of the gourd; not it is like a small gourd to be set aside,the children call out; for it is ended,Hilo is [no longer] black,darkened by the rains, [emptied] are the rain troughs in the heavens... [The references to the many waters, streams,rains and storms of Hilo referred to the evil `olohe who beset the region. The winds that cleared the heavens refer to Ka-Miki ma. Thus the children[people] of Hilo rejoiced in their new-found safety.] Ka-Miki went on to tell Kuhua: It is I, the descendent of Ka-uluhe-nui-hihi-kolo-i-uka, who have cleansed and dried the rivers. Hereafter the debris (`olohe) that has blocked the pathways will never again rise. Nana-i-ke-kihi-o-Kamalama, the descendant of Lani-nui-ku`i-a-mamao- loa has ended the practices of Upeloa, Kaumana, Kalanakama`a-o-uli, Pukihae, Mokuhonua, Waiaea, Kaiwiki, Honoli`i, Kikooakapuna, Pau and Keka`a [Pauka`a], Pueopaku, Papa`i-nui-a-kou [Papa`ikou], Waiahole, Ka`ie`ie-lulu-ka-i`a [Ka`ie`ie], Kalaoa, Hanawi, Kula`imano, kuilauania, Kapahe`ehe`e, and Honomu—for all have been bound by Ka-Miki. Thus Ka-Miki has waded through half of the streams of Hilo, and here is Ka-Miki seeking out and judging the skilled `olohe who remain, seeking the koa trees that darken [i.e. disreputable warriors] all the forests. (Seeking) the great koa and little koa, those who are called the Koa pa`ele-ku o Hilo – Koa trees that darken Hilo [high canopy trees that shade all that is below; descriptive of powerful warriors.] Ka-Miki then asked Kuhua, "Ma ke koa nui, ma ke koa iki, mahea 'oe?"(A great koa, a little Icoa,where are you,what is your nature?) Thus, Kuhua understood the nature and skills of Ka-Miki, and that these youths had come seeking her out (5/24/1916). Kuhua and Ka-Miki exchanged taunts, and Kuhua said that she was the woman who snared the `a'ama kualena(yellow backed black crabs [fierce warriors]) along the cliffs from which the koa`e (tropic birds) fly. Kuhua leapt to fight,but was defeated and bound in the net of Lani-nui-ku`i-a-inamao-loa (6/1/1916). Kuhua surrendered to Ka-Miki, and agreed to give up waylaying travelers. She then led Ka-Miki into Kolekole, where he met with Huia, the chief's master image carver and a skilled orator (6/8/1916). Kolekole This area was named for Kolekole(meaning red, or raw), a high chief in the region of Hilo Paliku.The narrative continues: Seeing Kuhua arrive with strangers at the village of Kolekole, the populace approached her, questioning the nature of her visitors, for they knew the habits of Kuhua, Honomo (sic.), and Kapahe`ehee ma. Kuhua told them what had happened and stated that there was no one who could beat Ka-Miki, not even the priest Hakalau-nui. Observing the area around the village and compound of Kolekole,Ka-Miki noted that there were many finely carved images and he commented on their beauty, but his comments led Kolekole's master image carver Hu'ia (who was also a formidable riddler) to boast before Ka-Miki and ridicule his knowledge. Hu'ia stated that the CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 27 2.Background Kulanikapele and the champions of Kolekole would defeat him on the contest field. Thus, Ka-Miki learned that Kolekole was hosting contests between champion competitors of the region, and he asked Hu'ia to make arrangements for the area champions to meet him on the contest field that evening. Ka-Miki then called out in a chant, and described the nature-forms of his ancestress and instructor, and a mysterious voice responded, carried on the winds that rushed into the village from the mountain slopes. Because of the mysterious nature of the chant, Hu'ia became frightened of Ka-Miki(6/8/1916). Hu'ia went to the home of the chief, Kulanikapele, who was a counselor and olohe master who served under the chief Kolekole. Hu'ia described the events to Kulanikapele, and Kulanikapele sent his messenger, `Ohi`aokalani, to confirm what had been said about the fate of the other `olohe in that section of Hilo. `Ohi`aokalani found that what was said about Ka-Miki was true, and returned to his chief, confirming the reports.Kulanikapele then sent his runner to call `Akaka,the grandson of Kulanikapele, who was also a skilled competitor, and when `Akaka met with his grandfather, the two agreed that there would be no sense in challenging Ka-Miki to a contest. Kulanikapele and `Akaka acknowledged Ka-Miki's expertise and hosted a feast and `awa ceremony for him. As the night drew near,preparations were made for the contests at the kahua of Kolekole. Kulanikapele was to be the overseer of the contests, and it was agreed that `Akaka would take Ka-Miki to the kahua. (6/15- 22/1916). In preparation for the contests, people gathered from all over at Kolekole. Among the observers were Ka-hung (The hidden one; a waterfall) and Nawao-lele (Nawao, an upland taro garden),the two beautiful chiefesses and daughters of the chief Kolekole. The areas that bear these names were named for them(6/29/1916). The first contest was to have been between Kuhua and Waile`ale`a, but because Kuhua had surrendered to Ka-Miki, she agreed that Ka-Miki could compete in her place. The lands of Waile`a (Pleasurable water),both in Hilo and on Maui, at Paeahu, were named for Waileale`a, a famous Maui olohe who was visiting Hawaii at the time of Ka-Miki's visit at Kolekole. The contest began,and Waileale`a leapt to attack Ka-Miki but was quickly thrown off of the kahua. Ka-Miki then called out to learn who would be next to compete with him, and Waileale`a said he would compete again. Ka-Miki called to Waileale`a, "Kdhand! (How surprising!). This is Waileale`a who was thrown from the kahua like a bundle of taro leaves for the chief Kolekole. I would have thought he'd had enough of Ka-Miki, the little finger of Ka- uluhe-nui-hihikolo-i-uka." Outraged, Waile`ale`a leapt to the kahua and was once again thrown from the field. Thus Waile`ale`a realized he was no match for Ka-Miki—Ka niuhi ae 'ale a ka moana (the great white shark that rises upon the ocean waves). Hakalau-nui then entered the kahua as the next competitor to face Ka-Miki. Hakalau-nui called out to Ka-Miki— Iluna ke alo, ilalo ke alo,mahea'oe?Is it face up or face down,where are you? [Was the fight to be to the death of one competitor?] To which Ka-Miki responded it could be however Hakalau-nui wished it to be! Hakalau-nui then said, "So you claim to be a true `dlohe, master of all manner of skills!" Ka-Miki told Hakalau-nui, "It is my right, for all manner of knowledge and skills are known to me, for I have ascended, and dwelt at Koki o Wailau (The heights of Wailau) [Mastered the very highest skills].Numerous indeed are the teachings of Ka-uluhe-nui-hihi-kolo-i-uka,but this is not a time for questioning,it is a time for contests,so if you wish it to be"face down," let it be!"(7/6/1916). Hakalau-nui leapt to seize Ka-Miki and became entangled in Ka-Miki's malo. Ka- Miki then called to Hakalau-nui, "If you are master of all knowledge, as if at Koki o Wailau, then release the opae(shrimp)and hinana (goby fish) from their perch(pass or hiding place)." Try as he might, Hakalau-nui was unable to free himself, and he was left bound by Ka-Miki. The reason that Ka-Miki quickly dispatched Hakalau- nui, was because he wanted to complete this night of contests and continue on to 28 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Maulua,where he would meet with Hilo-Hanakahi's master instructor and friend. Ka- Miki then chanted,calling out and asking who the next competitor would be. Mele paha Spoken chant 'Eu e, 'ell la ka `Opae, 'en ka hinana Stirred up, and animated, stirred up are the `opae and hinana; 'Eu ka 'ula a ka naele, ka i`a he `unci Agitated is the lobster in its crevice, this wawae fish of ten feet. ...0 ka po le`a o Kolekole ke li`i It is the night of contests for the chief Kolekole, Ke li`i `ai kalana, `ai ahupuaa`a(sic.) The chief who consumes the kahana (sic.) (combined parcels), the ahupua`a (sub-districts) 'Ai `okana, ai k0 ele [The chief] who controls the `okana (region)and the kO ele chiefs' farmlands Ike kuakua a lele wale [The chief who controls] the kuakua (lands planted in rows), and the lele (detached land parcels) He in, he ninau na Ka-Miki An inquiry,a question asked by Ka-Miki Owai hou a`e ua olohe hialoloa Who is the next skilled `olohe? I hoa mokomoko no Ka-Miki? The wrestling companion of Ka-Miki? (7/13/1916) Kama`e`e-a-kau responded that he would be the next challenger. Kama`e`e The lands of Kama-`e`e(interpretive translation: Contrary Child)were named for the `olohe chief Kama-`e`e-a-kau. Kama-`e`e called to Ka-Miki, "Great indeed is your knowledge, that you could defeat the expert `olohe of Hilo, the great branchless koa of Hilo, which are made into wa`a kialoa (long hulled canoes). Which are you, the large koa or the small koa? Ka-Miki then answered Kama-`e`e, "Take heed my companion of the swollen surf, protect your legs and arms, lest they become entangled in the mest of Ku`uku`u, the net of my mysterious ancestresses. Take heed lest you become the long legged fish (sacrifice). I have come with Kuo-a-koili the ko`i pahoa kuamauna (the broad bladed adze) which cuts down the koa trees of Hilo, trees used by the kahuna kalai wa`a (canoe maker priests) of Hilo. This night the extent of your knowledge shall be known, and when it is finished, your bones shall be stripped and made into tuna fishhooks for your chief Kolekole, and your flesh shall be used as bait for the sharks (Ke holehole `ia ou man iwi i makau lawai`a ahi na ko li`i, na Kolekole, a ko i`o 'ea i mea kupalu mana). Ka-Miki then chanted his background, chanted calling upon his ancestresses. Kama-` `e then leapt upon the kahua, thinking he would bind Ka-Miki, but he was thrown off and killed. At this turn of events, eleven `Olohe broke the strict rules of kahua competition, and joined together to kill Ka-Miki. The `olohe included the chiefesses Wailua, and Honohina, and `Awapuhi, Pele`au, Nanue, Piha, Waikaumalo,Nahiku,Pu`u`ohua,Manowai`opae,Pohakupuka,and Kaiakea. Ka-Miki defeated all of these `olohe and compared them to a branchless koa tree hewn by the master canoe maker. He also told all assembled that the actions of those `olohe had shamed their chief and brought dishonor on the kahua. All of the `olohe were left bound until the following day(7/13 and 20, 1916). After Ka-Miki defeated the assembled `olohe, the events were completed for that night. Ka-Miki forbade that the bound `olohe be killed, saying that they should be left bound until the following day. Seeing all that had occurred,Hu'ia went to Ka-Miki to repent for his rash behavior, and Hu'ia became the konohiki for Kolekole. Hu'ia oversaw—Re]ka to'1 kalo, ka ma'a `uala, ke opu ko, ka mai`a palaku iluna ka 'awa kau i kaulu patio Akaka...([the] taro terraces, sweet potato planting rows, the sugar cane clusters, the ripening stands of bananas and the 'awn that grew along the cliff CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 29 2.Background ledge of`Akaka).Kolekole was greatly pleased with Ka-Miki's defeat of the `olohe of Hilo Paliku, and he hosted Ka-Miki ma to a feast and papai`awa (`awa ceremony). After the `awa ceremony Ka-Miki ma prepared to continue their journey. Hilo Hanakahi went ahead to see his `olohe master and instructor, Maulua-a-pi`o. Hilo Hanakahi told Maulua about all that had occurred and asked Maulua to acknowledge Ka-Miki's skills, rather than challenge him...(7/27/1916). (Maly in Rosendahl 2009:A5-A9) Kamehameha I And His Guardian/Teacher, The Famed Warrior Kekuhaupi`o,Battle Maui Warriors in Hakalau He Moolelo Kaao no Kuhaupio Ke Koa Kaulana o ke Au o Kamehameha Ka Nui (A Tale of Kekuhaupi`o, the Famous Warrior of the Era of Kamehameha the Great ) was recounted by Reverend Stephen Langhern Desha Sr. and published in serial form in the Hawaiian-language newspaper Ka Hoku o Hawai`i. Consisting of 174 articles published between December 16, 1920, and September 11, 1924, Desha's account narrates the life of the famed warrior Kekuhaupi`o who trained Kamehameha 1 in the art of warfare and served him on the battlefield (Desha 2000:xiii-xiv). Kekuhaupi`o was born and raised in Ke`ei, South Kona, and from an early age, was noted for his strength, agility, and vigor. Following a mock battle on the shores of Kealakekua between boys from Ke`ei and Napo`opo`o—a battle in which the kahuna kia`i (guardian priest) of the heiau Hiki`au observed Kekuhaupi`o's fearlessness and courage—the kahuna kia`i spoke to Kohapiolani, Kekuhaupi`o's warrior-chief father, and foretold of Kekuhaupi`o's fame and success as a warrior. Following this interaction, Kohapiolani became Kekuhaupi`o's first instructor and trained the young warrior in sprinting, spear hurling, boxing, and wrestling. Years later, Kekuhaupi`o trained under other skilled warriors, including La'amea and Koaia. Once he mastered the various arts of warfare under Koaia,he was tasked with capturing and eating the eye of a niuhi(tiger) shark as part of his `ailolo (graduation) ceremony (Desha 2000:1-17). Following his training, Kekuhaupi`o and his father traveled to Kokoiki, Kohala along with many other high chiefs who were waiting for the high chiefess Keku'iapoiwa to give birth. Once Pai`ea (Kamehameha I) was born, Kekuhaupi`o then served Kalani`opu`u, who was then the chief of the Ka`u District. Upon the death of Alapa`inui, the ali`i of Hawai`i Island, Kalani`opu`u waged war against Keawe`opala, Alapa`inui's son and successor. Kalani`opu`u emerged victorious from this conflict, becoming the new ali`i of Hawaii Island. It was following Kalani`opu`u's ascension that Kamehameha I, who was "under the care of Alapa`inui, his uncle," went to live in Kalani`opu`u's court (Desha 2000:31). It is also during this time that Kalani`opu`u instructed Kekuhaupi`o to become Kamehameha T's teacher and guardian, which "brought about the firm bond of affection between"the two(Desha 2000:31). In He Moolelo Kaao no Kuhaupio Ke Koa Kaulana o ke Au o Kamehameha Ka Nui, Desha recounts a battle that took place in Hakalau between Kalani`opu`u's armed forces (including Kamehameha I and Kekuhaupi`o) and those of Kahekili, the ali`i `ai moku of Maui. Although the exact year of the battle is not known, Desha's account indicates that the battle in Hakalau took place sometime after the arrival of Captain James Cook on Hawai`i Island in 1779 and before Kalani`opu`u's death in 1782. Kahekili's warriors, under the command of Kahahawai, were in the Hilo Paliku region because Keawemauhili, the all'i 'ai kalana (district chief) of Hilo, permitted Kahekili to send some of his people to Hakalau to craft a canoe. Kahahawai was a famed warrior of Maui and an aikane (favorite friend, companion) of Kahekili. When Kamehameha 1 and Kekuhaupi`o arrived by canoe in Hakalau, they were greeted by the chiefess Keakealani of Hilo,princess Liko`a, and princess Kahipa, daughter of Kanekoa, the ali`i `ai kalana of Hamakua. In the original Hawaiian language texts, it states that Kahipa was living with female relatives in Hakalau in those days, and it is assumed that these relatives were Keakealani and Kahipa (Desha 1996:99). Keawemauhili was not present, as he was in Ka`u at this time. The following excerpt recounting the battle is from Frances N. Frazier's translation of He Moolelo Kaao no Kuhaupio Ke Koa Kaulana o ke Au o Kamehameha Ka Nui,published under the title Kamehameha and His Warrior Kekuhaupi o (2000). In the mo`olelo, mention is made of the Hunalele army gathering stones where the Hakalau stream meets the sea. This brief note on the gathering of this resource for warfare is underlined in the excerpt below: Kahahawai had stationed a spy at Hakalau to watch the activities of the Hawaii people. On that day that Kamehameha landed there the spy ran quickly to Kahahawai in the upland forest to tell him that Kamehameha and Kekuhaupi`o were at Hakalau. When Kahahawai heard this news from his spy he became very angry because at some battles on Maui Kamehameha and Kekuhaupi`o had thwarted him. The landing by Kamehameha and his group at Hakalau caused suspicion that he 30 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background had come to spy on Kahahawai's activities in Hilo, or perhaps to waylay him in the Hilo forests. Therefore,Kahahawai quickly prepared to make a secret attack on Kamehameha. While Kamehameha and his men were idling pleasurably at Hakalau, feasting on the delicacies prepared by the chiefesses,he received secret information about the Maui people saying that they were planning to attack him and his people. As the most favorite occupation of this Pai`ea Kamehameha was warfare,he rejoiced in this news. He secretly called Kekuhaupi`o and some of his officers and disclosed the news which had been told to him. They began to discuss the means of meeting the enemy who were thinking of a night assault on them. Quick preparations were made to meet the enemy, and the army called Hunalele was readied. These were people very accomplished with slingstones, led by Kalawa the famous warrior of Halawa at North Kohala. They were quickly sent to the stream, where it emerged at the sea, to gather hard stones to let fly when they met the enemy. At this time also the Hueloku were readied. They were very skillful at hurling spears and at seizing them and they were led by Puniawa, a famous warrior of Makahanaloa, close to Hakalau. He was a daring man accomplished in warfare. Kamehameha ordered the warriors of this division to follow quickly after the Hunalele after they had thrown their hard basaltic stones which made a cracking sound when they struck. When Kamehameha's Hunalele warriors had prepared their slingstones they proceeded to the place where they would meet the Maui warriors led by that pa'ele ku [black,referring to tattooing] warrior of the Bays of Pi`ilani. The Maui warriors were sure that Kamehameha was not aware of their secret attack and they came down thinking that Kamehameha was taking his ease. However they met with something undreamed of:the hot stones of Kaueleau[unyielding forces]. When those Maui warriors emerged from the `ama`uma`u ferns they were startled to meet the Hawai`i warriors. The stones from the slings of the Hunalele struck some of them, so that their bodies were left in the foreign land. However, Kaihe quickly called to his warriors and led them fearlessly to meet Kamehameha's Hunalele army, who, not having spears in their hands, were unable to fight with those Maui people. At this time the warriors of the Hueloku, led by Puniawa, the famous warrior of Makahanaloa, met the Maui people face to face and a very strong battle between the two sides began. Kamehameha's army was very skilled at hurling spears and in warding off or seizing the spears of their enemy. They fought like hyenas, uttering their battle calls, and trampled the Maui people who had become victims of Kamehameha's Hunalele warriors. The Maui people displayed their fearlessness and great cleverness as they were very skilled in that type of battle, learned from numerous encounters. This "black man" of Kahekili was incomparably skilled with his spear and was overwhelming Kamehameha's warriors, as well as warding off with great skill the thrusts of his opponents,so that his followers were encouraged by his bravely. Kamehameha's searching eye noted the forward movement of that Maui warrior,who was causing death to his warriors of the Hueloku.He greatly desired to meet this famous man in person,but his way was barred by the war instructor of his youth,the one of whom this story is told. E Kalani e,perhaps you should not cause pain to the skin with that Maui warrior of low status—you do not lack for people on your side who have equal status with him. Therefore abide, and one of us shall place the punishment of death upon him. They shall not at all triumph on this day. They did wrong by attacking first and attempting to assault you, 0 heavenly one. Therefore leave it to us to punish this warrior who intruded wrongly. As Kamehameha's intention was blocked by these words of Kekuhaupi`o, he turned and began to slay some others of the Maui people, leaving Kaihe for his instructor to fight. It was said that this battle in the vicinity of Hakalau showed the strength of Kamehameha, which so terrified the Maui people,that they fell back,behind that"black"Kaihe. Now Kekuhaupi`o moved toward this man who was killing Kamehameha's warriors, and when they met face to face they eyed each other fearlessly in preparation for their fight. There was a little pause in the fighting between some of the warriors in order to watch the fight between these famous warriors. (In a certain previously published history of Kamehameha it was said that it was another lesser chief who killed Kaihe, the famous "black" of Kahekili, and that his name was Ho`ohi`olo`olo, the son of Ho`onohoka`ie`ie CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 31 2.Background and her husband Kaukahiakua.However,the genuine truth was that Kekuhaupi`o was the opponent of that"black"Kaihe of Maui. This was verified by Kekuhaupi`o when he told the story to some of his family at Napo`opo`o. Perhaps that is the truth, for the most famous warrior on Kamehameha's side was this man of Ke`ei o lalo Lilo). This"black"man of Kahekili was extremely proficient in whirling the spear,as described previously, and he had engaged victoriously in numerous battles. His opponent, who stood forth at this time, is known to us, 0 readers, for his proficiency, as a lesser chief instructed in the various martial arts of ancient Hawai`i. His companions regarded him with pride, knowing that this "black"man of Kahekili would be unable to slap his head (ke pa`i i kona po'o). Kekuhaupi`o well understood the status of his opponent, and prepared himself accordingly. They immediately began telling of their sons (A ho`oinaka koke ihola no ka ho`ike 'ana o lana i/la keiki kerne o lana).It is true that Kahekili's warrior was extremely well prepared and if Kahekili had been present on this battlefield he would have been stirred by the appearance of his favorite warrior. The eyes of Kamehameha and those of his battle companions were upon his instructor, because if he fell under the spear of Kahekili's warrior then his ali`i would be shamed, as well as his battle companions, and the Maui people would stand boasting. Kekuhaupi`o gathered together all his skill, and both opponents well understood that death was the goal. They maneuvered to gain the best situation from which to hurl their spears, each attempting to find the other's weakness. For a short time they did this, then Kaihe was seen to whirl his spear, hurling it strongly at Kekuhaupi`o thinking perhaps that Kekuhaupi`o was unprepared. As the spear left the hand of Kaihe it was warded off by the spear in Kekuhaupi`o's hand, so that it fell uselessly. That first thrust by Kaihe was immediately followed by Kekuhaupi`o's spear hurled with great strength;however,it was dodged effortlessly and passed without harming that Maui warrior. It was the custom in this type of fighting to have two spears in hand, the first to hurl at the enemy, the second to ward off the enemy's weapon. When those two spears of those opponents missed equally, the persons close by this fight hastened to furnish each of them with another spear.Again they prepared to fight. Kaihe was seen whirling his spear like a windmill, and while he was doing this Kekuhaupi`o observed the movement of his feet to understand his next action. Another reason for Kekuhaupi`o's staring at Kaihe's feet was his thought of attempting to deceive Kaihe by making him think that he was going to thrust below the navel so that perhaps he would attempt to defend below, giving Kekuhaupi`o the opportunity to aim his spear above the navel. While Kekuhaupi`o was staring at the movement of Kaihe's feet, Kaihe hurled his spear, and Kekuhaupi`o alertly seized it and hurled it back at his opponent. Kekuhaupi`o had thought this movement of Kaihe would weaken his defensive stance, but with great alertness Kaihe warded off the spear and it struck quivering in the forest. The din of battle was stilled on both sides and all eyes focused on these two daring ones of the battlefield. When the spear hurled by Kekuhaupi`o had missed, the opponents again took up their stance, eyeing each other with fiery eyes, seeking any weakness, as well as a good opportunity to use their spears. We, 0 readers, are able to understand that Kekuhaupi`o's eyes were accustomed to assessing the conditions in a battle, for he had been the instructor of not only Kamehameha, but of some of the warriors under Kamehameha. His opponent,Kaihe,was also accustomed to the battlefield, although he had not been an instructor and did not have the experience of assessing the students of warfare. However this did not lessen his preparedness as he had gained experience on many battlefields. While these two were resuming their stance the multitudes were unable to make a choice as to who was the more proficient, but soon we shall see, 0 reader of this story of the famous warrior of the era when the nation was conquered by that person later distinguished by the title Napoleon of the Pacific. 32 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background While these warriors were preparing themselves, Kekuhaupi`o noted that his opponent was preparing to leap, and he perceived the means by which to deceive him. It was the custom of this famous "black" warrior to leap here and there. While they were staring, one at the other, Kekuhaupi`o deceived his opponent by making a feint to the right of Kaihe, who believed that his opponent was hurling at his right side, and he leaped to the left, at which moment Kekuhaupi`o hurled his spear straight to Kaihe's belly,before he was able to leap again to the right. He received a direct thrust of the spear from the famous warrior of Ke`ei o lalo lilo, and he fell, with his feet fluttering, as the spear had pierced him through to his back. When the Maui warriors witnessed the death of their leader, fear of the Hawai`i people overcame them and they began to run from the battlefield, pursued by the Hawai`i warriors. The shouts of Kamehameha's men were heard as they pursued Kahekili's warriors. The words of encouragement from Kahahawai were not heeded by the Maui people,and he ran with his people,without seeking to fight with Kamehameha's men.He was one of those whom Kekuhaupi`o had greatly desired to meet on that day, but his wish was unfulfilled. After the Maui people had fled into the forest of the Hilo districts,Kamehameha's people returned, and he conferred with his chiefs, also discussing what should be communicated to his uncle,Kalani`opu`u. At this same time when Kamehameha was fighting at Hakalau with the Maui people,Kalani`opu`u had arrived at North Kohala,desiring to see his keiki Kamehameha and to discuss with him the preparations to make war again on Kahekili. When, however, he arrived at Kohala he learned that Kamehameha was at Hilo. Kamehameha learned that his chiefly makua[uncle] was at Kohala with his retinue,and a swift messenger was sent to report to Kalani`opu`u concerning Kamehameha's fight with the Maui people and that Kahahawai and his people had been put to flight. On the arrival of the swift messenger before Kalani`opu`u and his retinue at Kohala, this news was much discussed by the high chiefs who supported Kalani`opu`u. The foremost, however, of the chiefs who spoke without reservation was Keawemauhili, the chief of Hilo,and the main subject of his conversation concerned Kamehameha's actions. He was the chief who had spoken these portentous words at the time of the birth of Kamehameha at Kokoiki, North Kohala: "Pinch off the tip of the young mulberry shoot." Because of these words by this high chief of Hilo, Kamehameha had been secretly taken by Naihe [Nae`ole] and reared in seclusion during the young days of Kamehameha's life. On hearing of Kamehameha's victory in this battle with the Maui people, Chief Keawemauhili sighed, and he said: "This is perhaps the bravery which shall achieve the conquest of the islands. Woe to us, his hulu nu7kua [esteemed elders], perhaps he will revenge himself upon us." It is truly said that this young chief of Kohala was feared by the chiefs,who realized the arrival of a chief who would"slap them on their heads"in the time to come. (Desha 2000:67-71) Whereas the mo`olelo summarized above make explicit reference to the lands of Hakalau, the following accounts are a selection of mo`olelo that speaks to different coastal areas of the broader Hilo Paliku region. The Story of Kuahailo and Hinaaukekele He Moolelo Kaao no Kuahailo a me Hinaaukekele, Kana Kaikamahine Hanauna (An account for Kuahailo and Hiaaukekele,his female relative)is a story that tells of the establishment of the highest-ranking genealogical lines of Hawaii. Published as a weekly serial in the Hilo-based Hawaiian language newspaper Ka Hoku o Hawai`i from July 18, 1918, to March 13, 1919, the mo olelo follows Kuahailo and Hinaaukekele along their journey from their ancestral home of Kuaihelani to the various islands of Hawai`i. The following translated summary was prepared by ASM staff,Halena Kapuni-Reynolds. The segment of the mo`olelo in Hilo Paliku takes place midway through the narrative and were published in installments published on January 30,February 6, 13, and 27, 1919 (Ka Hoku 0 Hawaii 1919). At this point in the mo`olelo, Hinaaukekele and her husband, Kahikikuaokalani, resided in the valley of Waipi`o. Their journey to Hilo Paliku began with a dialogue between Hinaaukekele and Kahikikuaokalani, where she expressed her desire to visit her grandmother, Hailikulamanu, and other relatives who lived in the `okana of Hilo Hanakahi. Kahikikuaokalani CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 33 2.Background agreed with Hinaaukekele to visit their relatives. They made their way to Hilo Hanakahi atop a traveling `ohi`a tree filled with lehua blossoms. According to the mo`olelo, the tree grew out of Hinaaukekele's `iewe (placenta, afterbirth)that her mother,Hinauluohia,planted near their home in Paliuli. As the couple traveled to Hilo Hanakahi, Kahikikuaokalani heard the yelling and cheering of many people coming from the valley of Laupahoehoe. He asked Hinaaukekele to instruct her traveling `ohi`a tree to stop where all the commotion was coming from. In his curiosity, Kahikikuaokalani searched out the source of the cheering. He discovered that the noise was of bystanders who were cheering on two exceptionally skilled surfers, one from Hilo One and one from Hilo Paliku, who were competing against each other. The waves at Laupahoehoe were well known across Hawai`i Island and were the same waves that were favored by the famed ali`i, 'Umi,generations later. When Hinaaukekele and Kahikikuaokalani arrived,the people of Laupahoehoe shifted their attention away from the surfers and rushed towards the beautiful travelers atop the moving `ohi`a tree. What made these travelers even more extraordinary was the fact that they were accompanied by numerous forest-dwelling birds and four low-lying rainbows. When Hinaaukekele inquired about the commotion, some spectators responded that they were celebrating the fact that their surfer, a Hilo Paliku man by the name of Kekuaiwa, beat Kenao, the surfer from Hilo One, and won forty kapa cloths and a long canoe in the process. When Hinaaukekele asked how Kekuaiwa won, the people responded that it was because he was more skilled at surfing in the rough waters of Laupahoehoe as opposed to the calmer waters of Hilo One. Furthermore, Hinaaukekele inquired about the ruling chief of the area, in which the people of Laupahoehoe responded that there was no ruling chief who lived in the valley but that they were subjects of Kanakea, a chiefess who resided in Hilo. Kanakea knew of Hinaaukekele, as she was the one who was sent to retrieve Kahikikuaokalani from O`ahu. Hinaaukekele then proceeded to tell the people of Laupahoehoe to have the two surfers compete once more. The spectators enthusiastically followed these instructions and told the local konohiki (head man of an ahupua`a) what they heard from these distinguished travelers. In turn, the konohiki told the surfers to take to the waves again, and the surfers agreed without complaint. When Kekuaiwa and Kenao reached the wave break, both were intent on outdoing their competitor to become the champion of the waves. Kekuaiwa did not think twice about Kenao, for he surfed in the waters of Laupahoehoe since he was a child. As a wave neared, Kenao paddled to a spot where the waves were easier to ride. Kekuaiwa knew what Kenao was doing and prepared himself for the competition ahead. Onshore,most spectators believed that Kekuaiwa would win once more since he won the first time. Enthused by the energy of the crowd and surfers, Kahikikuaokalani proposed to Hinaaukekele that they pick who they believed would win the surf competition. When Kahikikuaokalani told Hinaaukekele that she could pick first, she laughed, teasing him by saying that he only wanted her to choose Kekuaiwa, the obvious choice since he won the first competition,because he could rebuke her for choosing the former winner.Kahikikuaokalani laughed at Hinaaukekele's remarks and told his beloved that he was letting her choose first as a gesture of honor and respect and that either of the surfers could win. When the couple looked down at the surfers who were poised to catch the next wave, Hinaaukele used her thoughts to secretly call her magical grandmother to let the surfer from Hilo One win the competition. When an excellent surfing wave neared,the two surfers caught it. They both rode splendidly. As they neared the shore, it was clear that the surfer from Hilo Paliku, Kekuaiwa, would win the competition. But as they neared the shore, Kekuaiwa saw a human hand emerge from the sea and snatched his board down into the depths. Kenao was thus the winner of the second round. The spectators ashore were shocked to the point of speechlessness due to the outcome of the surfing competition.They could not explain how Kekuaiwa lost to Kenao. So too was Kahikikuaokalani puzzled by this turn of events, as he had no way of knowing that it was Hailikulamanu, Hinaaukekele's grandmother, who intervened. When the surfers came back to land, Hinaaukekele instructed someone to tell the surfers to come to her and Kahikikuaokalani. Kenao happily obliged to this request,but Kekuaiwa was furious about his loss and did not want to see these visitors out of embarrassment. Kahikikuaokalani was still pondering the outcome of the competition. He realized in time that Hinaaukekele must have had something to do with Kenao's win, so he asked Hinaaukekele if he could leave and find Kekuaiwa, which she allowed him to do so. When he found Kekuaiwa, Kahikikuaokalani explained that it was because of Hinaaukekele's magical abilities that resulted in his loss during the surfing competition. Kekuaiwa then described how a human hand grabbed his board and pulled him down. In response, Kahikikuaokalani explained to Kekuaiwa that he had nothing to be ashamed of because it was his decision to bet against Hinaaukekele that resulted in his 34 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background (Kekuaiwa's)loss.Kahikikuaokalani continued by describing how Hinaaukekele used her thoughts to call out to her grandmother to assist Kenao in winning the competition. When Kahikikuaokalani returned to Hinaaukekele, she laughed because she knew that her secret was exposed. She turned to Kenao and asked him if he wanted to accompany them to Hilo One, in which he humbly declined due to their superior rank. From there Hinaaukekele and Kahikikuaokalani continued on their journey through Hilo Paliku until they reached Hilo One. Pau Kuhihewa Ia Hilo Paliku-Completely Mistakened by Hilo Paliku One of the sayings for the Hilo Paliku region of Hilo is "pau kuhihewa is Hilo Paliku," which translates to "Hilo Paliku is completely mistaken." In historical sources, authors used this saying as an expression of disdain for someone who lies and does not keep promises. In August of 1900, an author under the penname "Hawaii Oiaio" published an article that explains the origins and usage of"pau kuhihewa is Hilo Paliku." In the article titled "Pau Ole Kuhihewa Ia Hilo Paliku," Hawaii Oiaio addresses it to members of the Aloha `Aina political party, including Joseph Nawahi, William White, John Richardson, Thomas Clark, Reverend John Kalana Hihio, J. Nazareka, David Kalauokalani, James Kaulia, Robert Wilcox, and William Auld, which he chastises for their pro-Kingdom politics. Although the excerpt that is included below focuses on the story of the Hilo Paliku saying, the overall message of the article encourages readers to pursue leadership positions within the newly formed government of the Territory of Hawai`i. A transcription of the original article along with a translation provided by ASM staff, Halena Kapuni- Reynolds is provided below: O ka huaolelo a hopunaolelo maluna ae e The saying and sentence located above, "Hilo kau ae la, "Pau kuhihewa ia Hilo Paliku," Paliku is mistaken completely," it is a he huaolelo kaulana loa keia mai ka wa legendary saying from the ancient times of our kahiko loa mai o ko kakou aina, mawaena land, that arose between two friends, who o na ho loh [sic] elua, e lilo i mau became best friends, and later became halekipa, a i mau aikane "Punakeonaona, companions. "Punakeonaona, indeed if the ina no Maui, Oahu, Kauai ke kanaka i person from Maui, Oahu, and Kauai hoaikane me ko Hilo, a ina paha ma Maui befriended Hilo's [person], and if on Maui is kahi i fauna ai, alaila, ua mopopo[sic]no i where they enjoy each other's company, and ke kanaka o Hilo ka makemake o ka then, the person in Hilo would know that their hoaloha o Maui he waa alaila,pane aku la Maui friend is in need of a canoe,and then,the lee kanaka o Hilo, he wahi waa no ko`u Hilo people responds,I definitely have a canoe makemake no ia, e lawe koke mai hoi ha that was painted black, I will leave and then oe, ae, ua pono. return, and then, the person from Maui Oi kali aku ke kanaka o Maui a, a hala ae responded,that is what I who desired it,please ana he anahulu, a hula aku ana ua bring it quickly,indeed,it is needed. Whilst the person from Maui waited, a month anahulu, pau ka palena o ka pono, o kau nae kai puhi aku la ia iala, a hoka iho la ke passed, and another month passed, he reached kanaka o Maui. Pane iho la ke kanaka o his limit and became furious and disappointed. Maui, he lohe akahi no a ike maka, nolaila, The person from Maui told the person from ua ailolo na kanaka o Maui, Oahu, Hilo, I heard you but I have yet to see it with Molokai, Lanai, Kuai i ko Hilo Poe i ka my own eye, therefore, the people of Maui, Oahu, and Lanai were scorned. Hilo's people, hoopunipuni, pili nae keia i ka poe kalaiwaa. (Oiaio 1900:6) in particular the canoe carvers,trade in lies. Although the saying does not see people from Hilo Paliku as favorable or honest, it speaks of the region's long history of interisland exchange and communication. E Alu Ka Pule Id Hakalau—Concetrate Your Prayers on Hakalau E alu ka pule id Hakalau is another famed `olelo no`eau that is used as a rallying call for collective concentration and unity toward completing a project or goal. Pukui (1983:15) translates the saying as "Concentrate your prayers on Hakalau"and shares the following anecdote regarding the origins of this wise saying: A sorcerer at Hakalau once created havoc in his own and other neighborhoods. Many attempts to counter-pray him failed until a visiting kahuna suggested that all the others band together to concentrate on the common enemy.This time they succeeded(Pukui 1983:15). CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 35 2.Background On November 6th, 1880, a more detailed narrative behind the Vela no'eau was published in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka Nupepa Ku`oko'a, edited at that time by Samuel Kaaikaula and Hezekia Aea.Kaaikaula and Aea were responding to an announcement that was shared in the newspapers Ko Hawaii Pae Aina and Ka Elele Poakolu (the announcement was not found at this time) asking for commoners to gather on November 16'and to "concentrate their prayers in Hakalau,"perhaps in connection to festivities associated with King David Kalakaua's birthday, which also fell on that day. Given the use of this saying, Kaaikaula and Aea sought out the source of this `olelo no`eau from older Hawaiians who said that it is derived from a story about a chief who practiced `and`and (sorcery) in Hakalau. Although Kaaikaula and Aea published the account to discourage further use of the `olelo no`eau, this article presents one of the few written sources explaining the story behind this `olelo no`eau and its connection to Hakalau. In the story, mention is made of Pd'ele, a chief of Hakalau; Pakilohala, a chief from Hamakua that practiced `and`ana; a narrow cliffside trail that descended to the Hakalau shoreline; and a large boulder along the trail where Pakilohala would snatch his victims. The following narrative is a translation of the original Hawaiian language source prepared by ASM staff,Halena Kapuni-Reynolds: Today's newspaper readers are probably not unaware of an opinion that was published in Ka Paeaina (Ko Hawaii Paeaina) and Ka Elele Poakolu, calling for all commoners to gather on the 16"of this month and to concentrate your prayers on Hakalau. Due to the confusing nature of that demand,we asked a few old folks,what kind of saying is"concentrate your prayers on Hakalau?" A single answer was given by this and that person and it is this: "It is an 'and'and(sorcery)prayer of the ancient past."Here is its explanation. In the ancient past, when the [Hawaiian] race lived in pagan times, 'Vele was a chief of Hakalau in Hilo, Hawai`i. Another Hamakua chief by the name of Puakilohala went to live in Hakalau. This chief(Puakilohala)practiced 'and'and on Hakalau's people,with many of them being killed. It was on the narrow trail ascending Hakalau valley that a huge boulder blocked the cliffside pathway. On the far edge next to the rock is where fishermen came back up onto the land. When the fishermen returned with an Akua (deity, god) to that rock, when they were carefully making their way back on the side where the white of the Akua joined the rock, that is where the chief Puakilohala snatched people and practiced `and`and on them. When Pa`ele sought out the reason regarding the death of his peoples, he instructed all of the po`e pule `and`and (people who knew 'and'and prayers) of Hakalau to pray for Puakilohala's death. That is where these words were spoken: "concentrate your prayers on Hakalau." It is Kuokoa's (the newspapers) opinion, that we should abandon practices like this and not mix them with the religious practices of enlightened times. It is appropriate for storytelling and pleasant pastimes, however, it is not suitable for convincing others. It is inappropriate to combine the old and the new. (Kaaikaula and Aea 1880) As the mo`olelo recounted above reveal,Hakalau and Kama`e`e's stories are interwoven with the larger story of the Hilo Paliku region.In the story of Hi`iakaikapoliopele,we learn of the fame lehua grove of Malaeakini that once grew in Hakalau.What stands out in the mo`olelo of Hua,Ka-Miki,and Kamehameha I are the numerous battles and athletic feats that took place in Hakalau and neighboring lands. The stories behind two famed wise sayings,pau kuhihewa is Hilo Paliku and e alu ka pule id Hakalau, offer further context regarding the origins and place- specificity of `olelo no`eau. From these stories, we learn of some of the area's cultural practices and resources including surfing, canoe building, gathering of sling stones, trails, among others. Building on these traditional accounts, the next section traces descriptions of Hakalau and Kama`e`e in the 19th century, with emphasis on transformations of the physical landscape and traditional land tenure system. Hakalau and Kama`e`e During the Early to Late 19th Century Some of the earliest written descriptions of Hilo Paliku come from the accounts of the first Protestant Missionaries to visit the island. Early Historic visitors to the region noted the beauty, fertility, and ruggedness of this part of the island.In 1823,the Reverend William Ellis(Ellis 1825),a member of the London Missionary Society and one of the first Christian missionaries to arrive in Hawai`i,passed along the South Hilo coast during his tour of Hawai`i Island. Having been warned against walking due to the ruggedness of the terrain, he sailed from Hilo to Laupahoehoe in a canoe, passing by Hakalau and Kama`e`e along the way. In his account, he provides the following description of Hilo Paliku, with reference to its verdant landscape, numerous waterways, and limited landing points along the coast: 36 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background The face of the country by which we sailed, was fertile and beautiful, and the population throughout considerable. The numerous plantations on the tops or sides of the deep ravines, or vallies, by which they were frequently interspersed, with the meandering streams running down them into the sea, presented altogether a most agreeable prospect. The coast was bold, and the rocks evidently volcanic. We frequently saw the water gushing out of the hollows in the face of the rocks,or running in various cascades from the top to the bottom. After sailing very pleasantly for several hours, we approached Laupahoehoe. Although we had come upwards of twenty miles, and had passed not less than fifty ravines, or vallies, we had not seen a spot where we thought it would be possible to approach the shore, as the surf was beating violently, and the wind blowing directly towards the land. However, when we got within a few yards of the surf, we perceived an opening in the rocks, just wide enough to admit our canoe. (Ellis 1825:192) Later in his trip, Ellis made his way to Ka`ula(spelled Kaura in his account), a gulch on the boundary of Hilo and Hamakua and reflected on the country of Hilo: Hiro, which we had now left, though not so extensive and populous as Kona, is the most fertile and interesting division on the island. The coast from Waiakea to this place [Ka`ula] is bold and steep, and intersected by numerous valleys or ravines;many of these are apparently formed by the streams from the mountains,which flow through them into the sea. The rocks along the coast are volcanic, generally a brown vesicular lava. In the sides and bottoms of some of the ravines, they were occasionally of very hard compact lava,or a kind of basalt. This part of the island, from the district of Waiakea to the northern point, appears to have remained many years undisturbed by volcanic eruptions. The habitations of the native generally appear in clusters at the opening of the valleys,or scattered over the face of the high land. The soil is fertile,and herbage abundant. The lofty Mouna-Kea [Mauna Kea], rising about the center of this division, forms a conspicuous object in every view that can be taken of it. The base of the mountain on this side is covered with woods,which occasionally extend within five or six miles of the shore(Ellis 1917:263). Overland travel across the central and northern Hilo District remained difficult throughout the first part of the 19th-century due to its rugged coastline and deep gulches. Transportation difficulties may have even temporarily delayed large-scale commercial exploitation of the kula lands in the vicinity of the study area(Desilets et al. 2004). Initial commercial exploitation of these lands was limited to small scale agriculture in areas with coastal access for shipping and receiving goods. The Reverend Titus Coan,who settled at the Hilo Mission Station in 1835,wrote that: For many years after our arrival there were no roads,no bridges,and no horses in Hilo,and all my tours were made on foot...The path was a simple trail, winding in a serpentine line, going down and up precipices, some of which could only be descended by grasping the shrubs and grasses,and with no little weariness and difficulty and some danger. (Coan 1882:31-32) In 1846, Chester S. Lyman, arrived in Honolulu and later made a visit to Hilo where he stayed with Reverend Titus Coan. Stopping at Hakalau on June 18th of that same year,Lyman wrote the following: Two miles further on we halted at 61/2 for the night at a place called Hakalau. Our host is headman of the vicinity. We found here greater marks of civilization than in the other native houses we had occupied. A glass lamp with oil I saw for the first time, the substitute at other places being strings of the Tutui or Candle-nut. The native who lighted the lamp pulled up the wicks an inch or more so as to make a torch, this being I am told their universal practice, until by hard drilling they are taught to do otherwise. Frid. 19th June.Hired a guide, &started with Mr Lyman&his son Frederic at 71/2 to visit the Falls of Akaka about 4 miles S or SW of Hakalau. (Lyman 1924:80) Mahele `Apra of 1848 The mid-19th century brought with it great changes, especially as it relates to the alteration of the traditional Hawaiian land tenure system. During the 1830s and 1840s, the Hawaiian Kingdom was an established center of commerce and trade in the Pacific, recognized internationally as a sovereign nation by the United States and other nations in the Pacific and Europe (Sai 2011). As Hawaiian political elites sought ways to modernize the burgeoning CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 37 2.Background kingdom, and as more Westerns settled in the Hawaiian Islands, major socioeconomic and political changes took place,including the formal adoption of a Hawaiian constitution by 1840,the change in governance from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy, and the shift towards a Euro-American model of private land ownership. The change in land governance was partially informed by ex-missionaries and Euro-American businessmen in the islands who were generally hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands that could be revoked from them at any time. Convinced that the feudal system of land tenure previously practiced was not compatible with a constitutional government, the reigning MO 7(King) Kauikeaouli and his high-ranking chiefs decided to separate and define the ownership of all lands in the Kingdom (King n.d.). The change in land tenure was further endorsed by missionaries and Western businessmen in the islands who were generally hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands that could be revoked from them at any time. After much consideration, it was decided that three classes of people each had one-third vested rights to the lands of Hawai`i: the MO 7, the all i (chiefs) and konohiki (land agents), and the anaka`ainana (common people or native tenants) (Chinen 1958). In 1845 the legislature created the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles (more commonly known as the Land Commission), first to adopt guiding principles and procedures for dividing the lands and granting land titles, and then to act as a court of record to investigate and ultimately award or reject all claims brought before them. All land claims, whether by chiefs for entire ahupua'a or by tenants for their house lots and gardens,had to be filed with the Land Commission within two years of the effective date of the Act (February 14th, 1848) to be considered. This deadline was extended several times for the ali`i and konohiki,but not for commoners(Alexander 1920; Soehren 2005). The MO 7 and some 245 all`i (Kuykendall 1938) spent nearly two years trying unsuccessfully to divide all the lands of Hawai`i amongst themselves before the whole matter was referred to the Privy Council on December 18, 1847 (King n.d.). Once the MO 7 and his all i accepted the principles of the Privy Council, the Mahele Aina (Land Division) was completed in just forty days (on March 7th, 1848), and the names of all of the ahupua'a and `ill kupono (nearly independent ili land division within an ahupua'a) of the Hawaiian Islands and the chiefs who claimed them, were recorded in the Buke Mahele (also known as the Mahele Book) (Buke Mahele 1848; Soehren 2005). As this process unfolded the Mo 7, who received roughly one-third of the lands of Hawaii, realized the importance of setting aside public lands that could be sold to raise money for the government and also purchased by his subjects to live on. Accordingly, the day after the division when the last chief was recorded in the Buke Mahele, the King commuted about two-thirds of the lands awarded to him to the government(King n.d.). Unlike the King, the ali`i and konohiki were required to present their claims to the Land Commission to receive their Land Commission Award (LCAw). The chiefs who participated in the Mahele were also required to provide commutations of a portion of their lands to the government to receive a Royal Patent that gave them title to their remaining lands. The lands surrendered to the government by the MO 7 and ali`i became known as "Government Land," while the lands that were personally retained by the Moa became known as "Crown Land," and the lands received by the ali i became known as "Konohiki Land" (Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). Most importantly, all lands (Crown, Government, and Konohiki lands) identified and claimed during the Mahele were "subject to the rights of the native tenants" therein (Garovoy 2005:524). Finally, all lands awarded during the Mahele were identified by name only, with the understanding that the ancient boundaries would prevail until the land could be formally surveyed. This process expedited the work of the Land Commission. Disposition of Hakalau Nui and Kama`e`e As a result of the Mahele, the entirety of Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a was claimed by the high chiefess Miriam Kekau'Onohi, who was subsequently awarded these lands as parcel forty-two of LCAw 11216 (Royal Patent Grant No. 7541). Hakalau Nui was one of eight ahupua'a in Hilo that was awarded to the chiefess. (Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). Kekau`onohi was the granddaughter of Kamehameha I and at the time of the Mahele was the second largest landholder after the Mo 7 Kauikeaouli. When Kekau`onohi died in 1851, her land went to her second husband,Levi Ha'alelea(Kame`eleihiwa 1992). Based on a review of the Buke Mahele (1848), it appears as though Kama`E`E was divided into three,possibly four sections, with three different ali i laying claim to each, namely Eseta Kipa, Kalaimoku, Kaaiawaawa, and Kaunuohua. Despite their claims, they each had likely relinquished their interest as Kama`E`E, in its entirety, was transferred and incorporated into the inventory of Government Lands. The Kuleana Act of 1850 As the King and his ali`i and konohiki made claims to large tracts of land via the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the native tenants. To resolve this matter, on August 6th, 1850, the Kuleana Act (also 38 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background known as the Enabling Act) was passed, clarifying the process by which native tenants could claim fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved (Garovoy 2005). The Kuleana Act also clarified access to kuleana parcels, which were typically landlocked, and addressed gathering rights within an ahupua'a. Lands awarded through the Kuleana Act were and still are,referred to as kuleana awards or kuleana lands. The Land Commission oversaw the program and administered the kuleana as Land Commission Awards (LCA) (Chinen 1958).Native tenants wishing to claim their lands were required to register in writing those lands with the Land Commission,who assigned a number to each claim, and that number(the Native Register)was used to track the claimant through the entire land claims process. The native tenants registering their kuleana were then required to have at least two individuals (typically neighbors) provide testimony to confirm their claim to the land. Those testimonies given in Hawaiian became known as the Native Testimony, and those given in English became known as the Foreign Testimony. Upon provision of the required information, the Land Commission rendered its decision, and if successful, the tenant was issued the LCA. Finally, to relinquish any government interest in the property, the holder of a LCA obtained a Royal Patent Grant from the Minister of the Interior upon payment of the commutation fee. No records indicating a claim or award of kuleana lands were found for both Hakalau Nui or Kama`e`e. In October of 1853, H.M. Lyman working as a government surveyor completed his survey of the kula portion Hakakau Nui which he calculated the land area to include some 9,357 acres.A review of Lyman's survey notes does not provide any specific information for the coastal portion of Hakalau Nui, in which the project area is situated, howerver, his map indicated that Hakalau Nui is bound on the south by Hakalau Iki (near the coast) and Makahanaloa(in the uplands), on the west by Humu'ula, and north by Piha (in the uplands) and Kama.`e`e(near the coast).A copy of Lyman's map,Hawaii Registered Map No.20 is included below as Figure 19. A transcription and translation of Lyon's surveyor notes is provided below by ASM staff, Lokelani Brandt. Lyons's notes reads: Hakalau nui Hakalau Nui Hilo—Hawaii Hilo—Hawaii E hoomaka ana keia ma kahakai ma This survey commences at the kahi ahupohaku maloko o ke awawa seashore at the stone pile within the kahawai e moku ana keia aina me stream gulch separating this land and Hakalauiki, a e holo ana iuka ma ia Hakalauiki, and running upland to a awawa kahawai, a hiki ma kekahi dried `ohi`a tree standing at the river kumu ohia maloo e ku ana ma just outside of the forest; then running kahawai mawaho o ka ulu laau; a into the forest South 58° 28' West laila e holo ana maloko o ka ulu laau 541.30 chains to the boundary of Hem. 58°28'Konz. 541.30 kaul. a hiki Makahanaloa at a waterfall in the great i ka palena o Makahanaloa ma kekahi river of Kolikoli [Kolekole]; then at wailele ma kahawai nui o Kolikoli; a the boundary of Makahanaloa South laila ma ia palena o Makahanaloa 67 3/4 West 361.00 chains to the large Hem. 67 3/4 Kom. 361.00 kaul. a hiki stone pile at Puakala at the boundary ma ke ahupohaku nui ma ka Puakala, of Humu'ula; then at that boundary ma ka palena o Humuula; a laila ma North 3° West 117.00 chains to the is palena Ak. 3°Kom. 117.00 kaul. a large stone pile at the river Waioheu, hiki ma kahi ahu pohaku nui ma that is the river of Hakalau Nui, then kahawai o Waioheu, oia ke kahawai o running from that river to the Hakalau nui a laila e holo ana ma ia seashore; then running at the shore kahawai a hiki ma kahakai; alaila e until the point of commencement. holo ana ma kahakai a hiki aku ma Containing 9,357 acres kahi i hoomaka i ai. Eka 9,357 m.a.l. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 39 2.Background Approximate project area location . 5 � \ ,:.,, pp /'a la 1 e ,..,2I 2._. (O 44,,99+n 44414,/- Opee sa a. ‘..t;2.. me, A.,../...4.,'..pa led als./0. aAt 214 a L•./Ca O .YC ?f.l aw�/Y�+a. JG4�61- l .4,441.1. C ,it 04. 4 M A. Z 1¢� a./ae a. .yya.c, .69 ,,e.?u/ A e .4,I 4_.a. <u.44, ma, aa._as✓a,1,1 A�:.`., ,.mai I I .e/f. Jf 7 4\k, II a«a" tE!•..../..,e .,r, ✓:+<: 2.Background information about geographical features, vegetation, and survey markers, but they generally do not say anything about improvements to the land or land use. No government land grants were awarded in Hakalau Nui, however, in the neighboring Kama`ee, nine grants were awarded which are listed below in Table 5, and eight of which are shown in Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1092 by Lyons and Wall from 1882 (Figure 20). That grant (Grant No. 1350) to loela (not shown in Lyon and Wall's 1882 map) is,however, depicted in a Hawai`i Registered Map No. 2728 prepared in 1925 by E.W. Hockley and C. L. Murray (Figure 21). Hockley and Murray's 1882 map show portions of the project area extending into two land grants; Grant No. 1350 to Ioela which is located along the Kama`e`e side of Hakalau Stream, and Grant 1057 to Manuhoa et al. In summary, the awarded land grants included a total of 369.23 acres that extended from the coast to about the 700-feet elevation or roughly 1.6 miles inland of the coast with one grant situated on the north side of Hakalau Stream and the remaining eight grants all situated on the Kama`e`e plateau. Except for the grant awarded in 1854 to Ioela,the remaining grants were awarded in 1852 and ranged in size from 4.12 acres up to 131 acres (see Table 5). A review of the survey notes for each of the grants identified several plants species including niu (coconut), "puuhala" likely a variant spelling of puhala (pandanus), as well as alani (orange) and laila (Pride of China; Koelreuteria sp.). The survey notes also identified several built features including an alanui (road) and the kahua hale kula (school house foundation), the locations of which are shown in Lyon and Wall's 1882 map (see Figure 20). Table 5. Government Land Grant in Kama` `e. Grant No. Grantee Year Acres Notes from Boundary Survey 909 Kapueuhi 1852 16.0 Vegetation noted included niu and puuhala 910 Manuhoa 1852 23.23 Vegetation noted included niu,puuhala, alani as well as built features including an alanui and kahua hale kula. 911 Kahookaamoku 1852 4.75 n/a 912 Kawaikini 1852 19.87 Vegetation noted included 'alani,niu,and puuhala. 913 Lau 1852 31.0 Noted vegetation included niu and puuhala. 1056 Keawe 1852 22.20 Noted vegetation included niu. 1057 Manuhoa et al. 1852 131.0 Other grantees named for this property included Puhi, Aikane,Kalua,and Mahiki. 1058 Kekahiko 1852 117.12 Noted vegetation included niu,puuhala, alani,and Laila (Pride of China;Koelreuteria sp. )as well as built features including an alanui and kahua hale kula. 1350 Ioela 1854 4.12 n/a CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 41 2.Background cA 'i v ❑Project area ��� 4 y1 o O ,;.F Grant 913 to Lau -�--yam I y 1`� �-,> r?1 Grant 911 to Kahookaamoku . Q,,r5 S j.-'- Grant 909 to Kapueuhi 1 • z Grant 912 to Kawaikini tS ! s(a\C ' ?' ,,, i l Grant 910 to Manuhoa czae m� 9/0 J i _ �'i po, y Grant 1057 to Manuhoa et al. ,n�,� Grant 1056 to Keawe n t Can`t Jo C ��—.�w-o.ba'q ^--�� „-S- 6..e.."*,:'� ■Grant 1058 to Kekahiko "' ? Government Road' . i4 " --,.,7',„,„WKama e e School Lot Ga ,-taa t. , 94e • )-,n,�� �01 , to i i'yy ? }�w,vyr���^V,,i__ - i 4': .. .s ,fir. 4 ... I.. (-_ y •,, - VV, a Church -,� • Figure 20.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1092 by Lyons and Wall (1882)showing land grants in Kama' `e. 42 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama'e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background h 1q . !`, z ,°� N A wp 11 \\I x� ��'f- .. ,r / 1rf .,'^. +E -..fid.. t.,.. 911 d \ ,I ant 911 to , ,_,,,,,,j Chant 909 to KaP ueuhi `� L' Grant 912 to Kawaikini - 1�.(' i�_� gars' I����������I 6,e" ;� (' K :, Ii Grant 910 to Manuhoa r''' I Ir • Grant 1057 to Manuhoa et al. e�; O1 Grant 1056 to Keawe \JI Grant 1058 to Kekahiko I' (: Grant 1350 to loela �',, FFF ��'� Kama`e`e School Lot , . :--,-. ,.;,,:,:. , ,.,„ , A 'y�jl „4.,, 1' .....„.,:,..,„7„:4, ::.„',,.‘.,...,,' ,00: iw I \�r W iI - / \:` I 11• iI i'ff, a- _ (rel,' �`1 ' ` Q Project area sr Pi 1 Figure 21.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No.2728 by Hockley and Murray(1925)showing portions of the project area in Grant 1350 to Ioela(shaded purple)and Grant 1057 to Manuhoa et al. (shaded yellow). Boundary Commission Testimony(1875) In 1862, the Commission of Boundaries (Boundary Commission) was established in the Kingdom of Hawaii to legally set the boundaries of all the ahupua`a that had been awarded, by name only, as a part of the Mahele. Subsequently, in 1874, the Boundary Commission was authorized to certify the boundaries for lands brought before them. As a part of this process,the Boundary Commission gathered testimony from informants, who were typically older native residents who learned of the boundaries from their ancestors, relatives, or neighbors. The boundary information was collected primarily between 1873 and 1885 and was usually given in Hawaiian and simultaneously transcribed into English. Although hearings for most ahupua`a boundaries were brought before the Boundary Commission and later surveyed by Government employed surveyors, in some instances, the boundaries were established through a combination of other methods. In some cases, ahupua'a boundaries were established by conducting surveys on adjacent ahupua`a. Or in cases where the entire ahupua'a was divided and awarded as Land Commission Award(s) and or Government-issued Land Grants (both of which required formal surveys), the Boundary Commission relied on those surveys to establish the boundaries for that ahupua`a. Although these small- scale surveys aided in establishing the boundaries, they lack the detailed knowledge of the land that is found in the Boundary Commission hearings. Although no testimony was heard for Kama`e`e Ahupua`a, the Commission did hear testimony for Hakalau Nui. On February 11th, 1875,upon the application of W. L. Green, the Boundary Commission met at the courthouse in Hilo to hear testimony to help settle the boundaries of Hakalau Nui. The testimony for Hakalau Nui was quite extensive with five individuals, Kekualiilii, Kanehoalani, Lyman, Kapou, and Halaioo, testifying before the commission. Their testimonies which are cited in their entirety below has been annotated with the following; Hawaiian words are italicized, definitions of Hawaiian words added in brackets on their first mention; and cultural practice and resources are underlined: Kekualiilii k[kane;male] sworn, CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Karna`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 43 2.Background I live at Kamaee, Hilo. I was born there and have always lived there. I was born at the time Kamehameha II returned from Honolulu to Hawaii and remained on Hawaii. I know a part of the boundaries of Hakalau Nui that old people told me when I was young. Kamaee bounds Hakalau Nui on the Hamakua side of the valley. The muliwai [stream] belongs to Hakalau and the dry land on the Hamakua bank to Kamaee. Ancient fishing rights extending out to sea. Thence the boundary runs mauka [upland] along the Hamakua side of the stream to a place called Nakama a hill way mauka in the woods, where we can see the shore; there are branches from the Kamaee side,first one called Kawelo below the woods,thence the boundary follows up the main stream to where a large branch of the gulch called Wawaa comes in on the Hamakua side; the boundary follows up this branch, passing a branch from the Hamakua side called Wailimu and passing another branch from the Hamakua side called Kuamoohua,up the main gulch called Nakana. This is as far as I know the boundaries. Kamaee reaches to this place above this place the gulch is not so deep but is wide. I do not know where Kamaee ends; I have heard that Umauma cuts it off; I have always heard that Hakalau extends to the upper edge of woods. The main branch of Hakalau on the Hilo side in the middle of the land has a great deal of sand in it. The Wawaa branch has none.I do not know the boundaries on the Hilo side of Hakalau Nui adjoining Hakalau-Iki. Cxd The boundary is along the Hamakua branch of the stream in the valley. When we need to go fishing in the stream,Hakalau people used to take the fish away from us. Kanehoalani k sworn I was born at Kamaee and am a kamaaina(native-born,well acquainted). I was born at the time of Ualakaa; I know the land of Hakalau and the boundaries adjoining Kamaee. Fishing rights extending out to sea. The boundary between Hakalau and Kamaee at the shore is at a large flat rock in the water. The water in the stream belongs to Hakalau, and the dry land on the Hamakua side to Kamaee. Thence the boundary follows along the Hamakua side of the stream passing the stream from Kamaee to a high water fall, thence mauka to the junction of Wawaa, from the Hamakua side with Laniomaui, thence up Wawaa gulch to Nakama, a puu [hill] and old kauhale 'settlement] in koa, thence mauka a short distance to where Wawaa gulch [illegible] and on to a pali [cliff] called Kaoku, and below this pali the kahawai [stream] becomes only an awaawa [gulch]. Here the Waiau gulch comes in on the Hamakua side called Waiau. At Kaoku Kamaee is cut off by Umauma. I have never heard that Wawaa reaches to the upper edge of woods. Laniomaui reaches through the woods in the middle of the land. I have heard that Hakalau-Nui reaches through the woods. I have heard that a place called Awakee is the boundary at shore between Hakalau-Nui and Halcalau-Iki.I do not know the other boundaries. Cxd Waiau is the Umauma kahawai. Punaluu kahawai is a good branch of it. Hakalau extends from Kaoku to Waiau gulch. F.S.Lyman k sworn I went with my brother Henry to a point on the boundary between Hakalau-Nui and Hakalau-Iki just makai of the woods, where he triangulated to a large hill in the woods, on the boundary of Makahanaloa. He had already surveyed from the shore to the woods. We then went to Hamakua through the woods and to mauka corner adjoining Makahanaloa. There is a pile of stones there near Laumaia road; From there we surveyed across, a mile or a little more, until we came to a gulch with steep sides,hard to cross,which they said was the boundary of Hakalau, I think. Waiki was with us also Kapou, konohiki of Hakalau-Nui. I do not remember who were the kamaaina at that time. Cxd The kantaaina told us that this gulch ran clear to the shore and was the Hakalau gulch. 44 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background Kapou k sworn 1 live at Wailea,Hilo [illegible] from Hakalau. I was born at Hakalau at the time that the moku aa came. 1 know a part of the boundaries of Hakalau. The boundary between Kamaee and Hakalau Nui at the shore is at a large rock in the water at the landing place. Thence the boundary runs up the Hamakua side of the stream till it comes to Wawaa kahawai. Then the boundary runs up the Wawaa kahawai. I have not seen where Kamaee ends. Have heard that Kamaee is cut off by Hakalau but do not know where. I have heard that Hakalau leaves Waawaa at Waaloa across land till it comes to a bend of Waawaa gulch. Thence it runs mauka in the Waawaa gulch to the upper edge of woods Kupouli,my father and Naluliilii were Henry's [Henry Lyman] kamaaina and went on to the mountain with him. I have heard that Humuula cuts it off above the woods. I did not go with them. Kupouli, now dead and father of Naluliilii, were bird catchers and used to go through the woods to the upper edge of woods. My father was the luna of the bird catchers when he was living. I know that part of the boundaries on the Hilo side. My father, Kawainui, and Kawaiholo, and myself, went with Henry Lyman where he surveyed the land. Kawainui was konohiki of Hakalau-Iki at that time, and I of Hakalau-Nui. The boundary at the shore between their land and Hakalau-Iki is at Awakee, an awaawa. This I learned from my kupuna.Nalu is my only father still living,very feeble. Kupouli was my uncle. The boundary runs from Awakee mauka along a small awaawa. Kawaiholo was the kamaaina and my kupuna. The awaawa runs mauka until you come to a large ditch; thence it runs mauka along the ditch to its mauka end; thence past bamboo and into awaawa;up awaawa to Kukui-nui. Thence to the mauka end of the awaawa. Thence passing Puna side of loi to a clump of bamboo where we stopped surveying. The boundary runs mauka along the ditch to a poauwai[head water] called Kapihae belonging to Hakalau-Iki. Thence mauka in the woods to poauwai called Waihaka, belonging to Hakalau-Nui on a small gulch. Thence up and old trail to Kaawahine, an old kauhale. The mauka corner of Hakalau-Iki. Thence along Wailea to Napuumaia, banana trees. Thence along Kaiwiki along an old trail. Thence along Kaahakina gulch. This is as far as 1 know the boundaries. I do not know where Kaiwiki ends. There is an old bird catcher named Moi?living at my house. I have heard that a large koa(Acacia koa)tree called Puuwai is in the middle of Hakalau-Nui. Cxd By D.Kamai I have heard that Kaiwiki reaches to the Niuika. I have heard that the Waiau gulch cuts Kamaee off an that Hakalau joins Umauma. Hitchcock accepts the boundaries as surveyed beween Hakalau-Nui&Humuula. Halaioo k sworn(middle aged man) I lived at Wailea. I was born there at time of Akakaio Maalo. I know the boundaries between Hakalau-Nui and Hakalau-Iki. My makua, now dead, a kamaaina there told me the boundaries. Awakee is the boundary at the shore, between these two lands. The awaawa runs mauka to Government Road. Thence mauka on the Puna side of the awaawa across land to Lanikeha a kauhale[settlement]. Thence along the old road into the woods to the mauka corner of Hakalau-Iki at Na puu ma o ka Ehu. Thence up along Wailea to a gulch called Waimana. Kaahina ends and Napuumaia. Thence up Waimana a branch of Kolikoli. This is as far as I know the boundaries. I do not know the boundaries adjoining Kamaee. Hakalau ends at Napuumaia not a Kaawahine. Kaawahine is makai of this. I do not know where Kaiwiki ends. Cxd(Boundary Commission 1874:359-364) In summary,the boundary commissions reveal a wealth of information regarding geographical features and land use in the area during the early to mid-19th century. The most predominant feature that testifiers described was the numerous muliwai (streams) that were found at higher elevations in Hakalau and Kama'e , serving as boundary markers between ahupua'a. Regarding cultural practices, the testimonies also describe fishing rights in the streams and open ocean. These rights were enforced and known by the residents of Hakalau of Kama`e`e. Bird catching is also noted to have taken place in the upper forested regions of the area. Several forest settlements were also noted including one at Lanikeha and Nakama. Trails leading to the uplands were also noted by several of the informants as well as the practice of orally transmitting knowledge of the area's boundaries and gathering restrictions over the generations. Some of the informants mentioned the presence of the Government Road along with to`i (irrigated CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 45 2.Background terrace traditionally used to grow taro) in the upper portions of Hakalau, as well as bamboo, kukui, `ohi`a, and bananas. Land Acquisition in Hakalau and Kama`e`e Post-Mahele In the decades following the Mahele, Hakalau Nui was retained by the high chief, Levi Ha'alelea until his death on October 3', 1864. Born in 1822 in Lahaina, Maui, Ha'alelea was the son of the chief Ha`alou and his wife, Eseta Kipa,who relinquished her claim to a portion of Kama' during the Mahele of 1848 (Ka Nupepa Kuokoa 1864). As noted by Kameeleihiwa(1992:307),by the time of Ha'alelea's death,he accrued some"$40,000 worth of debts, part of which he owed to Bishop & Co." Two repay his debts, the courts auctioned many of his lands, including those in Hakalau.An advertisement showing the public action of Ha'alelea's lands appeared in the March 10th, 1866 edition of the Pacific Commercial Advertiser (Figure 22). The advertisement notes that the lands of Hakalau were favorable for cultivating sugar cane, raising cattle, and harvesting timber from native hardwood trees. Three years later, William Lowthian Green began placing advertisements in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser and The Hawaiian Gazette to sell 9,357 acres of land in Hakalau. Green would advertise the sale of Hakalau until 1875. As for Kama`e`e, which became part of the inventory for Government Lands through the Mahele, it appears that by 1881,the government had set up a 15-year lease at an annual rate of$200(Daily Honolulu Press 1881). In the August 26t'', 1871 edition of the Pacific Commercial Advertiser, a traveling correspondent under the pen name Quirk wrote about their journey along the Hilo coastline. Their commentary while visiting Hakalau provides a glimpse into the life of the people residing within Hakalau Gulch prior to the establishment of the sugar industry: HAKALAU GULCH Opens up beautifully, filled with trees, conspicuous amongst which are the cocoa-palms, overshadowing the school-houses and native cottages that nestle close to the shore. From this point the cliffs decrease in height, honey-combed as usual with caves, giving a wild look to the coast line. Last night, being near Makahanaloa point, the wind left us, and out helpless schooner rocks idly on the glassy swell. The school-master and C. leaves us, and in the ship's boat gain the shore. We can just manage to make out with a glass that they have found a couple of horses, and now they wave us "good-bye," as they disappear on their way to Kaiwiki. (Quirk in The Pacific Commercial Advertiser 1871:3) By 1874, Hilo already ranked as the second-largest population center in the islands, and within a few years the fertile uplands,plentiful water supply, and port combined to make Hilo a major center for sugarcane production and export. After earlier failed attempts to secure a treaty with the United States, in 1875, King David Kalakaua signed the Treaty of Reciprocity, which established a free-trade agreement between the Hawaiian Kingdom and the U.S. (Kuykendall 1967). The signing of this treaty,which guaranteed a duty-free market for Hawaiian sugar in exchange for special economic privileges for the United States, drastically increased sugar production in the islands and forever altered the political, economic, and socio-cultural fabric of the islands. Although sugar production was already occurring in Hilo, within a few short years after the signing of the treaty and in an effort to cash in on incoming sugar boom, a slew of plantations sprung up around the islands, one of which included the Hakalau Sugar Plantation. The arrival of large scale commercial sugar would,throughout the remainder of the 19th and 20th century, radically transform the lands in the project area and neighboring vicinity. In April of 1877, following the passage of the 1876 Act "to aid in the development of the resources of the Kingdom" the Royal Commissioners on Development of Resources toured different areas of Hawaii Island including Hakalau. The commission reported on their findings and provided recommendations regarding improvements and prospetive land use. In presenting their findings for Hakalau,the commission reported that: The landing at Hakalau was examined. An iron pier to connect the beach with a point of lava on the east side of the bay, would give a fair landing, but the expense would be great; as well as connecting roads up the palis. If mills were put in the gulch it would be adviseable to make the landing available for surf boats. The Government have about 1500 acres of good land in the vicinity,and there is a larger quantity of lands beloging to private parties. (Carter et al. 1877) Sometime between 1871-1896 Hawaii Government Surveyor, C. J. Lyons conducted a coastline survey between Nanaue and Hakalau. Lyon's undated map (Hawaii Registered Map No. 344; Figure 23), although faint, shows the project area during the latter half of the 19th century. 46 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i yy� ����� 2.Background Le A.. �� Com- _.L-1 S A. I DESIRABLE LANDS ! —ON Till IC— Island et Hawaii. irh.- t"nele°rw a_rr.^•I will +rrt.at PUBLIC'IR AUCTION 4! ear II r%•rl C LI . rh.. l' i1 .witr, Limit; +itu.rt•.I ••tr tt.•• I.I3n•1 •4 11,11W.14.1..4 -ii many ..t It►eur as wa:r} kw Uc e.i. a.ry t•.r the Irr i t•.rrt •4 the IN'Liar •4 Os.- Estate •4' Ow talk Mtn. LEVI III t %I.f3.1:%. hi 1..rr•+r.s••-•, •4 :rrr •.t,l.r' .4 f°..urt• grant.•.I to thy:. ,A Inerri,Irutiir••f 4,3 1 Ii.-tot.-. .r e' ',.tai.. u' Li.-rtt tie... azsa 4h r' .% 3 l•il ,ie t ! t I- t '' tr'i 1.r r( I► . M.. AT TUE: t'. it < , ii )l SI. it 1 '!• ;. 11alNllLtJL4J 1:. r•c a r . 'a ar.•^ +Itltt.ittistra. r= -.r.•l F.-gate, CA; THE AIII.1'I. A .t or PAPAlK11I . t04.rec+.1 'is the Iiea;rirt .,( 111.- THE A111"1'I,AA OF ItAKALAV I z-i..r..,e.•.1 as ow ir:str:CL 44 '!lits. Tb. rrtv•re Mi•rl•rt:tits iir»- +0,11 a.tr.i, ta`'•.r,►hry 1.3cnIe'I f..r the retltin:rtr•rrl .4 SU!: .I It ('.f N I•..:rr-I t•••rlr1eti+•• :r 13r.•• traae•t r.f rrr..•t vylet.rt•I^• Cirri.. lattrrl. Also, I"Ar'tt 111: a►u4 WUUtr 1...01110 . THE A1111.PI-A .t► (PF IIONA.1"NAU ! .itw.r-.1 in Ow District 14 K•.ua. A rr..lu:rtde!And ro►rt1 :t•l r1•trri t.r tlt.. cult.r' it ,.:, of OIL A NO SL'iiAlc Ct.Sk ar..l I •.'i EL. THE A111 rI AA OF lIl1NOKAI1Alf I ..t ualt-tl ,11 ow Iri-tt.ct •.f li'•tr .r.at L.rr;. WOO to 1..t N 1). II. W. tiENE:R..t%LII&. A uuti•.ti f. Figure 22. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser(1866)public auction notice advertising the sale of Levi Ha'alelea's Hakalau lands. Hakalau Sugar Plantation In 1878, California sugar mogul Clause Spreckles, with W. G. Irwin & Company as his agent, established the Hakalau Sugar Plantation. By 1880,the plantation was already cultivating sugar cane on 430 acres,with 1,480 acres available for planting. Three hundred men were employed by the company, along with forty mules, ten oxen, and ten horses(Bowser 1880:417). At the time,the Hakalau Plantation was one of the most modern sugar plantations in the islands: All the modern improvements, both as regards the mill and the plantation, are of the very best character; and the appearance of all the surroundings denote that all is done in the best possible manner by the managers to forward the interest of their employers. No expense is spared to carry on the work as it should be. The mill and buildings are now (April 1880) drawing toward completion; and the mill, when completed, will rank first on the list with any on the Hawaiian Islands. The facilities for transporting the cane to the mill is of the very best description, and Mr. Claus Spreckels is proving himself to be the right man in the right place, as an A No.1 sugar planter. (Bowser 1880:417-418) CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 47 2.Background Li X _ �i1 _ ! ;C '_- -_' �. _ - � :_; ...:�, •tau-:,_ I ' - _ + jL I O Prosect area - 0 V.•lu, o inn I Figure 23.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No 344 by C.J.Lyons(n.d.) showing project area. Four years later in 1882, Spreckles organized the charter for Hakalau Sugar Co. Ltd. Following the formal creation of the new sugar company, announcements were published in local newspapers conveying the purpose of the company: The purposes of the company are the raising and cultivation on the Hawaiian Islands and elsewhere of sugar cane, and the purchase and sale of its products; also, the acquisition by lease and otherwise, of such lands and water rights as may be necessary to properly carry on the business, and the making of such contracts and obligations as are essential to the transaction of its affairs. (The Pacific Commercial Advertiser 1882) Over the years, the Hakalau Sugar Co. steadily grew its operations with their fields extending to about the 1,500-foot elevation and stretching for some nine miles along the coast, extending north and south of the project area on the broad plateaus. The annual rainfall provided an ample water supply to naturally irrigate their vast fields and fill their extensive network of flumes to transport cane to the coastal mill site (Star-Bulletin 1935). The water used for their flumes was supplied by "mountain gulches in the forest belt with a system of ditches to carry water where needed"(Star-Bulletin 1935:3). In the deep gulches that bisected the fields planted on the broad plateaus, the plantation built long trestles to support the flumes, some as high as 125 feet. By the early 1900s, Hakalau Plantation had expanded enough to produce 11,932 tons of sugar and employ 800 workers (Husted 1902:479). Hakalau Village, the primary hub of the Hakalau Plantation, was relatively small, consisting of a few dwellings built along the main government road, as shown in the 1903,Hawai`i Registered Map No. 2225 (Figure 24). The road, included in the project area, descended into the gulch, followed the contour of the cliffside,passed over the streambed, and ascended the other cliffside into Kama`e`e. 48 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background �� mr 5"'i,. v- —r 060. A" gyp. J • ,� .w�- . • 4I0' fir / r'HM R ..01.. .;.''!V np aaa'.s ,4wee rtd 114 r i `� _�1�" P .. • nV` n� ?0� " Pie m J 6 ��,N,.. o\�1.\A, eon �'' C y_.. th.�SS'. ,.--4 •IIS r AV' 1 4 �.y N�' _ A I 'po\�. J I ` �tn. K a dlK 'a`"11, i, ' 6 y' a- 1w. �•h�\` �,yn. n1� I h 4W.+Apw dt$'`. .yn ]:.•y�ca.. �, +gym" a `N n- 4." Y?J' F • ' 0 Project area r .�� HQ Meters , .,„,•N O 100 200 4: a Figure 24.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No.2225 by Morange(1903)showing Hakalau Village and the main government road meandering through Hakalau Gulch. In 1909, The Honolulu-based Evening Bulletin published a detailed description of the company and their activities. Information is provided regarding the machinery used in processing the sugarcane and the ethnic makeup of the plantation employees: The property of the Hakalau Plantation Company is in the Hilo district, about fifteen miles from the town of Hilo. The plantation embraces 26,600 acres, 6,000 of which is planted and several varieties of cane.The Yellow Caledonia predominates. The plantation maintains ten miles of main and lateral V flumes through which the cane is conveyed to the mill and delivered direct to the twelve-roller mill, operated by steam power and with a capacity of seventy-five tons of raw sugar in twenty-four hours. The company operate their own electric light plant, driven by a 24-inch Pelton water wheel,which furnishes light to the mill, store, manager's house, etc. The mill is located in a picturesque spot at the bottom of Hakalau Gulch close by the sea, a sea-wall built of cement and stone, surrounding it upon the ocean side. The sugar, when sacked and ready for shipment, is hauled up over a steep incline tramway to the landing warehouse, where it is shipped on board the Inter-Island steamers by a wire cable arrangement from warehouses to the deck of the steamers,without damage or breakage. The grinding season at Hakalau usually lasts about six months. The average yield of sugar to the acre is about 3 t/2 tons. The total output of the mill during 1908 was 12,832 tons. The estimate for 1909 is 11,000 tons. The present mill,which is most complete,was erected by the company in 1897,the steel structural work being supplied by the Judson Manufacturing Company of San Francisco. The working plans were furnished by the Honolulu Iron Works. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 49 2.Background Its Big Smokestack. Because of the situation of the mill it was necessary to construct a brick flue surmounted by a smokestack 120 feet high and having an elevation 235 feet above the mill site. This tall smokestack gives the furnaces in the mill a better draught. The mill is quite complete in all its departments, being supplied with sixteen 30-inch centrifugals, two Standard triple effects, ten open clarifiers, two 8 and one 5-ton vacuum pans, besides much other machinery. The four 3- roller mills and Krajewski crusher are driven by two powerful Hamilton-Corliss engines while the centrifugals which make 1,300 revolutions per minute, are driven either by steam or water power. An immense twelve-ton overhead traveling crane is used in the mill for handling the ponderous machinery when making repairs or changes. The sugar is dropped from the centrifugals to the floor of the sugar room whence it is elevated into two large bins, and there it is allowed to cool before being bagged. The various cane fields are intersected by good roads. Plowing is done with Secretary disc and ordinary molboard plows drawn by mules, while the cultivation is carried out by Deere disc bedders, Crescent disc cultivators, Horner ratoon plows and Homer cultivations, the Horner patents proving highly satisfactory. The soil is fertilized with 1000 pounds of high grade fertilizer and 1800 pounds of lime to the acre. The company maintains a large number of stock upon its property, there being 210 mules and 41 horses in use. Percentage of Working Laborers There are over 1200 laborers on Hakalau plantation, 38 skilled; 51 Portuguese, 800 Japanese, 83 Japanese Women, 60 Porto Ricans, 30 Spanish and Porto Rican Women, 144 Chinese, 4 Hawaiians, 39 Koreans and 26 Spaniards. Nearly all the work is performed under the day labor system. The machine shops are at the mill, while at Hakalau proper are the spacious plantation stables, carpenter and blacksmith shops and the large general merchandise store run in connection with the postoffice and plantation offices. The blacksmith shop has been recently kept busy while the steamer lies but a short distance off shore. John M. Ross, who has been connected with the Hakalau Plantation Co. For fifteen years, has been its manager since September 1st, 1905. (Evening Bulletin 1909:31) Figure 25 offers a partial view of the mill site, flume, and other infrastructure built within Hakalau gulch prior to 1911, based on the absence of the Hakalau bridge/railroad. Another photo (Figure 26) depicts a panoramic view of the Hakalau mill, landing, and smokestack that are referenced in the Evening Bulletin article. Although this photo (see Figure 26), which was retrieved from the Hawai`i State Archives is undated, based on the presence of the completed Hakalau/bridge railroad,this photo was likely taken some time after 1911.A 1919 Sanborn fire insurance map (Figure 27) also illustrates the numerous facilities that were built by the company to accomodate their sugar operations. Within the Hakalau gulch was located the sugar mill, laboratory, general supply warehouse, and oil storage. The bluff overlooking the mill was populated with various warehouses, molasses tanks, an office, and an auto repair shop. 50 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background .,, • ate, - wa . Figure 25.Hakalau Mill and gulch,pre-1911 (Hawai`i State Archives,PPWD-4-7-018). Railroad Smoke Stack, Warehouse ` • Flume Landin� d "" Tramway ® Figure 26.Panoramic view of Hakalau Plantation showing the landing,mill, flume,and other built features,post- 1911.Image source:Hawai`i State Archives,PPWD-4-7-029. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 51 2.Background .o...Ain,*k. 25 .5:4•w.r[.Fu FWNra w r .Qa f&a4, ,,,,IrL H R A• e I ! N S A y F1t s 1 _71__ • / if, ,i,"0 B A f' f I - i L rr `4 � `v' . .�, .. r;+,'.� r,t,v , 4 144' ; \ \ Figure 27. 1919 Sanborn Map Company fire insurance map of Hakalau Plantation showing details of roadways and buildings. A prominent building of the Hakalau Plantation was their sugar mill, remnants of which are found within the project area. The company's mill was nestled on the southeastern base of Hakalau Gulch just a few feet above sea- level and surrounded on its remaining sides by Hakalau Stream and the Pacific Ocean. The first two mills were built between 1879-1881 by engineer and agriculturalist John Alison Scott(Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1925). A description of the mill's location was published in the Daily Honolulu Press on August 1, 1885, noting its location in the gulch and near the shoreline: 52 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background Hakalau mill—at least the one that was being operated when I was there—is in the bottom of one of those incomparable gulches, so low that the tide washes its foundation walls, and the spring freshets threaten it... (Daily Honolulu Press 1885:2) The proximity of the mill to the ocean meant that damage caused by stormy weather and high surf occurred periodically.As an example,the mill was damaged in 1892 following a winter storm that swept through the area: Hakalau probably received the worst damage, as there the sea, running dead on, broke with appalling force. It carried way the landing and trash house and stove in the sides of the lower mill, filling the lower story with rocks and sand"(The Honolulu Advertiser 1892:2) In 1895, the first two mills were torn down and replaced with a new mill that was imported from Scotland and erected in 1896 (Capellas 1925; Evening Bulletin 1909; Hawaiian Gazette Co. 1895). This third mill (and other facilities nearby) was in use until it was destroyed by the 1946 tsunami. After the 1946 tsunami, the mill was reconstructed and put back into use less than a year later(Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1947). Although the plantation employed its own laborers,it also favored the policy of shareholders growing cane on a contract basis—a policy that has been attributed to the amicable relationship between the plantation and workmen. Most of the plantation's shareholders who grew cane for the mill lived in the upper elevation on homestead lots which they owned,whereas many of contract laborers lived in camps situated near their workplace.Near the project area, there were multiple camps formed. Hakalau Upper and Lower Camp were located on the Hilo side of the Hakalau Gulch, near the mill and other plantation buildings. In the coastal region of Kama`e`e was Korean Camp and Sugimoto Camp(Figure 28). One of the earliest camps was the Hakalau Gulch Camp,nestled in the gulch along the government road along a covered bridge(Figure 29)(Forbes and Forbes 2023-camps). H I L O FOREST RESERVE Kamaee Mauka Honohina � Camp q Kaminaka Mauka ' '114 1, ` .. .. .• fa �e Ca • Camp fir,' Ai,//, AR Nanue Chin ,,m.,i.�.b�ly�,,1 1� �d ��. rt X-, CamRChuck . �-••.rai,'miwx,i ��'. .^"+ GSI .m r : �I�� I �I/rQ �'i r" Ix ( , i o _ Stable ,R 1 r 1 f14i 1'�' . cm Wr iY 4404t 1 Cam [ Is -' tliiktAnii Q �:., 1, A I .4'./•,, '/ G. ..*-ii111 111 ‘111 LIP-4110.. virt fil t. -,:i4,:--0.,,T . — r ef".j'41, '7, : ii) \- '..:(' ' ' • ' , • li ''.., > Y. \;,, .-• Chi ,' � . Ilii n ` ,..,,,,�• �IA .(M` ,.. '1.r> °'r� "A. r.t ...!. 1 Chu►rte �i�.�< 1f,9Q=' ., . . .�, 1 , ` ��,� gi 4 fir 4 Cam I; iiInt 7 ® 1 d. •�G w .41,17 t, -' •L ;leg 1,4;‘ ., • , -- ®�'fir� • 4; , I " % o ala ��1; ' tt Wades ' ¢. fir#, .,,?V,01:141.1-k, �? Mill v, ;_ '` R -.ms r� �._-0�ais Yamagata Camp L d � C_71" =Air Honohina Honohina 9 96� Wailea Spanish i - •� Upper Lower ;m.o.. „., _.„. Camp Hakalau °�. i� Hakalau Camp Camp --PVitleV::.e, — . . .. Mill ' Lower Ca_mp_, _ Figure 28.Hakalau Plantation Company Field Map annotated to indicate the various camps in the region.Original field map is courtesy of the Edmund Olson Trust Archive(Forbes and Forbes 2023). CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Karna`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 53 2.Background ... .. way • Co\cicd Qi Idcc lit .g» . ° Camp " 4,. 0., 2 �s' F p 6 Y Figure 29.Hakalau Gulch Camp.Photo courtesy of Steve Sutter(Forbes and Forbes 2023). With its mill situated in Hakalau Gulch and the camps located on the bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean, the upper coastal plateau of Hakalau grew as a social hub to support the many laborers and their families. An aerial photo taken in 1925 (Figure 30) shows a sprawling plantation community with the mill situated on the coasts in Hakalau Gulch, other plantation buildings on the bluff overlooking the mill, and workforce housing spread out on the plateau and in the gulch. A 1930s County TMK map (Figure 31) shows the project area during this period. Life in the plantation community of Hakalau was described in a 1935 article published in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin: Hakalau plantation is particularly distinctive in its social aspects,having a reputation for drawing people from all the surrounding plantations. Labor conditions have been particularly good, a general contentment prevailing. Excellent houses are provided both skilled and unskilled employes and numerous recreational facilities afforded, including club houses, tennis courts, basketball and volleyball courts, baseball and football grounds, motion picture theatre. (Star- Bulletin 1935:3) Life on the plantation was radically changed on April 1", 1946 when a tsunami triggered by a 7.1 magnitude earthquake in the Aleutian Islands slammed into the north-facing shores of Hawai`i Island. This tsunami claimed the lives of 159 people, caused millions of dollars in property damage, and destroyed more than 500 buildings one of which included the oceanfront Hakalau Mill(Muffler and Museum 2015).At Hakalau Gulch,the: ...water reached 37 feet above sea level on the south side of the valley mouth,and 23 to 29 feet on the north side. . . The Hakalau Sugar Company's mill, which stood less than 10 feet above sea level and near the water's edge,was badly wrecked. A large clarifier tank, small steel girders, and sheet-iron roofing from the mill were carried 800 feet inland. Steel girders in the railroad trestle, inland from the mill,were bent by the impact of the debris-laden water. Fourteen noticeably large waves, at intervals of about 10 minutes,were counted at Hakalau Mill,the seventh or eighth wave being the largest. (Shepard et al. 1950:439) Because of its seaside location, Hakalau Mill was the hardest hit of all the then-existing plantations with damages amounting to over 1 million USD (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1956). The tsunami destroyed the mill's boiling house and laboratory, damaged multiple engines and various other pieces of machinery and infrastructure, and washed away the Hakalau Gulch labor camp (Hilo Tribune Herald 1946). The Hakalau steel-constructed bridge, however, escaped major damage. Historic photographs (Figures 32, 33, 34, 35) show the inundation of Hakalau Gulch and the extensive damage to the mill site. Following the destruction of the Hakalau Mill, sugarcane was routed to the Pepe'ekeo Mill for processing until the new $600,000 replacement mill was built eleven months later in 1947(Figures 36 and 37)(Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1947). 54 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background aii' lii* � fiS, ' 0 3--' ."';'1. " { r a,$F' .�wr' '4: e -. jp „6 yt t y a u a ''''' or 1r ' "', v' ".'...,,."..,,A:-,5,"'''. ''. _{�r' :, . �Ri�, 4,p3J r'•' °,�`'r •?- '''''''''''''' '..- c; ', ..+• c. 8. s •�'". ;..' . Iw•,,fit/4.1',. �� •p fir, 4,0 4 s` , ti icd yoll' A. .rt,�aor d `' 4-.1 Atioc 'ft �� ^� d.O-.r'. -,•- Imi 4 5�,' - ;!l.. Apr ��,' .,' ii,., 4,,,,-.1,... , ,-,,,,*-?!.4,--,; . , - - , ,,,,,,.......lr2.A.,...0:‘. . -----.7:r'. •',e.,,, ..,..,,,,, ,,,,,,i,. .1.,,,,4-,,,,...•., ,,-,.....3.i. ,. - - ..--,,„...-,,....,... ....,.. _ ,,,.. .„..,:., „f"-L''c'''Af.''' ' g ,: “;***.",-* A 4 , .�, - mo . ..1fiTykr _--_,''_. z. proungrosa -,0 . er : 7,„„.„:„ , ..,,,,,,, , • .,....,...... e. _ ,...,,,,,,,,e.. , ,-.- - . ,r_...:-. . . , . , ' - e..i - . - c� _ - t>'' y ,. 1 .I . .... . ..„.„..,.. .., .:.•••tf‘a 5: 923-M-111-23-25 -500)HAKALAU;HAWiiyT . - er 38458A,C. Figure 30. Aerial photo of the Hakalau plantation community taken on January 23, 1925 (USAAF 1925). -- ,. v 1111 +� I / 0 N J ., >�1'A OA G , 0 4\`4 AQP ,�`�j A, Q\0 p.' 64 R� g,,y, / vq '$ $ oy • '�' ,.:-.. *Iltp :7 y<f*'\" ,.,•:,.';‘\I." ii4ir ##01.* lk( -;"' ' • .,i1N/4 \oi. - • 'sill\��� '1\ ' i- oi_JOt1�,'`x`,'!11\\\ •' ` .I, . \ /I\ OM\i:::; I I h,.�,\1„I111,E. O I'mjccl arca Figure 31.Portion of County TMK(3) 1-01 map showing the project area during the 1930s. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 55 2.Background ,, �� r a„, wK , y - . N -..`. - +� • M' s, - �r gyp."` �' �' ...4.,..„,,,,, ��4�"u4, ✓ .. -1 � �a y�' e re y"� ,s. a ar , tr� r - 't '‘r ,,,,, ..., , ,..101.110,,.„ , ,,A ( a ..'0 w , * 4,, n, ' ' , '7 *'7'47k** 411 00 Figure 32.Incoming tsunami wave inundating Hakalau Mill on April 1, 1946 taken by Waichi Ouye (Forbes and Forbes 2023-mill site photos). 14101.1 aw.. t AYf 0 Ph moi• . U. ` 1 ~ �- : • ., . S° 1. Figure 33.The 1946 tsunami battering Hakalau Mill,note the steel trestles and the tops of the coconut trees in the background(Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1940s). 56 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `e-,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background _..- µms° . b , s,e. 4. s / 1 . . . , - - , -lo-,000,$.... y t c.. �, _ 1 ,✓" t / OPP.^ .' r ✓ 411 ♦ I .. Figure 34.Hakalau Mill in the wake of the 1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1940s). � 'r''°— l 1 , '...:7 l- 0s0 II Y a/ L -� - „ ,� .. Vie'F1 + , ".,` t t - k� •'-.1�. j - r ^U / s*r . y� ti, -. 1. ..�` . „ „n, a ; ,. .�. .'�++ 'a » cr` ,+.....,, .r -sip 41 ,,, ..., Figure 35. Workers surveying the damage at Hakalau Mill following the 1946 tsunami(Muffler and Museum 2015:57). 57 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background 1 if ,+mss'+, n. moi ) . J•I %.... 4, •44:,,,,v1,07 K t �i• • 1i : 1� ,rteiry i No t 'y yb n , .. IP ti ti ' .011111 'a 0 * J tea' ,� a, . ° � r, 44 Figure 36. Reconstructed Hakalau Mill post-1946 tsunami(Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1940s). THE HONOLULU ADVERTISER, FRIDAY. MARCH 7. 1947. y 1 .1''' -, {.. h y C4r:•,. 6,. .air., F N b $ .,,,a- `',: .t�Y. -d" #;,"a?` y ,. .; X'4 .ate a)F, •ea�.'x ,; ;-' s§,,ara "'T + is a `"+ , 47:, 7 , l f < k ‘1.t. :1`'..'e",:., � x`s' y&.:�. ..* .. 1 °�' yam.. _. a 1-t,4.-i-,7:':-.-,;,v-,d 4^ ',.....4.;„.... 'b . 11 .!...,,,:,,,, ,,..t,,,, •az�k � f `.2, n 3 YK X: � SY ,rte ..'�F jj k .Y $ , it. ..--,..„....,.,„ii: T' " 5 S 3'�. .140,• ��`',�k d •;0; 'I LI .AND NOK'—Hakalau plantation mill on Hawaii starts "`�" "°'^ iAw �� operation atter more than 11 months of reconstruction.following /c �. -y.,., ihr Anril 1st tidal wave last year. Shown left is a picture taken � .r.9.�� '�'; during the height of the wave. On the right the final touches 31!16 are being solaced on the new boiling house, which was rebuilt =' completely The coif of Dulong the mill into operation was ap- L.EGAL NOTICES I2�7 Juvenile proximately *600.000, according to plantation manager tS. C. Jennings. Other losses suffered by the plantation.indirectly,will NOTICE OF .Oy•RESPONSt813JTY run the losses to well over a million dollars. Figure 37.Photos published in The Honolulu Advertiser(1947:9)showing the Hakalau Mill during the 1946 tsunami (right)and the reconstructed mill in 1947(left). 58 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background Although changed, sugar plantation life after the 1946 tsunami returned to some semblance of normal. Derek Kurisu,Executive Vice President of KTA Super Stores,was born in 1951 and raised on the Hakalau sugar plantation in the mid-20t''century(Santos et al.2019).Below he describes what communal life was like in their community: Growing up on Hakalau, a sugar plantation along the Hamakua coast, fifteen miles from Hilo, we learned to respect our elders and treat everyone with dignity and respect. Since we were all poor, we looked at how individuals behaved and carried themselves, not what they possessed. Regardless of our race,age,religion,or character,we lived together as one big family,and saw the positive in everyone. The fishermen fished, the gardeners raised the vegetables, the hunters provided the meat, the mechanics fixed the car, the carpenters fixed the homes, the baseball players coached the kids' team, etc. etc. Everyone had the strengths and used them to contribute to the plantation community. (Kurisu 2014:76) Hakalau Plantation Post-1946 Following the 1946 tsunami, which caused a great deal of damage to facilities in the gulch and thus required a significant amount of funds and debt to reconstruct, the Hakalau Plantation was forced to modernize and provide better wages for workers. Forbes and Forbes (2023) offered the following summation of camp and plantation conditions in the 1950s: The 1950s were difficult for Hakalau Plantation and the question of viability was raised repeatedly. Financial losses and heavy debt resulting from the 1946 tsunami were made worse as [industry-wide] labor strife erupted. Strikes resulted in months of lost production and new labor contracts required significantly higher wages and more employee benefits. Plantation managers and workers implemented new systems to improve efficiency of operations, most notably vastly increasing mechanized harvesting. Workers were aware that the existence of the plantation and their jobs were at risk. Improving efficiency, even if it meant a reduction in jobs, was understood to be essential. The single capital improvement deemed essential to the survival of the plantation was the building of roads to facilitate mechanical harvesting. Most other capital improvements were delayed and equipment was leased instead of purchased. The process of abandoning outlying villages and selling houses to workers on a removal basis began. The Hilo Coast plantations worked together to solve common problems like studying the road system and agricultural research to support improved fertilization practices and cane ripening studies. (Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1950s) A County TMK map from the 1950s (Figure 38) shows the project area and a historic aerial take in 1954 (Figure 39) shows, in greater detail, the neatly laid-out Hakalau plantation community and the project area. The 1954 aerial also clearly shows the runoff from the mill clouding the entirety of Hakalau Bay. Like the previous decade,the 1960s were a time of immense change and challenges for many of the plantations throughout the islands. Although sugarcane was, for many decades, the primary form of sugar that dominated markets globally, the development of the beet sugar industry, which was much cheaper to produce than sugarcane, meant that sugar plantations in Hawai`i needed to adapt if they wanted to survive. Furthermore,the increasing costs of labor, the need to mechanize cultivation and production, as well as the high manufacturing tax for sugar and pineapple, resulted in many plantations either closing down or consolidating their companies and activities (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1961:1-2). It was also during this time that the Hakalau Plantation Company began to sell homes in their plantation camps (including Hakalau Lower Camp), ranging from $50-$100 USD, "on a removal basis"to plantation employees(The Voice of Hakalau(1962)in Forbes and Forbes 2023). In 1962, Hakalau Plantation Company merged with the Pepeekeo Sugar Company. This was not the first time that either company merged with another company; in 1944, the Hakalau Plantation Company purchased Wailea Milling Company, while the Pepe'ekeo Sugar Company merged with the Honomu Sugar Company in 1946. The merger between the Hakalau and Pepe'ekeo companies included the continual operation of the Hakalau Mill,which was threatened with closure months prior and would have resulted in the lay-off of some seventy-five employees (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1962). James C. Stopford, president of the newly merged company, reported in 1963 that the yield for 1962 was 57,300 tons of sugar with earnings amounting to$687,800(Stopford 1963). CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 59 2.Background —till' ��t!ill / --r a�� a0 P° \o Co' A p"* - \\<,---•"''' ...7 c,, ..›.., ,• ••.0 \-;-...•\.* It Tv, .\ kti..‘^. \k% /:..., t` `- ',ONA 4 ,44. - s. ,"\IN\\ /..40"1"..' "--1 # \\\'1,1,I,11,'.‘‘10 iii, ........y..'• \tt1S\\' �/"'I \\111f( \'ttf• .• `It1iIIi, t10 vi,,.�.INAhlltr,, = 1),[01,,:o arca 0 Figure 38.Portion of County TMK(3)-1 map from the 1950s showing the project area. 1p wa �+ ,.:`Y W�! ""d+�i yo ,,.1h: d. .rc : '',,,It t'^' ' 4, ''., ' '4•0g, --# , , ,•„‘", • ,4116,#' „ , f • gp 6.�,,, v ;,& aFP 'r �l n." " afa6 . s.-;a1;.., offj11,4;P:8" r • a "‘, y ,. ,..,..„. •:::,'it. . , rt.' * "'41, ,,, ' tiIli h D M. "' .� „.0, k'',. I'. '.L I 41I.. w Figure 39. 1954 aerial photograph showing the project area,the sprawling Hakalau plantation community(note the runoff from the mill clouding Hakalau Bay). 60 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background Throughout the 1970s, sugar production along the North Hilo and Hamakua coastline continued to dwindle. In 1971, Pepe`ekeo Sugar Company, along with other companies in Wainaku and Papa`ikou, were consolidated into a processing cooperative led by C. Brewer Company. "Under C. Brewer's ownership the sugar companies combined with hundreds of independent sugar growers to create the Hilo Coast Processing Company which processed all of the sugar cane for their plantations as well as used a by-product,bagasse,to create 25%of the electric power for the island of Hawaii"(Forbes and Forbes 2023-the 1970s). Simultaneously in 1972,the U.S. Congress passed the Clean Water Act, establishing "the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters" (Environmental Protection Agency 2022). Evidence of the runoff caused by the mill can be seen in the 1954 aerial (see Figure 39). This piece of legislation meant that sugar companies would be forced to abate the pollution that sugar operations generated, especially with regard to coastal discharges of sugar processing byproducts. Months prior to the passage of the act, C. Brewer Company announced their commitment to spend more than$5.5 million USD "to improve the quality of ocean water adjacent to its five Hamakua Coast mills" (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1971a:61). A historic aerial photograph taken in 1977 (Figure 40) shows the project area and Hakalau plantation community. Additionally, plans were made to close the Hakalau mill and related facilities, as conveyed in the article excerpt below with any remaining crops to be sent for processing to the mills at Papa'ikou and Pepeekeo: Pepeekeo Sugar Co. Site clearance has already begin at Pepeekeo to make way for a giant$6.4 million boiler and turbo power complex that will consume all trash and bagasse produced at the Pepeekeo and Papaikou factories. Power generated by a 20 megawatts turbine generator at the plant, scheduled for completion in September, 1973,will be sold to the Hilo Electric Light Co. By that same date,the Wainaku and Hakalau factories will be closed down, and their crops will be processed at the Pepeekeo and Papaikou mills. To facilitate this increase, Pepeekeo's processing capabilities will be doubled and Papaikou will undergo modifications to meet the State's ocean water quality requirements. (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 197lb:61) I. 't „..,,,:*-12- ,fi ' '' • n• -4-4."--,- t ,t ' t' • - ",' � rp '` ✓' "ill • w 1".' x .'"...‘4,...._.'"...,.: f�i , V,t` r r ,.`?�_ l.- t,,, t m .,,, .,..4.1,,,,,:.-,...--,,,-,,,,y "11 ,.f.�w,rt.F��r .r. 1. ,:. fj �'4 .:::::,:.„.„-.2.-, f C. - $fir ' itt ' - ”' - fis.4 orb0 S. >• , • ��'� ��� ��., ' ''''' ''t N'. , \C. �,�' as • 4v . � i. }+S"'. t o �.•'si ' ,.'.�•}; iii 4,‹.t '- _ t .. '".f ....:----r7,,);',Ici ,..,:,.4 t .tigis .„,,,,..H- . ' ' : .4t..•.. - ,: -9 e7-....,,,...ill. •.7,.' Ir.:.',/".% ."SOK .livw ,...c. x, 't: le- — , a ., y 6{ ; , o ' .A� ,''t~ rt lr *^ r a - , , 4.:„...0„...;.. � fiT .:. . . .. -,. . ..f ee ., = Project arta ,i. Figure 40.Aerial photo from 1977 showing the project area and Hakalau plantation community. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 61 2.Background In 1973, Pepeekeo Sugar Company merged with Mauna Kea Sugar to form the Mauna Kea Sugar Company, becoming the fourth largest sugar company in the state at the time with over 18,000 acres planted in cane(Campbell and Ogburn 2004). "Upon the final merger, the plantation offered houselots for Hakalau sugar workers and their families at Kulaimano Subdivision in Pepeekeo.Perhaps 75 per cent[sic] of the 300 to 400 who left Hakalau moved to homesites there..." (Rood 1975:12). A year later, after 92 years of operations the Hakalau Mill was closed. A special ceremony was held in December 1974 to commemorate the closure of the mill (Figure 41). The ceremony was attended by Herbert Matayoshi (Mayor, Hawaii County), John Farias Jr. (Director, State Department of Agriculture), Robert Hughes (Chairman of the Board of Directors, Hilo Coast Processing Company), William Kenda, (President, Hilo Coast Processing Company), Joseph Garcia Jr. (former State Representative), and several retired employees(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1974): Ceremonies began at 9:30 a.m. when Corsito Santiago, senior cane truck driver, delivered the last load of cane to the Kamaee Station. As the last piece of cane passed through the mill rolls at 10:30 a.m., Antoku Kobashigawa, a 28- year Hakalau veteran and acting assistant factory superintendent, tossed his hat into the mill grinder, symbolically ending the grinding season, and Larry Iwani, former factory superintendent and presently superintendent,manufacturing,for HCPC,poured champagne over the rolls. At 11:00 o'clock William Kenda, president of HCPC, closed the valves shutting off the mills roll—officially ending the factory's long career. (C.Brewer and Company Limited 1974) The consolidation of the Hakalau Plantation Company with Pepeekeo Sugar Company(followed by the merger of the latter with Mauna Kea Sugar Company), the modernization of other facilities along the Hamakua Coast, and the closure of the Hakalau Mill effectively contributed to the departure of numerous former plantation employees and their families, as well as the dismantling and demolition of many of the buildings and structures associated with the Hakalau Plantation and the communities surrounding it. As stated in the title of an April 1975 newspaper article printed in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald, Hakalau was deemed a"dying town" (Figure 42) (Rood 1975:12). By 1977, Hakalau Lower Camp (located near the current project area) was demolished (Forbes and Forbes 2023- the 1970s). Lands that were previously owned by the sugar companies were subdivided into smaller agricultural lots that were then sold on the open market. In 1978, the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works publicly announced the indefinite closure of a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway on the Hamakua side of the gulch,north of the Hakalau Bridge(Figure 43). The purpose of the closure was to "allow for the utilization of a portion of the old road as a drainage way"(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1978:10). la Sundal Tr n.-I r9ld,DK. . :29.14.',..i " ,-''' r,��t�� - 1�s .0 ' i+ ilk pr A / 111Xt ® ,,, r r 111'1' ill i' ; .....'"' - in,' 1 ' s ' {/ ' 4 i vile ;41 YYGG re yA c ' iM ,a. r..., LAST LOAD—Thc haat load of cant arrivte al part kelpated kn a(tre.rnopg to elm tdc mail after ki.t.PAI'--Wilkiam Kends,president of Rile(;oast Processing Co., Kagan mill Saturday as some 50 [smarts 9:}ears of operation, shuts dawn the fiakatau mill machincrs'Saluda) a ceremonies marking the mill closing. Figure 41.Photos published in the Hawai`i Tribune-Herald of the last cane haul and processing of sugarcane at Hakalau Mill(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1974). 62 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background .,.........1,..........w...,,..4.,Apnt 9.1913 • Portrait Of A D in Town .. ,....... Y g By Jim Rood SYR Enmrr a .+Ayi1 }�� y J,,"' i'f Mahal.. I diol',I,at uw Manlallun rosy. •, 'E to`. ^'bN� . fib, Mali.the A.the Naminhn,HIRAI" ,is d.inl A. ,(� ••,'''';7"..,,' 'T \.r34.4* 'Aa woe! Ae WAI ..rrN be Ah M "5 d•�' I "�`� � "3 � r'o'an d 1 h A " 4l• A.E .1 • ..� ,,.( ., f 'Yinl t A l7al br J. n.'I' A'.iR � r ,1 � rnJ aJIV r ,max, a: ♦-� i44 i Horrrrr.%fauna A-1 r 1 1,.I 1,aAb ' •. • t i 'r I .a d be h I A 1 et a r .. 14' `.h-_ •TUC; !,—,„ an ' — p A Tp �i ..- •J /h,n rotor the r... Il.'h.'!nu ,,!I', .1. a�. 4Sc' ti' l flan,, .. 1 J IN nn A., : I.' h 1 '•• '" i taw ,,," J.4i4'q..t.M,' .r+; t ,`» .:v:.-^rY.` ,nd neer, "" .- i, ,el Nn, n A.. t.d..I "f .', sbj•� 1.. A III mem no\u0,11.:.ndn(r., SALVAGE OPLP.AITC*i-Thr..Ival m,t plrl 9prmrlrer halIGmh m.I,1nI,nIYraa,ld P1171'Rr fir flute f'SST -Ti.Holds v of Mt r1,1111111($a,Ia:!.i I:ra,a�s Damm a fora a.•.,. I r ,,h'J.nal es.,t,,•the pl,,n .,.n off erre 1 i,ip.,n,r,w,s 'o,ma,,.,is r Intel ]nt,r.,,,..'t.,,,...I lt.. h.... .,J..,II.ash,....l ...A.'...-nd,A.ir In e.,1 t., Aufai Cnb,itn nl'rperken .r ,nnn. 1 -.':per tent„J,A JIAI to 1U/aholo^ftlls ` 4 en,.....1,.h....., th rl 1�._ _ ,A,...rr ..h..o. Men, m ,. ..I.J....11.4..1 le h p JI, Arvut.'hop and on,dd pinnanm.fo will rnwn,l the/nrntsh papal A m...,1 The pl 1 t nn +. \ * "cm had been the first.in A,,. halm Atoll along C Y _-_ he ur Tette, :,to ' tl, .wa n the IWO',Al,,.,,walled.It ailf h. . en..crn T. p\n r.Idro troop . . ih t .r,f,..N. .. uff.111,f0 • Z .4 ` •I „ h�..l m.. Anda ,r.;;IN aurl.II „f vF..l l!.n..d h. r — •Paths need He . a•nod the HnAol.ra ..hn..I tee,.A 5.lr.oh,,..1.0.herr fall.I..,.... . �' ,, '. ,•+ won.,/mat/'ala..Ana to(rapalan see plated , ,a.,,A IA I.iout tend"u....Wel /ghhtn ..no- t nt lot nod.tato.,nh.h. ,unl oath,. PI ,.n tete•t I h.e'.r,A.,Iib(..no Loose..pion',,',.., _ ,N.,_ y;'n' _ �a11 .r11,5n I'.,hu/n w...nolo.r+l!IJar tthe.n _ x •` i . ,h,fl.F.... Tribune-Herald Photos RAAAI..IL I:YII-Murk quY4tatm.IO enrl,d RAM I:Iw.IN Nba p41YWa "Si 1.A n11;ATTJL-Thin ho::l:IA aa.saws 17 eon Ins NM MI.Ms YwaW.a 14451. .ani Innr.Ir, ten ,pelt I.nu,r. n On,.1,51*A.ii.., By Paul Miyasaki ,l.flak...1..11,111m ane abr.utt WO.R IA .» Pep'drv.Acta,.m,..aedlr,uaa Is the Si Figure 42. Images of derelict and demolished buildings accompanying an article published on April 9, 1975 in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald about the"Dying Town"of Hakalau.The photographs were taken by Paul Miyasaki. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 63 2.Background PUBLIC NOTICE I CLOSING Of PORTION OF OLD MAMALAHOA HIGHWAY AT HAKALAU GULCH The porton of the Oid Mamaiahaa 11 h woy beginning of o poles approximately two Hundred and Thirty 30) lingo! feet north of the 1•lok 4au Gulch bridge and extending northeasterly (Hematitic direction), for One Thauiond Three Hundred and Twerity4i p 2 lineal feet will be doted indefinitely to all iraffic reavertent effective February 1, )9 111 to o Ilene utilization of portion •af the 411- old made%a drainage way. : Appropfi rte agar will be postedand inutarirh are advised to obicrv, the posted i ne. LAMrTS Or KtukchN.�Y Tr, CLC5CO 11 11) cow Herveleu +�rr"e 0EFARTMEN7.Of PUBLIC WORKS COUPIIT OF itAWAIII EDWARD 14ARADA,Chief C9•gire,r ,2 17 —Hawaii Tdilb9a licir '. unwary 18,24,2?,1 I • Figure 43.Public notice of the indefinite closure of a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway within Hakalau Gulch(included in project area)(Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1978:10). 64 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama` `6,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background From Railroad to Highway During the years of growth and expansion in Hawai`i's sugar industry,modernizing transportation infrastructure was necessary to efficiently transport goods and materials. By the turn of the 20th century, plans to install a railroad between Hilo and Honoka`a were being actualized. Around 1879, the Hawaiian Government conducted a survey to determine a preliminary route for the proposed railroad as shown in Hawaii Registered Map No. 339 from 1879 (Figure 44). As shown in the 1879 map (see Figure 44), it appears as though two possible routes through Hakalau Gulch were considered; one that extended in a straight fashion across the gulch and the other meandering in a westward (mauka) direction through the gulch. Although neither route (as shown in the 1879 map; see Figure 44) was developed into the railroad, the direct route across the gulch eventually became the chosen path. However, it was decidedly moved further makai to cross above the mouth of Hakalau Stream. Railroad construction was one of the most important elements of governmental and private sector planning following the Treaty of Reciprocity, as crops and products were still being transported by cart and animals (Dorrance and Morgan 2000). On the Island of Hawaii, the first major line to be constructed was in the North Kohala District, which operated as the Hawaiian Railroad Company. The North Kohala line, however, was envisioned as only the first step toward a much larger system connecting the cane fields of Kohala, Hamakua, and Hilo with Hilo Harbor, the only protected deep-water port on the island. Beginning in 1899, railroad lines began transporting sugar to the harbor for marine transport,thus Hilo became an important shipping and railroad hub. • ,W, t, ry. r• ,4'W c 13 _f N • / . h • J _ � s. •%"{, l 16 rt jy _ / •t • Proposed railroad ali uii�eut ti t 4 ' . . .. ) 4 . I.- \jr 4—'71 . - • a: 1N ; • '•' ` ' ,11,.• u• f ' � hr •ult. ry�� y1' lr`r 1.7'Im•el,,p' t +y! tss` 01i t 11 ` :y Ar , tiWl<< i , � , •.1` , ; •tnt _ ` . - 5 ` {� • ro 10 • y 0 Meters ,. : o 100 200 I reject area ' ; Figure 44.Portion of Hawaii Registered Map No.339 prepared by(Cabot 1879) showing the preliminary route of the railroad. Lorrin A. Thurston, who according to Thrum had "been connected with the enterprise from its initiation" (Thurston 1913:142),wrote an article upon the completion of the railroad from Hilo to Pa'auilo,Hamakua in May of 1913 entitled "Railroading in Hilo" which was published in Thrum's Hawaiian Annual and Almanac for 1914. Thurston reported that the Hilo Railroad Company (HRC) initiated the railroad endeavor in 1899 from Waiakea south to `Ola`a and onwards to Kapoho. The initial distance of twenty-five miles of track was completed by April 1901. Later that same year, the track was extended along the waterfront of Hilo to the Wailuku River, at the foot of CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Karna`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 65 2.Background Waianuenue Street" (Thurston 1913:143). In 1903, HRC constructed a wharf at Waiakea and completed a branch line connecting it to the waterfront line. The commercial sugar industry provided most of the cargo transported by HRC but suffered a sharp decline between the years 1904-1907, which caused a halt of development in Hilo (Thurston 1913). In response, HRC worked with `Ola`a Sugar Company to send a representative to Washington D.C. in 1907 to secure funding for the construction of a breakwater that would allow Hilo Bay to accommodate larger ocean-going vessels. Construction on the breakwater began in 1908 and was still ongoing at the time of Thurston's writing (ca. 1914); the breakwater was completed in 1929. In exchange for the construction of a breakwater in Hilo Bay, HRC was required to build a new wharf, a one-mile rail extension from Waiakea, and a 50-mile rail extension north to Honoka'a Mill (the Hamakua Division). The funding of the breakwater by HRC resulted in the extension of the railroad through the populated section north of Hilo to Hakalau and eventually to Hamakua. The route of the HCR in Hakalau is shown in a 1915 USGS map (Figure 45) and the 1923 Hawaii Consolidated Railway map (Figure 46). In describing plans for the proposed extension of the HCR in the area north of Hilo town,Thurston wrote: When the breakwater project was pending before Congress, opposition was made to the appropriation on account of the limited commerce then being transacted through Hilo harbor. Assurances were thereupon made by the Hilo Railroad Company, that if the breakwater were constructed, a railroad would be built into the country north of Hilo and suitable wharf facilities provided under the lee of the breakwater. Such assurances had a material effect in securing the appropriation. (Thurston 1913:145) Between June 1909 and December 24, 1911, the HRC built 12.7 miles of rail extending from Hilo to Hakalau Mill, crossing many deep gulches and valleys along its route (Figures 47 and 48). This was followed by the construction of an additional 21 miles of rail that connected Hakalau with Pa'auilo to the north, which covered a total distance from Hilo of roughly 34 miles and was known as the "Hamakua Division" (Thurston 1913:146). The rail spanned the Hakalau gulch by means of a steel trestle girder bridge that measured 775 feet long and 261 feet tall (Figure 49). The Hakalau rail bridge was considered the second-longest bridge on the line. Lorrin A. Thurston,who according to Thrum had "been connected with the enterprise from its initiation" (Thurston 1913:142), wrote an article upon the completion of the railroad from Hilo to Pa'auilo, Hamakua in May of 1913 entitled"Railroading in Hilo" which was published in Thrum's Hawaiian Annual and Almanac for 1914. Thurston defined the objective of the Hamakua Division as: The principal object of the extension is to give adequate transportation facilities between Hilo and the fertile and well-settled territory extending for 50 miles north of the town of Hilo, and averaging three to four miles in width. This district produces nearly one-fourth of the entire output of sugar of the Territory and is, including the town, the home of over 30,000 people. The only means of access to this section has heretofore been by wagon road, almost impassable in rainy weather, and by derrick and cable landings over bluffs rising from 50 to 300 feet sheer from blue ocean. There are no harbors. (Thurston 1913:147) 66 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 2.Background , . .7.74f_.,..__".....-4.' filts:ik. --411.1g -,..!.,:..:, --7-=, \..._ \N -1.1 -77';.% 'I? ' 1 al E ...0% I �-%Et° ` =141"—"r '�,+ ���� lir , • ,by ;� �, � .,•. V ,/lifi ,�.fAk 421 � .r- --.-.. 4. .;; ,,,,-. _,,_ . .s.,...„."-\\\:\\‘\\. ilk ;r : *Ps„ lip, - -,-.-°1 F %` r fr . i. k .1--, , .\ •,.....„..... ....._•••-.10-14. 0.-- ,i' •••1'i ',„' \ , PriA,--91...01/1 IL •'-'110!)11 1 , s Q Protect al'C8 1+ /�%! / • — /� .. \1` 7777 _____ 41r1S k / Lr' ;.. _ 1 ,�i { ,- -. -0'4 twou 'nu nu ` r \ t,, Figure 45. 1915 USGS map showing the HCR alignment over Hakalau Gulch. %;.1.... '� e..// . .- ...;:%-• ' ••' •ti rlu ..-:',..;7: K o li /K L f ;. .of '�\ y.c t. ti.'3: :`. .,Ca✓ . _7, `' "\ 1 [ yam )...J/ NwM+ Kw,...J.1. A..,. ._yiy t` .:.,,,.„..,...\ fi/� f*, j 9 .,r1. .� r..am g '4t..,yY14; �h.r1.MA 24, SO '�Ll.^�' J j 1, \• 1 s T••.ay. "I 1.104. Ovate tsrmswe p 0.....►.•u1. r -k-.4: Hi•••• .‘""4/4"-`r...e.,,,,•-•-•••• .r.••••••••''-'-,-. . 7 ' kW. di Irw' \Da r" -o .} !`q p..gai•% .__ PL/111410Alla. ...•.T..•eye~ ,.. 44, Project arca NIA Pa,a rtc.• 5r-r• OF QART OF THE ISIAHD or Hgw ,, . .. O"� SHOWING THE LNES OF THE f..p v :a. •' HAWAII CN3CLIDATED RAILWAY• fi- ,� Hwugeu..w • • HAAviAllAN AB D PEIAGO. 3a.... M.t_rn '\ Figure 46.Hawaii Consolidated Railway Map of November 1923 (Hawaii Consolidated Railroad 1926). CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 67 2.Background • tom• ,4"0"+u n P ;rte. +�' i ,, r�+ ( wa W # Jpp waro v ,„1,114. . a -dip Lik'r, J .i A 4 ° w.. " � T d iYA4 RR a gr �F M1 �f • r »" '�f � iit iiihil Figure 47. Steel trestles installed across Hakalau Gulch(ca. 1911)with the mill in the background(Forbes and Forbes 2023-railroad). 110 il aed A t o F, 1 Sf w - rr *�. ;144111 I:Ali"'I :e411: w . rli a r ` ar Aw7 y h+ Figure 48. Railroad bridge being installed on steel trestles across Hakalau Gulch(note labor camp on the rnauka side of the bridge in the gulch)(Forbes and Forbes 2023-railroad). 68 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama‘ ‘a,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background 41. 1/ • A - • n 9 $M f 9 it.' A- .!` ' '` itt,..9 6 aP"a 14071'1,V75 f u 494,114 � r Figure 49.HCR train crossing Hakalau Bridge ca. 1911-1920(Forbes and Forbes 2023-railroad). Railroads throughout the North Hilo/Hamakua coastline remained in use until the 1946 tsunami, after which it was converted into a highway—a process that was both economical and made vehicular travel, which was quickly becoming the preferred mode of travel,more efficient in this part of the island. These highway bridges became part of the Mamalahoa Highway(Hawai`i Belt Road).Prior to this conversion, "automobile and truck traffic was limited by the narrow,winding road running through the deep gulches that mark the coast,"including Hakalau Gulch,which was the second longest and highest bridge in the state (Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1953:32). Hired to do the general contracting for Hakalau Bridge was James W. Glover, Ltd., while K. Morishige was contracted to paint the bridge using "Dutch Boy red lead and black bridge paint on this and all other bridges reconstructed along the Hamakua coast"(The Honolulu Advertiser 1953:25). A photo showing the newly painted bridge was also included in the 1953 article (Figure 50) On April 17th, 1953, following a ceremony, the Hakalau Bridge, which cost $635,000, was opened for vehicular travel (Figures 51 and 52) (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1953). More than three decades later, in 1989, James W. Glover, Ltd. was awarded a contract totaling $313,986 to resurface three bridges along the North Hilo/Hamakua coast, including Hakalau. The work consisted of"removing the existing bridge surface, installing a new asphalt-concrete surface...[and] constructing a level connection to the bridge from the existing roadway," as well as "routine improvements on bridge expansion joints" (Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1989:5). In following years, further improvements and renovations were made to the bridge. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 69 2.Background !Hakalau Bridge '� a • ,I TA.,r iii e Rebuilt, AAGiven 4,.•t it icy° ' " � 'X Aillw I�Z ;New Paint Job FA •• 0 •4 e ,a44 < � � . 1 One of the highest and long- `4 A est bridges in the Hawaiian Is- • 't+ F• SRA, lands is the old Hakalau rail- ,t.' i ,kA,r road bridge, recently rebuilt in, 1r ter, : � � order to fill the transportation: : ' c iirk ‘;, " i ; , . needs of the modern and pro- i Z gressive Big Island. � „e .,,;, Q •1 er ' , T • ! • • • jai ' t� l., + y 9 TO MEET THE growing de-1 �.t ; . ` e' i mands for more convenient and ,- .,,,;A, safer crossingfacilities for ., tourists and the sugar industry, . • VA; < re. • < ;;, .. ; '" t,,V4,4. the Territory established this , II a � l . reconstruction program which * •b: included the rebuilding of a se- ,° t `' 'i 00. . ries of eight bridges along the s °1 ; w • Hamakua coast from Hilo to ; , r" :;' i Honokaa, and a new highway t . which is still under construc- ,a` to:.g "'� '�? , r tion. , . � S , :. °� � p The Hakalau bridge is 210 feet . • �' "'" °� ,0 �' , ", •s, � I` high and 1,000 feet long. Gen- 3 ? t' . eral contractor on the recon- ""; s _ `! .M +0 •� • IIt „,"*0.,10 tjj ' struction job was James W. ,� "s",, � l k Glover, Ltd. I i ,,,,: , . , ', �► : I PAINT CONTRACTOR was, K. Morishige of Honolulu, who „Waiti” "i �""' used Dutch Boy red lead and \ 1 a -; 3 4 \ + Dutch Boy black bridge paint • iia s ,on this and all other bridges re- `+ • ( constructed along the Hamakua .1.. coast. NEW LOOK FOR HAKALAII BRIDGE Figure 50.Photo published in The Honolulu Advertiser(1953:25) showing the newly lead painted Hakalau Bridge. 70 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background m Z�v" Nt i a , 144.4 •r'I , o , Ott t . ♦ , t h �tr1 oeinlillit:4:.-, *,z,...:1•11'I:I' :: -'''„, . ' ,. 0 .1,,ro. II.' %. 4. t 0 r ii.t..,.. .w ��nn ([ `. \ i I.I.!I t+FQ `( 1 't ,ili, vs, ..--- Participating in the ceremony on April 17,1953 were(I.- wife of the former long-time manager,cutting lei:'Blue" r.) Miss Hawaii (now Mrs. Arloli, of Kamuela); Kaaua,State District Engineer;Rev.Bine Marniya;Mrs. Alexander Hossack, then manager of Hakalau Plan- Andres Baclig; Melvin Lepine, As,t. State Dist_ Eng.; tation;Jack Ouye; Mrs.Hossack; Mrs.John M. Ross, Janet Yara,Hakalau School queen. • • . . Hakalau aaeBridger, ..„. _ ... Last week's Where Is It?_was the / framework supporting the Hakalau Bridge, which spans Hakalau Gulch,on the Hamakua ; i Coast. 7. According to Jack Ouye,who was Hakalau ' i Postmaster at the time the bridge was • opened,in 1953, "this is supposed to be the tt longest bridge in the State, and second- ' highest(Honohina-Nanui bridge is higher)." It was opened to the public at 4:00 p.m.on I ,'••-.4 April 17,1953 in a ceremony sponsored by the '`. '' t ! Hakalau Athletic Association,under Ouye's direction. • Also naming the bridge for Where Is It? ',",:'* '. lik,,L1.7.,',''1 1 ' 41 were: Arlean Yugawa, Elayne Fujii, Cory Vierra, of Hakalau; Joseph S. Pavao, of S Nt'; Pepeekeo; Francis M.Aldrnseu,of Mililani ". St.; J.Walter Silver,of Hilo; M.Hirata,of — Palua Loop;and Mrs.S.H.Blumenthal,of St. % ;.",:, S ' e _,,, Petersberg Beach,Florida. • As the lei is untied,opening Hakalau Bridge,cars wait along the road for the honor of being the first to cross the new structure. Photos courtes of Jack 4 e. Figure 51.Dedication and opening of Hakalau Bridge on April 17, 1953 (Hilo Tribune- Herald 1973:22) CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 71 2.Background t �; A al op2 f FPI e ant 1.4 t 1t "w y y'Cr? ; BIGGEST BRIDGE—The Hakalou Gulch bridge on the new Ho- highway bridge was constructed by strengthen;ng the seas. makua coast highway, is the longest highway bridge in the porh under the old railroad bridge, then pirating n new, territory,totaling 772 foot.it eliminates the long, winding de- wider deck.Structure in background h a cane flume.—Photos scent in and out of the tulch followed b the old road. The by R. T.Kanemari,Modem Camera Center. Figure 52.Hakalau Bridge following reconstruction efforts with cane flume in the background(Hawaii Tribune- Herald 1953). Post-Plantation and Creation of the County-Owned Hakalau Beach Park More recently, the first consideration of a Hawai`i County beach park at Hakalau Bay was in 2003 (Armstrong 2003).The landowner at that time, Mauna Kea Agribusiness Co. (formerly Mauna Kea Sugar Company),wanted the County to assume ownership of the 5.9-acre property (old mill site) as well as several roads in Papa`ikou and Pauka`a. The then Planning Department Director, Chris Yuen reported that the old mill site"is one of just a handful along the Hamakua Coast offering a safe way for people to enter the ocean" (Yuen in Armstrong 2003:1). Armstrong went on to report that access to the beach was "restricted since area landowner Steven Wolf gated the only entrance road last summer"(Armstrong 2003:6). The installation of the gate along the entrance road drew much community controversy as reported by the Hawai`i Tribune-Herald. Wolf argued that "he put the yellow metal gate across the road mostly to curtail illegal dumping and vandalism on the property" and that beachgoer could walk past the gate, a couple hundred yards from the shoreline "at their own risk" (Wolf in Bishop 2002:1). The Honomu Village Association President, Jude Mattos pointed out that: The limited access...makes it difficult for our retirees to fish, (and for) people with handicapped disabilities, older surfers, and Native Hawaiians and others to retrieve and return rocks for imus and lois(terraces)(Mattos in Bishop 2002:1). In that same article Mike Staszkow, a writer for the Honomu Village Association newsletter noted that he and other community members were working to clean up the mill site area but to stop because of the lack of vehicular access. J.W.A. "Doc"Buyers, Chairman of C. Brewer(parent company of Mauna Kea Agribusiness Co.)noted that prior to Mauna Kea Agribusiness selling the property to Wolf, recreational use of the area was welcomed and that there "was drinking, vandalism and illegal use of firecrackers—maybe some gunfire—on the property" (Buyers in Bishop 2002). An agreement was not reached and sometime between 2003-2006, the property was sold to Atlanta- based developer Continental Pacific LLC, who in 2006 pledged to gift the parcel to the county for use as a public park (Armstrong 2006). It's unclear when the mill site area was designated as a County Park but it appears that much of the clean-up of debris at the mill site was an ongoing community effort. By 2017,the park was closed due to foundation issues with the 1930 bridge along the Old Mamalahoa Highway leading to the beach park (Johnson 2017). A 2016 bridge inspection showed that the Hakalau Stream had scoured rock and soil away from the foundation of the bridge,making it prone to collapse.It was at this time that lead contamination of the soil under the Hakalau bridge (Hawa`i Belt Road) was identified (Callis 2017). Due to the ongoing lead contamination, Hakalau Beach Park remains closed. 72 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL STUDIES The earliest archaeological work to be done in East Hawai`i was that of the early 20th-century researchers Thomas G. Thrum and John F. Stokes (Stokes and Dye 1991; Thrum 1907). Neither identified heiau within the current project area nor in the larger region between Honomu and Hakalau. In the early 1930s, after the widespread development of vast plantations fields, Alfred E. Hudson, working under the aegis of the Bishop Museum, conducted archaeological investigations in East Hawaii (Hudson 1932). Concerning his findings in Hakalau, Hudson reported: The greater part of Hakalau gulch is also planted in cane. It is only in the upper part of the gulch, in dense guava, that taro terraces are found over an area of a quarter of a mile square. No clearly Hawaiian stone structures remain. Mr.Kaffenberg tells me there was formerly a konane board in the bottom of the gulch. Kinney(46,p.29)says that the gulch was at one time a robber's stronghold. (Hudson 1932:218) During the Hawai`i Tsland portion of the Statewide Survey of Historic Places conducted in the early 1970s, a single site (Site 50-10-16-7392), the Hakalau Historical District was documented (Hommon et al. 1974). Although the site record is missing from the DLNR-SHPD files, a brief description of this district along with a map (Figure 53) was provided by Forbes and Hibbard(2018:60) in their National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form for the Hakalau Jodo Mission: Hakalau Historic District. While not the focus of this nomination, it is noteworthy that the Hakalau Jodo Mission is one of seven structures still existing within the Hakalau Historic District (SIHP 50-10-16-7392), recorded in the State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) in 1973. This district extends from the old mill site adjacent to Hakalau Bay and including the site of Hakalau School, adjacent to Wailea. [The others include the Hakalau plantation manager's home (1897, Hawaii Register of Historic Places No. 10-16-9070), two plantation warehouses on Hakalau Point (1920), Hakalau Jodo Mission (1904/current structure 1936), Hakalau Theater (now the post office, 1931), Hakalau School Gym (1941) and Hakalau School (various dates, at current site beginning in 1882). Within the Hakalau Historic District, the Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (SIHP 50-10-16-9070) and the Hakalau Jodo Mission (SIHP 50-10-16-30894)have been listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Forbes and Hibbard 2018; Hibbard 2009). Of these two Historic sites, a portion of the project area extends into the parcel (TMK: (3) 2-9-002:039) in which Site -9070 is located. The location of the Historic District along with the Forbes and Hibbar(2018)and Hibbard(2009) studies relative to the current project area are shown in Figure 54. The following is a summary of prior archaeological and cultural studies conducted in the immediate vicinity of the project area. This summary does not include those studies (Carter 1990; Raymond 1991, 1993; Speulda 1996; Tomonari-Tuggle 1996) have been been conducted further mauka within the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge. Paul H. Rosendahl Inc. (PHRI) completed an archaeological inventory survey (Walker and Rosendahl 1994a, 1994b) of TMK: (3) 2-9-002:023 and (3) 2-9-004:056 (see Figure 54). Their study area extended along the south side of Hakalau Gulch from the mauka (west) side of Hawai`i Belt Road up to the 1,500 foot elevation and included some 595 acres. A portion of their project area extends into the makai (eastern) end of the current project area. A low-level aerial (helicopter) survey was conducted on some uncultivated portions of the area. Other uncultivated areas were inspected using "variable-coverage (partial to 100%) variable-intensity ground survey" (Walker and Rosendahl 1994b:2). Walker and Rosendahl report that the project area had been extensively modified in historic times for sugar cane cultivation. For this reason,no archaeological sites or"significant cultural materials of any kind"were found(Walker and Rosendahl 1994b:2). PHRI conducted a historical assessment of two former Historic cemeteries located in the makai portions of TMK: (3) 2-009:002 (Lot 5) and TMK: (3) 2-9-002:088 (Lot 10) (Rosendahl 2001a, 2001b), situated southeast of the current project area (see Figure 54). These studies were undertaken to determine the status of the cemetery and its potential impact on the sale of residential property.For the Lot 5 study,it was determined that the roughly 1-acre cemetery was"informal"meaning that it"was never formally registered with any regulatory agency,or dedicated by recordation with the State Bureau of Conveyances"(Rosendahl 2001a:2). Furthermore, the cemetery was associated with the Hakalau Jodo Mission (locally referred to as the "Japanese Cemetery") and contained an estimated 200 individuals(Rosendahl 2001a:2).It was principally used during the first third of the 20th century and the graves were disinterred in the early 1970s by Homelani Memorial Park, Inc., using a backhoe. Most individual internments consisted of deteriorated wooden coffins and skeletal remains. The grave monuments were generally reburied in the CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 73 2.Background excavated pits after the remains were removed. Rosendahl(2001a:4)recommended that this area be defined(written description and map) and designated as "Site of Former Plantation Era Japanese Cemetery" and that such information be disclosed to any future buyer. Unable to confirm whether all graves were disinterred, Rosendahl (2001a)recommended that any development involving subsurface construction be excluded from this area and that landscaping or other similar activities involving any subsurface activity be limited. PHRI's study on TMK: (3) 2-9-002:088 (Lot 10; see Figure 54) (Rosendahl 2001b) was conducted in two stages: research and field inspection. The purpose of the field inspection was to confirm the boundaries of the cemetery (the "Catholic Cemetery"). They determined that this cemetery, like the Japanese Cemetery (discussed above), was an informal plantation-era cemetery with an overall total area estimated between 1 to 2 acres and held possibly 200 to 250 internments of individuals of several ethnicities (Filipino, Portuguese, Puerto Rican), all of whom were likely plantation employees and/or family members of the Catholic faith. They found that the cemetery was primarily used during the first half of the 20th century, and,while a few of the graves were disinterred in the late 1970s by individual families; most of the graves remain in place. Some of the graves within the cemetery probably date to the end of the 19th century or early 20th century. N NORTH t 'I. �'�" -,,,- ,0,,,),,'' ,` ' ;. i Hakalau • .,..- r,.�;„ Historic Distric . ,„.., ' 7392 1 \\ i '1 , „�/ • .. IV--'.% ,. •. • ($ :...-. -; ' 'f...-4 7392 ,4 I . �,%I. / TT: tit 'I 1. •` / ��� r. r d .;� ., / k, t 1 �, 73 3 1., n 4. 3�i' 7739a";.:' `�ti �x yi' tr t.s ` ' 04°''¢ * . ii Wailea Village IL•'� ',Historic District ,� ,. . I ••:�' ., 19'S?14'. s Source:An Architectural Preservation Plan for Site 26591 Feature A and Feature B Located on Lands ofthe Former Hakalau Plantation,Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a,South Hilo District, Island ofHawai'i [TMK: (3)2-9-002:079(POR.)] dated April 2014. Figure 53.Map showing the extent of the Hakalau Historic District and Wailea Village Historic District both of which were designated in 1973 (Forbes and Hibbard 2018:61). 74 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 2.Background '� N e © A iik 't, Area of Detail • yo,.. 0 200 Km .r: 1 ^� tk.t lit I°�r •k , 'w"-"'t '' ,,-.f si• ., . Hakalau Historic District �'" a y_ " '� "/ ' �:Atill(in �xrp� 1: SIHP50-10-16-7392 ' t ` �t Rosendahl 2009 :+ a- Haun and Henry 2014 a i' ...-„� ' Rosendahl 2001a Leineweber 2009 a f' '.. Walker and Rosendahl 1994a.. 1994b '-*".-'1.14 ***;.'"'1100 2001b. ç !? osefldalu x ...,.., A .010A 0, ...4.......111111a., ., % Hibbard_2009 '. ''�� jti \ \ ,.;, Forbes and I Iibbard 201 S x',a•' 1✓ r "Q ' r�, ,' a" ;'. ,,,,,,/..., ,),,:llll, .. ' '"„10010 l;\.„, .,;,al".-:"" '-, s -. 11171„ ' 1‘, 11; ''',,,,,,,::::::/,:::,/ 4y : ; llannnatt and Uyeoka 2007 Li. , lIllL . - J 4 J pp O Project area 'N " --'' ., � ', J o I00 200 D Tax Map Key (TMK) , R 0 Meters Figure 54. Location of prior studies conducted in the vicinity of the project area. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 75 2.Background Cultural Surveys Hawai`i, Inc. prepared an archaeological monitoring report (Hammatt and Uyeoka 2007) for Hakalau Elementary School,Hawai`i Inter-Island DOE Cesspool Project in TMK: (3)2-9-002:005, located south of the current project area (see Figure 54). The purpose of the excavations at the school was to install a new 2,000- gallon septic tank and leach field to improve the school's wastewater system. They conducted two trench excavations,one at the leach field and the other at the septic tank. The leach field trench measured approximately 50 feet long by 40 feet wide and extended to a depth of 5 feet. The septic tank trench measured approximately 20 feet long by 11 feet wide and extended to a depth of 10 feet. All excavations were completed without encountering any significant subsurface deposits. They recommended that if any subsurface activities are conducted in the future that an on-site archaeological monitor be present. PHRI conducted an archaeological inventory survey and cultural impact assessment for an 8.7-acre Hakalau coastal property (TMKs: (3) 2-9-002:079 and 081) (Rosendahl 2009), located to the east-southeast of the project area along the coastal bluffs(Figure 54). The objective of this study was to determine the general nature, extent, and potential significance of any archaeological-historical remains present, the historic preservation implications of any such remains for the feasibility of proposed residential development, and the general scope of work and level of effort for any subsequent archaeological-historic preservation work that might be needed. During their survey, two archaeological sites were identified: Site 26591, which consists of two warehouses (Features A and B) and foundation remnants (Features C thru I); and Site 26592, the site of the former Japanese/Korean cemetery (previously documented by PHRI(2001a)but never assigned a SIHP number). In 2009, Spencer Leineweber nominated the Hakalau Stream Bridge (SIHP 50-10-16-9090; see Figure 54) to the National Register of Historic Places(Leineweber 2009). The bridge was considered significant under Criteria A, B,and C.Leineweber's statement of significance reads thusly: The Hakalau Stream Bridge is significant under Criteria A,B, and C. Criterion A is applicable for the bridge's association with the Hilo Railroad Company. Criterion B is applicable for the bridge's association with three founders of the Hilo Railroad Company. Criterion C is applicable since the bridge is a representative example of early twentieth-century engineering technology as well as a source of information about early twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction. A copy of the Hakalau Stream Bridge National Register Nomination Form in available in Appendix A. As part of the proposed project, ASM Affiliates undertook an archaeological inventory survey of the project area. The fieldwork was conducted on February 7th and March 16thi 2023 and resulted in the documentation of four previously documented Historic Era sites; Site 50-10-16-09070 (the former Hakalau Plantation Manager's House), Site 50-10-16-09090 (Hakalau Stream [Highway 19] Bridge [State]), Site 50-10-16-26591 (six features of the Hakalau Mill), Site 50-10-16-30187 (old Mamalahoa Highway), and one newly identified; Site 50-10-16-T-1 (Hakalau Stream Bridge [County]) shown on Figure 55. The six features of the Hakalau Mill recorded by ASM include a tramway/stone staircase (Feature J), eight concrete flume supports (Feature K), the Hakalau Mill foundation (Feature L), the mill access road (Feature M), a smokestack base (Feature N), and a pipe stanchion (Feature 0). The Hakalau Plantation Manager's House (Site 09070) was assessed under NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance under Criteria A(a), B(b), and C(c). No further work was recommended at this site because it will not be impacted by the Hakalau Bridge Project. The Hakalau Stream Bridge (Site 09090)was assessed under NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance under Criteria A(a),B(b), and C(c)and it was recommended that the bridge be recorded by an architectural historian as mitigation of effects from the proposed Hakalau Bridge Project. Site 26591,the Hakalau Mill,was assessed under NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance under Criteria A(a), C(c), and D(d). No further work was recommended at this site because it will not be impacted by the Hakalau Bridge Project. Site 30187, the Old Mamalahoa Highway, was assessed under NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance under Criteria A(a)and D(d).No further work was recommended at this site because it will not be impacted by the Hakalau Bridge Project. The Hakalau Stream Bridge (Site T-1)was constructed in 1930 and carries the Old Mamalahoa Highway across Hakalau Stream. The bridge was assessed under NRHP eligibility and HRS Chapter 6E significance under Criteria A(a), C(c), and D(d) and it was recommended that the bridge be recorded by an architectural historian prior to commencement of the proposed Hakalau Bridge Project. 76 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Ir q O ', to ccs ^ 14 ci Uit cn NI: G1 y .2 Of fel �' ' '\\ , , Q [i til to 1 11 1. \ . 1 1 Hil .. • d v 1` i • ••.w , 5+« d op _U c3 • • 1 11. 1 vy 1 �?� w _2 IV 111 -51 1 U N o ta 1 c I) 11010, y `°' ,r 1? 1 " CC trl ,— ."1_.-+ ' • U z J Q G 1 'w�l. O c3 1 U n) 1 ^�,�v m U J ' • Q O 1 pH� H 1 '• 6 CA 1 q ct 76. CAI Qccs 1 x I) e -- w° \ ' to Q 3.Consultation 3. CONSULTATION Gathering input from community members with genealogical ties and long-standing residency or relationships to the project and or study area is vital to the process of assessing potential cultural impacts on resources, practices, and beliefs. It is precisely these individuals that ascribe meaning and value to traditional resources and practices. Community members often possess traditional knowledge and in-depth understanding that are unavailable elsewhere in the historical or cultural record of a place. As stated in the OEQC (1997) Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, the goal of the oral interview process is to identify potential cultural resources, practices, and beliefs associated with the affected project area. It is the present authors' further contention that the oral interviews should also be used to augment the process of assessing the significance of any identified traditional cultural properties. Thus, it is the researcher's responsibility to use the gathered information to identify and describe potential cultural impacts and propose appropriate mitigation as necessary.This section of the report begins with a description of level of effort undertaken to identify persons believed to have knowledge of the study area, followed by the interview methodology. This section of the report concludes with a presentation of the interview summaries that have been reviewed and approved by the consulted parties. Outreach Efforts In an effort to identify individuals knowledgeable about traditional cultural practices and/or valued cultural resources associated with the current project and study area, a public notice containing (a) locational information about the project area, (b) a description of the proposed project, and (c) contact information was printed in a newspaper with state-wide readership. The public notice was submitted to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) on January 10",2023,for publication in their monthly newspaper,Ka Wai Ola. This notice was subsequently published in the February edition of Ka Wai Ola and a copy of the public notice is included in Appendix B of this report. From the public notice,zero responses were received. On August 9th, 2022, the HDOT, submitted a letter to the County of Hawai`i Cultural Resources Commission (CRC) as part of a Section 106 consultation effort inviting the CRC to provide comments on any historic resources located within the project area. In a reply letter dated September 28r", 2022, the CRC provided extensive comments to the HDOT. The CRC requested Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the undertaking be sure to include the area downstream of Hakalau Bridge. A copy of CRC's September 28r", 2022, letter is included as Appendix C of this report. The concerns and comments of the CRC have also been considered as part of the mitigative measures discussed in the subsequent chapter(see Chapter 4). In addition to the public notice, ASM staff attempted to contact the following individuals listed alphabetically (by last name) below in Table 6. As part of the outreach efforts for the individuals listed below, ASM contacted them either via phone or email. If initial contact was made via phone, ASM staff introduced themselves, and explained the nature of the proposed project as well as the scope of the CIA study. After this initial conservation, ASM staff emailed a community consultation packet to the community members which included a more comprehensive explanation of the proposed project, contact information including, phone, email, and physical address of ASM staff,as well as maps showing the location of the project area.If initial contact was made via email, the community consultation packet was provided. In some instances,the community members responded with either the names of other community members they felt would be able to contribute to this study or they did not respond altogether. Of the eighteen people contacted,five(Carmelito Arkangel, Susan Forbes,Kehaulani Lum,Blake McNaughton, Keith"Bradda Skibs"Nehls)agreed to be interviewed for this study of which only four(excluding Kehaulani Lum) were able to review and approve their interview summary for inclusion in this report. Their interview summaries are included below. 7& CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 3.Consultation Table 6. Community members contacted for consultation. Name Affiliation Contact Dates Results Akau,James January 20,2023 Referred ASM staff reach out to Nick Frazier, Blake McNaughton,Pi`i Laeha,and Todd Otake.Was able to get contact information for Blake McNaughton only. Arkangel,Carmelito Makahanaloa May 1,2023 See interview summary below. Fishing Association. Area resident (Makahanaloa) Camara,Kuali`i February 7,2023 No response February 27,2023 Cariaga,Jed Hunter January 20,2023 Called but was unable to leave a voicemail. Crivello,Tifaine Area resident January 17,2023 No response (Hakalau) January 19,2023 Dudley,Leila Area resident January 17,2023 Responded on January 17th,2023 indicating (Makahanaloa) that she didn't have information to share with ASM but referred ASM staff to reach out to Blake McNaughton and Ku'ulani Camara. Forbes, Susan Area resident January 17,2023 See interview summary below. (Hakalau) Kurisu,Derek Raised in May 1,2023 No response Hakalau Plantation Community. Executive Vice President of KTA Super Stores. Kurokawa,Brad Area resident January 17,2023 No response (Hakalau) February 17,2023 Lang,Leslie Writer/Historian January 17,2023 Responded on January 17,2023,with the recommendation that ASM staff contact Akiko Matsuda. Lum,Kehaulani Area resident January 17,2023 Interviewed on January 26,2023.Unable to (Hakalau) get in touch with Kehaulani to review and approve her interview summary. Matsuda,Akiko Area resident January 17,2023 Responded on January 17,2023 with the (Wailea) recommendation that ASM staff reach out to Kehaulani Lum,Brad Kurokawa,and Susan Forbes McNaughton,Blake Vice President February 28,2023 See interview summary below. of Makahanaloa Fishing Association Muise,Ku'ulani Area resident January 17,2023 No response. (Kahua) February 17,2023 Nehls,Keith(Bradda Chief Executive May 1,2023 See interview summary below. Skibs) Officer of the non-profit Basic Image,Inc. Table 6 continues on next page. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 79 3.Consultation Table 6. continued. Name Affiliation Contact Dates Results Office of Hawaiian -- May 1,2023 No response Affairs Urakami,Kawika Area resident January 27,2023 No response (Umauma) February 17,2023 Uyeoka,Kelly Area resident January 17,2023 Responded February 6,2023,stated since she (Hakalau) January 27,2023 wasn't raised there she felt it would be best that ASM staff reach out to Kuali`i Camara. End of Table 6. INTERVIEW METHODOLOGY Prior to the interview, ASM staff provided information about the nature and location of the proposed project and informed the potential interviewees about the scope of the current study. The potential interviewees were informed that the interviews were completely voluntary and that they would be given an opportunity to review their interview summary prior to inclusion in this report. With their consent, ASM staff then asked questions about their background, their knowledge of past land use, and the history of the project area, as well as their knowledge of any past or ongoing cultural practices. The informants were also invited to share their thoughts on the proposed development and offer mitigative solutions. The interviews were conducted either via Zoom or in-person, as per the consultee's preference. The four approved interview summaries are provided below. SUSAN FORBES On January 27th, 2023, ASM staff Kau`i Lopes met with Hakalau resident Susan Forbes via Zoom video call to discuss the proposed project. Much of the information shared during this interview focused her main concerns over the project and her research of the area. Susan Forbes has been a resident of Hakalau Plantation Village since mid- 2011, the neighborhood adjacent to the project area on the Hilo side. Upon her moving to the area, she and her husband became interested in its history and began researching. This history, most of which relates to the era of the sugar plantations,is available on their website,hakalauhome.com. One of her major concerns for the project is the selection of an alternative route to cross Hakalau Gulch while the Hakalau Bridge is undergoing rehabilitation. If the route chosen is the Old Mamalahoa Highway it would be a safety concern for their residential neighborhood. Old Mamalahoa Highway through their area is not wide enough to accommodate the amount of traffic that would be diverted from the Hawaii Belt Highway. Families, children and the elderly regularly walk along this road. Further,if this alternative route turns into a permanent scenic route,it will attract tourists, creating more traffic. Cliff safety is also another concern related to this route, sharing that if the portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway on the Honoka`a side of Hakalau Gulch is reconstructed, cliff failures pose a danger. She had discussed the impact of cliff failures with Dr. Bob Nishimoto, a retired marine biologist for the Department of Land and Natural Resources. He stated that cliff failures are also detrimental to the marine life. Further research supported his statement. She doesn't currently know if an emergency route has been selected. However, considering that the 1946 tsunami wiped out the Gulch Camp adjacent to the 1930s Hakalau Stream Bridge, it doesn't seem safe to select an emergency route at sea-level. Concerning the lead contamination, she also mentioned having a discussion with a scientist on the lead in the water and how lead gets flushed out on a regular basis which wasn't of much concern. The following portions of the interview relate to the history of the project and surrounding area, including the historical significance of the project area in Hawaiian history. From 2014-2016, the owner of Hakalau Point proposed a development that included the construction of houses near the cliffs. Susan Forbes advocated for the preservation of the Point by submitting a recommendation to the county to acquire the point under the Public Access and Open Space Natural Resource Preservation Commission (PONC). The owner at the time wouldn't consider selling the Point to the County unless Hakalau Valley was also included. A year later, the County approved the acquisition of both the Point and the Valley. The owner was willing to sell to the County at a certain price, but the assessed value of the properties was less than that price.Ultimately,the County did not acquire the property. During the PONC process, she learned of the historical significance of the area to Hawaiian history. Hakalau was the site of a great landing and battle by Kamehameha and Keknhaupi`o against the warriors of Maui circa 1791. This is a seminal event in Kamehameha's rise to power and unification of the Hawaiian Islands. She noted that currently, the Hawaiian Legacy Reforestation Initiative would be acquiring a parcel on the Point. She hopes there is 80 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`a`a,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 3.Consultation an opportunity to work with them to educate the public and honor both the Hawaiian and Sugar Era histories along a walking path that may be created on the Point. In talking about her research on the area's plantation history, Susan identified three camps adjacent to the project area, one of which was in Hakalau Gulch but was destroyed in the 1946 tsunami, the other two she identified as Camp 1 (Hakalau Upper Camp) and Camp 2 (Hakalau Lower Camp). Susan's house currently sits on the site of Camp 1,whereas Camp 2 is situated niakai of the old Mamalahoa Highway and was the largest of the roughly 18-20 camps that existed for the Hakalau Plantation. Susan continued to elaborate on the history of these camps, sharing how over time the camps changed and moved depending on how close the laborers needed to be to the sugar cane. As mechanization became more available, she shared the plantation began to reduce its workforce and consolidate, which she noted was not unique to Hakalau but rather typical for plantations. By the 1950s, the owners at the time, C. Brewer and Company decided to discontinue providing housing for its laborers. Workers were given the opportunity to buy their houses and move them elsewhere, otherwise what was left would be demolished. She noted that by 1975,75%of the plantation employees had moved out of the area, primarily to Pepeekeo. Whatever was left of the camps within the area was subsequently torn down. Hakalau Upper and Lower camps were the last to be demolished. Once the homes were removed or demolished the land was planted with cane, an attempt for the plantation to survive. Concerning cemeteries that can be found within the area, Susan identified a Korean cemetery located on the tip of Hakalau Point and a Japanese cemetery near the Hakalau lower camp site.Archaeological Inventory surveys have been conducted for both. To get more information on area cemeteries, she suggested reaching out to Akiko Matsuda, the"expert"on cemeteries, and advocating for their protection. Akiko Matsuda hosts a Cemetery Stewardship effort each month to clean some cemeteries, although none are in the area of the bridge rehabilitation project. She noted that behind Akiko's bed and breakfast in Wailea is where the Hawaiian cemetery is located and is on lands currently owned by Haili church. Susan also shared how in the 1970's there were efforts to remove some of the remains,but unfortunately,there isn't good documentation on those efforts. BLAKE MCNAUGHTON On March 13, 2023, a site visit/interview was conducted with Blake McNaughton, the Vice President of Makahanaloa Fishing Association. Blake met with ASM staff Kau`i Lopes on the side of the Old Mamalahoa Road near the site of the Hakalau Plantation Company warehouse for introductions and discussions about the scope of the current project. Blake moved from Waimea to Hilo in 2006 and lastly to Pepeekeo in 2008 where he currently resides with his wife and two daughters.Aside from recalling his family being from the area, as a surfer, fisher, and gatherer of the Hilo coastlines,Blake is particularly interested in this project to make sure access to Hakalau Bay is not cut off. As Vice President of the Makahanaloa Fishing Association, their mission is to grow and protect the fishing community's rights while maintaining the generational bond with shoreline areas. Aside from serving on the board,Blake works at Kamehameha Schools with their`Aina Ulu program. As the conversation continued, Kau`i asked about the current gate that restricts vehicular access down to Hakalau Bay. Making their way down the road on foot, Blake shared that the gate was put up about 3-4 years ago when the access to the old bridge was closed due to erosion. He shared how prior to the closure of the old bridge, you could find a variety of people driving down to camp,to sing karaoke, and in general to enjoy the area, even the "old timers" would go down. While this closure unfortunately affects whether the kupuna can come down, Blake shared that this restriction has some benefits like how less people in the area allows for the resources to thrive and come back and having less issues in the area. Currently there are two ways to access the bay, both by foot, one on the road and the other down the trail. Blake pointed out where the trail starts and ends and shared that it was originally the site of the old cable tramway. He shared that this trail is maintained by some of the uncles in the community and named uncle Skipper Butts as someone to reach out to for further consultation. Continuing down to the old bridge, Blake and Kau`i continued their conversation on the resources within the area. Blake named hau (Hibiscus tiliaceus), 'Wu (Artocarpus altilis), `ohi`a (Metrosideros polymorpha), loulu (Pritchardia), hala (Pandanus tectorius), and milo (Thespesia populnea) as some of the main plants you find in regions like Hakalau as well as adding along the cliffs you find hinahina (ku i ka pali/kahakai) (Heliotropiumn anomalum), and `ae`ae(Lycium sandwicense). Looking down from the road,Blake pointed out a"back road"below that was flooded with water,mentioning the existence of a punawai(spring)that causes the road to flood with water as opposed to from the river. Next to that area he pointed out the patch of ho`i`o (Pteridium aquilinum), which he shares is abundant in this region and continues to be gathered by the community today. Blake expressed how to him, the practice of gathering and sustaining oneself with `ai(food) from your own community is what makes someone local, and having access to these resources is why he is adamant on maintaining the access to the bay. Approaching CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 81 3.Consultation the bridge,Blake shared where the erosion started to occur as well as listing the types of 'o'opt((goby)that could be found in the stream: nakea (Awaous guamensis), `akupa (Eleotris sandwicensis), `alamo`o (Lentipes concolor) and nopili (Sicyopterus stimpsoni). He mentioned that because the `o`opu are transitional, you commonly find the "junker climbers"like the `akupa a bit more downstream since they are bigger and are limited by their size,whereas the smaller species like the alamo'o and nopili are"better climbers"and can be found higher upstream. Continuing the hike down to the bay, mai`a (banana; Musa sp.), niu (Cocos nucifera) and kukui (Aleurites moluccana) were further identified growing in the area. Approaching the causeway where the river flows over the road, Blake continued to share about the Hakalau aquifer and how it is one of the biggest aquifers in the state. The stream is constantly flowing and is for the most part healthy. Identifying other freshwater resources, Blake pointed out a prawn (Dendrobranchiata) and a hihiwai (Neritina granosa),that he shares is further utilized by the fishermen who will come up stream to catch bait and then go down to the shore to fish. Interestingly he shared that for a saltwater fish, you can find aholehole (Kuhlia sandvicensis) upstream. Crossing the causeway and approaching the flatter area below the bridge, Blake credited Uncle Skipper and his crew for mowing the area, out planting native vegetation,putting up an informational kiosk, and building a community space while the road was still open to vehicle use. Since the closure, the areas where people would park have been overgrown. Walking through the area where the road was flooded, Blake related how this was one of the area's that an uncle speculated to have been a site for to`i kalo (irrigated taro). Along the bay, Blake continued to identify other marine resources that would be harvested in the area, sharing that he would set net to catch 'ama`ama (Mugil cephalus), as well as noting halalu (young akule) and akule (Trachurops crumenophthalmus)appearing in the bay during the summertime and moi(Polydactylus sexfilis). Ending the hike on the site where the old mill was situated, Blake pointed out the landing at Hakalau point and the areas where divers would enter the water to dive. Regarding the name of Hakalau as many perches,he equated the perches to the noio (Anous minutus), which he recalls frequenting the area and especially making home in the nooks of the pali (cliff) face. Looking down at the rocks from the break wall, `opihi (Cellana sp.), ha`uke'uke (Colobocentrotus atratus), and 'a'atm (Grapsus tenuicrustatus) were further identified as marine resources that would be gathered. Blake shared that ecologically, this bay is no different than the resources you would find within the other gulches along Hilo like Kolekole and Honoli`i. As far as traditional mo`olelo of the place, Blake shared he doesn't have in depth knowledge, but recalls the story of Kamiki mentioning Hakalau Nui and Hakalau Iki, the story of Poli`ahu and Pele refers to Hakalau as a stopping point, and the history of Kamehameha staying in the area. He suggested reaching out to Ku'ulani Muise who he says is the best to contact for additional mo`olelo. Regarding any traditional sites prior to the plantation, he noted that there is kir tda (fishing shrine) but does not know the exact location. Additionally, Blake added that hunting within Hakalau is still practiced in the mauka(mountain)regions. When asked about the lead contamination he shared how the bay is constantly changing, much like how Honoli`i changes depending on the river. Because of this change the water is constantly filtering out and spreading out the lead in the bay. He shared that he hasn't personally heard of any sever cases of lead poisoning due to being exposed in this area and reasons that it would take constant consumption of the contaminated soil to get to a concerning level. However, Blake also questions the process of the remediation pointing out that the heavy equipment and vehicles running through the area will disturb the contaminated soil and would most likely have to be decontaminated after. Blake expressed his main reason for meeting and sharing his mana`o was to emphasize that during this process,those who gather resources from the area are not restricted and that the outcome does not end in a permanent closure of the park. He also suggests that the county plan parking solutions prior to any closures, recalling that while he was still able to access Kolekole, there was no way to safely park his vehicle. At the end of the interview, he expressed how magical and valuable Hakalau is to local families and gatherers and hopes that access to this place remains. KEITH "BRADDA SKIBS" NEHLS On May 3rd, 2023, ASM staff Kau`i Lopes contacted Keith "Bradda Skibs" Nehls via phone call to discuss the historical and cultural significance of the current project area. The majority of the interview focused on Bradda Skibs sharing about the outreach he does in Pohoiki, Honolii, and Hakalau with his non-profit and how the work they do is important for reconnecting people back to `aina and taking care of these spaces.Bradda Skibs is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the non-profit Basic Image, Inc., where they establish live in classrooms to teach various communities about Hawaiian values and culture. 82 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 3.Consultation In talking specifically about Hakalau,he shared that he doesn't know much history except that there was a big battle that happened in the valley where many Hawaiian lives were lost.He also noted that the area is abundant with resources, specifically canoe resources and marine sources that he recalls kupuna driving down to fish when the road was open. Hakalau was one of the areas where his non-profit established a gathering space to conduct outreach to the youth of Hakalau, something that he is passionate about and has been doing for the past 20 years. The gathering and teaching of the youth is important as they focus on helping the youth stay away from drug use and other illegal activities by cleaning and taking care of the area. Since the closure of the road, Bradda Skibs shared that they can't gather as frequently as they have in the past, and because of this, he has seen some of the youth go back to doing drugs. He hopes that Hakalau will reopen again,especially the road access since it is an easier way for all age groups to go down and enjoy the area. Bradda Skibs also shared about Skipper Butts and how he has been maintaining and taking care of the area in Hakalau. Towards the end of the interview, he shared that Hakalau is a beautiful place, a gem,and that he hopes that they can return and gather once again in Hakalau. CARMELITO "LITO"ARKANGEL An in-person interview was conducted on May 10r'', 2023, by ASM staff, Lokelani Brandt with Mr. Carmelito Arkangel at Hale`olelo in Hilo. Mr. Arkangel, better known as "Lito" is a long-time Hilo Paliku resident, father, songwriter, musician, and educator. Having spent the better part of his life in Hilo Paliku, Lito mentioned that he spent a lot of time at Hakalau and is where he raised his children. He shared that Hakalau is a"very important and traditional area to teach our keiki (children) traditional knowledge skills such as ocean knowledge; fishing, diving, thrownet, surfing, shoreline conservation, ocean safety and awareness, as well as utilizing resources from the river" and the gulch for self-subsistence purposes. Lito commented that when there is a natural disaster or when "we no longer can depend on common everyday commodities"having these resources (which are discussed in greater detail below)and the knowledge to gather them is essential.As such,he added,bringing his keiki to Hakalau is one way he teaches them to be more self-sustainable and that Hakalau also encourages and provides access for the community to be more self-sustainable. When asked if he was familiar with any past or on-ongoing cultural practices and valued resources, Lito shared that lawai`a (fishing, marine resource gathering) has and continues to take place within the Hakalau Bay area. He explained that just outside of Hakalau Bay is a channel where pelagic fish are found and that this channel extends roughly between Pepeekeo Point and just north of Hakalau Bay. Some fishers, he noted, will go out on a boat and some will fish for pelagic fish from the shore including Hakalau Point. A little closer inland of the pelagic zone and along the cliff faces, Lito noted, are various species of reef fish including `ulua, `uhu, kole, kumu, and many other species. He added that these fish are often gathered using the lu'u kai(diving) method. Closer to the Hakalau River mouth are found the "silver fish" such as aholehole, mullet, moi, `o`io, and others. Along the rocky shoreline areas, Lito shared, you will find shellfish, for example, 'opihi, ko`ele, pupu`awa, makaloa, ha`uke`uke. As you proceed closer to the river mouth and up the river are valued river species such as wi, `o`opu, `opae, prawns, tohe (puhi `uha), and different types of limu such as limn `ele`ele as well as rarer deep sea limu, which is found offshore. Lito related that Hakalau is one of the few places along the Hilo Paliku area where there is this type of concentration of marine resources and is what makes this place waiwai(rich,valuable,important)"i ka wa kahiko a i keia wa"(in the past up the present-day). In addition to the diversity of marine resources, Lito pointed out that along the gulch floor and river edge are patches of ha V'o (warabi) which people gather for subsistence purposes and that alualu pita'a (pig hunting) also takes place in the valley. He indicated that there are other flowering plants found in Halakau Gulch that people gather for lei.Lito shared that the river stones at Hakalau are also an important resource because people will come to the shoreline near the river mouth to gather `iii`iii (pebble) for hula (traditional dance). Also, he added, people gather `ala(dense waterworn volcanic stones)from the river which is essential to making imu(underground ovens). As described by Lito, "Hakalau has a strong energy" and felt that this energy comes from the land and the history of this place. He recalled an old mo'olelo about a kahuna `ana`ana(sorcerer)that lived at Hakalau who was known to travel up and down the pall(cliff). He reflected that the County of Hawai`i always knew there was lead in the soil and that there was always talk about "fixing" the problem but the "project was never prioritized". Lito recalled that there was a time when Hakalau Beach Park was overrun with things like drug use and loitering but with the leadership of Bradda Skibs (Keith Nehls) and the late Mayor, Billy Kenoi, and the help of the community, the area was cleaned up. Lito commended the leadership and efforts of Braddah Skibs and Billy Kenoi and recalled how Braddah Skibs invited everyone, including those who were loitering at the beach park,to lend a hand in cleaning up and taking care of the area. When asked about his thoughts on the closure and potential reopening of the park, Lito CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 83 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts shared that for him and others in the community, the closure was seen as a sort of kapu (restriction) period. He added that the closure of the park allowed the area and resources to replenish. He shared that although the closure put a pause on the park clean-up efforts,he stated that once the park is reopened,the"culture and community going come back...we're waiting to malama that area again." When asked about his thoughts on the park's reopening after the project is completed,Lito felt it is important to "prioritize `aina over the people" and reflected on the `olelo lahui "Ua mau ke ea o ka `aina i ka pono" which emphasizes the importance of maintaining the life and integrity of `aina. Lito expressed that "Western styles of management" which are often imported from elsewhere and enacted in Hawai`i do not incorporate the kuana`ike Hawai`i(Hawaiian perspective) or kuana`ike kama?Una (kama`aina perspective), which for him is problematic. He shared that the reopening of the park is a chance to reframe the mindset of the community and to engage with them to implement positive change. He felt that this is such a critical aspect of future park/beach management because of the history of neglect, improper park use, and the changing community demographics. He felt that the changes that had been implemented before the park's closure by Braddah Skibs should serve as inspiration or even a motto for how parks in Hawaii County could be managed. He shared that before the park's closure, there was outplanting being done, mural patining to help beautify Hakalau as well as community events for the entire `ohana that promoted cultural and ecological awareness. He advocated for the incorporation of these prior efforts into future park plans and would like to see signage developed and installed to help educate people about the rich history of Hakalau. In closing,Lito was glad to see forward momentum on remediating the lead contamination issue and looks forward to returning to and caring for Hakalau Beach Park. 4. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL IMPACTS The OEQC guidelines identify several possible types of cultural practices and beliefs that are subject to assessment. These include "...subsistence, commercial, residential, agricultural, access-related, recreational, and religious and spiritual customs" (OEQC 1997:1). The guidelines also identify the types of cultural resources, associated with cultural practices and beliefs that are subject to assessment. These include other types of historic properties, both man made and natural, submerged cultural resources, and traditional cultural properties. The origin of the concept and the expanded definition of traditional cultural property is found in National Register Bulletin 38 published by the U.S. Department of Interior-National Park Service (Parker and King 1998). An abbreviated definition is provided below: "Traditional cultural property" means any historic property associated with the traditional practices and beliefs of an ethnic community or members of that community for more than fifty years. These traditions shall be founded in an ethnic community's history and contribute to maintaining the ethnic community's cultural identity. Traditional associations are those demonstrating a continuity of practice or belief until present or those documented in historical source materials,or both. "Traditional" as it is used, implies a time span of at least 50 years, and a generalized mode of transmission of information from one generation to the next, either orally or by act. "Cultural" refers to the beliefs, practices, lifeways, and social institutions of a given community. The use of the term "Property" defines this category of resource as an identifiable place. Traditional cultural properties are not intangible, they must have some kind of boundary; and are subject to the same kind of evaluation as any other historic resource, with one very important exception. By definition, the significance of traditional cultural properties should be determined by the community that values them. It is however with the definition of"Property" wherein there lies an inherent contradiction, and corresponding difficulty in the process of identification and evaluation of potential Hawaiian traditional cultural properties,because it is precisely the concept of private property boundaries that runs counter to the traditional Hawaiian belief system. The sacredness of a particular landscape feature is often cosmologically tied to the rest of the landscape as well as to other features on it. To limit a property to a specifically defined area may actually partition it from what makes it significant in the first place. However offensive the concept of boundaries may be, it is nonetheless the regulatory benchmark for defining and assessing traditional cultural properties. As the OEQC guidelines do not contain criteria for assessing the significance of traditional cultural properties, this study will adopt the state criteria for evaluating the significance of historic properties, of which traditional cultural properties are a subset. To be significant the potential historic property or traditional cultural property must 84 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts possess integrity of location,design, setting,materials,workmanship,feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: a Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; c Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period,or method of construction;represent the work of a master; or possess high artistic value; d Have yielded,or is likely to yield,information important for research on prehistory or history; e Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. While it is the practice of the DLNR-SHPD to consider most historic properties significant under Criterion d at a minimum,it is clear that traditional cultural properties by definition would also be significant under Criterion e. A further analytical framework for addressing the preservation and protection of customary and traditional native practices specific to Hawaiian communities resulted from the Ka Pa`akai 0 Ka Aina v Land Use Commission court case. The court decision established a three-part process relative to evaluating such potential impacts: first, to identify whether any valued cultural, historical or natural resources are present and/or past or ongoing traditional customary practices; and identify the extent to which any traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised; second, to identify the extent to which those resources and rights will be affected or impaired; and third, specify any mitigative actions to be taken to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist. SUMMARY OF CULTURAL-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION This section presents a summary of the culture-historical context for Hakalau Nui and Kama`e ,which collectively revealed a vibrant history.Prior to the establishment of the North and South Hilo judicial districts,these areas were a part of Hilo,a vast district stretching from Waiakea in the south to `0'okala in the north.Hakalau Nui and Kama'e`e are located within the traditional subregion of Hilo called Hilo Paliku, an area known for its steep cliffs, lush vegetation, and extensive plateaus cut by numerous valleys and gulches, including Hakalau Gulch. This subregion has and continues to be admired and honored for its natural beauty as demonstrated by the numerous `olelo no`eau and indigenous classification system that refer to the plentifulness and diversities in the region's rains, winds, gulches,and valleys. It was precisely the abundance of waterways and valleys that made foot travel in this subregion particularly difficult. The plethora of place names recorded for Hakalau is yet another example of the traditional ecological knowledge once held by ancestral Hawaiian populations. These place names tell us of the presence of certain plant resources (holei(Ochrosia spp.), kukui(Aleurites moluccanus), and mai`a (Musa spp.)),water features both natural and constructed(Honohina,Kalepolepo,Kapahunui,Kapihae,Kawelo,Kuamo`ohua,Wa`awa`a/Wawa, Waiau, Waihaka, and Wailimu), prominent hills (Kaloaloa, Kanepu`u), old village sites (Lanikeha, Nakama), and coastal locations(Awake`e,Kaoku,Lemupahupahu). The traditional mo`olelo that make explicit reference to the lands of Hakalau and Kama`e`e recount the visit made by the deity, Hi`iakaikapoliopele and her companion, Wahine`oma`o. This story tells us of Malaeakini, the famed `ohi`a lehua (Metrodideros polymorpha) grove which was used by Hi`iaka to rid the bay of po`e 'ula lele (flying ghost). This lehua grove was also known to have healing properties and was used by po`e ho`olana ma`i (people with a specific form of sickness that is unknown at this time). This mo`olelo also tells us that Hakalau Bay was an ancient surf spot. Another lesser-known mo`olelo tells of the chief Hua of Maui and the outcome of the Battle of Kani`auho`opio in which the warriors of Hawaii Island were slain at Hakalau by Hua and his army. The story of Ka-miki on the other hand tells of the naming of Hakalau. According to this mo`olelo, Hakalau was named for the area chiefs, a priest, and a skilled warrior (`olohe); Hakalau-lani-a-pi`i and Hakalau-a-olo were the chiefs; Hakalau-iki was the priest, and Hakalau-nui was the `olohe and land administrator (kaula `aina) who served under the chief Kolekole. In this story,the authors,Wise and Kihe,weave an extensive and intricate tale that highlights the numerous place names in Hilo Palikf. These places are associated with individuals who had familial ties and competed with each other,and who ultimately conspired against the visiting protagonist,Ka-Miki. Another mo'olelo, recorded by Desha recounts the battle that occurred at Hakalau between the forces of Kahekili of Maui and those of Hawai`i Island chief, Kalani`opu`u. Although Desha does not give an exact date, CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 85 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts based on Desha's listing of historical events, this battle appears to have transpired sometime between 1779 and 1882. As told by Desha, Kahekili's warriors, under the command of Kahahawai, were in the Hilo Paliku region because Keawemauhili,the all`i `ai kalana (district chief) of Hilo,permitted Kahekili to send some of his people to Hakalau to harvest koa for canoes. Kahahawai was a famed warrior of Maui and an aikane (favorite friend, companion) of Kahekili. When Kamehameha I and Kekuhaupi`o arrived by canoe in Hakalau,they were greeted by the chiefess Keakealani of Hilo, princess Liko`a, and princess Kahipa, daughter of Kanekoa, the all`i `ai kalana of Hamakua. In the original Hawaiian language texts, it states that Kahipa was living with female relatives in Hakalau in those days, and it is assumed that these relatives were Keakealani and Kahipa. While at Hakalau, Kahahawai stationed a spy to keep watch on the activities of the Hawai`i Island people. After the spy observed the arrival of Kamehameha and Kekuhaupi`o at Hakalau he ran back into the forest to report his observations to Kahahawai. Angered by this report, Kahahawai's suspicions were roused and he prepared to wage a secret attack on Kamehameha. Kahahawai expressed a great dislike for Kamehameha as he had thwarted him in a prior battle on Maui. While Kamehameha was idling in Hakalau, he received word that the Maui people were planning to attack him and his people. With delight,Kamehameha gathered his lead officers including Kekuhaupi`o, and organized his army including the accomplished band of slingstone throwers known as Hunalele. The Hunalele went to the mouth of Hakalau Stream to gather hard stones. Other bands were readied including the Hueloku who were skilled at spear throwing and seizing. Kamehameha's band of warriors ascended to the uplands where the 'ama`uma`u (Sadleria cvatheoides) ferns grew and met with the unprepared Maui forces. Kamehameha's Hunalele band hurled sling stones which struck down some of the Maui warriors. Soon a fierce battle was being waged in the uplands of Hakalau. Leading the Maui forces was Kaihe,who Kamehameha sought earnestly to defeat but Kekuhaupi`o urged Kamehameha to depart from his intentions and leave Kaihe for him. As Kamehameha turned his attention to the other Maui warriors, Kekuhaupi`o and Kaihe met face-to-face in a formidable and daring spear battle. Both Kaihe and Kekuhaupi`o displayed their excellence in spear fighting. After carefully studying each other for some time, Kekuhaupi`o hurled his spear which struck Kaihe's belly and pierced him through his back. At once, Kaihe was struck down which sent the remaining Maui forces into a flurry. Despite Kahahawai shouting words of encouragement to his army, they fled the battlefield into the uplands of Hilo, and Kamehameha's bravery was recognized by the elder chiefs such as Kalani`opu`u and Kawemauhili. The stories behind two famed wise sayings,pau kuhihewa id Hilo Paliku and e alu ka pule is Hakalau, offer further context regarding the origins and place-specificity of `olelo no'eau as well as the practice of `and`and (sorcery) and the use of cliffside trails where a particular chief, Pakilohana would search and kill unsuspecting victims. Historical accounts penned by Early foreigners noted the beauty, fertility, and ruggedness of Hilo Paliku. In addition to describing the rough terrain which made foot travel quite difficult and treacherous, we learn that inter- ahupua'a and inter-moku travel via canoes was often utilized in this region. At the time of the 1848 Mdhele `Aima, Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a was claimed and awarded to the ali`i wahine (chiefess), Miriam Kekau`onohi and upon her death in 1851,this ahupua'a was inherited by her second husband, Levi Ha'alelea. Regarding Kama`e`e, it appears as though this ahupua`a was divided into three, possibly four sections with three different ali'i laying claim including Eseta Kipa, Kalaimoku, Kaaiawaawa, and Kaunuohua. However, it appears that each of these all`i relinquished their interest as Kama'e`e, in its entirety, was transferred and incorporated into the inventory of Government Lands.Although there were no kuleana claims awarded within Hakalau or Kama' ,nine Government Land Grants were awarded in Kama`ee. The current project area encompasses portions of two of these land grants (Grant No. 1350 to Ioela and Grant No. 1057 to Manuhoa et al.). During the 1875 Boundary Commission hearing for Hakalau Nui five individuals, Kekualiilii, Kanehoalani, Lyman, Kapou, and Halaioo provided testimony regarding their knowledge of the boundaries. Collectively, their testimonies revealed a wealth of information about geographical features and land use during the late 19th century including the numerous streams found in Hakalau. The testimonies also describe fishing rights in the streams and open ocean. These rights were enforced and known by the residents of Hakalau of Kama`e`e. Bird catching is also noted to have taken place in the upper forested regions. Several forest settlements were also noted including one at Lanikeha and Nakama. Trails leading to the uplands were also noted by the informants as well as the practice of orally transmitting knowledge of the area's boundaries and gathering restrictions over the generations. Some of the informants mentioned the presence of the Government Road along with lo`i (irrigated terrace traditionally used to grow taro)in the upper portions of Hakalau,as well as bamboo,kukui, `ohi'a, and bananas. In 1871, a traveling correspondent wrote an account describing the beauty of the Hakalau Gulch, which was filled with trees, including coconut palms that surrounded the schoolhouses and native cottages that were nestled near the shore. This account describes this area just before large-scale sugar operations were established in the area. 86 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts However, by 1878,just a few years after the Treaty of Reciprocity was signed, the Hakalau Sugar Plantation was established by California sugar mogul Clause Spreckles,with W. G. Irwin& Company as his agent. The company's fields, overtime, covered the broad plateaus of both Hakalau and Kama`e`e, however, the heart of the company's operations was located in the makai portion of Hakalau Gulch which was accessible via the Government Road. Here, along the southern bank at the mouth of the river, the company established its mill site and a little upland on the makai side of the Government Road, they built a plantation camp. Another area critical to the Hakalau Sugar Company was the plateau overlooking Hakalau Bay where other ancillary structures associated with the company's daily operations were located. This area, over time, grew to become to neatly laid out community and was the heart of daily plantation life for the many laborers and their families. By the late 19th century, plans were drawn up to install a railroad along the Hilo and Hamakua coastline. The construction of a railroad was considered to be one of the most important elements in increasing sugar production along the Hilo and Hamakua coastline. The construction of the railroad greatly reduced or altogether eliminated the use of the Government Road which was unsuitable for the large cane trucks as the road was narrow, winding, and impassable in rainy weather. With Hilo quickly growing into the main port center,between 1909 and 1911,the Hilo Railroad Company began construction of a rail line along the north Hilo and Hamakua coast. The railroad spanned the Hakalau Gulch by means of a steel trestle girder bridge that measured 775 feet long and 261 feet tall. On April 1`t, 1946, a destructive tsunami swept through Hakalau Gulch and destroyed the mill site, and disrupted daily life and plantation operations. Although the Hakalau Bridge survived the blow of the waves, significant damage to other parts of the rail line made repairs financially unfeasible. By 1947, a new mill was constructed but by the 1950s, mounting debt, labor strikes, and the industry-wide shift towards mechanized harvesting created significant challenges for the Hakalau Sugar Company. It was during this time that the former railroad was altered to accommodate vehicular traffic and renamed Hawai`i Belt Road. In preparation for the opening of the Hakalau Bridge, the bridge was painted with a fresh coat of black lead paint. In April 1953, the ceremonial blessing of Hakalau Bridge was held.By 1962,the Hakalau plantation merged with the Pepeekeo Sugar Company which allowed the company to continue cultivating sugar and operating the Hakalau Mill. Throughout the remainder of the 20th century, sugar production along the Hilo and Hamakua coast continued to dwindle. To weather the changes, in 1971, the Pepeekeo Sugar Company along with other companies was consolidated into a sugar processing cooperative led by C. Brewer Company. Upon its final merger in 1973 with Mauna Kea Sugar, plans were made to close forever,the sugar operations in Hakalau. After a 92-year long run,in December of 1974,closing ceremonies were held for the plantation at Hakalau. The closure of the mill effectively contributed to the departure of numerous former plantation employees and their families from the area as well as the dismantling of former plantation buildings. In the decades following the closure of the Hakalau Plantation, the ownership of the former cane lands shifted into the hands of private owners. While some of the more intact plantation infrastructure has been retained for its historical and or architectural value (i.e. Hakalau Bridges, Warehouses, Plantation Manager's house, etc.) the mill site itself and its associated apparatus including the tramway and flume, are today but mere ruins. Efforts by the community to clean up and care for the areas have been ongoing,however,the abrupt closure of the beach park area has halted these efforts. IDENTIFICATION OF TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY PRACTICES,VALUED CULTURAL RESOURCES The information from the culture-historical background and the results of the consultation process has revealed the following with respect to traditional and customary practices and valued cultural resources at Hakalau and Kama'e`e. Forest Resources and Practices The background information reveals that the upland forest of Hakalau was utilized for various purposes. Bird hunters (po e kia mann) harvested the plumage of native birds for crafting royal insignia, while canoe carvers (kalaiwa`a) searched for koa logs to build canoes. Additionally, the forest served as a battleground between Kalani`opu`u's forces led by Kamehameha I and Kekuhaupi`o and Kahekili's forces from Maui. The Battle of Kani`auho`opio, which involved the chief Hua from Maui, also took place in Hakalau, but no specific location is mentioned. The upland areas contained at least two settlements, including one at Lanikeha and one at Nakama. Access to the upland forest was possible through foot trails, some of which followed the boundaries of the ahupua`a. As these practices and resources were limited to the upland region, it is anticipated that the proposed project would not impact the aforementioned resources and practices. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 87 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts Botanical Resources and Horticultural Practices A diversity of botanical resources and horticultural practices in Hakalau were identified. Various cultigens were planted in the region, with the mention of Kapihae `Auwai indicating the customary practice of growing kalo in irrigated terraces (lo`i). However, there is no evidence of widespread development of lo'i in Hakalau or Kama`e`e, suggesting that such practices may have been limited to the river and stream banks rather than the valley floor as seen elsewhere throughout the Hawaiian Islands. Traditionally, mai'a (banana), niu (coconut),puhala (pandanus), `uala (sweet potato),kO(sugarcane), `ulu (breadfruit), and `ohe(bamboo) were planted. During the Historic Period, other introduced cultigens were grown including 'alani (orange) and Laila (Pride of China). Other valued non- cultivated plant resources that were identified included holei (Ochrosia compta), koa, `ohi`a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha), 'ama`uma`u(Sadaleria cvatheoides), and kukui(Aleurites molucanna).From the consultation process, the following botanical (some of which are noted above) resources were identified including hau (Hibiscus tiliaceus), `ulu, `ohi`a, hala, and milo (Thespesia populnea), mala, niu, kukui, and ho'io (Pteridium aquilinum). Additionally, the consultation process identified the following plants which commonly grow on the coastal cliffs, namely hinahina (kfi i ka pali/kahakai) (Heliotropium anomalum), and `ac`ae (Lycium sandwicense). Some of the above-identified practices and resources are occurring within the project area and mitigative measures specific to these practices and resources and further described in the ensuing section. Waterways The waterways in Hakalau are significant cultural resources, as demonstrated in the background research. These rivers and streams are a fundamental feature of the region and essential to the survival of various life forms, including humans, and the overall prosperity of this land. The waterways provided fresh drinking water and were used for irrigation and the species living therein were and continue to be used for subsistence purposes. Several rivers and streams in the Hakalau and Kama`e`e areas were named, including Honohina, Kaulia, Kawelo, Kuamoohua, Hakalau, Kolekole, Wa`awa`a, and Umauma, but only Hakalau Stream is situated within the project area. Given the project area encompasses the lower makai portion of the Hakalau Stream, mitigative measures are further described in the ensuing section. Avian Resources From the consultation process, the noio (Anous minutus) was identified as a valued resource. As specified by the consultant party, the name Hakalau(lit. many perches) may be in reference to the numerous perches along the cliff face created by the noio. Although ASM staff could not confirm if noio are found within the cliffs located in the project area,mitigative measures are provided in the ensuing section. Marine/River Practices and Resources Although the historical background information describing specific marine and river resources were limited, we know from the Boundary Commission testimony that area resident had fishing rights in both the streams and ocean. From the consultation process, the following river species were identified; several types of 'o'opt( (goby) including nakea (Awaous guaniensis), `akupa (Eleotris sandwicensis), `alamo`o (Lentipes concolor) and nopili (Sicyopterus stimpsoni). Also, prawns (Dendrobranchiata), `opae (shrimp), wi/hihiwai (Neritina granosa),puhi `uha (Conger marginatus) were also identified. Of these species, the `o`opu nakea is known to inhabit the middle and lower reaches of the stream and areas with slow-moving, deep waters with gravel and fine sediment are their prime habitat and riffles at streams mouths are known spawning grounds. `O`opu are migratory and are known to move up and down their river during their lifetime. Of the marine species, the following were identified: aholehole (Kuhlia sandvicensis), akule and halalu (Trachurops crumenophthalmus), `ama`ama (Mugil cephalus), kole (Ctenochaetus spp.), kumu (Parupeneus porphyreus), moi (Polydactylus sexfilis), `uhu (Parrotfish), `ulna(Caranx spp.), 'o'io (Albula glossondonta); `opihi including ko`ele (Cellana sp.), pupu`awa (Drupa sp.), makaloa (Morula granulata), ha`uke`uke (Colobocentrotus atratus), `a`ama(Grapsus tenuicrustatus), and limu(seaweed). In addition to the resources noted above, the cultural historical background information noted that river stones from Hakalau Stream have and continue to be been utilized for imu (underground oven)practices. Also, during the battle between Kalani`opu`u and Kahekili's forces,river stones were gathered and used as clingstone. As the project area encompasses portions of Hakalau Stream which connects to the Pacific Ocean,mitigative measures are detailed in the following section. 88 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts Recreational,Access, and Subsistence Uses From the background information and consultation efforts, it is evident that coastal Hakalau was a favored recreational area namely surfing and fishing. Reference to Hakalau as a surf spot can be traced back to the legend of Hi`iakaikapoliopele and this practice persists today. Fishing and gathering of marine resources for subsistence purposes is another cultural practice that was and continues to be carried out in Hakalau.As such,mitigative actions are provided in the ensuing section. Historic Era Resources (Hakalau Plantation Company,Old Mamalahoa Highway, and Hakalau Stream Bridge [County and State]) Although large-scale commercial agriculture is not considered a traditional customary practice, the legacy of the Hakalau Plantation Company is a significant part of the project area's history. Remnants of this former era can still be found throughout the project area including the foundation of the Hakalau Mill and its associated infrastructure as well as both of the Hakalau Stream Bridges. As such, mitigative actions are provided in the following section. Concerning the old Mamalahoa Highway, given the scope of the proposed project which does not involve altering the old Mamalahoa Highway,there are no anticipated cultural impacts. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Of the traditional customary practices and valued cultural,historical or natural resources identified within the project area, the proposed project has the potential to impact the following: botanical resources and horticultural practices, waterways, avian resources, marine and river practices and resources, recreational uses, and Historic-era resources namely those associated with the Hakalau Plantation Company and the old Mamalahoa Highway. To mitigate the potential for adverse impacts to the above-identified practices and resources, the following mitigative actions are recommended. Botanical Resources and Horticultural Practices: As discussed above, the proposed lead remediation has the potential to impact botanical resources and horticultural practices within Hakalau Gulch. As requested by some of the interviewees during the consultation process, efforts should be made to minimize the impacts to these valued plant resources (identified above), as well as to reestablish populations of culturally important plant species after the soil remediation has been completed. In areas where ground disturbance is anticipated as part of the lead remediation, it is recommended that the replanting of traditionally important plant resources be incorporated into any landscaping plans, and that the project proponent should consult with community leaders to discuss ways in which the community can assist with any landscaping/out-planting efforts. One suggestion would be to first identify any traditionally important plants that might be removed from the area,then to collect cuttings and/or seeds of those plants that could be replanted as part of the re-naturalization effort. Waterways: The proposed project has the potential to impact Hakalau Stream which extends through the center of the project area and was identified as a significant cultural resource. While this potential impact should be mitigated by the appropriate installation of best management practices (BMPs),it is recommend that those BMPs be monitored throughout the course of the project to limit the potential for construction runoff into the stream. Furthermore, there should be no damming or blocking of any kind to Hakalau Stream in order to ensure that a continuous flow of the water continues through the stream and that any migrating river species are able to do so without injury. Avian Resources: As mentioned during the consultation process, the proposed project has the potential to impact traditionally important avian species. In order to lessen the potential for impacts to traditionally important avian species, the recommendations of the biological survey conducted f by a qualified professional or the project should be followed. Especially recommendations regarding constraining or limiting construction activities during nesting seasons or other sensitive periods to limit disturbance to any such species. Marine/River Practices and Resources: As discussed above regarding the waterways, the proposed project also has the potential to impact Marine/River Practices and Resources within Hakalau Stream and the nearshore waters of Hakalau Bay. While this potential impact should be mitigated by the appropriate installation of BMPs, it is recommend that those BMPs be monitored throughout the course of the project to limit the potential for construction runoff into the stream and ocean. Limiting construction runoff is the best way to protect the resources found within the stream and bay. Recreational, Access, and Subsistence Uses: The proposed project has the potential to (positively) impact recreational, access and subsistence uses of Hakalau Gulch and Hakalau Bay, by allowing for the reopening of the CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 89 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts County of Hawai`i Hakalau Beach Park. It is the intent of the project that upon completion of the proposed lead remediation, the Hakalau Beach Park will be reopened for public use. While public access will likely be limited or restricted during any proposed construction activities, it is imperative that this beach park be opened as soon as the area is deemed safe by the proper authorities and that vehicular access is allowed. Reopening the beach park will allow for continued recreation, access, and subsistence use of the area as well as allow the community to resume their prior beautification efforts and cultural and ecological awareness programs. Historic Era Resources Associated with the Hakalau Plantation Company: The proposed project has the potential to impact Historic era resources associated with the Hakalau Plantation Company, as well as the State's Hakalau Stream Bridge and the County's Hakalau Stream Bridge, which any machinery needed for the lead remediation will need to cross. The legacy of the Hakalau Plantation Company continues to be a significant part of the heritage of the Hakalau community. These resources have been documented to the standards set forth in Hawai`i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-275 and 276 as part of an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) prepared by ASM Affiliates (report in prep). While the documentation presented in the AIS report is meant to mitigate any potential impacts the Hakalau Plantation Company's former mill site and related infrastructure documented within Hakalau Gulch, it is recommended that the project proponent attempt to limit impacting that site to the extent possible during ground disturbing activities, and to reestablish the access roads to the shoreline after the lead remediation is complete. The project proponent should also adhere to any recommendations or requests provided by the State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD)upon their review of the AIS report,and to any mitigation measures that are recommended/requested by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) as part of the on-going Section 106 consultation for the rehabilitation of Hakalau Stream Bridge. Adherence to these measures will help ensure the project proponent is compliant with applicable laws governing historic resources and prevent and/or limit impacts to such resources. Other Recommendations for Consideration: Lastly, to honor and bring into the public's consciousness the Hawaiian and Plantation-Era history and ecological resources, it is recommended that educational and interpretive signage be developed with input and guidance by the community for selected resources within the project area (including Hakalau Stream Bridge). Such signage could highlight the plantation's heritage, the Hawaiian cultural history,and inform the public of the ways in which they can help protect the valued natural resources in the area. Also, given the gathering of natural resources (flora and faunal) has and continues to be exercised within the project area, it is recommended that there be ongoing monitoring and testing of the natural resources for the bioaccumulation of contaminants post-construction. The findings of such studies should also be publicly accessible. A post-construction monitoring and testing program will ensure that the natural resources,particularly those that are being consumed, are properly identified as "safe" or"unsafe" for human consumption. Such information should be conveyed to the public and updated as necessary. CONCLUSION hi summary, the culture-historical background, consultation, and recommendations provided above are intended to ensure that the activities associated with the Hakalau Bridge Project do not adversely impact any of the above- identified valued cultural resources and traditional customary practices. While none of the consulted parties expressed any strong opposition to the proposed project, the concerns, and recommendations offered above are intended to help the HDOT remain mindful of the cultural, social, and environmental uniqueness of this 'aim. Furthermore, this study is intended to inform HDOT of the cultural importance that is ascribed to this place by the community. Conducting background research, consulting with community members who so willingly gave their time and knowledge, and taking steps towards mitigating any potential cultural impacts are done so with the utmost aloha,for both the land and the people whose heritage is intimately connected to this landscape. If HDOT assumes its kuleana to implement the proposed project, we recommend that it be done so in the same spirit and practice,with aloha for both the land and the people. Failure to consider and implement the above-described recommendations has the potential to adversely impact the above-identified valued cultural resources and traditional customary practices. Likewise, the no-action alternative for the project has the potential for further degradation and loss of the traditional customary practices and resources occurring in the project area. 90 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i References Cited REFERENCES CITED Akana,C.L. and K.Gonzalez 2015 Hanau Ka Ua:Hawaiian Rain Names.Kamehameha Publishing,Honolulu. Alexander,A. C. 1920 Land Titles and Surveys in Hawaii. The Hawaiian Planters' Record XXIII:67-78. Electronic document, https://ags.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Land-Titles-and-Survey.pdf, accessed 2017/03/07. Alexander,W.D. 1890 A Brief History of Land Titles in the Hawaiian Kingdom. In Hawaiian Alamanac and Annual for 1891.Press Publishing Company,Honolulu. Alvarado,G. 2005 Index of Winds by Island.Unpublished manuscript,University of Hawai`i Library. Armstrong,J. 2003 Old Mill Site Eyed for Hakalau Beach Park: Land Donation Possible if Firm Can Unload Rural Roads. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 10 January: 1 & 6. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/,accessed April 18,2023. 2006 Hakalau Beachfront Property Gift: Owners of Land Want it to Become a Public Park. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 09 May: 1. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/, accessed April 18,2023. Athens,J. S.,T.Rieth, and T. S.Dye 2014 A Paleoenvironmental and Archaeological Model-Based Age Estimate for the Colonization of Hawai`i.American Antiquity 79(1):144-155. Beckwith,M.W. 1951 The Kumulipo A Hawaiian Creation Chant.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1971 Kepelino's Traditions of Hawaii. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 95. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Bishop,H. 2002 Hakalau gate sparks clash. Hawaii Tribune-Herald[Hilo, Hawaii]. 15 August: 1 and 8. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com. Boundary Commission 1874 Boundary Commission Book Vol.B,Reel#1. Microfilm. Mo`okini Library,University of Hawai'i at Hilo.Hawaiian Reference Collection. Bowser,G. 1880 Hawaiian Kingdom Statistical and Commercial Directory and Tourists' Guide George Bowswer & Co., Honolulu and San Francisco, CA. Electronic document, http://ulukau.org/elib/collect/polk1880/index/assoc/DO.dir/book.pdf,accessed October 8,2021. Buck,E. 1993 Paradise remade: The politics of culture and history in Hawai'i. Temple University Press, Philadelphia. Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia hyaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana,Hale Alii,Honolulu. C.Brewer and Company Limited 1974 Vets pay Final Tribute to Hakalau. Monthy Letter III (12). Electronic document, in www.hakalauhome.com. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 91 References Cited Cabot,L. 1879 Map of North Hilo Shoring the line of the Preliminary Railroad Survey. Hawai`i Land Survey Division, Registered Map No. 339. 1:24000 scale. Electronic document, http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search. Callis,T. 2017 Hakalau Beach Park Bridge Repairs Coming But Fix Doesn't Guarantee Reopening. West Hawaii Today [Kailua-Kona]. 04 September: Al. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Campbell, S.and P. Ogburn 2004 Pepeekeo Sugar Company History. Hawaiian Sugar Planters' Association Plantation Archives Cannelora,L. 1974 The origin of Hawaii land titles and of the rights of native tenants. Security Title Corp. Capellas,E. S. 1925 North of Hilo Bay. Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. April 30: 9. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/259014841/?terms=north%20o1%20hilo%20bay&match=2, accessed February 6,2023. Carter,H.A.P.,J.M.Kapena,and J.Makee 1877 Report of the Royal Commissioners on Development of Resources. Pacific Commercial Advertiser [Honolulu]. 5 May. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed December 6,2022. Carter,L.A. 1990 Report on the Archaeological Survey of Selected Areas for the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge.National Park Service. Case,E.M.K. 2015 I Kahiki Ke Ola: In Kahiki There is Life Ancestral Memories and Migrations in the New Pacific. Ph.D. Thesis,Victoria University of Wellingtom,Wellington. Chinen,J.J. 1958 The Great Mahele:Hawaii's Land Division of 1848.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii.Privately published. Coan,T. 1882 Life in Hawaii:An Autobiographic Sketch of Mission Life and Labors 1835-1881. Randolph,New York. Cordy,R. 2000 Exalted Sits the Chief The Ancient History of Hawai`i Island. Mutual Publishing,Honolulu. Crabbe,K.,K.Fox,and H.K. Coleman 2017 Mana Lahui Kan.aka Mai na kupuna kahiko mai a hiki i keia wa. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Honolulu,accessed 2019-04-29. Daily Honolulu Press 1881 The Sale of Leases and Lands at Ali[i]Iolani Hale. Daily Honolulu Press [Honolulu]. 10 September: 2.Electronic document,www.newspapers.com, accessed December 6,2022. 1885 Hakalau Mill.Daily Honolulu Press [Honolulu].August 1: 2,accessed February 7,2023. Desha, S. 1996 He Mo'olelo Ka'ao No Kekuhaupi`o Ke Koa Kaulana o Ke Au o Kamehameha Ka Nui. Edited by W.Wilson and L.Kimura,vol. 1.2 vols.Hale Kuamo`o,Hawaii. 2000 Kamehameha and his warrior Kekuhaupi`o. Translated by F. N. Frazier. Kamehameha Schools Press,Honolulu. 92 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii References Cited Desilets,M.,A.L.Kasberg,and R.B.Rechtman 2004 Archaeological and Limited Cultural Assessment of TMKs: 3-2-9-03: 13, 29, and 60, Wailea Ahupua`a, South Hilo District, Island of Hawai`i. Rechtman Consulting, LLC RC-0247. Revised 2004.Prepared for McCully Works,Inc.,Hilo,Hawaii. Edith Kanaka`ole Foundation 2012 Ethnohistorical Study of Honohononui, Hilo, Hawaii Island. Honohononui Kalaninuiiamamao. Revised 2012.Prepared for Kamehameha Schools,Land Assets Division,Honolulu. Ellis, W. 1 825 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions, Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. Cocker and Brewster,Boston. 1917 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions, Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. Reprint of the London 1827 Edition ed. The Advertiser Historical Series No.. 2. Hawaiian Gazette Co., Ltd.,Honolulu. Else,I. 2004 The Breakdown of the Kapu System and Its Effect on Native Hawaiian Health and Diet. Hillili: Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-Being 1 (1):241-255. Environmental Protection Agency 2022 "Summary of the Clean Water Act". Electronic document, www.epa.gov/laws- regulations/summary-clean-water-act,accessed January 20,2023. Evening Bulletin 1909 Hakalau Plantation Company, LTD. Evening Bulletin [Honolulu]. March 25: 31. Electronic document, https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn82016413/1909-03-25/ed-2/seq-31/, accessed February 6,2023. Forbes,K. and S.Forbes 2023 Hakalau Our Home.Electronic document,www.hakalauhome.com,accessed April 18,2023. Forbes, S. and D.Hibbard 2018 Hakalau Jodo Mission National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Revised 2018. Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service. Fornander, A. 1916-1917 Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-lore. Memoirs of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum,vol. IV.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1969 An Account of the Polynesian Race: Its Origins and Migrations, and the Ancient History of the Hawaiian People to the Times of Kamehameha I. Edited by J. F. G. Stokes. Charles Tuttle& Co., Inc.,Tokyo. Garovoy,J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii.Harvard Environmental Law 29:523-571. Giambelluca, T. W., Q. Chen, A. G. Frazier, J. P. Price, Y.-L. Chen,P.-S. Chu, J. K. Eischeid, and D. M. Delparte (CrossRef) 2013 Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai`i.Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94(3):313-316. Giambelluca, T. W., X. Shuai, M. L. Barnes, R. J. Alliss, R. J. Longman, T. Miura, Q. Chen, A. G. Frazier, R. G. Mudd,L. Cuo,and A.D.Businger 2014 Evapotranspiration of Hawaii. Revised 2014. Prepared for Water Resource Management, State of Hawai`i. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 93 References Cited Hammatt,H.H. and K.L.Uyeoka 2007 Archaeological Monitoring Report for Hakalau Elementary School, Hawai`i Inter-Island DOE Cesspool Project, Hakalau Ahupua`a, Hilo District, Island of Hawai`i, TMK [3] 2-9-002:005. Cultural Surveys Hawai`i, Inc. Revised 2007. Prepared for CH2MHi11 and Department of Education State of Hawaii. Handy,E. S. C. and E. G.Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Handy, E. S. C., E. G. Handy,and M. K. Pukui 1991 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Hawaii Consolidated Railroad 1926 Annual Report of the General Manager. Vol. For the year ending December 31, 1926, Headquarters of Railway,Hilo,Hawaii. Hawaii Tribune-Herald 1953 "Hakalau Bridge Opening Ceremony Next Friday". Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawai`i]. 12 April: 1.Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1962 "Lay-Off of 75 Men Averted. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 13 April: 1. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1971a Brewer Will Spend $5.5 Million. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 11 July: 61. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 197 lb Firms Report Progress In Pollution Abatement. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 11 July: 61. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1974 Hakalau Factory Ends Cane Milling. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 29 December: 10. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1978 Department of Public Works. County of Hawaii 1978. Public Notice: Closing of Portion of Old Mamalahoa highway at Hakalau Gulch. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 24 January: 10. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1989 Motor Vehicle Safety Checks Are Up to $10.75. Hawaii Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 07 August: 5. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Hawaiian Gazette Co.,L. 1895 Bright Skies At Hilo. Hawaiian Gazette [Honolulu]. December 10: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/49693173/?terms=Carpenters%20are%20busily%20engaged &match=1,accessed February 6,2023. Hibbard,D. 2009 Hakalau Plantation Manager's House National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form.Revised 2009.Prepared for U.S.Department of the Interior National Park Service. Hilo Tribune-Herald 1973 Hakalau Bridge. Hilo Tribune-Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. 28 January: 22. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/. Hilo Tribune Herald 1946 Hakalau Damage Over $500,000. Hilo Tribune Herald [Hilo, Hawaii]. April 2: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/555631850/?terms=hakalau%20mi1 l&match=1, accessed February 7,2023. 94 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii References Cited Hockley,E.W. and C.Murray 1925 Kamaee-Wailua Govt. Tract, North Hilo, Hawaii. Hawai`i Land Survey Division,Registered Map No. 2728. Hawaii Territory Survey. 1:300 scale. Electronic document, http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search/,accessed February 12,2023. Hommon,R. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawai`i. In Island Societies:Archaeological Approaches to Evolution and Transformation, pp. 55-88. Edited by P. Kirch. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Hommon, R.J.,A. Sinoto, I. P. Gordon,and P. C.McCoy 1974 Statewide Inventory. Depaitinent of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum Project 090. Honolulu Star-Bulletin 1925 Pioneer Builder of Hawaii, John A. Scott, Dead. Prominent Figure In Industrial Life of Territory Passes Away In Honolulu. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. November 13. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com. 1947 Hakalau Mill, Tidal Wave Scars Erased, Resumes Its Operations. Honolulu Star-Bulletin. March 7: 12. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/282705311/?terms=hakalau%20mill%20tidal%20wave%20s cars%20erased&match=l,accessed February 6,2023. 1953 Hamakua Railroad Bridges Made Part of Road System. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. 29 April: 32. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. 1956 Tidal Wave Disaster, 10 Year Ago, Recalled. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. 31 March: 7. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com/. 1961 Isle Sugar Industry Fights for Survival:HSPA Chief. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. 12 June: 2. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. Ho`oulumahiehie 2006a The Epic tale of Hi`iakaikapoliopele. Translated by M.P.Nogelmeier.Awaiaulu,Honolulu. 2006b Ka Mo'olelo o Hi'iakaikapoliopele.Awaiaulu,Honolulu. Hudson, A. 1932 The Archaeology of East Hawaii,Bernice P Bishop Museum. Husted,F. (editor) 1902 Husted's Directory of Honolulu and Territory of Hawaii.Hawaiian Gazette Co.,Honolulu. Johnson,K. 2017 'A Very Real Threat' Foundation Erosion Prompts Hakalau Bridge, Beach Park Closure. West Hawaii Today [Kailua-Kona]. A5. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Jokiel,P.,K. Rodgers,W.Walsh,D.Polhemus,and T.Wilhelm 2011 Marine Resource Management in the Hawaiian Archipelago: The Traditional Hawaiian System in Relation to the Western Approach.Journal of Marine Biology 2011:1-16. Ka Hoku 0 Hawaii 1919 He Moolelo Kaao No Kuahailo A Me Hinaaukekele Kana Kaikamahine Hanauna. Ka Hoku 0 Hawaii[Hilo,Hawaii]. 30 January: 1.Electronic document,www.papakilodatabase.com. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa 1864 Honolulu, Okatoba 8, 1864. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. October 8. Electronic document, www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed December 6. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 95 References Cited Kaaikaula and Aea 1880 Pehea Kakou! Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 6 November: 3. Electronic document, https://www.papakilodatabase.com. Kahapee, S.B. 1867 Lele i ka pali a make loa! Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 16 February: 3. Electronic document, www.papakilodatabase.com. Kalakaua,L.D. 1888 The Legends and Myths of Hawaii. The Fables and Folk-Lore of a Strange People. Charles L. Webster & Company, New York. Electronic document, https://archive.org/details/legendsmythsofha00kala/page/n9, accessed 2019/01/24. Kamakau, S.M. 1866 Ka moolelo o Kamehameha I: Mokuna III. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 22 December: 1. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 08/28/2020. Kamakau, S.M. 1976 The Works of the People of Old, Na Hana a ka Po`e Kahiko. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 61.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Revised ed.Kamehameha Schools Press,Honolulu. Kame`eleihiwa,L. 1992 Native Land and Foreign Desires: Ko Hawaii ',Tina a Me Na Koi Pu`umake a Ka Po`e Haole, Pehea la e Pono ai?How Shall We Live in Harmony?Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Kelly,M. 1956 Changes in Land Tenure in Hawaii, 1778-1850. Manuscript. Hawaiian-Pacific Collection, Master's thesis.University of Hawaii at Manoa. 1956. Kikiloi, S.K. 2010 Rebirth of an Archipelago: Sustaining a Hawaiian Cultural Identity for People and Homeland. Hulili:Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-Being 6:73-115. King,R. 1935 Districts in the Hawaiian Islands. In A Gazetteer of the Territory of Hawaii, pp. 214-230. Edited by J.W. Coulter.University of Hawaii,Honolulu. n.d. Hawaiian Land Titles. n.d. Electronic document, https://ags.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads, accessed May 15,2020. Kirch,P. V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 2011 When did the Polynesians Settle Hawai`i? A Review of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer.Hawaiian Archaeology 12:3-26. Kuapuu, S.K. 1861 He wahi Moolelo--Helu 1. Ka Hae Hawaii [Honolulu]. 17 April: 12. Electronic document, https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 08/28/2020. Kurisu,D. 2014 Honoring the Family of KTA Super Stores. The Value of Hawaii 2: Ancestral Roots, Oceanic Visions. Kuykendall,R. 1938 The Hawaiian Kingdom 1778-1854. Foundation and Transformation, vol. 1. 3 vols. University Press of Hawaii,Honolulu. 96 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii References Cited 1967 The Hawaiian Kingdom: Volume III: 1874-1893. The Kalakaua Dynasty,vol. 3. 3 vols.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Lam,M. 1985 The Imposition of Anglo-American Land Tenure Law On Hawaiians.Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 23:104-128. Leineweber, S. 2009 Hakalau Stream Bridge National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Revised 2009. Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service. Lila, M. 1872 He inoa no Miss Kaiewe, ka Hiapo a B. Kuhea. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 17 February: 3. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 08/28/2020. Liliuokalani 1978 An Account of the Creation of the World According to Hawaiian Tradition, Translated from Original Manuscript Preserved Exclusively in Her Majesty's Family.Pueo Press,Kentfield. Lucas,P. 1995 A Dictionary of Hawaiian Legal Land-Terms. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation. University of Hawai`i Committee for the Preservation and Study of Hawaiian Language, Art and Culture, Honolulu. Lyman,C. 1924 Around the Horn to the Sandwich Islands and Califorrnia 1845-1850 Being A Personal Record Kept by Chester S. Luman.Yale University Press,New Haven. Lyons,C. J. n.d. Umauma Section Hilo Coastline Hakalau to Nanaue. Hawai`i Land Survey Division, Registered Map No. 344. 1:6000 scale.Electronic document,http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search. Lyons,C. J. and W.A.Wall 1882 Map of Hilo Hawaii From Honomu to Maulua. Hawaii Land Survey Division, Registered Map No. 1092.Electronic document,http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search. MacKenzie,M. K. 2015 Native Hawaiian Law,A Treatise.Kamehameha Publishing,Honolulu. Mahoe,G.K. 1876 Ka Huakaihele ike i na Makaainana o Hilo. Ka Lahui Hawaii [Honolulu]. 1876: 1. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed August 28,2020. Malo,D. 1903 Hawaiian Antiquities (Moolelo Hawaii). Translated by D. N. B. Emerson. Hawaiian Gazette Co., Ltd.,Honolulu. 1951 Hawaiian Antiquities. Second ed. Translated by N. B. Emerson. B. P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 2.B.P.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Maly,K. 2001 Malama Pono I Ka `Aina--An Overview of the Hawaiian Cultural Landscape. Kumu Pono Associates.Revised 2001. Maly,K. and O.Maly 2001 He Wahi Mo'olelo No Na`Aina,A Me Nd Ala Hele I Hehi `Ia,Mai Keauhou A I Kealakekua,Ma Kona, Hawai`i (A Historical Overview of the Lands, and Trails Traveled, Between Keauhou and Kealakekua, Kona, Hawai`i). A Study of Archival-Historical Documentary Literature, Oral History - Consultation Interviews, and Kama`dina Recommendations on Site Preservation in the Lands of Keauhou, Honalo, Maihi, Kuamo`o, Kawanui, Lehu'ula, Honua`ino, HOkUkano, Kanaueue, Haleki`i, Keeke`e, `Ilikahi, Kanakau, Kalukalu, Onouli, Keopuka, Ka`awaloa and CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawaii 97 References Cited Kealakekua, North and South Kona, Island of Hawai`i (TMK Overview Sheets - 7-9, 8-1, 8-2). Kumu Pono Associates Report HiAla40-061501. Revised June 2001. Prepared for Na Ala. Hele Program Manager(Hawai`i Island), State Division of Forestry and Wildlife,Hilo,HI. 2006 Hilo Paliku -Hilo of the Upright Cliffs: A study of Cultural-Historical Resources of Lands in the Laupahoehoe Forest Section,Ahupua'a of the Waipunalei-Mauluanui Region,North Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK Overview Sheet 3-7-01). Kumu Pono Associates KPA Study HiHETF116-Laupahoehoe (120506a). Revised 2006. Prepared for United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service- Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry,Hilo. McEldowney,H. 1979 Archaeological and Historical Literature Search and Research Design: Lava Flow Control Study, Hilo, Hawai`i. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum. Revised 1979. Prepared for the U.S.Army Engineer Division,Pacific Ocean. Morange,J.H. 1903 Plan Showing Kamaee Tract Road, Kamaee-North Hilo Hawaii. Hawaii Land Survey Division. Registered Map No. 2225. 1:500 scale. Electronic document, http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map- search. Muffler,B. and T. P. T.Museum 2015 Images ofAmerica Hawai`i Tsunamis.Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina. Nakaa,G. W. 1893 He moolelo Hawaii: Mokuna II: Ke kumu mua o ko Hawaii nei kanaka. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 4 February: 4. Electronic document, https://www.papakilodatabase.com, accessed 08/28/2020. Nawaa, S.K. 1904 Ma Ka Aoao Ikaika E Ku Ai Kakou. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 28 October: 4, accessed 08/28/2020. OEQC(Office of Environmental Quality Control) 1997 Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, as Adopted by the State of Hawaii Environmental Council in 1997 and amended in 2000. Electronic document, http://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/OEQC Guidance/1997-Cult ral-Impacts-Guidance.pdf. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database. Electronic document, http://kipukadatabase.com/kipuka. Oiaio,H. 1900 Pau Ole Kuhihewa Ia Hilo Paliku. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 3 August: 2, accessed 08/28/2020. Oliveira,K.-A. 2014 Ancestral Places: Understanding Kanaka Geographies. Oregon State University Press,Corvallis. Parham, J. E., G. R. Higashi, E. K. Lapp, D. G. K. Kuamo'o, R. T. Nishimoto, S. Hau, J. M. Fitzsimmons, D. Polhemus,and W. S.Devick 2008 Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds & Their Aquatic Resources. Department of Land and Natural Resources-Division of Aquatic Resources, Honolulu. Electronic document, https://hawaiiwatershedatlas.com/index.html,accessed April 5. Parker,P. and T.King 1998 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. Revised ed.National Register Bulletin 38. U.S.Department of the Interior,National Park Service,Cultural Resources. Poepoe,J.M. 1906 Moolelo Hawaii Kahiko. Ka Na`i Aupuni [Honolulu]. 21 June: 1. Electronic document, https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 08/28/2020. 98 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i References Cited 1908a Moolelo Hawaii! (He Hooponopono). Ka Na`i Aupuni [Honolulu]. February 24: 3. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 3/31/2023. 1908b Moolelo Hawaii! (He Hooponopono). Ka Na`i Aupuni [Honolulu]. February 20: 2-3. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 3/31/2023. 1909 Ka Moolelo Kaao 0 Hiiaka-i-ka-Poli-o-Pele. Kuokoa Home Rula [Honolulu]. 22 January: 4. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed December 13,2022. Pogue,J.F. 1978 Moolelo of Ancient Hawaii. Translated by C. W. Kenn. Topgallant Press, Honolulu. Pukui,M.K. (editor) 1983 `Olelo No'eau:Hawaiian proverbs&poetical sayings. Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K.and S.H.Elbert 1986 Hawaiian Dictionary: Hawaiian-English, English-Hawaiian. Revised and english ed. University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K., S.H.Elbert,and E.Mo`okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii.Revised and Expanded ed.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K.,E.W.Haertig,and C.A. Lee 1972 Nand I Ke Kumu(Look to the Source),vol. 1.Hui Hanai,Honolulu. Raymond,A. 1991 Cultural Resource Survey at Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge Island of Hawaii. Revised May 1991. Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland,OR. 1993 Cultural Resource Surveys of Selected Projects at Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge Hawaii Island.Revised April 1993.Prepared for U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Portland,OR. Rood,J. 1975 Portrait of a Dying Town. Hawaii Tribune Herald [Hilo]. 09 April: 12. Electronic document, www.newspapers.com, accessed April 18,2023. Rosendahl,P.H. 2001a Archaeological-Historical Assessment,Lot 5 -Hakalau Estates Subdivision,Land of Hakalau Nui, North Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-9-02: Por 1).Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. 2174- 090101.Revised 2001.Prepared for John Cross,Mauna Kea Agribuisnes Co.,Inc.,Hilo,HI. 2001b Archaeological-Historical Assessment, Lot 10 — Hakalau Estates Subdivision, Land of Hakalau Nui, North Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-9-02:Por.1). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. 2174-092301. Revised 2001.Prepared for Mauna Kea Agribusiness Company, Inc. 2009 Archaeological Inventory Survey and Cultural Impact Assessment, Hakalau Coastal Parcel. Land of Hakalau, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-9-79,81). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.2684-070908.Revised 2009.Prepared for Jeffery Melrose,Island Planning. Sai,D.K. 2011 Ua Mau Ke Ea Sovereignty Endures: An Overview of the Political and Legal History of the Hawaiian Islands.Pu`a Foundation,Honolulu. Santos,A.,L.M.U.Kepa`a,and L.Brandt 2019 A Cultural Impact Assessment for the County of Hawai`i's Kolekole Gulch Park Accessibility Improvements Project, TMK: (3) 2-8-015:015, Kuhua Ahupua`a, South Hilo District, Island of Hawai`i. ASM Affiliates Project Number 31480. Prepared for Geometrician Associates, LLC, Hilo,HI Shepard,F.P.,G.M.MacDonald,and D. C.Cox 1950 The Tsunami of April 1, 1946. Bulletin of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography of the University of California 5 6,Berkeley and Los Angeles. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 99 References Cited Sherrod,D. R.,J.M. Sinton, S.E.Watkins,and K.M. Brunt 2007 Geologic Map of the State of Hawai`i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. Open-File Report 2007-1089. Electronic document, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1089, accessed Apr 27,2018. Soehren,L. 2005 A Catalog of Hawai`i Place Names Compiled from the Records of the Boundary Commission and the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Title of the Kingdom of Hawaii.Part 1:Puna and Hilo. 2005. Electronic document,http://ulukau.org/cgi-bin/hpn'?,accessed September 14,2016. Soil Survey Staff(United States Department of Agriculture,Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document,http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Speulda,L.A. 1996 Cultural Resources Survey Report of the Upper Honohina Unit and Middle Road and Pua Akala Road Gravel Pits on the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Hawaii County, Hawaii. Prepared for U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Region 1,Cultural Resources Team, Sherwood,OR. Star-Bulletin,H. 1935 Hawaiian Sugar Plantation History No. 26-Hakalau Island of Hawaii. Honolulu Star-Bulletin [Honolulu]. August 24: 3. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com, accessed December 6,2022. Stokes,J. and T. S. Dye 1991 Heiau of the Island of Hawai`i: A Historic Survey of Native Hawaiian Temple Sites. Bishop Museum Bulletin in Anthropology 2. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Stopford,J. C. 1963 The President's Annual Report for the Pepeekeo Sugar Company. Electronic document, in www.hakalauhome.corn. Tatar,E. 1982 Nineteenth Century Hawaiian Chant. Pacific Anthropological Records. Revised 1982. Prepared for Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum. The Honolulu Advertiser 1892 Hilo Budget. Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. December 1: 2. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/256280832/?terms=Hakal au%20probab ly%20received%20th e%20worst%20damage%2C%20as%20there%20the%20sea&match=2, accessed February 6, 2023. 1947 Tsunami Damage. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 7 March: 9. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/. 1953 Hakalau Bridge Rebuilt, Given New Paint Job. The Honolulu Advertiser [Honolulu]. 05 July: 25. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed April 18,2023. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser 1866 Large Sale of Desireable Lands. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser [Honolulu]. March 10: 3. Electronic document,www.newspapers.com,accessed December 6,2022. 1871 Letters from Hawaii-No. 1. The Pacific Commerical Advertiser [Honolulu]. August 26: 3. Electronic document,https://www.newspapers.com,accessed December 6,2022. 1882 News of the Week. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser [Honolulu]. November 4: 3. Electronic document, https://www.newspapers.com/image/174892670/?terms=The%20purposes%20of%20the%20comp any%20are%20the%20raising%2 0and%20cultivation%20on%20the%20Hawaiian%20lslands%2 0 and%20elsewhere%20of%20sugar%20cane%2C%20and%20the%20purchase%20and%20sale&m atch=1,accessed February 6,2023. 100 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i References Cited Thrum,T. G. 1907 Heiaus and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands.Island of Hawaii. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1908,pp. 38-47.Edited by T.Thrum.Thos. G.Thrum,Honolulu. Thurston,L. 1913 Railroading in Hilo. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1914. Edited by T. Thrum. Thos. G. Thrum,Honolulu. Tomonari-Tuggle,M.-J. 1996 Bird Catchers and Bullock Hunters in the Upland Mauna Kea Forest: A Cultural Resource Overview of the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, Island of Hawaii,Contract No. 10181- 5-2193. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Contract No. 10181-5-2193 (DS). Revised 1996.Prepared for U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Hilo,HI. USAAF(United States Army Air Forces) 1925 Hakalau, Hawaii, T.H. National Archives and Records Administration.Aerial Photograph 18-AA- 37-5. Airscapes-Hawaiian Islands. Electronic document, https://catalog.archives.gov, accessed February 6,2023. Walker,A. and P.H.Rosendahl 1994a Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chin Chuck Road Project Area, Land of Hakalau Nui, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-9-02:23 and 2-9-04:56). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph. D., Inc. 2174-092301. Revised 1994.Prepared for Mauna Kea Agribusiness Company, Inc. 1994b Interim Report: Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chin Chuck Road Project Area, Land of Hakalau Nui, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-9-02:23 and 2-9-04-:56). Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph. D., Inc. 1563-102894. Revised 1994. Prepared for Mr. Eben Dale, C. Brewer Homes,Inc.c/o PBR Hawaii. Wilmshurst,J.,T.Hunt,C. Lipo,and A.Anderson 2011 High-Precision Radiocarbon Dating Shows Recent and Rapid Colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:1815-1820. Wolfe,E.W. and J.Morris 1996 Geologic Map of the Island of Hawai V. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. Geologic Investigations Series Map 1-2524-A. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 101 Appendix A APPENDIX A. HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NOMINATION FORM CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 103 Appendix A NPS Forrn 10.900 OMe Na.1024-0010 United Slates Department of the Interior t'l:il''�rl i (-lir -I vi,,• National Register of Historic Places Registration Form Ibis form is for use rn nomrnahny 4r fegiP:•i,1. .. , .-,for individual properties an!i districts See inttrucirons in National Register Bulletin,How to Complete rhe Nortortaa Reguiror of His .•s r 11.r.arwe Form. It any Item does not apply to the property beim documented enter`NAA"for "not applicable` For functions, architectural classification. materials.and areas of significanceenter only categories and subcafegwies from the instructions Place additional certification comments,entries,and narrative items on contlnuatlon sheets(MPS Form 101.900a1. 1. Name of Property Historic name HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Other namesfaite number Hakalau Highway Bridge(structure dumber(H)I00(1l9030S4(I F} 2. Location street&number Hawaii Belt Road E not for publication city of town Hakalau(TMK 3-2-9-02) 0 vicinity State Hawaii code HI county H r.c ri'i code 001 zip code 3.State/Federal AgencyCertification. As the cle.r.)i'i 'Ii authority undo Ii ti I list s ration Act,as amen fed, I hereby.Li-ti ,'that 1t„c n;, aiir . ri i:• i ai.i n nation of chu t) r ,•,rets he documentation standards for registers}i i .I'e r i_ ui tier•P.nh.:,onl Reyiatei ul Ilisluric:Pieces and iriucis Inc urracedural and professional requirements set(coil in 36 CFR Part 60. In my nrinion 11,r i)'.)lmrty meets does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that Ihis proper., C•.: .:'':t;..i+_rL•:s si•_7rnficant at the following level{s)of significance: _national _statewide local Signature of certifying official Dale Tide Slate or Federal agency arid bureau In my opinion the property_meets—does riot n-reet the National Register criteria. Signature of cOmtnentmg olficral Date Tale Slate or Federal agency and bureau 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property rs Signature cit the Keeper Dale of Action _entered in the National Register determined eligible for the Nalionat Register determined eel eligible for the National Register „-,-removed from the National Register other(explain I 104 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii P.r.reriy Counly and Slate 5. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property (LI-,eck a.smany tuxes as apply) (Check only one hos} (Do not include previously listed resources in the count.) Contributing Noncontributing private buildings) 0 0 buildings public-Local district 0 0 sites x public-State site 1 0 structures public-Federal x structure 0 0 Objects private building(s) 0 0 buildings object 0 0 Tote) Name of related multiple property listing Number of contributing resources previously }Enter"WA'if property is not pad of a mull,ph-prnper,.Irstlrgt) listed in the National Register Steel Trestle Bridges on the Hamakua Coast 6.Function or Use Historic Functions Current Functions (Enter categories Iron m5truCtiOne) l Enler categrtiess!turn inytructiores) TRANSPORTATION:rail-related TRANSPORTATION:road-related(vehicular) 7.Description Architectural Classification Materials I Enter categories Prom instructions) (Enter categories from rnalruclionsl OTHER:steel girder and trestle bridge foundation: NIA walls: N/A roof: NIA other: METAL CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`d`d,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 105 Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BR[DGE Hawaii County,Hawaii County and Stale Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance of the property. Explain contributing and noncontributing resources if necessary.Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property.such as its location,setting,size,and significant features.) Summary Paragraph The IIak:il,lc "u .nn lttlti-t t< ,ie l e ter:u tl ii it it ill tla t,ital length of7-5 Iccl.a 20 Heel hill. toil :1 hnilt,l.ci 1titrc:n,i,il, n�_ Ili,fliiituikua ,+:1.1 : !I1. I•I.Ln,i,'t Il.i,',:11 1 :mc i tl:e lural :t'llr_ iii:Inr,l e rrtr:.: il4 unt':I,utc 11 I ,%p.a-tniehtre o1 the hI I.1; : sItli,,, alt lh.1111, 11.1 I'',ll'1111i+ , ,[1,1 I"ii titeel 13111,i tl,•+il ,I1],p041, . rill Illi , nr. 11.1.k 'r 1.1.thuinn'rtt• I:11'. .! 'I 'II:'I,tI°:.I . 't tmei ..ill. :+•nrrete Balt coal eoite'i ctr end piers+pith incised budge n,unr e Iaurtitni.a4Lied ret tits: Mico. rehabilitation. Narrative Description The l I;ikalau Stream Bridge carries the I lawai'i Belt Road(FAP 19)over llakalau Stream along the llamakua Coa.,t Iif the Island of l lawai'i. The present highway bridge was reconstructed from older railroad trestle;Iml gutter titan,. In 1911-1912, lourteen steel trestle girder bridge, , :r:,r tett;tiling the l-lamakua Coast to support railroad tracks for the Ililo Railroad Company. All ut lite I,rl enitl es along the line were devastated by the tsunami of 1946,and nine of the steel trestle bridges were disassembled;aid,old as scrap. Hie remaining live bridge:t I I,ik:Il:un.Nanue,Pahe`ehe`e,Umauma,and Kapue)were retained and Iiiirtfllieti as territorial highway bridge.between 1950-53.Kolekole Bridge was assembled using parts of other tleruulished railroad trestle bridges. The railroad bridge remains in its n1 itnt it location;however,the Hawaii Belt R,rmmd. ille 15rnn.0 t transportation artery tot the island, was re-routed In thy'early 1950s in order to utilize the abandoned railroad alignment and railroad bridge trestle ' stein. I he set mill has experienced little,if any.change.In 1953.the bridge t\ is Idened Ilii use.is bridge isith members from the disassembled railroad bridges-The reconstruction follows the original trestle design•hoitriet bolted rather than riveted connections were utilized.A concrete deck stdelt°ill,s and rill it ere:irked to fat ihnrte,nitntnttbile and pedestrian traffic The integrity of the original subylruLturc remains lttt�t5t,and Is a le/winder t+l the only standard-gauge railroad constructed in the islands. The bridge's•tibsi lnCtu e,nt He tcv.ed from the,old 11Jrnahihl+ii Ilighw'av witiclt runs under the highway bridge. 1 he bridge's historic associations are readiii ,ippareni to;ill observers:the bridge retains its historic feeling due to its unusual euristrue1ton 1t pe. Interpretation is aided by the presence of a plaque on the substruelui:e n high reads: Hamilton&Chambers Contractors for Steel Structure New York,U.S.A. 1912 The Hakalau Stream Bridge has recently undergone seismic retrofit modifications.The project included addition of hinge restrainers,scat extenders at hinges and abutments,longitudinal struts at abutments,and the upgrade of pier footings. 106 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A HAKALAIJ STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Properly County and Slate 8.Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria Areas of Significance iMark".em one or more boxes for Iha criteria qualifying tha property (Enter categories from instructions) Ior National Register listing) ENGINEERING x A Property is associated with events that have made a TRANSPORTATION significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. B Property is associated with the lovesof persons x significant in our past C Property embodies the distinctive characteristics x of a t type,period,or method of construction or represents the work of a master,or possesses high Period of Significance artistic values,or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack 191 1 individual distinction. 195; •D Property has yielded,or is likely to yield,information important in prehistory or history. Significant Dates 1911 1953 Criteria Considerations [Mark"x"in all the boxes that apply) Significant Person Property is: (Complete only if Criterion B is marked above) Dillingham,Benjamin owed by a religious institution or used for religious Thurston,Lorrin A purposes. Robinson,Mark B removed from its original location. Cultural Affiliation C a birthplace or grave. N/A ❑ a cemetery. E a reconstructed building,object,or structure. Architect/Builder F a comrnemcrst;e pronert5'. Yuutv,:, UMtilatiun G less than 50 years old ,i:hieving significance I'l.lrtri:, llill[un R within the past 50 years CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 107 Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State Period of Significance(justification) 'IL I I(tkalau Stream 13ridge tt as built in 191 1 as a railroad bridge during the railroad's second phase of ctmslnlction to the area north of Hilo. In 1953.the Territorial Iiigltwav Department.under Ike direction of William R.Bartels,reconstructed Iiaktllau Stream Bridge as a pail ut the Ilanai`i Belt Road tl'AP 19)utilizing members of the original railroad trestle support system and additional materials from other railroad bridges. Criteria Consideratons(explanation.if necessary) Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph[provide a summary paragraph that includes level of signficance and applicable criteria) The I i rkal;lu Stream Bridge is significant under Criteria A, B,and C'. Criterion A is applicable for the bridge's association tsLH] the Hilo Railroad[-uutpanc. Criterion 13 is applicable for the bridge's association with three founders of the I lila Railn+nd C ,Irnpan} ['Merlon C is applicable since the bridge is a representative example of early twentieth-century engineering technologyas well as a source for inform iiinn ahoui early twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction. Narrative Statement of Slgntftcance (provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance) C'il ic;l,.,r1 A The 11.th.rl;iii Stream Bridge is significant for its contributions to the lie Iris of engineering and transportation in I'tl.i•.. r:'l l l,: hi''rleec 1 C11lb]i lir ler'(ri[.,l ,r: \ for it, , til; iI ]H., tri l l:l`.r, a I t •71•.1,,Ildated Railtt.r., ',ilu+ii;,LI',ed a m.rt,n I 'Ic 111 I!1: t+t:`. ,I+ln 11t 4•I 11',:' 1i1.1,and .he II:in hua H'. lit...,t l in. !r:nl purlall,ni7,, lr. 11:0h1 r lirr 1lie lnl;innnl u l 1, ;lu I+,a; I lie l ill!r'.rl:inti ll, 1)1ru;,•r,+n, •r l,l; Cr.:l 7;,r.0 ',t'r:...IL 1111: "!'I„tt.'•. cll'_t11:i1-.!I_ic;lt in IIan'..+I 't ll,el ler eUlllrlleal:l I,'i ll�ti ed that the r,Illr',l,.111a1l.td rr1,i1111r,' 1.- lrr:n; all l+.l ut th !c. ,I:nl.r;r or the islands l lie ;reel l.ulrowl 'a ,ilc •and irn• •l,,lus from the url:ltial hrldee r:n,nn rr.it.le t ltl, nnrar r nl,nilli(atir,n, Ira nlie 1:t,;J.� r nlC,ir:�.i i,, lt.ci ennlrecli�+n.. Idle nrtt 1)•LLI1•'.ta•. .0rd passed and ..rr•uc'htened-out llR �•l� �l�,ur,l alrua Eli�titt.i:. ;Indlllr!nor:. l �r,i.ir 1t LIi' �.'1 tip• l9;,,-r'1 licit Rudd IF..\P 1atr l,l+ 1,I1nL indent li.iila+ .11,cion taeilihe,. I:,i ILc 1.1,0;.1,d toits culluir..tii.11 1l,tll X1i lire to entieth-centllt . ri ICfl "r H I he bridge as eligible under H h+r 1i a,•, .`iatinn«ith figures significant in the history of the Hawaiian islarrds clic 111111 E4ailr,,:le1 L'unrp;nit founders ftent;unin 1)illilt>barn,Lorrin Thurston.and Mark Robinson, l3e1l3111m Dillingham v.as a nosed bri,ari'•sinan who drew tip plans for a large sugar mill at'Ola`a,eight miles 5r nit11 of IfiEr,in the pretntusl unetd li vaned Puna district. Lorrin Thurston was the Minister to Washington durlrip lire runner Republic of E I;ott;tl-i and a Huller Interior Mt mater under the monarchy. Mark Robinson worked as the former Slirrister of Foreign Aliinrs fur Queen Liliuokalani.3 Criterion C Paradrnc of lire Pacific,IDccnnier 19241:14. 2 Thnma,r Thrum.Hawaiian Almanac and Annual Homo'On Hawaiian(iaaelie Company,19141.142 Com t i M11 tictr.Rarlmata tri lint..',ISan Marino,Calil'urnla..(S'imten West Books.19781,12.l.i24 108 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawai'i County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State The bridge is eligible under Criterion C as a representative example of early twentieth-century engineering technology.The bridge is a rare remaining example of steel girder and trestle construction and was,for many years,the longest span in the state.The bridge represents the"work of a master":John Mason Young,designer of the original railroad line and bridges:as ww ell as William R.Bartels,of the Territorial Highway Department, who engineered their conversion from railroad to highway use in the 1950s. The analysis of the structure may provide information about early twentieth-century steel manufacture and construction,as well as information regarding the only standard gauge railway in the islands. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`B` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 109 Appendix A HAF ALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii N,a,,r,nr i°•.-�lerft ----- County acrd State .... United States Department of the Interior National Park,Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet HANALAUSTREAM BRIDGE WawaCounty Hawarl Histone Concrete and Steel Trestle Bridges along Hamakua Coast on the Island of Hawaii Section number 8 _Page I Developmental history/additional historic context information.'Ir,;I l,rnprialej The Hakalau R;iilr,.:t.] I is tic Bridge t'ii built in 1911 h'. 111 Hilif .r,Ir, ,uP! ,trrl a±l, iftlnll. Oh.rail[o: second phase, r,n,•.IIIICIr,'r1 io sulipott the plantatl,trl utdu•11'. , i 111:'I.;;LIrd l ilu, \1.l„0u 't cn_'lir, lie ,it IliC bred” 'tin''.ta tit: It tiilll,'I VI l°;, III I II!'111JCrt11_f ,tiil .IPI H1,114.1'11,1.110 a;,I,�ril'l'I ;:L:IIi?'. IIP.1111 •il oil Lli.t u i_i,,1 :1 f1�1111Iri Ilnr 11.',.'11:1111 .lti,E L,1.'1 OIL or II.['•',:1, 1 1 h :I,IL.,E, III[, ll.l,', .:", p tt I'l tin the Nev,. •k,i1 Iltrt, i 1[,1r111'n+tl ,ilii]I L.CIII,,.'I< iiii,II i it i :lied [Le lie 11,1,1;11:1 I.,, 'I f;lnhe on Kauai the Name}e:u l Ii N:I,erected I n It.lt liar• .. ,I11-ed to', IIIc ]111•utie'as a Hakalau R iiIroad Trestle Rrider was one of the most impressive bridges built by the!lila Railroad. At 775 feel Ih'tis!and Itna .'it,,, n ,rc rl r ,tiers,the I l.1L.tl.iu on cClm E3nd I he•- t,,m1 I, nc'est bridge on the line, „I11': ,'. ! 1,• 11.Ir11u.r Bridge.tl ll,t,r.' tll.u: ]Milt) feet.Aitcl I'It 19.111.11.1 f;lidge wastai,,Jt down. l l.li..anll I,,c:,In;'i;. II't ,,t 111.!1,'A.111 111t1t;::In the Irtt ,[, +tr ar.,r;r1 .cars.'' It t,.1•,:k,,crnr•n,.l [ILL tallest.with a Il4svlit„I .r, !r,t , til _..i Icrl ,h� ul Illy=..111 ,t +rlt3 e, r, .:urt,e tir;C.1I/1. IIt 1,1-If` III:' cul: ,.ill (tilt'E',.'!'t'l]L•ta.i,ii it l,', .i iot;nllrin II.aL.:I,III\II,'.Iili H: li.al I..,-i,L',111te[Cll It he11 the !Cot nt Ill.' ,I.'C] Il.alis.' +r l,h�:', „„r 'Ji. 1 ,..' ..t'ild L'i'was ..,,i'itl•.e. Hill c11t.1[1'1111;part,. 1,au lie I I!I'.t.n i 1311 1,I,,,isl 11',11' 1`ai ',::• early Jill,' the abandiirie l I:Irr,jr:.:In iiri 'nl ,Inc Hanti” n1 ; :,ui ntig for h. :.§I 'tO,�,• It<c11 h� t i j1I.ittt.nr.,.1 :rlll,t-tl' Irl lieu uI tic .le-:i,t,te I I.1.111,.:,,1 II, I'+ I I.IF,..t1;o1 Hr..,�.. tilli'il.', cii I I I,'e.I'•.I 11L'tllta'. I,l!'., .t irh incinbers from tilt tll•:Ititi HiI-L..l l.t!11iCr.l bili]_'., n•irui Ir 'n [r it st.lit, rrlll:.11 lr.,tl 1.';I;.I;, la .t Honed rather Ilt;,n II',tite I c{ Sin ctltlu',iccie ultllr r1. I'..ill 'tide .I,lc i,',I I,i i,k:111 LIir.J tltatttlr1�1 .. '.I➢Ill ire Ieoir l.:r:II ilk. 01,111.,, SIcn of Hawaii I fertitnn,d Hawaii.Honolulu Sear Hul[ettn,[5211.451.and George Nellist.Lice or Hawaii, I&n,n,,o I,-• 5 Nita I d..c., 'y,nl 1.9111?. 6 Hr:, I ","1,..I II I,11;1,11.,1 1'iinnint mit!!c ru in r Dc,,I,,prrrcnt,The Stale of Hawaii flats Html,Lc52 A Siattsncal Abstract 1Hu,r..1., "r, 'c,,::r' • PI,..ma:.n.•i i.i.ii.unc 11C,el,pinent.I•lti,.414 Kari, II hot..I I Smite ehnpi 1 the I tit Ilnu•th.[tndge Insenten Jed E saluauon.Island of Hawai t,prepared for the Star 1 I , I ....1 I., , il.,l n.l11E7n,.y.1t uta n in t, puan,.n,+0,d c I. S It,pamncnt nt Traccponaliun.lvtleral Highways.A,emrninlnlerm, I Honolulu 110 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and State 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography[Cite the books articles,and other sources used in preparing this form on one or more continuation sheets) See Continuation Sheet. Previous documenlallon on fife(NPSJ: Primary location of additional data: preliminary determination of individual listing l36 CFR 67 has been State Historic Preservation Office requested c 011ier State agency _ previously listed in the National Register Federal agency previously delerrnined eligible by the National Register Local government designated a National Historic Landmark University recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey 4 Other recorded by Historic American Engineering Record p Name of repository. 1 ;ar rig f-�+a-:iurce$Survey (if assigned): 10. Geo9.raphical Data Acreage of Property L s ln.ar .;r r,:u l•- i Do not include previously listed UTM References (Place additional USM reference$on a continuation sheet] 1 5 277032 2201749 3 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing 2 4 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing Verbal Boundary Description(describe the boundaries of the property) "Me nirrltltlaierf pr pertn Is a rectaneular shaped parcel measuring 772 feet by 28 feet.which is centered on the UTM point hstcd dHrit e IncliLLtod 15itttin this parcel arc the bridge's superstructure,substructure,floor system,and approach spans. Boundary Justification(explain why the boundaries were selected) The nutnln.tted,ttucturr Inc lurks the Hridec's superstructure,substructure,floor system and appropriate spans and the property upon ttInch this rest i hese Hiitnriaries encompass,hut do not exceed,all of the property that has been hhlurtc.tlly associated to.aft ibis bridge. 11.Form Prepared By namelutle Spencer Leineweber•FAJA Professor organization Heritage Center,University of Hawaii at Manoa date August 15,2009 street 8 number 2410 Campus Road telephone J08)956-4704 city or town Honolulu state HI zip code 96822 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 111 Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE. Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Property County and Stale Additional Documentation Submit the follov;inu ll! • Maps: A USGS map(7.5 or 15 mantle CCI rnelcahng the property's location. A Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map. • Continuation Sheets • Additional items: (Check with the SHPO or FPO for any additional items) Photographs:. Submit clear and descriptive black and while photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels at 300 pill (pixels per inch)or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map, Name of Property: Hakalau Stream Bridge City or Vicinity:Hakalau County: Hawaii State:Hawaii Photographer:Spencer Leineweber,FAA/Professor Date Photographed: August 2009 Description of Photographs)and number: Photo#1: Approach Photo#2: Name Photo#3: Trestle Substructure. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement; This information is being collected for applicallans to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or or.i.<„ .--ly!brldy for listing,to list propertles,and to amend existing 1151ngs Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit in accordance w:t' ! .. .;,n.at Historic Preservation Act.,as amended(16 U S C 460 el seg I Estimated Burden Statr:r ornt reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 16 hours per response including lime for reviewing instructions gathering an.- .•,.hung data ana completing and reviewing the form Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this form to the Chief.vilrrur .lraeve Services Division National Park Service PD Box 37127,Washington,DC 20013-7127.end the Office of Management and Budget.Paperwork Reductions.Protect 11024-0018).Washington DC 20503 112 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name M Property County and Slate .2.4"7.711111. W , arsnlpn:H tit 11,ttt.Haman trr st Zone g NorMint-22111111%W , , J T p . I h� �"a .�'��'"�" "4 " ;� "t", ,✓ p °74;,.„ !'. -i-7 ,, ..#:;,:,„:FJ.,-,..40,,,k ,''.,,,,,...,..- : „,- . _ .' - , ; ..,," , \'''' . tt '1 el ."'� ' r$' �y J o f"."t �" Wt*� i " , "�* .� l Jr � . �.�,.. ♦ r "" •.. CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 113 Appendix A HAKALALI STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name or Property Cnurn[y and Stale Map Newnan' \\,. f�rkM�rkrr r,�l�I .�1 Strum Sri i 5 alae `",t.cry ;,, ' +" L� Ile ` Ni N Cr.''',.:--,_ L. t')..' " *4�`'a {,r, %N. t �keW. t . ; tr. flotation fi • i4jC r 1 m E Si• ' Gt4\ \ y ti Y Jµ, ,SM , .404 114 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix A HAKALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawaii County,Hawaii Name of Pr,-1 County and Stale Photo#1:Approach Photo#2:Name y .,. .. , : , , ,,,,,,,,,..k I i +� } X d.. .♦,C..LE uF o" s4tirtir ,-0,..,."--,, W Y ,. t "e r t Yq �J 7g,�. , .. ara .r y rf r lri aih ' e If.,1"'' "4,f 4 4717»,.7." CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 115 Appendix A HAl(ALAU STREAM BRIDGE Hawai'i County Hawaii _._ Name of Property Cour r,anal Slab: Photo#3:Trestle Substructure ` Ate" f�Ak •�-S n 'fl'bP." �+ �,as A a 1 F tr 4_MS �i��r- _ 4 r 116 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix B APPENDIX B. KA WAI OLA PUBLIC NOTICE CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 117 Appendix B 022.003,004.005,006. 777, 999; (3)2-9-002U23,025,039,064,080, 888,999;a(3)2-9-006.021 within CULTURAL IMPACT Kama'e a and Hakalau Nui,on the ASSESSMENT: boundary of North and South Hilo, HAKALAU STREAM Hawaii. BRIDGE REHABILITA- ASM is seeking kama'nina TION, HAKALAU NUI, familiar with the area's cultural HILO, HAWAII ISLAND resources,customs, and practices. We also seek input regarding strut- Ma o ka State of Hawaii egies to prevent or mitigate impacts Department of Transportation, on culturally valued resources or ke ho'omakaukau nei 'o ASM traditional customary practices. Affiliates i Cultural Impact if you know of such information, Assessment i ko pono na koina contact Kau'i Lopes, klopes@ o ka HRS. Chapter 343 Envi- asmaffiliates.com.(808)969-6066. ronmental Assessment no ka Hakalau Stream Bridge Reha- bilitation Project ma Hawaii Belt Road. Aia keia pahana ma kekahi mau 'apana o TMK (3) 3-1-001:001, 022. 003, 004, 005, 006. 777,, 999; (3) 2-9-002:023. 025.039.064,080,888,999;a(3) 2-9-006:021. ma Kama'e a lana 'o Hakalau Nui Ahupua'a, ma ka palena o Hilo 'Akau laua 'o Hilo Hema. Hai►a►i. Ke 'imi nei 'o ASM i pee kama'aina i Iowa paha ka 'ike no na kumu waiwai mo'omeheu. nä loina, a me na hana ku'una i pili me keia 'sins. Ke 'imi pu nei makou i na mana'o e pale ai a ho'emi ai i na hopena hiki i is mau mea.Ina he Ike kau,e ho'oka'a'ike me Kau'i Lopes,klopes@asmaflil- iates.com.(808)969-6066. On behalf of State of Hawaii Department of Transportation. ASM Affiliates is preparing a Cul- tural Impact Assessment to inform a HRS, Chapter 343 Environmen- tal Assessment being prepared for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project on Hawaii Belt Road. The project includes portions of TMK:(3) 3-I-001:001. 118 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix C APPENDIX C. COUNT OFHA WAI`I CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION(CRC) COMMENTS CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e` ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 119 Appendix C KAY or k� Mitchell D.Roth Geraldine Bell,Chair Mnwr .'� Vatalit.hnrashirna,Vice Chair hil_halia Hirano Robeira -1.11 Ulc1 heal calami Kea lc..ha nu l opw ra Kinney Nicol+i:ui County of Hawaii scot[Mahoney PI.-kNNIX ;1)EPARTMF:INT Aaron Spielman CULTURAL RESOURCES CONIMISSION Aupuni Center • 101P..t,rihi Street SUELC 3 • Hilo,Hawaii 96720 h;ne r:.ilt/1)oi•1-8281. • I ne(-808)961-8742 September 28,2022 Nis.I[ol lv Yuen [WIC rT Project Manager Design Branch.Iliehways Division I laws i i Department ofTransportation 6111 hams hila L;uulet;nd [iapolei_I lawaii 96707 Via email:holly-.yuer a;hawaii.gov Dear N1s.Yuen, SUBJECT: National Ilistoric Preservation Act,Section 106 Consultation Ilakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Federal-Aid Project No.BR-019-2(075) TMK(s): (3)3-1-001:001,002,003,004,005,006,777,999;(3)2-9-002:023,025,039,064,080, 1488,999; and(3)2-9-006:021 Location: Ilakalau Ahupua'a,Ililo IMIoku,Ilawaii Island FILE No.: PL-LNT-2022-002650 In response to your August 9,2022,invitation to participate in the consultation for the subject bridge rehabilitation project_the Cultural Resources Commission held a public hearing pursuant to Section 1-71 on Seplenrl+cr 21,2022.Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NIIPA)of 1966[amended 20061 has been initiated to ith the State Ilistoric Preservation Office(SIIPO)for the subject project and b way of this letter,the County of Hawaii Cultural Resources Commission is stating intent to participate in the Section 106 process. The ITakalau Stream Bridge is a steel girder and trestle bridge with the total length of 775 feet a 261-feet hrl .b[o4er thi stream bed.and a roadway width of 28 feet.The superstructure. if the bridge is composed of-a e,?nelete deck on steel girders.and die uk tincture is composed sf e.1911 steel rails ad trestle supports with masonry(lava-ioelel abutrrrents.The llakalau Stream Bridge is significant for its association with the I-Gla Railroad Company and three of its founders.It is also a representative example of early 20tlr-century engineering technology,as well as a source for information about early 20th-century steel nranILi elure and constineli+n. 17ris briJae is built over the Ilakalau Stream and is listed on the Hawaii Rcgislrt oh Historic Place-SHT'T-1 Historic Site timber 10-16-90910.'.tiotino its Preservation Status: Presenvalion rec+nnnneruled in ,1IS_ 13TP.or Section 106 document,Source:Leine-weber 2009.Condition noted as Excellent tno alterations.no erosion,no clisnrrhance). r Rules of Practice and Procedure for the Hawaii County Cultural Resources Commission,Rules 1-5 www.cehplennlri dept.wm Hm•II'i C'auri s isa iEqualOpp6rft ii( Pa:widerard Eo player planalinpgco.hawail.ht.is 120 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawaii Appendix C Ms.Holly Yuen,RIOT Project Manager Highway Department of Transportation Page 2 September 28,2022 As pertains to the invitation to comment on the Area of Proposed Effect(APE). • The Cultural Resource Commission recommends revisiting the APF.boundary in order to comprehensively address the following natural and cultural resource items of public trust concern. • Hakalau Stream has been identified in the Hawaii Island Stream Assessment as having no dam diversions and the persistence of an estuary at the mouth of the stream;Hakalau Stream is an un�:ige l.stream with high flow and tied to at least one USFWS wildlife refuge:several tributaries also feed into Halcalan Stream. • 1lie tih...sh,+uId capture all downstream ell=cet.4,t•lead contamination and any 11)drodynairie impacts to steam.stelland in estu:u-inc Surelics For remediation of chemical contamination should be of inmost concern in furtherance of pub]ie trust duties.For e::;itnple.bioaccuunrlation of contaminants.including lead,should be investigated and quantified on the natural rusowc n +f the arca(floral and faunal); especially since rather trig of fish,'opihi-Buil-Lrifs and similar resourcas continuos,a testing and monitoring component should lie developed for continuing any contaminant remediation post-construction.Any impact to stream flow,habitat and morphology,or similar impacts to the estuary should be modelled prior to undertaking substructure or nlii r r:pairs including construction within the stream bed or floodway.A flood study ineiildnr_,hydrndvrnnnic modelling should also he considered. • The stream i' i:iiil:.J t tutstanding for recreational resources-Recreational resource op1F:irlunities for Ilal.:al:1u Streamimaluele camping.limon . hunting and scenicviews, The APF.boundary should capture all such recrcationak-traditional and customary practices in the arca-includiiie niitllering and sulisistenee activities such as tishin -harvesting,traditional and costornar'v rights.ceremony and recreation. • The steam is ranked Outstanding fur aquatic resources and ranked Substantial for riparian resources.Water quality information exists.As of last survey.60%o nativ=e forest exists and at least three species of threatened and cmdan_O,crcd birds exist as well as palustrine tyetlands identified try the 1'SP11 S and an astuarinc system identified by C7.M. One or more cit the following special areas are associated with the l lal:alau Stream: Natural Area Rs-serve System,plant san:iirar,Recovery Habitat for U aterbirds,private preserves.Bake an Finest National L!ii lltIc Refuge.1111„Forest Reserve,estuary todemi t:fled by 07 is P.wetlands_nri„rita :,yu:itiC site lu lr qualitystreams- • I least drLi Jrcnt poet",•i 'r i',•pn ht: l4' lilli.I'it the slr.am.Per the Hawaii Stream .;ssessinent,native"uuliear,r sl cosies J,.ciunclItcd as .l,su 0,1(circa 1980)in l IaL ul:wtistream include. _ „I:+u;Lim• •. i--tit: +._,,, .._ i. -e-t-opu nopili {:'' i',f. a+:,.;rr:ir�:•urlrl.rink'i rola nal:ea 1:141'.11llf.•sir,tri u,tr.ei The latter,`O'opu nakea should be expected to befound in the middle and lower reaches of streams. Areas of slots.step waters with gravel or line sediment are key habitat for them.Riffles at stream mouths are critical spawning mounds.A major ecological requirement for'dopu is the need to pass tluough a stream mouth at two times during the individual's life.The most ini I,:irlant tutor for the existence of'o'opu in streams is that access to and from the ocean CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 121 Appendix C Ms.Holly Yuen_HDO'l Project Manager Highway Department of Transportation Page 3 September 28,2022 is maintained.Stream channelization or other diversions can eliminate or significantly limit native fish populations within a stream. As pertains to Identification of IIistoric Properties within the(ultimate)APE. • Hakalau Mill Site is located along the southern side of the mouth of Hakalau Stream on-FMK:3- 2-9-002.080.Hakalau Plantation Manager's House is located on'I'lv1K:3-2-9-0U2:039 at 29-2301 [tl t lain alalma Highway(S1HPNo.50-10-16-09070);immediately adjacent to the August 9, 2022,proposed Area of Potenlial Affect(APE).The CRC recommends including this property in the APL or justifying its exclusion iH writing. • I he Hawaii Stream:�ssesnient included no e.\-tent oh'survey envera_e for archaeological resources and little or no information ceiSIS to assist lir:Ail:lion of what historic sites be located in unsurveyed areas of the.stream;low survey coverage exists as to historic sites that may be associated with Hakalau Stream. • The Cultural Resources Commission recommends investigation,survey and documentation of pre-contact Hawaiian production systems_pre-eulnnial indigenous:nriculturc systems and traditional agriculture such as lo'i kali and otlier ancient:historic subsistence%cultural or religious areas/sites within the vicinity of the Hakalau Brill e.Similller}valleys such as Hakalau may have smaller lo'i;Ind loko'ia sites that were cumulatively representative of resilience,sustainability and religious practic -of pre-contact Hawaiians:the riparian and estuarine areas have been important locations lt/r'.`.ative Hawaiians since antiquity and contemporary use continues. Additionally,flume and older bridge foundations associated with the plantation era are likely present within the area and should be investigated_surveyed and documented. As pertains to sH(]an i or Hawaiian descendants,or other individuals and organizations. • The r.-Cultural Resources Commission recommends contacting Richard A MacKenzie. diel land research ecologist and James Akan who perform research in this watershed,IIui Loki) and i he[l al;al au Homeowner Association.the Cultural Resources Commission also recommends I,eiic-Irian,ur ey of cull eicnl radius,during peak days and limes in order to better identify affected perr it cultural praelitk?ners,.organizations,properties and resource connected practices within the al e.r. • Complete tire:analis is outlined in ha Pa'akai to ensure that proposed uses of land and water resources are pried in a culturalhy appropriate war••.including the identity and scope of"valued enitln al.historical.or natural res„urc .s"in the pet;tion area.At this time the CRC is unable to de[.rruirre the extent n, which resonreG. including traditional and customary native Hawaiian ri tuts will lie:111.,:,21,.d or impaired by the proposed action. • I lie Cultural Resources Commission concurs[hal Since I DOT is proposing work in the Hal ilanr Stream in close proximity to nearshore Craters.II1151 should courrl[closely whit t)PSl]-Cn..l. the Connnissloll on Water Resources Management(Cll`1Cvlt.Dir isiun of Aquatic Resources (DAR).and lire Division of Forestry and Wildlife(DOFAW)to help mitigate any potential impacts to avian and aquatic species as well as to protect stream flow/water quality standards. 122 CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kama`e`e,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i Appendix C Ms.Holly Yuen_II O'I'Project Manager Highway Department of Transportation Page 4 September 28,2022 The cultural Rei4ources commi(((t+ It i In+1Tc1;i11hal 4+n11+i11t,1 Itnt1•it Ill 1'4i]."eIil a,;i Hili and and areas nrahlc rc'lolation effort for the public truest resources cujoinedrincLi this:project. Finally_the Commission was not furnished with details as to the hrirl2c,ailmc replacements heilr upgraJed for"safety standards"and therefore could not detcmllinc ifdiese ulr r,ids:t,ul n•ill bc;.mhalhetic to the historic nature ol'[he bridge.The C'RC requests said infonnation b:provided at earliest e ms cnicnce. I lie i.'ia'also concurs s+,ith the eonlnrents and concern:provided to\I ti I ul1lcc bi Ilw [historic Iiawaii Foundation in their September 14.211.Y..2.iralism ii:tal letter and urscs rc olein_ the outstanding issues and avoid.minimize,or mitigate any acIvei c effect;on the Hak.11au Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project. If you have any questions concerning this matter,please contact Kevin Sullivan at kevin.sullivatn i'hawaiicounty.gov. Ma halo, Geraldine Bell Cultural Resources Commission Chair Cc: Stale Risk)i icP1'::serA'alfo it officer Histone I-Iartai'i Foundation ICS:I:It •..+I �I•Iiluum,.Iu.I+'IC.ssInr•ni•;c.�dnir:a Ito-oiucc;Comm isam\Prnjeds••llakalan 13ririge Rchabilitatiun TMF 310011Ki1,nut,IIII3,un4, 999•H:rkaalau Biidge Rspiirs_CRC Rc0F,+use.olo.du CIA for the Hakalau Bridge Project,Hakalau Nui&Kamal ,North&South Hilo,Hawai`i 123 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX E BIOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT AFF �� H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES _ fey11!!; l P'C Y K. Y` Ecological Consultants � - 50 years of field notes, exploration, and excellence r " .,,,,4,.-°a,---'.:•r,,7 y , ? ' - u4 ,, Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— y ,,'' , Biological Survey Report ,;,--.:...- Project #4639-01 *� ,�I ��-11,1„,,,,,,,,ova '.`T., , .., Prepared for: WSP USA ,�`a I• 1,.,,,'''.`e . f, • 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2400 T- 3 Honolulu, HI 96813 E �� ~� F� � i y �r e'�Y�� 3y S 5 yi�7n.�.r d �✓¢ N fi'+ Ems P F'4 $. < Prepared by: S y4 ,�Y,1xi..,gW� _ pf 3 N1.ti '.t �1'S' • :+51} d . ` r �� H. T. Harvey & Associates W. P, A '1;4:1'. Ykt liiQ 5 4'rti �. �,^ ���X-� �r � kid' � p. . "IA' -',• '''' .." `i.,---1',1?' ' . , ' t, ri" „� �''��� dad.. i1/4\ *" . '-i,'21..14.-)i.:u•�* -*I March 2024 91-1020 Kai Lou Street• Ewa Beach HI 96706 • 808.499.9092 • i i w.hanveyecolvj.com Table of Contents Section 1.0 Introduction 1 Section 2.0 Methods 5 Section 3.0 Results 7 3.1 Flora 7 3.2 Fauna 19 Section 4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 24 4.1 Flora 24 4.2 Fauna 26 4.2.1 USFWS Species of Concern 26 4.2.2 State Species of Concern–Hawaiian Hawk 28 4.2.3 National Marine Fisheries Service Species of Concern 29 4.3 Invasive Species 30 Section 5.0 References 31 Tables Table 1. Plant Species Observed in the Hakalau Stream Bridge BSA 7 Table 2. Bird Species Observed in the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project BSA 19 Table 3. Approximate Abundance and Distribution of Large Trees in BSA Assessed to Potentially Provide Suitable Habitat for Hawaiian Hoary Bat 22 Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map 3 Figure 2. Project and Biological Study Area 4 Figure 3. Habitats Map 11 Figure 4. Location of Bird Point Count Stations and Potentially Suitable Trees for Hawaiian Hoary Bat 21 Appendices Appendix A. IPaC Resource List for Hakalau Stream Bridge Project Area A-1 Appendix B. General Project Design Guidelines for Endangered Hawaiian Goose,Waterbirds,Seabirds, Hawaiian Hoary Bat, and Green Sea Turtle B-1 Photos Photo 1. Southeastern Slope of Hakalau Bridge BSA with Mixed Alien Forest,Alien-Dominated Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland 12 Photo 2. Small Grove of Polynesian Trees at the Base of the Southeastern Slope 12 Photo 3. View of Alien Dominated Riparian Vegetation on the Southern Bank of Hakalau Stream,Viewed from the Northern Bank 13 Photo 4. Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland in the Southwestern Portion of the Hakalau Bridge BSA 13 Photo 5. Road and Alien Dominate Riparian Vegetation in the Southwestern BSA 14 Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— i H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Photo 6. Mixed Alien Forest and Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland along the Southern Bank of Hakalau Stream to the West of the Bridge 15 Photo 7. Middle Section of Hakalau Stream to the West of the Bridge 16 Photo 8. Northern Bank of Hakalau Stream to the West of the Bridge 16 Photo 9. Mixed Alien Forest in the Northwestern BSA 17 Photo 10. Roadside Vegetation of the Northwestern BSA 18 Photo 11. Mixed Alien Forest in the Northeastern Portion of BSA 18 List of Preparers Scott Terrill,Principal-in-Charge Shahin Ansari,Senior Plant Ecologist Chuck Chimera,Botanist Ilana Nimz,Wildlife Biologist Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— ii H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Section 1 .0 Introduction Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410)is located at milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) on the Island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00" N, 155°07'47.00" W (Figure 1). The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT),in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),is proposing the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project (the Project). Hakalau Stream Bridge is a historic and an aging steel-trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road roughly 180 feet above Hakalau Stream and spans roughly 775 feet across Hakalau Valley. It was originally constructed in 1911 as a railroad bridge and was later rehabilitated and converted into a highway bridge after the 1946 tsunami that struck the Island of Hawaii.The Project proposes two main actions: 1) soil remediation and 2) bridge rehabilitation,which are described below. Hakalau Stream Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge and Hakalau Beach Park,which is below and adjacent to the bridge. In 2000,the lead paint was removed from the Hakalau Stream Bridge, so it would not continue to further contaminate the environment. However, lead remains in the surrounding area, including at Hakalau Beach Park. Because of this contamination, soil remediation for lead abatement is needed to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe for the public.HDOT proposes to remediate lead-contaminated soil surrounding the bridge to restore public use of the Hakalau Beach Park and to rehabilitate the substructure of the bridge. Studies conducted by Hawaii Department of Health's Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office,formed the basis of HDOT's proposed soil remediation actions.HDOT proposes to replace up to an estimated 7,623 cubic yards of soil in a roughly 2.4-acre proposed remediation area with the Project Area(Figure 2).Actual depths of clean fill will correspond to actual soil removal depth; the area will be regraded to match pre-construction conditions.Any associated vegetation will be removed and replaced with new vegetation,except for large trees, which will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The clean soil will be used to re-level the site and allow for revegetation,drainage,and grading. In addition to lead contamination issues, recent bridge inspections have revealed steel corrosion and scour conditions that undermine the structure and foundation of the Hakalau Stream Bridge. The ongoing Hakalau Bridge Bent 8 Repair Project will not be adequate to prevent further deterioration of this Bridge. Therefore, after the completion of soil remediation work,HDOT proposes to rehabilitate the bridge's entire superstructure which includes replacing the existing steel bents and concrete foundations with new concrete bents and foundations to ensure future continued safe operation of the bridge.The concrete trestles would be constructed in approximately the same location as the existing trestles but would have a larger footprint surrounding each existing trestle. Concrete trestles will be installed using drilled shafts up to 6 feet in diameter. These drilled shafts will be constructed on both dry land and in the stream bed. No vegetation clearing for access is anticipated. Construction of the Hakalau Bridge's concrete trestles would be conducted incrementally to allow for continued safe operation.Night work may be conducted to expedite the construction schedule.Temporary best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize potential soil erosion into Hakalau Stream. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 1 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 The objectives of this biological study were to: • Conduct a reconnaissance-level wildlife survey to detect and record the wildlife species (birds and mammals). • Conduct a reconnaissance-level botanical survey to identify and document vegetation communities and the plant species. • Identify and document biological issues of concern, including the presence of any taxa that are state or federally listed as threatened or endangered, candidate species for listing,or sensitive habitats. • Identify the potential impacts of implementing the Project and conservation measures that may be considered for inclusion into the planning and design phase if any listed taxa, candidate species for listing, or sensitive habitats are found at the Project Site. • Identify the approximate number of large (>15 feet) trees that may provide suitable day roosting habitat for the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinerea senotus). The Project site is bound by Hakalau Bay and the Pacific Ocean to the east and undeveloped lands to the west and north, and a residential neighborhood to the south. The Project Area is about 14 acres and overlaps the Hakalau Gulch with elevations ranging from sea level to about 134 feet above mean sea level. The Hakalau Stream bisects the Project Area in the west to east direction and terminates into the Pacific Ocean just outside of the eastern boundary of the Project Area.The Project site is steeped in the history of sugar plantation era in Hawaii and includes several features of historical significance,which to some degree has also contributed to the existing ecological landscape here.In 1878,the Hakalau Sugar Plantation was established at the Project site and grew to be extensive and one of the most modern plantations at that time. In fact,the Hakalau Rail Bridge was built by the Hawaiian Railway Company and as mentioned above,was later refurbished to construct what is the existing Hakalau Stream Bridge. There was large scale clearing of vegetation at this site to not only plant sugarcane on the broad plateaus between the gulches,but also to build supporting infrastructure such as ditches to carry water,Humes to transport freshly cut cane,and a mill to process sugar.Remnants of this infrastructure such as the broken sea wall, concrete foundation of the mill, fragments of concrete and metal including remnants of a crane to move sugarcane, and a large (about 9 feet) pipe stanchion can still be found in the southeastern corner of the Project Area. The climate at the project site is characterized as moderately warm with the daytime temperature over a year ranging from 70 to 75°F. The site is very wet; according to the Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii (Giambelluca et al. 2013), the area receives a mean annual rainfall of approximately 142 inches with the highest rainfall occurring during the months of March and November and the least during the month of June(Giambelluca et al. 2013). Typically, the trade winds blow from east to west, except sometimes (during summer months) the "kona winds"blow in the opposite direction. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 2 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Project Vicinity 1191 Hilo 0 Hawaii 19 Kau 0 n�s \eau Stream Qe Rd 19 Lep°.Oa Project uma mauS�t� Location a i$ er R 41,202' ' aKalau StreaR` Hakalau cr, eRa ae Wailea aa Stream �a 19 Gh\n chu°* hakini Stream E Kaa a Honomu N 0.5 0.25 0 0.5 �ry A Miles 9-- H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project Ecological Consultants Biotic Resources Report (4639-01) March 2024 41 r Project Boundary O M1 R. °•••, im �Q •�R(F • ' f ti* x,;'e. s, # ru b? �--,, . 117140-II&'IP 1 Il SSI - f F, 1 1" O ♦ �.e ? s. e ;�:i,<af Pacific Ocean 4 •w 1 + ` ♦ i c• e . ! Hakalau Beach Park t Si , _ - tot - • ,-0 to (Former Hakalau Sugar Mill)► • v\cy„ .A ,, , ,z •" Y } , � ` e �. r^ , 1► sem"see*` tiv u j� n • �I 't,";.' '� , �� �4 • ora . , •,rry `` ♦ a :". 0\ ♦ IP. • • + ''''' ♦ ed ♦ • ♦ 4. I I of • .� �, ' ,` .., 0 • r i. 040 g. cc 9 Tow rW+ m cc m gg y. a � 1 N 250 125 0 250 w x..`- Feet .' a` 0 z H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Figure 2. Study Area Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project 0 — Ecological Consul Biotic Resources Report (4639-01) March 2024 Section 2.0 Methods The Biological Study Area (BSA) for the flora and fauna studies consisted of the entire Project Area depicted in Figure 2. Prior to the field survey, H. T. Harvey &Associates' botanists, and wildlife biologist (biologists) reviewed aerial photographs and topographic maps of the BSA and conducted a thorough literature review to identify any ecological concerns and biological resources present in the BSA and its vicinity. We reviewed the resource list of threatened and endangered species in U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service's Information for Planning and Consultation database (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2023),which lists species either known or expected to be within or near the BSA. A reconnaissance-level survey of the BSA was conducted on March 16 and 17, 2023. Sunny skies with mild trade winds prevailed during the survey. Two botanists and one wildlife biologist (hereafter referred to as biologists) conducted the survey together.The vast majority of the BSA overlaps a deep gulch with steep slopes to the north and south and which were not accessible on foot.Vegetation on the steep slopes was surveyed by scanning with binoculars from the gulch bottom as well as from the old Mamalahoa Highway which runs along the top of the southern hillside. The biologists walked the accessible areas of the BSA and documented the vegetation communities, plants,birds, and mammals observed. A handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) device preloaded with spatial data(e.g.,BSA boundary)was used to navigate during the survey and record field observations. In general, rocky outcrops, shaded areas, and topographic depressions,which are more likely to support native plant species,were surveyed more extensively. The wildlife biologist recorded observations of birds and mammals in the BSA.Visual and auditory detection, as well as secondary indicators (e.g., nests) were used to identify the bird species present. To survey for birds, 8-minute point counts were made from eight locations in the BSA between 6:30 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. The eight point count locations were spread out to cover different representative habitats in the BSA.Point count surveys included tallying all birds seen or heard by a single observer from a fixed point over a period of 8 minutes. Binoculars (e.g.,Eagle Optics 10x50)were used to assist with visual identifications.In addition to these focused point-count surveys, incidental detections of birds were recorded throughout the duration of the survey. An avian species list was compiled,which includes common and scientific names of the individual species,the legal regulatory status, the average number of individuals detected per count station, and how many count stations were occupied. The last two metrics were used to provide a qualitative relative abundance of observed bird species. .The scope of this study did not include nocturnal surveys to detect Hawaiian seabirds. The only native Hawaiian terrestrial mammal,the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat is known to occur on Hawaii Island (Tomich 1986,Bonaccorso et al 2015). For this biological study,it is assumed that Hawaiian hoary bats may use the BSA.Thus,rather than detection,this survey effort tried to assess the habitat for Hawaiian hoary bats in the BSA. To do this the wildlife biologist estimated the number of large (> 15 feet) trees that may provide suitable day roosting habitat for Hawaiian hoary bats. In addition to size, the wildlife biologist also assessed the density of leaves, the structure and form of the branches with dense leaf clusters, and the ability Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 5 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 of bats to ingress and egress these areas of dense leaves.The determination that these trees provided potential habitat was based on the wildlife biologist's experience surveying for Hawaiian hoary bats and observations documented by other bat biologists (Gorreson et al. 2013, Montoya-Aiona 2020). Most of the habitat on the steep hill slopes was assessed using binoculars.The presence of non-native terrestrial mammals was noted either via direct observation or signs such as tracks, scat, or remains. No protocol level surveys were conducted for the native marine mammal, the Hawaiian monk seal (Neomonachus schauinslandi), however during this two-day survey the biologists periodically scanned the beach area adjacent to the BSA to look for them. Hawaii does not have native reptiles and amphibians. No protocol level surveys were conducted for the Hawaiian green sea turtle (Chelonia lnydas) and hawksbill sea turtle (Eretr ochelys imbricata), but during this two- day survey, the biologists periodically scanned the beach area adjacent to the BSA to document sea turtles, if present Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 6 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Section 3.0 Results 3.1 Flora The taxa recorded during the reconnaissance-level survey are indicative of the season (i.e., spring) and the environmental conditions at the time of the survey. No rare native Hawaiian plant species or taxa that are state or federally listed as threatened, endangered, or taxa that are candidates for listing were observed in the BSA. Table 1 provides a list of the plant species observed and their relative abundance in the BSA.A total of 68 plant taxa were found, of which 3 (-4%) are native (indigenous) and 65 (96 %) are either Polynesian introduced or alien species (Wagner 1999,Imada 2019). Table 1. Plant Species Observed in the Hakalau Stream Bridge BSA Relative Family Scientific Name Common Name Status' Abundance2 Acanfhaceae Thunbergia grandiflora Roxb. Bengal trumpet, blue alien A trumpet vine Anacardiaceae Mangifera indica L. mango alien R Araceae Alocasia macrorrhizos (L.) G. ape pol C Don Epipremnum pinnatum (L.) Engl. golden pothos, pothos, alien C taro vine Araliaceae Schefflera actinophylla (Endl.) umbrella tree, octopus alien R Harms tree Arecaceae Archontophoenix alexandrae (F. Alexandra palm, king alien C Muell.) H. Wendl. & Drude palm Cocos nucifera L. coconut, niu pol C Asparagaceae Cordyline fruticosa (L.) A. Chev. Ki/ti pol R Asteraceae Calyptocarpus via/is Less. Calyptocarpus, alien R straggler daisy Crassocephalum crepidioides ebolo,fireweed, alien R (Benth.) S. Moore redflower ragleaf, thickhead Elephantopus mollis Kunth tobacco weed, soft alien R elephantsfoot Emilia fosbergii Nicolson Pualele alien R Emilia sonchifolia (L.) DC.var. Flora's paintbrush alien R sonchifolia Erechtites valerianifolius (Link ex Fireweed alien R Spreng.) DC Galinsoga parviflora Cay. gallant soldier alien R Pluchea carolinensis (Jacq.) G. marsh fleabane, alien R Don sourbush Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 7 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Relative Family Scientific Name Common Name Status' Abundance2 Sphagneticola trilobata (L.) creeping ox-eye, alien A Pruski trailing daisy, wedelia Youngiajaponica (L.) DC. Oriental hawksbeard alien R Athyriaceae Diplazium esculentum (Retz.) Sw. hoio, paca alien A Begoniaceae Begonia hirtella Link Begonia, Brazilian alien R begonia Bignoniaceae Spathodea campanulata African tulip alien A P.Beauv. Campanulaceae Hippobroma longiflora (L.) G. star-of-Bethlehem alien R Don Cannabaceae Trema orientalis (L.) Blume Gunpowder tree alien C Casuarinaceae Casuarina equisetifolia L. common ironwood alien C Combretaceae Terminalia catappa L. false kamani,tropical alien R almond Commelinaceae Commelina diffusa Burm.f. day flower, honhono alien C Convolvulaceae Ipomoea violacea L. Beach moon flower alien R Cucurbitaceae Momordica charantia L. bitter melon, balsam alien R pear Cyperaceae Cyperus mindorensis (Steud.) White kyllinga alien R Huygh Dioscoreaceae Dioscorea bulbifera L. yam, air potato, bitter pol R yam, hoi Euphorbiaceae Aleurites moluccanus (L.) Willd. Kukui, kukui nut pol R Euphorbia heterophylla L. spurge, kaliko alien R Fabaceae Canavalia cathartics Thouars Maunaloa alien R Chamaecrista nictitans (L.) partridge pea alien R Moench Falcataria moluccana (Miq.) Moluccan albizia alien A Barneby&J. W. Grimes Mimosa pudica L. var. unijuga sensitive plant, alien R (Duchass. &Walp.) Griseb. sleeping grass Vigna luteola (Jacq.) Benth. hairy cowpea, Nile alien R bean Heliconiaceae Musa x paradisiaca L. banana pol C Lauraceae Persea americana Mill. Avocado alien R Lytheraceae Cuphea carthagenensis (Jacq.) Colombian cuphea alien U J.F.Macbr. Malvaceae Talipariti tiliaceum (L.) Fryxell aloalo, hau pol A Malvaviscus penduliflorus DC turk's cap,firecracker alien R hibiscus Sida rhombifolia L. Cuban jute alien R Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 8 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Relative Family Scientific Name Common Name Status' Abundance2 Melastomataceae Arthrostemma ciliatum Pay.ex arthrostema alien R D. Don Miconia calvescens DC. miconia alien R Miconia crenata (Vahl.) koster's curse, clidemia alien R Michelang. Moraceae Artocarpus altilis (Parkinson) ulu, breadfruit pol R Fosberg Ficus microcarpa L.f. Chinese banyan alien R Myrtaceae Psidium cattleyanum Sabine strawberry guava alien R Psidium guajava L. guava alien R Onagraceae Ludwigia octovalvis (Jacq.) false loosestrife,water native R Raven primrose, alohalua, kamole Orchidaceae Spathoglottis plicata Blume malayan orchid, alien R philippine ground orchid Pandanaceae Pandanus tectorius Parkinson screw pine, hala, pu native U hala Poaceae Axonopus compressus (Sw.) P. wide-leaved alien C Beauv. carpetgrass Cenchrus purpureus cane grass, elephant alien C (Schumach.) Morrone grass, napier grass Coix Iachryma Obi L. job's tears alien U Megathyrsus maximus (Jacq.) B. guinea grass alien A K.Simon &S. W. L.Jacobs Setaria palmifolia (J. Konig) Stapf palmgrass alien R Sporobolus africanus (Poir.) dropseed, rattail grass, alien R Robyns &Tournay smutgrass Urochloa mutica (Forssk.) T.Q. California grass, para alien U Nguyen grass Polygonaceae Persicaria chinensis (L.) H.Gross creeping smartweed, alien A Chinese knotweed Persicaria punctata (Elliott) Small water smartweed alien U Polypodiaceae Microsorum grossum (Langsd. & lauae, maile scented alien R Fisch.) S. B.Andrews fern Phlebodium aureum (L.) J.Sm. rabbit's foot fern alien R Psilotaceae Psilotum nudum (L.) P. Beauv. moa, upright whiskfern native R Rubiaceae Pentas lanceolata (Forssk.) pentas alien R Deflers Solanaceae Cestrum nocturnum L. night cestrum, night alien R blooming jasmine Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 9 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Relative Family Scientific Name Common Name Status' Abundance2 Zingiberaceae Hedychium flavescens Carey ex yellow ginger alien R Roscoe 1Status Notes:alien=introduced or alien (all those plants brought to the Hawaiian Islands by humans,intentionally or accidentally,after Western contact [i.e.,Cook's arrival in the islands in 1778]).Native=species that occur naturally in the Hawaiian Islands including indigenous species that have a wider distribution outside of Hawaii. 2Qualitative Relative Abundance of Observed Species in Study Area:A=abundant—forming a major part of the vegetation in the BSA.C=common—widely scattered throughout the BSA or locally abundant in a portion of it. U= uncommon—scattered sparsely throughout the BSA or occurring in a few small patches. R=rare—only a few isolated individuals in the BSA. Additional Notes:This checklist is an inventory of plant species observed on March 16 and 17,2023 during a reconnaissance level botanical survey.The taxonomy and nomenclature of the flowering plants are in accordance with Wagner et al. (1999);recent name changes are those recorded in Imada 2019. In general,the vegetation of the BSA can be characterized as a mix of coastal mesic and coastal wet communities (sensu Gagne and Cuddihy 1999). These community types, on the windward sides of most islands, intercept sufficient rainfall to maintain forest cover, or occur in nutrient-rich floodplains, marshes, and riparian areas. The vegetation, including that occurring on the slopes and adjacent to Halakau Stream, has been heavily modified by pre-historic and modern human activities and is now largely dominated by alien species (Table 1). Four broad vegetation zones were seen in the BSA:Mixed Alien Forest consisting of various non-native trees, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland,Alien-Dominated Herbland (Persica/4a chinensis and mixed species), and Alien Dominated Riparian Vegetation (Figure 3). Described below is the distribution and composition of these vegetation communities in the BSA. The southeastern corner of the BSA is a mosaic of Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland. The ridgeline is lined with groves of mixed alien forest consisting of emergent African tulip (Spathodea campanulata), Gunpowder tree (Trema orientalis) and coconut palms (Cocos nucifera), and common ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia) draped in trumpet vine (Thunbergia grandra) (Photo 1). The slopes arc largely covered by a smothering layer of creeping smartweed (Persicaria chinensis) and trumpet vine interspersed with a mixture of banana(Musa xparadisiaca),'ape(Alocasia macrorrhkos)and variegated hau(Hibiscus tiliaceus). Of minor note, along the flats below this slope is a small grove of Polynesian trees including kukui (Aleurites moluccanus),ulu(Artocarpus altilis),both likely intentionally planted,along with the native hala(Pandanus tectorius) and an understory of ti (Cordyline fruticosa), Guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus),and various other herbs and vines (Photo 2). The southern bank of Hakalau Stream, to the east of the bridge, can be characterized as Alien Dominated Riparian Vegetation. This community consists of a scattered grove of coconut pahns, hala trees, common ironwood and tropical almond (Terminalia catappa), with an open understory covered largely by wide-leaved carpetgrass (Axonopus compressus),wedelia (Sphagneticola trilobata) and various other short-statured herbs (Photo 3). Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 10 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 . - ,i N. , s;,„, „,„ ate ; .., , . 7 F.,:3 2 9 ah , • rkl V ♦ : r Z ♦ °k��' 4b M a N \� ' p Tz>' CDi Ai \ ",,� �' ♦ r,.. N.. '�+"` "ri ii ', m ♦ " so Y i • • • �d • U •' P/' le is • i O. ‹), r; •i .. % �0 S x y P .,�,-% S ' �.� . 4' * . .1 �� ss et- �,}, a " \ • r / ° ,ti-0 rO •• 1 "*, 1"'i r I y •% '*4"71..., 17 i •— 1 • . %% . `„ • U -0 o t",. - _ • 5 1 O C � ' � '4 p Q ` a s ,� ♦5 cnN } O N ' 5%• ,�� F— a p = Q O) ;,, Q a) ♦,. " ' C.) (n N a) 0 ft •• '4 • O O > i$ U N , ♦ N �v V 0 U U o E a ,% F ♦ N U ti `o `L o ., F ¢ iv � k o N E Q ♦ � Y [ „:� > LJ m S ••� e p + � .,ki, • ` Ct U -� Z 4 ♦ � firF= D — E N X 0 � r LL r O r F F k - ^ rcr4lie S ep,esei....H H\aas\spodaa\Lo-sesa,00sowalmd\.N i ./ •�x s / .. . Photo 1. Southeastern Slope of Hakalau Bridge BSA with Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland Note: Gunpowder tree and coconut palms on the ridgeline and creeping smartweed smothering slopes. 5 ai�" ; �'r`` X 5 ;;y{f� r 4 s ter,. „ :=4' ri,,,,„, '''•••>,..; . ,,,.' .74•',- , 1 ,.$,4. tilf,,X: ,' 'Ai-t 14.4 ; YMq., J{� T �� �c.r- t eq r. 1M4T ;, lY . i �_ �y ti f � i r . ` Photo 2. Small Grove of Polynesian Trees at the Base of the Southeastern Slope Note: Note the kukui, and ulu trees in the center surrounded by a Guinea grass and other mixed alien herbs. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 12 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 7 .e N: • ;4 F' S �t: ti ' c @iila rr+a }j .T r a a' ' r .. w\Allie .,l ,i,,, yy ,� e ..**;;;,',v ;. Photo 3. View of Alien Dominated Riparian Vegetation on the Southern Bank of Hakalau Stream, Viewed from the Northern Bank Note the canopy of coconut palms, hala trees, and common ironwood with an open, herbaceous understory. r117r 117 1 „N:'` w � . P 7, A, t "'— 1191 > fit. 4 x 1„v-_,--i-_,u o 3 s kA t -v:--,-- : L �ur�W' a� _ - .� -,,., d.'- ,,,,„,A.1., j ^� ,Ig .JS d. f11 r � �j;r tr04- i, + sit.,tkr .1 , • nr v 4 1 } k K .44 , � fit' , 4._ Photo 4. Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland in the Southwestern Portion of the Hakalau Bridge BSA Note: Roadside dominated by Guinea grass, and paca ferns. Ridgeline of mixed alien trees. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— 13 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 V ° ri 4' # , u M M ' I l1 !J'55," 1 p F 1 • e, Anc , i 1 4 �- 1 r _ _— -- — — IIII 5r s; F ^r.y, ,• I 4 'I. r , ,,,. , , —,. ._,A,..„,....., „6,A ,. .. - ! rt,..- .. ,. . ., . , , it . . ,., r pry. , L 7 #c a• ' • �� , ''''.6.' "- 1' Aigo,n i ''',,,4" „,:,„ '. -'7j,,,•• ;,. -, :.....:.: 1, ' .'- ...1,t:' '-',1-`: • .. .. eo.. '74� .4 , On. � i # �G �.1 d rYh a 5 5•In a i Y J�. I 4� l� I a A "1 y I #I '4 ~"Y R y /021 l ikd l i""--.• ', •• " i,, • .°. r 4.,,Y,' Photo 5. Road and Alien Dominate Riparian Vegetation in the Southwestern BSA Note: Guinea grass along road and prominent Moluccan albizia grove in background. Like the southeastern portion of the BSA,the southwestern slope is also a mosaic of Mixed Alien Forest,Alien- Dominated Paca Fernland and Alien-Dominated Herbland(Photo 4).The roadside is fringed with Guinea grass and a mix of alien herbs.Also bordering the road and covering much of the flats and mid-slopes are paca ferns (D plaium esculentum),banana, 'ape and other short-statured alien herbs. The ridgeline above the access road is covered with a mixed alien forest of African tulip, Gunpowder tree, and Alexandra palms (Archontophoenix alexandrae) among others. The vegetation between the access road and Hakalau Stream is also largely covered with Guinea grass and other low-statured herbaceous plants, although a prominent small stand of Moluccan albizia (Falcataria moluccana) can also be found to the west of the bridge (Photo 5). Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 14 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 kp ,+ 'F'',-.:...-4,;`). Ff 9 ° r 7 a 1 A y Y Z r ti • tit, ' :, f r ^(t r� Illli ,A is f ,i._ ...ye,� yam. ,4 ( • : ,114,5:-.(4t.y, • v .,� n Y ,(moi " t- ; ,' .:¢ ,.'k,,,d,,,,i4,,,,,..,Alti r } � �s . �, „l,:..is I � .� , ,:: ril,;',.?:.11'.i.,”.'''',..:.•..,-.___-...,.‘"•:" 4 "1 '''41,,,,--474014 + ° ,:1 b r n 41 1-4.IyP • y ,,:. .,ir:t:./ : Y Y.` 7�- 4'1',4,•,°e' /Ter, I +. 74„ 7t' w5,�^,' a.1 r ! '� Y;�11 g I 4 it N Xy Cr 5., n iC° f r• %!x 22: _•� .E,'A' I CK . s •ip'*-'404'7,. ' i 9' — 4- «,4-1 A - j '„' ,-.4,,v: to• 5 { 9 ' 1 .�. r: t r I. it a '.1f :'/". - t '"' ,,' :--9t-.: . ' . . 1,' C ;,01,.-,, ' •3', '. - ''' l'..,41' 'Me':''.."7136"'!!! ' -41,-'••iilti44111 ' ` r , 1T. , - , h ` ` ',i' 'r 'x Photo 6. Mixed Alien Forest and Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland along the Southern Bank of Hakalau Stream to the West of the Bridge Note: Canopy of kukui and gunpowder tree. The vegetation along Hakalua Stream to the west of the bridge is bordered by Mixed Alien Forest.The southern bank of the stream consists of a canopy of kukui and gunpowder trees festooned with trumpet vine, pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum) and an understory of Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and other mixed herbaceous and small-statured woody plants (Photo 6). The middle section of the stream consists of a prominent mango tree (Mangifera indica), avocado (Persea americana), Chinese banyan (Ficus macrocarpa), and Moluccan albizia among others with an understory of Alien- Dominated Paca Fernland and smaller-statured woody plants and herbaceous vegetation (Photo 7). The northern bank of the stream is dominated by a dense stand of hau and an understory of Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland and smaller-statured woody plants and herbaceous vegetation (Photo 8). Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 15 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 '47-77., r b,. sig �1- s{� pyo f r �L ,A1,,...• 4 F+� �} T�'��'"�y(G � .',Tyy' 1. ,�.if� J •�K•:. �y', 454. • 1i �. '�. ;`..,•••••%.,,,.,a ' t :a. Ss•'?"J` .R e i�:.��� �J 4 rn +q� 4. r yr��t�',��: S _" �.X. � � ,,:;fav �ZswFt'F ..„,,,„). a �'^ r F?' � i ,..„*...-,,,A, fA''3'.di;3 ': 1(�y�� o,.Y.�" .11F'-'1,,,;'..4",,',..o;i • R 4 <d ..s. '4,, .�} .� -� "..,,,,-17/ t r i �'' p.Sp't�l -- �y.[`` I, ''°s ' til: �fit'' .1_,. '„:11,,..47§' • a.W/I � ru.- N•. 0,,,,, ,,-5,...i",1 '- it a .jai it{g ''1, ' 1 : l':-':•4 tilt. 'F". '�t t'i' `fWF 4 i# .tea N. ;6-„,..-l� 4� -- {{ (f h �y a _ .,.7 ,: ...'': -_, ' ,-, \ ..,...4_,46-. . 74' •'�` '4 .. �- .a .} a .r''�'` !.% `. ;Y.. . i v t 'Jv. _ - c:3'Y' Photo 7. Middle Section of Hakalau Stream to the West of the Bridge Note: Prominent mango tree in foreground of Mixed Alien Forest. Tr l 4 ^ , � _. :.4-F r t , • s- -...4yr • et-, . 4 "� y lam 1 ✓. a% .. i`�ft' 2 ,. a.€+R, , t+�s , �•s 4; ~ a -_ Ss -,. '�• '`.. jf'�" ,4 6s'` •- v ;G: - .,. f `'• 'n-.a 'moi 'u .' -re.- Iv,.a.'4 , r._ ,' ,� tf' }a I• .i' .`.gyp=: mitot., 44: ,�' :: a „i" ', y aid: 2; alt.Ye r''4 . i..i .x, F p�`�. c F a ru ,-6.-' ;f - ..�� w� � �'Yl`T. � , �- � � x `'y •-.t';.4*aQ. ��, '.+ "'�'t .. 1'r.'t`. �' a T �'. { , r >t. 3'�.`w`' f-. ft , a- 'f ' y�I, :�;:,.4/Q(/.' 4- ]t,.rbl ✓ ± f. r .:,:7..3--k-46,...,,...,.,.. , .,,,,,.„.,...; „,. ,„0,,,.......;„:f` .a , . . ,'^flydF :� t r'4.f i C E,yY�S .'j: >. .T'.�.,y5 5' S\ -'+6.. y-.'*,(7-_-•- �'.'"t 1?�F y�yy. .,_,,,_...... .. ,,..,., ...:.,, ,,:.. . !': -' r . ,.,-,421`'.,..4.,-,, �,,., Z.; c,„, '�x c• /',r--,.,yri { r 0,,-' . '�^ , •y^ ,1n 21- ed/ r y r / �9 • S Photo 8. Northern Bank of Hakalau Stream to the West of the Bridge Note: Hau prominent in foreground. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— 16 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 '!' „el'Y ` .r 11 Ser _' T yt rN ..c - ,.` a • S�'fL d • ` Nof -i u _(. :i M r r r ' ti 7 ,b • -c C �° .,44.;,*:. 96 j '13., ul R : ,ea..,' r_..I. cti ), ykA? . . K _yy 1 t ,,. k ;, '•rs., - • /1'. Sy.t•1,7.�. 1I.C. f' r'�,•' L'yt ,s�` 6 •` fit .may f 'ri -• .0,--el- � r r°� .er botiy .r^•,• k p/,I s {fp 1,,1 # 6 = ' P` ^ . ek • My\ p,. iA .F Biu . k�; - � 1• . �R 1, t .•�� 1:. .c,... ••••,•'"'1:1/' •Y X 1 S 1 a. ti .;�r� ryra is . ) ..,,,,•,„r ',lid"" 'I', 1.R -1 -+. `i: =fie •. '1'�rM` �F '} Ay r 'x •1•v :� ,4. K�'. - � r is"'-. . is 44 ` + y". 7'K r � , I.: '�_ .'�'7i f;d. 113"1:-::14sr '\ 'ie Yt�F 1• ! ,a' f�' ♦ *:r„� •"�.4• 7, '`. '+e� . ,i:1 ,x .:I r 'f' '7' icy „cN ,} s `b j Yr. sY .1• ,....„•:741.,1. r `�° 't' Y ;s ,yy ' r '�„J"xt*AL .A7• Yt It• i-) •. ;:,...,.'i,Yp, n �i MQ L Si, Vis• 0yp, i 7,1f. ,• , `x>t i�o .*-1 �. ,, .ee ( .' M.. '! ^�„ ..+, f •_ :'_r.j'as�1Fe'"'"-",t�,• ' `�; r. l, s,/''�'ul • ; •bwr 1 4,4 yf�p�1' 4. 1'.. K r ,,,i,..rp")*F-„,./s}: � V, A t t \t•4,+ �, 1 e 1. .�” '' V A i A.. 11D as $ : ?br� yp /t }, f 9."1 / fir( 4♦1 •Y'lj,Ptlk. Photo 9. Mixed Alien Forest in the Northwestern BSA Note: Emergent African tulip and other trees draped in trumpet vine. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— H.T. Harvey&Associates 17 Biological Survey Report March 2024 �i rt5 t y �..Gt ! �- M 4 fi'4 J - ti.., r � der$ aF ''r - - vr`i. „ ` ,,h ey 3 crya z j r Pte- r+" . ,a,t' r ......,0.-, ¢ • xZ3;x/xr i _ a +c;ij y ''or •.J'C "�' • x �t ..yam• :\. ‘'; x s .. • ./41,_ ,..„10"....,,,... „,,ii � t:fiA..- M,i/..., '' �L mac~ \ '�aK, ) -•' • i �'Kit ', , A ' ,R+ / ti! . Sir- 4r• �i;T r •.. �• /� Y`a � 6 , t ski J .', CiA' rI � �, a, - - �; ! }r`� -s� ; :, ',t .Nr'" 'r~'•D 'Tf 1n� SIT', ' '! ,. < f" 4:K, 4:. .at?A. ,?.:•. !'4 x lkl. 3'(.pp11�','.,.Y/v' 4 74' IT', •°' t,� f, r'C { y �P'x'+ ,;„ ' --,4r..,--Ace. frfil �,/ �� �'... ,}. "�.Y rrA ',��, �Py` `fjV `���v ,tY a �` ���? F Y 'ice i • �.�. .'' ��'?fL row, ,1. 1 . 'ter+ ' N- f� i / ;:Jl. ,m,.. "$(,t ��L �ad,y�,�' `4:,,A 1 re . f 4 Photo 10. Roadside Vegetation of the Northwestern BSA Note: Chinese banyan in the background with Guinea grass lining the road. 4 . ,. .-. .„ •,. • , ,,,4,. i,, , ., x' ,, r 4':' m"4. 3y ' . _ r � _�Iv lf N:;' t'^@ay, 4 ;, q , `-' meg ,. s, ' Photo 11. Mixed Alien Forest in the Northeastern Portion of BSA Note: African tulip and other trees on the slopes with Guinea grass covering the flat below the slope and bridge. The northwestern portion of the BSA to the western side of Hakalau Bridge is dominated by a thick cover of Mixed Alien Forest including an emergent canopy of African tulip,Gunpowder tree,and Alexandra palms with Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— 8 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 trunks covered in trumpet vine and pothos.The dense sub-canopy and understory consists of hau,banana and other shorter-statured trees,shrubs and herbaceous vegetation,with Guinea grass prominent along the roadside (Photo 9). The vegetation between the road and the stream in the northeastern BSA is notable for a large Chinese banyan,with African tulip trees,gunpowder tree, banana and Guinea grass also featured prominently (Photo 10). The northeastern slope of the BSA consists of Mixed Alien Forest dominated by African tulip trees, interspersed with emergent gunpowder trees,with trumpet vine and pothos climbing the trunks.Vegetation in the gulch bottom in this area is composed of Guinea grass and Alien-Dominated Herbland (Photo 11). 3.2 Fauna Birds Point count surveys identified 53 individuals representing nine species (Table 2).Eight out of these nine species are introduced or alien(non-native) to the Hawaiian Islands.One endemic species—Hawaiian hawk or io (Buteo solitaries) was seen flying over the Project Area, outside of the point count timeframes, but it did not land or appear to have a nest in the Project Area. Table 2. Bird Species Observed in the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project BSA Average Birds per Point Number of Qualitative Count Station Stations Relative Scientific Name Common Name Status2 (n=7) Occupied (n = 7) Abundance' Acridotheres tristis common myna X 1.29 3 uncommon Buteo solitarius 'io, Hawaiian ES 0.00 0 rare- hawk observed flying above project site Cardinalis cardinalis Northern cardinal X, M 0.43 2 rare Carpodacus house finch X, M 0.71 3 uncommon mexicanus Gallus gallus red jungle fowl X 0.29 2 rare Geopelia striata zebra dove X 1.00 5 uncommon Padda oryzivora yellow-billed X 0.29 1 rare cardinal Passer domesticus house sparrow X 0.29 1 rare Sicalis flaveola saffron finch X 0.57 2 uncommon Zosteropsjaponicus warbling white- X, IW 2.71 7 abundant eye 1Abundance based on the average number of individuals observed per count station,averaged across all point count stations,as follows: Abundant-average>2.5 individuals observed per station Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 19 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Common-average 1.5-2.49 individuals observed per station Uncommon-average 0.5- 1.49 individuals observed per station Rare-average<0.49 individuals observed per station 2ES=state or federally listed as endangered IW=State (HAR 12-124,Exhibit 5) or Federal (18 U.S.C.42)injurious wildlife species X=introduced or alien (non-native species) M=Listed as a Migratory Bird Treaty Act Protected Species (10.13 List) The warbling white-eve (Zosterops japonicas), was the most abundant species, with small groups of five to six individuals observed flying between tree canopies. Zebra doves (Geopelia striata) and common mynah (Acridotheres tristis) were also observed in higher numbers than other species,primarily roosting in larger trees which were predominantly invasive species such as African tulip, albizia, gunpowder, ironwood and false kamani. The warbling white eye is on the State of Hawaii Injurious Wildlife list and is known to be harmful to agriculture, aquaculture, or indigenous wildlife or plants, or to constitute a nuisance or health hazard (Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources [DLNR] 2015a). Mammals and Hawaiian Hoary Bat Habitat Assessment Two feral mammal species were detected in the Hakalau Project BSA. One individual of a small Indian mongoose (Herpestes javanicus) was seen near the foot of the bridge along the northern stream bank. Although feral cats (Felis catus) were not seen, cat scat was observed occasionally when surveying at the gulch bottom along the northern and southern stream banks. We did not incidentally observe any Hawaiian hoary bats during this two-day reconnaissance survey.However, the Project Area appeared to contain numerous trees that might potentially serve as suitable roosting habitat. Based on the density of leaves, the structure and form of the branches with dense leaf clusters, and the ability of bats to ingress and egress these areas of dense leaves, we estimated about 180 trees (including about 50 palms) across 21 locations to be potentially suitable day roosting habitat for Hawaiian hoary bats. The trees (excluding palms) consisted of the following alien tree species—ironwood, false kamani, African tulip, gun powder, Chinese banyan, mango, albizia, and kukui. The determination that these trees provided potential habitat was based on the wildlife biologist's experience surveying for Hawaiian hoary bats and observations documented by other bat biologists (Gorreson et al. 2013, Montoya-Aiona 2020). Figure 4 illustrates the distribution of the trees that were assessed to be suitable day time bat roosting habitat. Table 3 provides additional details such as the number and height of trees observed at each point location identified on Figure 4,the tree species and description where found in the Project Area. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 20 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 b rr v 4, I ,, c m 0 0 c ;~u`, :,?- `i', Xc• a v "~ , N O N . ♦ 1 :47. ...i' . : 14 o •.:1,♦ NO�Sp ,♦ <, . --'4 .. , O• •O ° Srr yI a ��* a y `„ 71e- V 2 O .....;.,,,.A,.+)...,,,0,:i'll,. % • .,, , • 'E ,— '63 � ♦ � . CL U tn •. ♦ �P "��, � . .a O . q ' . .1II. U. A _ .. s I ,I♦ r-0 0 Q in ,,♦ a m D I 0 I O I 0 ♦ ri • C•1r- ♦ 0 ♦ 0 • ♦ I ♦ . r, CV ♦ M 0 GI ♦♦ 0 0 0 q • • N. ♦♦ . .� ► ° Q# M I♦♦♦ ♦ its, '"" • o r-0 • ♦�• �, . 0 I • ♦_ . • • ./ I , I ♦♦ % 0 ,-- I ♦♦ • ♦ r 1'iy�. , o• O , ♦ ' ♦ .. "`' .�� I ♦♦ s,• gr?.' ♦ e ♦♦ • :, • . . i ,% ♦♦ ♦♦ % ' . 0 ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦♦ W r �♦ ♦♦ e I a ♦ ♦ Q • m ,♦ ♦ % U in ♦ ♦ % C.0G � /) O O ItI , (/) E }� 2 , ' : ♦♦ < -)p ♦♦ I W I >-♦ •,a-0 w\ ♦ �•,} OO A ♦♦ � O Q ca C p , .7---,, o - ° k t f 1 " r1 . 401 .,' # apiesel,....H R.:a.oda..o-se9b,00speloelod,.N Table 3. Approximate Abundance and Distribution of Large Trees in BSA Assessed to Potentially Provide Suitable Habitat for Hawaiian Hoary Bat Point ID as Approximate Approximate Tree Species Location in Project Area illustrated in Number of height of Figure 4 trees trees(feet) 1 5 75 African tulip, Northeast hillslope gunpowder 2 10 70-80 African tulip, Central area of the northern hill gunpowder slope, under the Hakalau Stream bridge 3 1 90 Gunpowder Northwestern hillslope 4 3 50 Ironwood,false Northeastern stream bank kamani 5 5 60 African tulip Lower portion of the northwestern hill slope 6 1 70 Chinese banyan Northwestern area gulch bottom 7 7 70 Gunpowder,African Northwestern stream bank tulip 8 9 60 Gunpowder,African Northwestern stream bank tulip 9 2 80 Gunpowder Northwestern stream bank 10 2 60 Chinese banyan, In the vegetated rock island in mango the middle of the stream west of the stream ford 11 10 50 African tulip Western border in center of Project Area just west of where Old Mamalahoa Highway crosses the Hakalau Stream 12 12 90 Albizia Southwestern stream bank, north of the old mill road 13 3 90 African tulip Southwestern hill slope near the western boundary of the Project Area 14 5 90 African tulip Southwestern stream bank close to the water's edge 15 30+50 60-80 African tulip and Southwestern hill slope down palms palms from upper Old Mamalahoa Highway toward the gulch bottom 16 1 30 Kukui Southeastern portion in the County beach park area 17 15 80 Ironwood Along upper Old Mamalahoa Highway Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 22 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Point ID as Approximate Approximate Tree Species Location in Project Area illustrated in Number of height of Figure 4 trees trees(feet) 18 3 80 Ironwood Southeastern gulch bottom in County beach park area 19 6 90 Ironwood Southeastern corner hill side 20 4 60 Ironwood Southeastern gulch bottom in County beach park area 21 3 50 Ironwood Southeastern gulch bottom upper stream bank Reptiles and Hawaiian Monk Seal We did not see any sea turtles or Hawaiian monk seal in the BSA during this two-day reconnaissance study. There are no terrestrial reptiles native to Hawaii. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 23 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Section 4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 4.1 Flora This study did not find any botanical concerns in the BSA. It is unlikely that the proposed Project would result in a substantial adverse effect on any plant species that is state or federally listed as threatened or endangered, a candidate species for listing, a rare native plant species, or a native plant species of concern. The BSA encompasses a highly disturbed area, and all but three plant species—hala, moa, and water primrose found in the BSA are non-native.Removal of either of these three plant species is not expected to have an adverse effect on species'populations locally or regionally as these native species are known to have a widespread distribution on Hawaii Island as well as in the State. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) IPaC database (USFWS 2023) lists four plant species that are either known or expected to be in or near the BSA;these are alani (Melicope ahlbrucknera),nanu (Gardenia remy), and two fern taxa—Deparia kaalaana and Microlepia strigosa var. maniensis(Appendix A). • Melicope ahlbruckneri or alani is a long-lived perennial tree in the Rutaceae family.It is medium sized,about 30 to 36 feet tall and currently about 15 individuals of this species are known to occur in one wild population in Kipukapuaulu (Bird Park) and possibly another individual in the Laupahoehoe Natural Area Reserve on Hawaii Island. No individuals are known to occur in the Hakalau Project Area and the closest designated critical habitat for this species is about 20 miles to the south of the Project Area(USFWS 2020a). Threats to alani include habitat degradation by invasive plant species and predation or herbivory by ungulates,rodents, slugs. • Gardenia relnyi or nanu is a tree species in the Rubiaceae family ranging from 10 to 43 feet in height. This species is known from wet forest,mesic forest, and wet cliff and ridge shrubland habitat types with about 29 individuals across 13 wild populations on Hawaii,Maui, East Molokai, and Kauai. On Hawaii Island, 5 individuals are known to occur across two populations—two individuals in the wet and mesic forests in Laupahoehoe iki (-38 miles north of the Project Area) and three individuals in wet forest and wet cliff and ridge shrubland habitat in Polulu (-45 miles north of Project Area). Historically, one plant was reported on the private lands of Hakalau Nui(about 15 miles inland of the Project Area)in 1977 however,it is now believed to be extirpated. Nanu plants are known to occur in full sunlight and mostly along leeward (west) facing ridges from 397 to 4,577 feet elevation,in areas receiving annual rainfall between 61 and 296 inches, and on Hawaii Island in moderately to well-drained, shallow to deep soils that have an organic surface overlaying pahoehoe bedrock and are slightly to strongly acidic.Threats to nanu include loss of habitat due to landslides, storms, erosion; destruction and adverse modification of habitat by feral ungulates; competition with invasive non-native plants; and herbivory by feral ungulates, rodents, non-native snails and slugs. • Deparia kaalaana is a fern in the Athyriaceae family.It is a small fern with decumbent(ground creeping) to erect rhizomes and fronds up to 12 inches long. The species is restricted to the rocky banks of perennial Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 24 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 streams and wet forest. Deparia kaalaana historically occurred in the Kaumana and Papaaloa areas on the Big Island, on Kauai, and from east Maui in Haleakala National Park, but currently there are no known wild individuals of this species following the extirpation of the last remaining population on the island of Maui in 2017 (USFWS 2022a). Deparia kaalaana are known to occur in ohia-uluhe lowland wet forest on vertical walls above perennial streams. Associated native plants include Asplenium excisum (pamoho), T'andenboschia cyrtotheca (no common name (NCN)), Adiantum raddianum (NCN), Dpopteris wallichiana (io nui), and Peperomia ligustrina (alaala wai nui); none of which were found in the BSA. Threats to Deparia kaalaana include habitat destruction by invasive plant species and ungulates, and herbivory by slugs. • Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis or palapalai is a terrestrial fern in the Dennstaedtiaceae family. This is a medium-sized fern with fronds less than 40 inches long. It is known to typically occur in mesic and wet forests from 1,400 to 6,000 feet on the islands of Hawaii,Maui,and Oahu.In the last 5-10 years only seven populations—five on East Maui, one on West Maui and one on Oahu have been observed with the last population on Hawaii Island observed in 2004 in the Waiakea and Piihonua areas. Threats to palapalai include habitat destruction and modification by both non-native plants and animals,and herbivory by pigs, goats,and slugs, (USFWS 2022b). In conclusion, no threatened, endangered, or rare plants were observed in the Project Area. The Project Area is highly disturbed with a history of vegetation disturbance in Hakalau Gulch over the last century since the sugar plantation times.Also, there is ongoing disturbance in the Project Area as it is an active recreational area and beach park.The Project Area has an almost 100 percent cover of non-native and invasive plants, and also contains other direct threats to the four endangered plants described above, such as feral ungulates, rodents, non-native snails and slugs.Based on these findings,it is highly unlikely that the Project Area contains the four endangered plant taxa identified in the IPaC resource list and therefore no mitigation measures are proposed at this time. The process of lead remediation in the Project Area does entail removing vegetation and soil. To the extent feasible, H. T. Harvey& Associates recommends that the Project should use native plants to revegetate these areas. Potential native plants that are ecologically suitable for outplanting in the BSA include species such as Acacia koa (koa), Pandanus tectorius (halo), Cibotium (hapuu), Coprosma pubens (pilo, hupilo), Freycinetia arborea (ieie), Kadua affinis (au, pilo), Psychotria spp. (kopiko), and Myrsine spp. (kooea). If native plants do not meet landscaping objectives, plants with a low risk of becoming invasive could be substituted. Additional information on selecting appropriate plants for landscaping can be obtained from the Plant Pono website (http://www.plantpono.org/). Furthermore, only plants grown on Hawaii Island should be used for landscaping purposes.If locally grown plants are unavailable,then imported plants may be used,but they should be thoroughly inspected or quarantined if necessary to ensure that they are free from invasive pests such as little fire ants (LVasmannia auropunctata) and invasive plant seeds and seedlings that could arrive inadvertently (also see Section 4.3). Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 25 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 4.2 Fauna 4.2.1 USFWS Species of Concern The USFWS IPaC database (USFWS 2023) lists nine threatened or endangered animal species that are either known or expected to be on or near the BSA;these are—Hawaiian hoary bat;four Hawaiian waterbird taxa— Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni),Hawaiian coot (Fulica alai), Hawaiian duck (Anas ivyvilliana), and the threatened Hawaiian goose or nene (Branta sandvicensis); three Hawaiian seabirds—Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), Band-rumped-storm-petrel(Hydro hates castro), and the threatened Newell's shearwater (Pu anus newelli); and one reptile—the green sea turtle or honu. None of these nine listed animal species were observed in the BSA during the two-day survey conducted in March 2023.This section addresses the likelihood of impact of Project activities on the listed Hawaiian hoary bat, Hawaiian waterbirds, Hawaiian seabirds, and the Hawaiian green sea turtle identified in the IPaC database for this Project Area. The IPaC resource list does not identify any rare or native migratory bird species in the Project Area. The Northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) and the House finch (Carpodacus mexicanus) seen during this field study are species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, but they are common on Hawaii Island as well as on other main Hawaiian Islands.Thus it is unlikely that the proposed Project would have an adverse impact on the population of these species. Hawaiian hoary bat Although the Hawaiian hoary bat was not surveyed for during this reconnaissance-level survey, there are numerous records for this species on Hawaii Island and in the vicinity of the Project Area (Tomich 1986, Gorresen et al. 2013, DLNR 2015b, Montoya-Aiona 2020). Furthermore, the Hawaiian hoary bat habitat assessment conducted as part of this biological study indicated approximately 180 trees across 21 locations in the Project Area that could potentially serve as suitable roosting habitat. Hawaiian hoary bats are known to roost in large (typically greater than 15-foot-tall) dense-canopy trees, sometimes at the edges of water bodies, such as streams and lakes (USFWS 1998).Hawaiian hoary bats may hunt for flying insect prey along roadways, gulches, and water ways (Bonaccorso et al 2015, DLNR 2015b) and occasionally roost in large, dense-foliage trees (Montoya-Aiona 2020) such as those in Hakalau Gulch within the BSA. Based on the documented evidence of Hawaiian hoary bat distribution and abundance on Hawaii Island and the presence of potential suitable habitat in the Project Area,it is possible that Hawaiian hoary bats occur or utilize the Project Area for roosting, foraging,and or breeding. This proposed Project will entail removal of large trees to remediate for soils contaminated with lead. H. T. Harvey&Associates recommends that any removal of large (> 15 feet) trees should,if possible,be conducted outside of the Hawaiian hoary bat breeding season, from June 1 to September 15. USFWS recommended general project guidelines to avoid and minimize impacts to Hawaiian hoary bats are included in Appendix B. If Project activities are not compatible with these federal conservation guidelines, then HDOT should consult with USFWS for further guidance. Outside of the breeding season, it is unlikely that removal of some large Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 26 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 trees will affect individuals or the local or overall population of Hawaiian hoary bats because-1) the potential and limited impact of habitat loss caused by removal of some large trees is temporary. Following soil remediation, the Project will revegetate areas with tree species that can serve as potential bat habitat and 2) in the interim when planted trees in the BSA have not reached optimal height or structure suitable for hoary bats; there is ample alternative habitat, similar to that found in the BSA that is available to the Hawaiian hoary bats in the immediate vicinity of the Project Area as well as elsewhere on Hawaii Island. Waterbirds Even though endangered Hawaiian waterbirds [Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, Hawaiian duck, Hawaiian common gallinule(Gallinulagaleata sandvicensis)]and the threatened Hawaiian goose or nene were not seen during this survey, it should be noted that these taxa occur on Hawaii Island (DLNR 2015b). There are suitable waterbird habitats, such as open water bodies (e.g. Hakalau Stream, ditch) and open grassy areas in the southeastern portion of the Project Area overlapping the County Park as well as in the vicinity of the Project Site.Therefore,it is not out of the realm of possibility for endangered Hawaiian waterbirds,including nene,to visit the Project Area. If Hawaiian waterbirds or nene are observed in the Project Area, H. T. Harvey & Associates recommends that HDOT consult with USFWS to assess the potential for adverse impacts on Hawaiian waterbirds from Project activities and seek guidance on Project specific conservation measures that may need to be incorporated to avoid and minimize impacts. General measures provided by USFWS to avoid and minimize impacts to endangered Hawaiian waterbirds are included in Appendix B. Seabirds No specific night-time surveys were conducted to survey seabirds in the Project Area. The endangered Hawaiian petrel and Band-rumped-storm-petrel; and the threatened Newell's shearwater are known to have a limited breeding distribution on Hawaii Island confined primarily to the mountains of Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa (Day et al 2003, DLNR 2015b). Movement of these seabirds over land, both inland and seaward, usually occurs nocturnally. These species may traverse the Project Area at night during the breeding, nesting, and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Both the Hawaiian petrel and the Newell's shearwater are known to be affected by sources of artificial light,which can distract the birds and cause them to become grounded. This phenomenon is referred to as "fallout" and it primarily affects fledglings that are leaving the nest for the first time on their way to sea.If the proposed Project activities will involve nighttime work,then lighting should be configured to be"dark sky friendly",in compliance with Hawai`i Revised Statute§201-8.5,and may require only the use of full cut off and/or appropriately shielded lights and include reducing or turning off non-essential operational lighting during the seabird fledgling season from September 15 to December 15. H. T. Harvey& Associates also recommends that HDOT consult with USFWS about avoidance and minimization measures planned or being adopted by the Project with regard to outdoor and operational lighting and seabird conservation. General measures provided by USFWS to avoid and minimize impacts to endangered seabirds are included in Appendix B. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 27 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Hawaiian Green Sea Turtle Listed as threatened under the federal ESA,the Hawaiian green sea turtle, or honu,is identified as the Central North Pacific Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the green sea turtle. The range of this Central North Pacific DPS includes the entire Hawaiian archipelago where they complete their lifecycle feeding in the Main Hawaiian Islands and nesting mainly in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (Balazs and Chaloupka 2006).Map guides published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Island Fisheries Science Center (NOAA-PIFSC) do not identify Hakalau Bay as an important basking or nesting site for Green sea turtles (Parker and Balazs 2015). No turtles were observed in the BSA during this two-day reconnaissance survey.Nonetheless,it is not out of the realm of possibility that Green sea turtles visit the Hakalau sandy beach area next to the eastern most boundary of the Project Area that overlaps the mouth of Hakalau Bay . In the event that Green sea turtles are seen at Hakalau beach or close to the Project Area, H.T. Harvey&Associates recommends that HDOT consult with USFWS for further guidance. USFWS recommended general project guidelines to avoid and minimize impacts to sea turtles are included in Appendix B. 4.2.2 State Species of Concern— Hawaiian Hawk Only one native wildlife species, the io or Hawaiian hawk, was seen in the Project Area. The io was on the federal endangered species list for several decades and was only recently delisted in April 2020(USFWS 2020b). Even though the species is no longer listed as endangered under the federal ESA,the io remains a Hawaii state listed endangered bird species (DLNR 2015b). Io are known to occur over much of Hawaii Island at all elevations, and occupy a variety of habitat types,including native forest, secondary forest consisting primarily of non-native plant species, agricultural areas, and pastures (Natural Resources Conservation Service 2007, DLNR 2015b).They occur at relatively higher densities in the Hamakua region of Hawaii Island,just south of the Project Area. Furthermore, the Project Area falls within identified io breeding range on Hawaii Island (Gorresen et al. 2008). to are territorial and are known to defend their territory year-round. They have an extended breeding season—egg laying occurs from March to June with nest building starting several weeks before March and fledging occurs from July to September (DLNR 2015b). Pairs sometimes build 2-4 nests that they reuse.Nests may be reused during consecutive breeding seasons or vacated for a year or more before reuse (Clarkson and Laniawe. 2020). Most nesting occurs in native ohia trees (Metrotiderospolyro7pha),although nesting also occurs in non-native trees such as eucalyptus,ironwood, mango, and coconut palm; species that occur within the BSA. H.T. Harvey&Associates recommends that to the extent possible,the Project should avoid removal of large trees during the io breeding season. If construction activities are likely to occur during the breeding season, then a preconstruction survey should be conducted and,if an active nest is found, H. T. Harvey & Associates recommends that HDOT consult with DLNR before construction work begins and determine the most appropriate course of action and obtain guidance to avoid and minimize potential impacts to this state-protected species. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 28 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 4.2.3 National Marine Fisheries Service Species of Concern Hawksbill Sea Turtle Hawksbill turtles are one of the rarest of the seven extant species of marine turtles and their scarcity has been recognized by the government of the U.S. and other nations, as well as by international resource management institutions. The hawksbill sea turtle was classified as endangered in 1970 (USFWS 1970). Critical habitat has been designated for the species but includes only nesting islands in Puerto Rico (NMFS and USFWS 1998). Small numbers of hawksbill sea turtles (probably no more than 20 nesting females annually) nest in Hawaii, primarily along the southeastern coast of the island of Hawaii,with small numbers reported on Maui,Molokai, and Oahu (Seitz et al. 2012). The nesting season extends from April through February, with peak egg laying occurring from late July through mid-September (Seitz et al. 2012). Map guides published by NO AA-PIFSC do not identify Hakalau Bay as an important basking or nesting site for Hawksbill Sea turtles (Parker and Balazs 2015) and no Hawksbill Sea turtles were observed in the BSA during this two-day reconnaissance survey. Nonetheless, it is possible the species at times may visit Hakalau Beach next to the eastern boundary of the Project Area at the mouth of Hakalau Bay and/or enter the stream mouth at the lower reach of the stream particularly during high tides. In the event that Hawksbill sea turtles are seen at Hakalau beach or close to the Project Area,H.T. Harvey&Associates recommends that HDOT consult with USFWS for further guidance. USFWS recommended general project guidelines to avoid and minimize impacts to sea turtles are included in Appendix B. Hawaiian Monk Seal Hawaiian monk seals are endemic to the Hawaiian Archipelago. They occur and breed throughout the NWHI and the MHI although the vast majority are in the NWHI (National Marine Fisheries Service [NMFS] 2007, Carretta et al. 2023). Hawaiian monk seals spend roughly two third of their time in marine waters. Terrestrial habitats are used to haul-out, with preferred haul-out areas that include sandy beaches, sand spits or low shelving rock reefs where they can rest,pup,molt and have social interactions. Haul-out habitats are generally near adequate foraging habitat;however,virtually all substrates could be used(NMFS 2007).They are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and were first listed under the ESA as endangered in 1976. Critical habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal was first designated in 1986 and was most recently updated in 2015 (NMFS 2015). In the MHIs designated critical habitat exists in marine habitats between the 200-meter depth contour line through the water's edge and 5 meters onto terrestrial environments from the shoreline(p. 50926 in NMFS 2015). The essential features of critical habitat include areas for haul-out, nursery grounds for pupping and nursing, and marine foraging areas. The waters fronting Hakalau Bay are designated as critical habitat for the Hawaiian monk seal.The Project Area is about 600 feet inland from this designated critical habitat.No surveys were specifically conducted for Hawaiian monk seals and no inadvertent sightings of the Hawaiian monk seal were made during this study. However, Hawaiian monk seals have been sighted on the sandy beach area of Hakalau Bay by people frequenting the Hakalau Couty Beach Park (Nui 2017). Any potential impacts to Hawaiian monk seal habitat or to individual seals that may visit the beach or rocky shoreline in Hakalau Bay could be avoided and minimized through the comprehensive in-water and land based BMPs that will be adopted by the Project.These BMPs include measures such as deploying full-depth silt curtains and sandbags to contain Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 29 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 the work area;and are discussed in detail in:An Integrated Storm Water Management Approach and a.S'ummary of Gear Water Diversion and Isolation Best Management Practices for Use in the State of Hawaii by the FHWA, the Hawaii Department of Tran.portation Practitioners Guide (2016), and the Construction Best Management Practices Field Manual by the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (2021). Also, the Project's proposed in-water work that will be conducted under permits obtained from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Hawaii Department of Health,Clean Water Branch. 4.3 Invasive Species A potential impact of implementing the Project is the introduction and spread of invasive species during the construction phase. There are several invasive species that occur on Hawaii Island,but do not occur on other islands (e.g., little fire ants, and coqui frogs [Eleutherodactylus coqur]) and vice versa (e.g. Coconut rhinocerous beetle [Oryctes rhinoceros] on Oahu) and are likely present in the vicinity of the Project Area. H. T. Harvey Sc Associates' recommends that the Project plan and design incorporate specifications that will result in the adoption of best management practices to minimize the introduction and spread of invasive species at the Project Area.These best management practices may include the following: • All construction equipment and vehicles should arrive at the work site for the first time in clean condition and free of: any soil; plants or plant parts, including seeds; insects, including eggs; and reptiles and amphibians,including their eggs. Similarly,all construction equipment and vehicles should be cleaned after use on the Project site and before leaving the site. This would be particularly important for equipment movement between the Project site and the other islands. • All materials imported to the Project site,including gravel, soil,rock, and sand, should be certified weed free.Invasive species found on stockpiled materials should be removed either chemically or mechanically. • Only weed-free seed mixtures should be used for hydroseeding and hydromulching on the Project Site. A qualified botanist should inspect the seeded areas a minimum of 60 days after the hydroseed/hydromulch is applied. Any species of plant other than those intended to be in the hydroseed/hydromulch should be removed. In particular, plant species that are not known to occur on Hawaii Island and those that are actively being controlled on the island should be removed. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 30 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Section 5.0 References Balazs, G.H.,and M.Y. Chaloupka. 2004.Thirty-year recovery trend in the once depleted Hawaiian green sea turtle stock. Biological Conservation 117:491-498. Bonaccorso,F.,C.M.Todd,A. C.Mies,P.M. Gorresen.2015. Foraging Range Movements of the Endangered Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Lasiurus cinereus semotus(Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae). Journal of Mammalogy. 96(1):64-71. Carretta,J.V.,E.M. Oleson,K.A. Forney,D.W.Weller,A.R.Lang,J.Baker,A.J. Orr et al.2023.U.S.Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2022. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS. July. NOAA- TMNMFS-SWFSC-684. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center. Clarkson, K. E., and L. P. Laniawe. 2020. Hawaiian Hawk (Buteo solitarius),version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A.F. Poole and F.B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA https:/doi?org/10.2173/bow.hawhaw.01 Day, R. H., B. A. Cooper, and R. J. Blaha. 2003. Movement Patterns of Hawaiian Petrels and Newell's Shearwaters on the Island of Hawaii. Pacific Science. 57(2): 147-159. [DLNR] Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. 2015a. Hawaii Administrative Rules, Chapter 124, Indigenous Wildlife, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, Injurious Wildlife, Introduced Wild Birds, and Introduced Wildlife. <http://dlnr.hawaii.gov/dofaw/files/2013/09/Chap124a.pdf>. Accessed August 20, 2021. [DLNR] Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. 2015b. Hawaii Wildlife Action Plan. <https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/wildlife/files/2016/12/HI-SWAP-2015.pdf>.Accessed August 20,2021. Gagne, W. C., and L. W. Cuddihy. 1999. Vegetation. Pages 45– 114 in W.L. Wagner, D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohmer. Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii. Revised edition. Bishop Museum Special Publication,University of Hawafi Press,Honolulu. Gorresen, P. M., R.J. Camp,J. K. Klavitter, T. K. Pratt, and P.J. Hart. 2008. Abundance, Distribution and Population Trend of the Hawaiian Hawk: 1998-2007. Hawaii Cooperative Studies Unit Technical Report HCSU-009. University of Hawaii at Hilo. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 31 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Gorreson P. M., F.J. Bonaccorso, C. A. Pinzaril, C. M. Todd, K. Montoya-Aiona, and K. Brinck. 2013. A Fiveyear study of Hawaiian Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) occupancy on the Island of Hawaii. Technical Report HCSU-041. USGS and University of Hawaii at Hilo. Giambelluca, T. W., Q. Chen, A. G. Frazier,J. P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu,J. K. Eischeid, and D. M. Delparte. 2013. Online rainfall atlas of Hawaii. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94:313-316. Imada, C. T. 2019. Hawaiian Naturalized Vascular Plants Checklist (February 2019 update). Bishop Museum Technical Report 69. <http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/publications/pdf/tr69.pdf>. Accessed March 15,2021. Montoya-Aiona, Kristina M. 2020. Roosting Ecology and Behavior of the Solitary and Foliage-roosting Hawaiian Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus). A thesis presented to the faculty of the Tropical Conservation Biology and Environmental Science graduate program University of Hawaii at Hilo. <content (hawaii.edu)> Accessed June 20,2023. [NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service, and [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Recovery Plan for U.S. Pacific Populations of the Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata). Silver Spring,Maryland. [NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. 2007. Recovery Plan for the Hawaiian Monk Seal(Monachus schauinslandz).August 2022. Second revision. Silver Spring,Maryland. [NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. 2015.Threatened and Endangered Species: Final Rulemaking To Revise Critical Habitat for Hawaiian Monk Seals. Federal Register 80(162):50926-50988. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2007. Hawaiian Hawk Habitat Enhancement and Management. Biology Technical Note No. 17. Honolulu,Hawaii. Nui, Tita. 2017. Update: Crushin' Hakalau Beach Park with Tita Nui. An article for Big Island Now. <https://bigislandnow.com/2017/02/17/crusin-hakalau-beach-park-with-tita-nui/> Accessed March 1,2024. Parker,D.,and G. Balazs. 2015.Map guide to marine turtle nesting and basking in the Hawaiian Islands. Data mapping product by NOAA-PIFSC Marine Turtle Research Program. <https://georgehbalazs. com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Hawaiianls_2015-PIFSCDataMappingProduct.pdf>. Accessed February 20,2022. Seitz,W.A., K. M. Kagimoto,B. Luehrs, and L. Kata.hira. 2012. Twenty Years of Conservation and Research Findings of the Hawai`i Island Hawksbill Turtle Recovery Project, 1989-2009. January. Technical Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 32 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Report 178. The Hawaii-Pacific Islands Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit & Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit,University of Hawaii,Honolulu. Tomich, P. Q. 1986. Mammals in Hawaii. Second edition. Bishop Museum Special Publication 76. Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu,Hawaii. [USFWS] U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1970. Part 17—Conservation of endangered species and other fish or wildlife;Final rule. Federal Register 35(106):8491-8498. [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Recovery Plan for the Hawaiian Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus).U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Portland,Oregon.<http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/ 980511.pdf>.Accessed June 20,2023. [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020a. Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis (palapalai) 5-Year Review Summary and Evaluation. https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/toss/species nonpublish/3532.pdf Accessed June 20,2023. [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants;Removing the Hawaiian hawk from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife.Federal Register 85(1):164- 189. [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2022a. Species Report for Deparia kaalaana (no common name). Version 1. https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery plan/Deparia%20kaalaana SR final.pdf Accessed June 20,2023. [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2022b. Species Report for Microlepia strigose var. mauiensis (palapalai, palai).Version 1. [USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2023. Information for Planning and Consultation Resource List. < https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VE4BIFXIXFERSPURENUMCJSN QM/resources Van Houtan, K. S.,J. N. Kittinger, A. L. Lawrence, C. Yoshinaga, V. Ray Born, and A. Fox. 2012. Hawksbill sea turtles in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 11:117-121. Wagner,W.L.,D.R.Herbst,and S.H.Sohmer. 1999.Manual of the Flowering Plants of Hawaii.Two volumes. Revised edition. University of Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 33 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 Appendix A. IPaC Resource List for Hakalau Stream Bridge Project Area Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— A_1 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE iRcn Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office ' 300 Ala Moana Boulevard,Box 50088 Honolulu,HI 96850-5000 Phone: (808) 792-9400 Fax: (808) 792-9580 In Reply Refer To: July 21, 2023 Project Code: 2023-0014325 Project Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project To Whom It May Concern: The enclosed species list identifies threatened and endangered species, as well as designated critical habitat that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and that may be affected by project related actions. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Please contact the Service's Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (PIFWO) at 808-792-9400 if you have any questions regarding your IPaC species list. The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may adversely affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information.An updated list may be requested through the IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list. A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological 07/21/2023 2 Evaluation, similar to a Biological Assessment, be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation are described at 50 CFR 402.12. Due to the significant number of listed species found on each island within PIFWO's regulatory jurisdiction, and the difficulty in accurately mapping ranges for species that we have limited information about, your species list may include more species than if you obtained the list directly from a Service biologist. We recommend you use the species links in IPaC to view the life history, habitat descriptions, and recommended avoidance and minimization measures to assist with your initial determination of whether the species or its habitat may occur within your project area. If appropriate habitat is present for a listed species, we recommend surveys be conducted to determine whether the species is also present. If no surveys are conducted, we err on the side of the species, by regulation, and assume the habitat is occupied. Updated avoidance and minimization measures for plants and animals, best management practices for work in or near aquatic environments, and invasive species biosecurity protocols can be found on the PIFWO website at: https://www.fws.gov/office/pacific-islands-fish-and-wildlife/library. If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that a listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http:// www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/index. Non-federal entities can also use the IPaC generated species list to develop Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. We recommend HCP applicants coordinate with the Service early during the HCP development process. For additional information on HCPs, the Habitat Conservation Planning handbook can be found at https:// www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/habitat-conservation-planning-handbook-entire.pdf. Please be aware that wind energy projects should follow the Service's wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds. Listed birds and the Hawaiian hoary bat may also be affected by wind energy development and we recommend development of a Habitat Conservation Plan for those species, as described above. Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications towers can be found at: ■ http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers ■ http://www.towerkill.com ■ http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/comtow We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation actions that benefit threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act in accordance with section 7(a)(1). Please include the Consultation Tracking Number associated with your IPaC species list in any 07/21/2023 request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office. Please feel free to contact us at PIFWO_admin@fws.gov or 808-792-9400 if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally listed species and federally designated critical habitat. Attachment(s): ■ Official Species List 07/21/2023 1 OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action". This species list is provided by: Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Box 50088 Honolulu, HI 96850-5000 (808) 792-9400 07/21/2023 2 PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code: 2023-0014325 Project Name: Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Type: Bridge - Maintenance Project Description: Hakalau Stream Bridge (Bridge No. 001000190308410) is located at Milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) on the Island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00" N, 155°07'47.00"W. The proposed bridge work can be divided into 3 major activities: 1) remove, remediate, or encapsulate lead contaminated soils around the bridge; 2) rehabilitate the bridge's deteriorating substructure; and 3) upgrade bridge railings. The construction duration will be no longer than two years. No night work is anticipated during construction. Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@19.89939305,-155.12949768013715,14z Counties: Hawaii County, Hawaii 07/21/2023 3 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 13 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce. See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions. 1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. MAMMALS NAME STATUS Hawaiian Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus semotus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/770 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6477.p df 07/21/2023 4 BIRDS NAME STATUS Band-rumped Storm-petrel Oceanodroma castro Endangered Population:USA(HI) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1226 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.p df Hawaiian (=koloa) Duck Anas wyvilliana Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7712 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.pdf Hawaiian Coot Fulica americana alai Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7233 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.p df Hawaiian Goose Branta (=Nesochen) sandvicensis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1627 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project1PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/692 5.p df Hawaiian Petrel Pterodroma sandwichensis Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6746 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.pdf Hawaiian Stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2082 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6934.p df Newell's Townsend's Shearwater Pu f finus auricularis newelli Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2048 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6939.p df 07/21/2023 5 REPTILES NAME STATUS Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened Population: Central North Pacific DPS No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/6929.p df FLOWERING PLANTS NAME STATUS Alani Melicope zahlbruckneri Endangered There is final critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7338 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7060.pdf Nanu Gardenia remyi Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5835 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/generated/7051.p df FERNS AND ALLIES NAME STATUS Deparia kaalaana Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9612 Microlepia strigosa var. mauiensis Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4737 General project design guidelines: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/project/PD5R32RVXBG6VOOK5QMMPAEBRA/ documents/gen erated/7051.p df CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S)MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. 07/21/2023 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency: Private Entity Name: Malie McClellan Address: 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2400 City: Honolulu State: HI Zip: 96813 Email malie.mcclellan@wsp.com Phone: 8085611324 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION Lead Agency: Federal Highway Administration Name: Meesa Otani Email: meesa.otani@dot.gov Phone: 8085612316 Appendix B. General Project Design Guidelines for Endangered Hawaiian Goose, Waterbirds, Seabirds, Hawaiian Hoary Bat, and Green Sea Turtle Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— B_1 H.T. Harvey&Associates Biological Survey Report March 2024 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hawaiian hoary bat Hawaiian Hoary Bat Generated July 03,2023 01:32 AM UTC, IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 „. 1 ri.. . „ . . .... i_ . ..._ { ..rte_ �°° , 4_i #f .. ,,,,, r Pi s f p jr, P r E l a r� Rte"# eilli"lirdlir r1 '�► �. a.i r ..„,.. i I 111141114‘\ lir of % •*%. , ,w1 41 iftii...44 1111114 4 .Fi :� L 1,. '' 41V ,r�ww I ...........,... __„..„,....,.,_(0.).earri---....„ IPaC-Information for Planning and Consultation(https://ipac.ecosphere.tws.gov/):A project planning tool to help streamline the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service environmental review process. Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office- Publication Date: March 1, 2020 General Project Design Guidelines-Hawaiian Hoary Bat Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus): The Hawaiian hoary bat roosts in both exotic and native woody vegetation across all islands and will leave young unattended in trees and shrubs when they forage. If trees or shrubs 15 feet or taller are cleared during the pupping season, there is a risk that young bats could inadvertently be harmed or killed since they are too young to fly or may not move away. Additionally, Hawaiian hoary bats forage for insects from as low as 3 feet to higher than 500 feet above the ground and can become entangled in barbed wire used for fencing. To avoid and minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: • Do not disturb, remove, or trim woody plants greater than 15 feet tall during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). • Do not use barbed wire for fencing. 7/3/2023 1:33 AM IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 Page 1 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hawaiian g oose Hawaiian Goose Generated July 03,2023 01:29 AM UTC, IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 „. 1 ri.. . „ . . .... i_ . ..._ { ..rte_ �°° , 4_i #f .. �, r Pi s f p jr, P r E l a r� Rte"# eilli"lirdlir r1 '�► �. a.i WI i ..„,.. :r +e. _ 111141114' lir + -% •i % A - , ., e`` ` 1.of * . ,w1 41 iftii...44 1111114 ...........,... - . — __„..„,....,,,,_(0.).e.,..1---„, IPaC-Information for Planning and Consultation(https://ipac.ecosphere.tws.gov/):A project planning tool to help streamline the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service environmental review process. Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office- Publication Date: February 1, 2022 General Project Design Guidelines-Hawaiian Goose Hawaiian goose (nene), (Branca (Nesochen) sandvicensis): Nene are found on the islands of Hawaii, Maui, Molokai, and Kauai. They are observed in a variety of habitats, but prefer open areas, such as pastures, golf courses, wetlands, natural grasslands and shrublands, and lava flows. Threats to the species include introduced mammalian and avian predators, wind facilities, and vehicle strikes. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to nene we recommend you incorporate the following measures into your project description: • Do not approach, feed, or disturb nene. • If nene are observed loafing or foraging within the project area during the breeding season (September through April), have a biologist familiar with nene nesting behavior survey for nests in and around the project area prior to the resumption of any work. Repeat surveys after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). • Cease all work immediately and contact the Service for further guidance if a nest is discovered within a radius of 150 feet of proposed project, or a previously undiscovered nest is found within the 150-foot radius after work begins. • In areas where nene are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on-site. nene 4(d) rule: A 4(d)rule was established at the time the nene was downlisted to threatened status. Under the 4(d) rule, the following actions are not prohibited under the Act,provided the additional measures described in the downlisting rule are adhered to: • Take by landowners, or their agents, conducting intentional harassment in the form of hazing or other deterrent measures not likely to cause direct injury or mortality, or nene surveys. • Take that is incidental to conducting lawful control of introduced predators or habitat management activities for nene. • Take by authorized law enforcement officers for the purpose of aiding or euthanizing sick, injured, or orphaned nene; disposing of dead specimens; and salvaging a dead specimen that may be used for scientific study. 7/3/2023 1:29 AM IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 Page 1 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hawaiian waterbirds Hawaiian (=koloa) Duck and 3 more species Generated July 03,2023 01:31 AM UTC, IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 „. 1 ri.. . „ . . .... i_ . ..._ { ..rte_ �°° , 4_i #f . ,,,,, r Pi s f p P r Nii all irligliri. 4 �. i 4' i + y .*+ AI 11141114‘\ - ., e``lir ` ii.of % ••t% , 4,ow1 1 or 41 iftik....44 1111114 „,,„. -..... , 4r-(.:6;';(+10t..4 . - IPaC-Information for Planning and Consultation(https://ipac.ecosphere.tws.gov/):A project planning tool to help streamline the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service environmental review process. General Project Design Guidelines - Hawaiian (=koloa) Duck and 3 more species Published by Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office-Publication Date:February 1,2022 for the following species included in your project Hawaiian(=koloa)Duck Anas wyvilliana Hawaiian Common Gallinule Gallinula galeata sandvicensis Hawaiian Stilt Himantopus mexicanus knudseni Hawaiian Coot Fulica americana alai Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office- Publication Date: February 1, 2022 General Project Design Guidelines-Hawaiian (=koloa) Duck and 3 more species Hawaiian waterbirds (Hawaiian stilt,Himantopus mexicanus knudseni; Hawaiian coot, Fulica alai; Hawaiian common gallinule, Gallinula galeata sandvicensis; Hawaiian duck, Anas wyvilliana): Listed Hawaiian waterbirds are found in fresh and brackish-water marshes and natural or man- made ponds. Hawaiian stilts may also be found wherever ephemeral or persistent standing water may occur. Threats to these species include non-native predators, habitat loss, and habitat degradation. Hawaiian ducks are also subject to threats from hybridization with introduced mallards. The creation of standing or open water may result in the attraction of Hawaiian waterbirds to a site (creative nuisance or habitat sink). In particular, the Hawaiian stilt is known to nest in sub- optimal locations (e.g. any ponding water), if water is present. Hawaiian waterbirds attracted to sub-optimal habitat may suffer adverse impacts, such as predation and reduced reproductive success, and thus the project may create an attractive nuisance. Therefore, we recommend you work with our office during project planning so that we may assist you in developing measures to avoid impacts to listed species (e.g., fencing, vegetation control,predator management). To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian waterbirds we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: • In areas where waterbirds are known to be present, post and enforce reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on-site. • Incorporate the Service's Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments into the project design. • Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology conduct Hawaiian waterbird nest surveys, where appropriate habitat occurs within the vicinity of the proposed project site,prior to project initiation. Repeat surveys again within 3 days of project initiation and after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). If a nest or active brood is found: o Contact the Service within 48 hours for further guidance. o Establish and maintain a 100-foot buffer around all active nests and/or broods until the chicks/ducklings have fledged. Do not conduct potentially disruptive activities or habitat alteration within this buffer. o Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology present on the project site during all construction or earth moving activities until the chicks/ducklings fledge to ensure that Hawaiian waterbirds and nests are not adversely impacted. 7/3/2023 1:31 AM IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 Page 2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Hawaiian seabirds Hawaiian Petrel and 2 more species Generated July 03,2023 01:25 AM UTC, IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 „. 1 ri.. . „ . . .... i_ . ..._ { ..rte_ �°° , 4_i #f . �, r Pi s f p jr, P r E l a r� Rte"# eilli"lirdlir r1 '�► �. a.i 4' i + y i A I 11141114‘\ - ., e`` `lir . 1.of % •t% , 4,ow1 1 or 41 iftik....44 1111114 ....mu.. __„..„,....,.,_(0.).earri---...4 IPaC-Information for Planning and Consultation(https://ipac.ecosphere.tws.gov/):A project planning tool to help streamline the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service environmental review process. General Project Design Guidelines - Hawaiian Petrel and 2 more species Published by Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office-Publication Date:February 1,2022 for the following species included in your project Hawaiian Petrel Pterodroma sandwichensis Newell's Townsend's Shearwater Puffinus auricularis newelli Band-rumped Storm-petrel Oceanodroma castro Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office- Publication Date: February 1, 2022 General Project Design Guidelines-Hawaiian Petrel and 2 more species Endangered Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), Threatened Newell's shearwater (Puffinus auricularis newell,), and Endangered Hawaii Distinct Population Segment of the band-rumped storm-petrel (Oceanodroma castro): Hawaiian seabirds may traverse the project area at night during the breeding,nesting and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Outdoor lighting could result in seabird disorientation, fallout, and injury or mortality. Seabirds are attracted to lights and after circling the lights they may become exhausted and collide with nearby wires, buildings, or other structures or they may land on the ground. Downed seabirds are subject to increased mortality due to collision with automobiles, starvation, and predation by dogs, cats, and other predators. Young birds (fledglings) traversing the project area between September 15 and December 15, in their first flights from their mountain nests to the sea, are particularly vulnerable to light attraction. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to seabirds we recommend you incorporate the following measures into your project description: • Fully shield all outdoor lights so the bulb can only be seen from below. • Install automatic motion sensor switches and controls on all outdoor lights or turn off lights when human activity is not occurring in the lighted area. • Avoid nighttime construction during the seabird fledging period, September 15 through December 15. Listed seabirds have been documented colliding with communication towers, particularly in areas of high seabird passage rate. In general, self-supporting monopoles are the least likely to result in collisions, whereas lattice towers,particularly those that rely on guy-wires, have a greater risk. To avoid and minimize the likelihood that towers will result in collisions by listed seabirds we recommend you incorporate the following measures into your project description: • The profile of the tower should be as small as possible, minimize the extent of the tower that protrudes above the surrounding vegetation layer, and avoid the use of guywires. • If the top of the tower must be lit to comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations, use a flashing red light verses a steady-beam red or white light. • If possible, co-locate with existing towers or facilities. Seabirds have been known to collide with fences, powerlines, and other structures near nesting colonies. To avoid and minimize the likelihood of collision we recommend you incorporate the following measures into your project description: • Where fences extend above vegetation, integrate three strands of polytape into the fence to increase visibility. • For powerlines, guywires and other cables, minimize exposure above vegetation height and vertical profile. 7/3/2023 1:25 AM IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 Page 2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Sea turtles Green Sea Turtle and 2 more species Generated July 03,2023 06:43 AM UTC, IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 „. 1 ri.. . „ . . .... i_ . ..._ { ..rte_ �°° , 4_i #f . �, r Pi s f p jr, P r li E l a ;el Rte"# eilli"lirdlir r1 '�► I �gffl a.i r ..„,.. i I 111141114‘\ lir of , % 'w%. , ,w1 illit4s ii. ... j --',:%:./,', 14; (44.. IPaC-Information for Planning and Consultation(https://ipac.ecosphere.tws.gov/):A project planning tool to help streamline the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service environmental review process. General Project Design Guidelines - Green Sea Turtle and 2 more species Published by Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office-Publication Date:February 1,2022 for the following species included in your project Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office- Publication Date: February 1, 2022 General Project Design Guidelines-Green Sea Turtle and 2 more species Pacific sea turtles: Green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) (Central North Pacific DPS -Hawaii and Johnston Atoll), (Central West Pacific DPS -Mariana Archipelago and Wake NWR) and (Central South Pacific DPS - American Samoa, Palmyra, Kingman, Howland, Baker and Jarvis NWR), and Hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata): The Service consults on sea turtles and their use of terrestrial habitats (beaches where nesting and/or basking is known to occur), whereas the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) consults on sea turtles and their use of off-shore and open ocean habitats. We recommend that you consult with NMFS regarding the potential impacts from the proposed project to sea turtles in off-shore and open ocean habitats. Green sea turtles may nest on any sandy beach area in the Pacific Islands. Hawksbill sea turtles exhibit a wide tolerance for nesting substrate (ranging from sandy beach to crushed coral)with nests typically placed under vegetation. Both species exhibit strong nesting site fidelity. Nesting occurs on Hawaiian beaches from May through September, peaking in June and July, with hatchlings emerging through November and December. Sea turtle nesting in the Western Pacific, Marianas, and South Pacific Islands can occur year-round; peaking in April and July. Nesting in American Samoa is from October to March). Construction on, or in the vicinity of,beaches can result in sand and sediment compaction, sea turtle nest destruction,beach erosion, contaminant and nutrient runoff, and an increase in direct and ambient light pollution which may disorient hatchlings or deter nesting females. Off-road vehicle traffic may result in direct impacts to sea turtles and nests, and also contributes to habitat degradation through erosion and compaction. Projects that alter the natural beach profile, such as nourishment and hardening, including the placement of seawalls,jetties, sandbags, and other structures, are known to reduce the suitability of on-shore habitat for sea turtles. These types of projects often result in sand compaction, erosion, and additional sedimentation in nearshore habitats, resulting in adverse effects to the ecological community and future sea turtle nests. The hardening of a shoreline increases the potential for erosion in adjacent areas, resulting in subsequent requests to install stabilization structures or conduct beach nourishment in adjacent areas. Given projected sea level rise estimates, the likelihood of increase in storm surge intensity, and other factors associated with climate change, we anticipate that beach erosion will continue and likely increase. Whenever possible, projects should consider alternatives that avoid the modification or hardening of coastlines. Beach nourishment or beach hardening projects should evaluate the long-term effect to sea turtle nesting habitat and consider the cumulative effects. To avoid and minimize project impacts to sea turtles and their nests we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: • No vehicle use on, or modification of, the beach/dune environment during the sea turtle nesting or hatching season, or on beaches where sea turtles are known to bask. • Do not remove or destroy native dune vegetation. • Incorporate applicable Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments into the project design. 7/3/2023 6:43 AM IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 Page 2 Pacific Islands Fish And Wildlife Office- Publication Date: February 1, 2022 General Project Design Guidelines-Green Sea Turtle and 2 more species • Have a biologist familiar with sea turtles conduct a visual survey of the project site to ensure no basking sea turtles are present. o If a basking sea turtle is found within the project area, cease all mechanical or construction activities within 100 feet until the animal voluntarily leaves the area. o Cease all activities between the basking turtle and the ocean. • Remove any project-related debris, trash, or equipment from the beach or dune if not actively being used. • Do not stockpile project-related materials in the intertidal zone, reef flats, or stream channels. Lighting: Optimal nesting habitat is a dark beach free of barriers that restrict sea turtle movement. Nesting turtles may be deterred from approaching or laying successful nests on lighted or disturbed beaches. They may become disoriented by artificial lighting, leading to exhaustion and placement of a nest in an inappropriate location (such as at or below the high tide line). Hatchlings that emerge from nests may also be disoriented by artificial lighting. Inland areas visible from the beach should be sufficiently dark to allow for successful navigation to the ocean. To avoid and minimize project impacts to sea turtles from lighting we recommend incorporating the following applicable measures into your project description: • Avoid nighttime work during the nesting and hatching season. • Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project-related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. o If lights can't be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. • Incorporate design measures into the construction or operation of buildings adjacent to the beach to reduce ambient outdoor lighting such as: o tinting or using automatic window shades for exterior windows that face the beach; o reducing the height of exterior lighting to below 3 feet and pointed downward or away from the beach; and • minimize light intensity to the lowest level feasible and, when possible, include timers and motion sensors. 7/3/2023 6:43 AM IPaC v6.94.0-rc4 Page 3 Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation Project Draft Environmental Assessment APPENDIX F WETLAND DELINEATION TECHNICAL REPORT g ; �� H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES ' � : y � Ecological Consultants i Y_1y S6,-�' I ,+ rb@s 4• fir. air 50 years of field notes, exploration, and excellence + • ,'-,� t < 3a_ '' . pipi i i,. �_ , � ,,,°k ,* r \ , IA Hakalau Stream Bridge Project ' ' !' Wetland Delineation Technical Report ri a - F . t• fp - 'V:1:"i:'. .-i-i., 'k:1-'''' ".'"r ItYr•S':1 ��.� ""it Project #4639-01 p p y'A/y�'e r1 rL^„,. 2' .fro .V.1%en a'•i.w r f j.," N C Y 4 w4",..,..-4,41,-': Va ''M T. 9.,..'v....:.,.;,:. •=',-4 �� F '�.,` 4 - .c ,^+ dti '� � Prepared UfSoAr: S k F � 41'714,6' � 1`0 ,'mak-' .,•C`y >, N 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2400 Honolulu, HI 96813 e . r. 4 .±-,,:::17.-t t '.-,;;',7, 1. '1',.4!":: R ¢ ♦J ''{ri 1 °°3""d 2 r5�:, _ -� Prepared by: '; - H. T. Harvey & Associates 20¢ !1„'v�k a. 414 le -. � s ;' rk March 2024 91-1020 Kai Lou Street• Ewa Beach,HI 96706 • 808.441.2082 • www.heroeejecology.com Table of Contents Section 1.0 Project Introduction and Purpose 1 1.1 Project Description 1 1.2 Wetland Study Scope and Purpose 2 1.3 Site Description 2 Section 2.0 Survey Methods 9 2.1 Identification of Jurisdictional Waters 9 2.1.1 Regulatory Regime 10 2.1.2 Identification of Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands (Special Aquatic Sites) 12 2.1.3 Identification of Other Waters 14 Section 3.0 Survey Results and Discussion 18 3.1 Assumption and Background Information 18 3.2 Site Conditions and Observations 19 3.3 Identification of Potential Section 404 Wetlands 21 3.3.1 Vegetation 21 3.3.2 Soils 22 3.3.3 Hydrology 22 3.3.4 Rationale for Sample Point Choice 22 3.3.5 Photo Points for Section 404 Wetland 23 3.4 Identification of Section 10/404 Other Waters 24 3.4.1 Rationale for OHWM Transect Choice 25 3.4.2 Photo Points for Section 10/404 Waters (Hakalau Stream) 26 3.5 Areas Not Meeting the Regulatory Definition of Waters of the U.S 27 3.6 Conclusion 27 Section 4.0 References 28 Tables Table 1. Soil Type,Texture,Drainage Classification,and Hydric Status for the Seven Soil Types Occurring in the Study Area 3 Table 2. Wetland Indicator Status Categories for Vascular Plants 12 Table 3. Summary of Jurisdictional Wetland and Waters Delineated Within the Project Area 18 Table 4. Summary of Sample Point Locations and Results 23 Table 5. Coordinates and Rationale for Section 404 Wetland Photo Points 23 Table 6. Rationale for Transect Placement and Determination of Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM) Level Along Hakalau Stream (Section 404 Waters) 25 Table 7. Coordinates and Rationale for Section 404 Waters (Hakalau Stream) Photo Points 26 Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map 4 Figure 2. Project Area 5 Figure 3. U.S. Geological Survey Topographic Map 6 Figure 4. Natural Resources Conservation Service Soils Map 7 Figure 5. National Wetland Inventory Map 8 Figure 6. Habitats Map 16 Figure 7. Preliminary ID of Waters of the U.S. 17 Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— i H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Figure 8. Discharge of Hakalau Stream Source: USGS Water data,2023 (USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl) https://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis 19 Appendices Appendix A. Plants Observed in and Around the Delineated Waters of the U.S A-1 Appendix B. Natural Resource Conservation Service Custom Soil Report for the Project Site B-1 Appendix C. USACE Hawaii Pacific Wetland Delineation and OHWM Delineation Data Forms C-1 Appendix D. Photographic Documentation of Wetland and OHWM Delineation D-1 List of Preparers Kelly Hardwicke,Ph.D.,Principal-in-Charge,Plant and Wetland Ecologist Terrell Erickson,M.S., Senior Associate,Wetland Ecologist Shahin Ansari,Ph.D.,Project Manager,Senior Plant and Wetland Ecologist Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— ii H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Section 1 .0 Project Introduction and Purpose 1 .1 Project Description Hakalau Stream Bridge(Bridge No. 001000190308410)is located at milepost 15.3 of Hawaii Belt Road (Route 19) on the Island of Hawaii at roughly 19°53'58.00" N, 155°07'47.00"W (Figure 1). The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT),in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA),is proposing the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project (the Project). Hakalau Stream Bridge is a historic and an aging steel-trestle bridge that carries Hawaii Belt Road roughly 180 feet above Hakalau Stream and spans roughly 775 feet across Hakalau Valley. It was originally constructed in 1911 as a railroad bridge and was later rehabilitated and converted into a highway bridge after the 1946 tsunami that struck the Island of HawaiiThe Project proposes two main actions: 1) soil remediation and 2) bridge rehabilitation,which are described below. Hakalau Stream Bridge was painted with lead-based paint that has contaminated the soil around the bridge and Hakalau Beach Park,which is below and adjacent to the bridge. In 2000, the lead paint was removed from the Hakalau Stream Bridge, so it would not continue to further contaminate the environment. However, lead remains in the surrounding area, including at Hakalau Beach Park. Because of this contamination, soil remediation for lead abatement is needed to make Hakalau Beach Park and the area surrounding Hakalau Stream Bridge safe for the public. HDOT proposes to remediate lead-contaminated soils surrounding the bridge to restore public use of the Hakalau Beach Park and to rehabilitate the substructure of the bridge.Studies conducted by Hawai Department of Health's Hazard Evaluation and Emergency Response Office,formed the basis of HDOT's proposed soil remediation actions.HDOT proposes to replace up to an estimated 7,623 cubic yards of soil in a roughly 2.4-acre proposed remediation area with the Project Area(Figure 2).Actual depths of clean fill will correspond to actual soil removal depth; the area will be regraded to match pre-construction conditions.Any associated vegetation will be removed and replaced with new vegetation,except for large trees, which will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The clean soil will be used to re-level the site and allow for revegetation,drainage,and grading. In addition to lead contamination issues, recent bridge inspections have revealed steel corrosion and scour conditions that undermine the structure and foundation of the Hakalau Stream Bridge. The ongoing Hakalau Bridge Bent 8 Repair Project will not be adequate to prevent further deterioration of this Bridge. Therefore, after the completion of soil remediation work,HDOT proposes to rehabilitate the bridge's entire superstructure which includes replacing the existing steel bents and concrete foundations with new concrete bents and foundations to ensure future continued safe operation of the bridge.The concrete trestles would be constructed in approximately the same location as the existing trestles but would have a larger footprint surrounding each existing trestle. Concrete trestles will be installed using drilled shafts up to 6 feet in diameter. These drilled shafts will be constructed on both dry land and in the stream bed. No vegetation clearing for access is anticipated. Construction of the Hakalau Bridge's concrete trestles would be conducted incrementally to allow for continued safe operation.Night work may be conducted to expedite the construction schedule.Temporary Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize potential soil erosion into Hakalau Stream. 1 .2 Wetland Study Scope and Purpose The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulates "Waters of the United States" (WoUS) including wetlands (termed special aquatic sites) under provisions of Section 404 of the 1972 Clean Water Act (Federal Water Pollution 10 Control Act) (CWA) and Section 10 of the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act. Under Section 404 of the CWA,dredged and fill material may not be discharged into jurisdictional waters (including wetlands) without a permit. Project activities described above in Section 1.1 may result in the discharge of materials in Hakalau Stream and/or any associated wetlands that might occur in the Project Area.The purpose of this study was to identify the extent and distribution of potential WoUS including any associated wetlands that might be impacted by proposed Project activities within the Project Area(Figure 2).H.T.Harvey&Associates examined the Project Area for features that may meet the physical criteria and regulatory definition of Section 404 wetlands and other waters. The field survey, however,was limited to safely accessible portions of the Project Area and excluded the nearly vertical portions of the hillside. 1 .3 Site Description The Project site is bound by the Hakalau Bay and the Pacific Ocean to the east and undeveloped lands to the east and north, and a residential neighborhood to the south. The Project Area is about 14 acres and overlaps the Hakalau Gulch with elevations ranging from sea level to about 134 feet above mean sea level(amsl) (Figure 3). The Hakalau Stream bisects the Project Area in the west to east direction and terminates into the Pacific Ocean just outside of the eastern boundary. In general, the Project site is steeped in the history of sugar plantation era in Hawaii and includes several features of historical significance which to some degree have also contributed to the existing ecological landscape here.In 1878 the Hakalau Sugar Plantation was established in Hakalau Bay and grew to be extensive and one of the most modern plantations at that time.In fact,the Hakalau Rail Bridge built by the Hawaiian Railway Company was refurbished to construct what is the existing Hakalau Stream Bridge. There was large scale clearing of at vegetation in Hakalau Bay to not only plant sugarcane on the broad plateaus between the gulches but also to build supporting infrastructure such as ditches to carry water, flumes to transport freshly cut cane, a mill to process sugar, a ford to cross the stream and a road vehicular access to the mill. Remnants of these infrastructure such as the broken sea wall, concrete foundation of the mill,access road,fragments of concrete and metal including remnants of a crane to move sugarcane,and a large (about 9 feet) pipe stanchion can still be found in the Project Area (ASM Affiliates 2023). The climate at the project site is characterized as moderately warm with the day time temperature over a year ranging from 70 to 75°F. The site is very wet; according to the Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii (Giambelluca et al. 2013), the area receives a mean annual rainfall of approximately 142 inches with the highest rainfall occurring during the months of March and November and the least during the month of June (Giambelluca et al. 2013). Typically, the trade winds blow from east to west, except sometimes (during summer months) the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 2 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 "kona winds"blow in the opposite direction.Two soil units are mapped by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) within the Project Area (Figure 4). Table 1 (next page) summarizes the associated texture, drainage classification,landform setting,and hydric soil status (MRCS 2023a) for these soil types found within the Project Area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map of the study area is depicted in Figure 5.The NWI identifies one aquatic feature within the study area (NWI 2023): the Hakalau Stream which his classified as riverine,upper perennial,unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded. NWI maps are based on interpretation of aerial photography,limited verification of mapped units, and/or classification of wetland types using the classification system developed by Cowardin et al. (1979). These data are available for general reference purposes and do not necessarily correspond to the actual presence or absence of jurisdictional waters. Table 1. Soil Type,Texture, Drainage Classification, and Hydric Status for the Seven Soil Types Occurring in the Study Area Soil Soil Drainage Hydric Symbol Soil Name Texture Classification Landform Status 901 Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, Silty Clay Well drained Ash fields on lava flows. No 0 to 10%slopes Loam Lower third of mountain flank 909 Hilo-Rock outcrop complex, Silty Clay Well drained Hilo: Gulches on lava flows. No 35 to 100 percent slopes Loam Lower third of mountain flank Rock Outcrop: Gulches. Side slope Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 3 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Project Vicinity uu I19I Hilo 0 Hawaii 19 Kau 0 \eau Stream Qe Rd 19 Lep°‘o Project umauma er Location FL V.0° Hakalau aKaik lau Stream ee Wailea aa Stream �a 19 Gh\n Shu°µ hakini Stream Kaa Honomu r tip, N 0.5 0.25 0 0.5 �ry A Miles 9-- H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES41.10 Figure 1. Vicinity Map Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project Ecological Consultants Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4639-01) March 2024 • ta � m ei, :�G ^J 1"T k^' ""4 t�� 7701,. qs, f_�,"' ',sdo,$\r't r'9. # ^ " '..N.'',.... 4 • ..1,;.};1;42,,,,..::::,:•,.4%'41. .,'74:',"!,,,,''7*-'''''.i _ , Project Boundary k Aro 4 4. y w� p tilt ;•..`''•,.°...'", .. A "� ,�. 5 1 V,y@ 14Y ..:,. o . . .. .?'''''' .2.4'.•:'r'....!•*'.:! ...' . '.40 ;'•w t iia" .,y,,� ^M6 . ' x '444.-l'"' : !,y .. d ..1;.;',:j x t a t , . t4„ �`, ,. y" "Lw.,ms Fmk: 3 " 2".,°k a apt ^?,C' ..4°,3,'-`1, Q$ 4'f '',,,,, .g !a► t "' ,;('Il*.ai ,,I ii k�• .'! a 4 O . r it o * M1 A K ,,. ,Mw'" �W`�b ;°y4�pt J ,l''''',',.'14,- ''''r T4s r • 1 "K . • ::: . c" ,� .11ti �'v2 r " w .'� Pacific Ocean aka e‘."2".-':;;i`,.'", /r�pC `y *Y` �, �" ,gam v:A" r � w � t r [��,� ��� ter �� w �'`�'ra as v✓�� ��'a ' y�'"'i �' "A aG pq, 11 „`� ! ,r . •1 { 1 M.,.,,,,,.,..,,..'..',7-..,':$':: � f !fir Hakalau Beach Park f e ^Mt.. , w „�;� � �`�"� '4'':,...��k ��,'�y,•�,: �d S'<t (Former Hakalau Sugar Mill) , .t. . *41jAii . " Cox .e ,� .> + ,'.!..",:',::14....',.....,..„. « 4 ': ,>'f V . `t.. . - '''',"".;"'"A1 1. w # , ,, ,''''. ,..„,.7'4!--• O� r. ,.t z .,',/;'-' ♦♦♦i +' d� ` .w ♦♦ _.. tom �. Se "A ".'","7"".: F Y. v,1r � %h, Y4 s M .. r , , • l'Af;;-,f.1•t:',, -40, ,.."..4.1;"'''.':.,1'1%, ;:".".11''''''''''''''',Iiic:.'6...,',i'N' l',.' '' .''9"yi` '^ Mem 1 .. '� `ti ' v�'IPCr "4i1�i •,wee.,,, „ .4p` n W dr r'MMp +'' Yp, .?d-iM'yM.4'rt _, �,qu ,.Wrt kA f wh N 250 125 0 250 ,": :'",":„.,.,:',,..,...::,z.--� p # �� *Ew t�q Feet T ' «" r a ay H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Figure 2. Study Area Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project Ecological Consultants Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4639_01) March 2024 p _Eisw; ° mil. — Project Boundary II . '. tii NS), . ANIL ‘‘) Ilkitila I . 1 doppilio L.,0 ,..:...._.,....„......, \J i?.• ,. , :•,,,,.�:.�..- jrs$ ;;;, ,,,• fiers.N....\;" :s.,,,.__, , Ir-gl sillio.b., , '*--\\, 1 - . !,1 pi) r ' ll ' N it - IlikAt` \h, . rMI F 1W-Wi ,„ \\ill. -1/ B o _ , ,, „. . , ,,v, ,..-- - tiii IL ,,. -..• smiw ,,>' -.„„ ,,,, ,,, _,,.., , 2 4pei Co b t<1016ii: *II\ ' I' . 14111111A,,,00, ' dill' I 110?-re"' 0, , 07;„)0e, t *IF Lle ,. All \eh % 1.\\ • ..w\.'...t/MIO �,i ;,r.""_ 1 NIA9� 4••m • ' Ilk ' . , .7/,44411111.1.100 la 40.16: Pilik\ ' 7 4‘\\A 114411041 W. ,a4ilkik4 \ 4, 111 1116\lni IrAbh,..111111111111rallOPPO Illbfr..4111101010.1111110:74a Ili' ' it1.11:„....:11 t. ' f '1415:11/4,1/4' '-; \ 4111111111PPA0prilliPir") A,. . b‘ i,i s.ri,i 0 0 0 y 4 , , ./ i mall ,,°, iiii :' 0 •� • "fir .. \ip-1I► 4 . ) .AI 4 Jo 11T 1,000 500 0 1,000 04 �� ,i • - _ I IlLtor, Feet ll • H.T. HARVEY &ASSOCIATES Figure 3. USGS Topographic Map Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project Ecological Consultants Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4639-01) March 2024 _ ; Project Boundary NRCS Soil Series Boundary 901 - Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, 0 to 10 percent slopes (6%) 909 - Hilo-Rock outcrop complex, 35 to 100 percent slopes (94%) Source:Natural Resources Conservation Service(NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture 901 kms» • .; s � ► ,)y � � � ����ssr� d� 909 OA, � �., # ✓ ✓ w.. 4 a I, as I, •, �t 0 �s v • • • • • k1 1 I + ?��>tta �1►n✓ ti ti 901 $ a, d! k x .� t tt � � ✓ Ila as ^~a .< gi H✓ t '. ♦ ✓,,. K S ,a., w Z yup d�,.�/a xa N 250 125 0 250 A Feet H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Figure 4. NRCS Soils Map 1 Ecological Consultants Hakalau Bridge Project Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters Rehabilitation(4639 Ol) March 2024 lardS, : Project Boundary , 44 I a ,.. . 1 National Wetlands Inventory 1 ^ 41:1117""4 Estuarine and Marine Deepwater 1:*11111 Estuarine and Marine Wetland • Freshwater Pond ,o• ,' •,'' '' Riverine ", . 4to *Ittolitt, Source: USFWS 2023 M1 UBL sl , - •* . . ".: • • .. • ', • 4? t • ,.#1 )11' -400 :‘\\ • ) R3UBH ,, H ,',. '' M . • ' dr* • ,,,,,, ' i • ' • M2RS1 N . 1 • RECO i, * Apt , - I „4,0,,Orr % • ,ef' if •, ...' I A •. --,-- -, . . - . . . • Is • • • • i I • • I • ." • • I • • I • I I 5 .4101111e I, • •I • s + • s + • • • + R3UBH • • • • • .. 1. • •• . • • • .„, • •• • • + • • • 0. • • • le . .•.„ , , . 4• . . , . - . I 1 , . - .i,, .„ ., .. ' ', --1,,,,,,,,,,0 ''' -00.041. . Ilk, 4 . Ps , • 0 • s • 0 • , , . . , S • ' • °° . . . '),*,fr' .. '., .*:#, • ' • s k • ' . • . , . . • ' lb ;,,,,,,.. t* ,,,, ,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, ,, • ,, . • . • *.•5 . . , . • .,,i‘‘,.AS; t likr.,,',.,,„, „, 1110. % ...%. 0 r5 il I . 'w t g ................._.. ... 2 ..,.... ., . g N 170 85 0 170 8: z . H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Figure 5. National Wetlands Inventory Map Ecological Consultants Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4639-01) March 2024 Section 2.0 Survey Methods Before the survey was conducted, H. T. Harvey & Associates reviewed topographic maps and current and historical aerial photos of the Project Area. These sources included the U.S. Geological Survey topographic map, NWI, Google Earth software (Google Inc. 2023), NRCS Soil Survey (2023a and b), Hawaii Watershed Atlas (Parham et al. 2008),and State of Hawaii Geographic Information System (GIS) data for streams (Office of Planning 2017). With background information gleaned from these sources, H. T. Harvey & Associates' certified wetland ecologists, Terrell Erickson and Shahin Ansari, performed a technical determination and delineation of Section 404 wetland and other waters in the Project Area on March 16 and 17,2023. The technical determination was performed in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Corps Manual) (Environmental Laboratory 1987). In addition, the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Hawaii and Pacific Region (Version 2.0) (Regional Supplement) (USACE 2012) was followed to document site conditions relative to hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. H. T. Harvey & Associates wetland ecologists performed preliminary mapping of the extent and distribution of wetlands and other WoUS that may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.The following sections present descriptions of the methods used to identify Section 404 jurisdictional waters (wetlands and other waters). 2.1 Identification of Jurisdictional Waters The"Routine Determination Method,On-Site Inspection Necessary(Section D)"outlined in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), and the updated data forms, vegetation sampling methods, and hydric soil and hydrology indicators developed for the Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region (USAGE 2012) were used to examine the vegetation, soils, and hydrology on site. This three-parameter approach to identifying wetlands is based on the presence of a prevalence or dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. In addition to applying these survey methods,we compiled this report in accordance with guidance provided in Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program (USAGE 2016a). This document list the information that must be submitted as part of a request for a jurisdictional determination, including: • Vicinity map (Figure 1) • Project Area map (Figure 2) • USGS topographic map (Figure 3) • NRCS Soils map (Figure 4) Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 9 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 • NWI map (Figure 5) • Habitat map (Figure 6) • Photo point locations (located at sample point locations,and numbered according to sample points, depicted on Figure 7). Photo points correspond to photos in Appendix D • Preliminary identification of waters map (Figure 7) • Plant species observed (Appendix A) • Current Soil Survey Report (Appendix B) • Data forms for wetland and OHWM sample points (Appendix C) • Photographic documentation of wetland and OHWM delineation (Appendix D) • Written rationale for sample point choice (Section 3.3.1 Rational for Sample Points and Section 3.4.1 Rationale for OHWM transects) During the survey, the Project Area was examined for topographic features, drainages, alterations to site hydrology or vegetation, and recent significant disturbance. A determination was then made as to whether normal environmental conditions were present at the time of the field survey. In the field,the techniques used to identify wetlands included digging of soil pits in the Project Area (also see "Hydric Soils" under Section 2.1.1),observing the vegetation growing near the soil sample points, and characterizing the current surface and subsurface hydrologic features present near the sample points through both observation of indicators and direct observation of hydrology.Note that digging soil pits was limited than is typically conducted in field studies,due to the presence of lead contaminated soils in this Project Area. Features meeting wetland vegetation, soil,and hydrology criteria were then mapped in the field using a sub-meter GPS unit. 2.1.1 Regulatory Regime On December 30, 2022', the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of the Army (the agencies) announced a final rule founded upon the pre-2015 definition of"waters of the United States." To determine jurisdiction for tributaries, adjacent wetlands, and additional waters, the final rule relies on the longstanding approach of applying two standards. Certain types of waters are jurisdictional under the final rule if they meet either the relatively permanent standard or significant nexus standard. • Relatively Permanent is a test that provides important efficiencies and clarity for regulators and the public by readily identifying a subset of waters that will virtually always significantly affect paragraph (a)(1) waters. To meet the relatively permanent standard, the waterbodies must be relatively 1 This rule took effect on March 20,2023.However,in light of preliminary injunctions,at the time of this publication the agencies are interpreting"waters of the United States"consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory regime in 26 states (not including California) until further notice.This delineation is also consistent with the pre-2015 regulatory mapping regime. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 10 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 permanent, standing, or continuously flowing waters connected to paragraph (a)(1) waters or waters with a continuous surface connection to such relatively permanent waters or to paragraph (a)(1) waters. • Significant Nexus is a test that clarifies if certain waterbodies, such as tributaries and wetlands, are subject to the Clean Water Act based on their connection to and effect on larger downstream waters that Congress fundamentally sought to protect. A significant nexus exists if the waterbody (alone or in combination) significantly affects the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters,the territorial seas,or interstate waters. The agencies' definition of "waters of the United States" does not affect the longstanding activity-based permitting exemptions provided to the agricultural community by the Clean Water Act.Additionally, the final rule codifies eight exclusions from the definition of "waters of the United States" in the regulatory text to provide clarity, consistency, and certainty to a broad range of stakeholders.The exclusions are: • Prior converted cropland, adopting the U.S. Department of Agriculture's definition and generally excluding wetlands that were converted to cropland prior to December 23, 1985. • Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, are designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act. • Ditches (including roadside ditches),excavated wholly in and draining only dry land,and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water. • Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased. • Artificial lakes or ponds, created by excavating or diking dry land that are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering,irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing. • Artificial reflecting pools or swimming pools,and other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or diking dry land. • Waterfilled depressions, created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand,or gravel unless and until the construction operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of"waters of the United States." • Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes), that are characterized by low volume, infrequent,or short duration flow. This report was prepared following the ruling issued May 23, 2023 for Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, but before guidance related to the ruling was issued to USACE regulatory staff. Based on the tidal influence and proximity to the Pacific Ocean,we have assumed that all areas meeting USACE jurisdictional guidance on 3-parameter wetlands and Section 404 waters would still be considered waters of the U.S. for the purposes of this report. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 11 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 2.1.2 Identification of Section 404 Jurisdictional Wetlands (Special Aquatic Sites) Where wetland field characteristics were present,the surveyor examined vegetation, soils,and hydrology using the Routine Determination Method outlined in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the updated data forms,vegetation sampling methods, and hydric soil and hydrology indicators developed for the Hawaii and Pacific Region Supplement(USAGE 2012). 2.1.2.1 Hydrophytic Vegetation Plants that can grow in soils that are saturated or inundated for long periods of time,which contain little or no oxygen when wetted,are considered adapted to those soils and are called hydrophytic.There are different levels of adaptation,as summarized in Table 2. Some plants can only grow in soils saturated with water(and depleted of oxygen), some are mostly found in this condition, and some are found equally in wet soils and in dry soils. Plants observed at each of the sample sites were identified to species, where possible, using the Manual of Flowering Plants of Hawaii Revised Edition (Wagner et al. 1999) and the Hawaiian Vascular Plants Checklist February 2019 Update (Imada 2019). The wetland indicator status of each species was obtained from the Hawaii and Pacific Islands Regional Wetland Plant List (Lichvar et al. 2020). Wetland indicator species are designated according to their frequency of occurrence in wetlands. For instance, a species with a presumed frequency of occurrence of 67 to 99%in wetlands is designated a facultative wetland indicator species.The wetland indicator groups, indicator symbol, and the frequencies of occurrence of species within wetlands, provided as a percentage,are shown in Table 2. Table 2. Wetland Indicator Status Categories for Vascular Plants Indicator Category Symbol Frequency(%)of Occurrence in Wetlands' Obligate OBL >99 (Almost always is a hydrophyte, rarely in uplands) Facultative wetland FACW 67-99 (Usually a hydrophyte but occasionally found in uplands) Facultative FAC 34-66 (Commonly occurs as either a hydrophyte or non-hydrophyte) Facultative upland FACU 1 -33 (Occasionally is a hydrophyte, but usually occurs in uplands) Upland UPL <1% (Rarely is a hydrophyte,almost always in uplands) Not Listed NI Considered to be an upland species 1 Based on information contained in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).Plant species that are not listed in the Hawaii and Pacific Islands Regional Wetland Plant List (Lichvar et al. 2020) are considered Upland species in Appendix A-Plants Observed in the Project Area. Obligate and facultative wetland indicator species are hydrophytes that occur"in areas where the frequency and duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils of sufficient duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present" (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Facultative indicator species may be considered wetland indicators when found growing in hydric soils that experience periodic saturation. Plant species that are not on the regional list of wetland indicator species are considered upland species. A complete list of the vascular plants observed within the study area,including their current indicator statuses,has been provided in Appendix A. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 12 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 2.1.2.2 Hydric Soils Given that the Project Area contained soils with low to high levels of lead contamination, only visual/color indicators for hydric soils were examined with limited assessment of soil texture. The National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils defines a hydric soil as one formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 12 inches of soil (NRCS 2018). Hydric soils include soils developed under sufficiently wet conditions to support the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation. In general, evidence of a hydric soil includes characteristics such as reducing soil conditions, soils with bright mottles and/or low matrix chroma, and soils listed as hydric by the U.S.Department of Agriculture on the National Hydric Soils List(NRCS 2023b).Reducing soil conditions can also include circumstances where there is evidence of frequent ponding for long or very long duration.A long duration is defined as a period of inundation for a single event that ranges from 7 days to a month, and very long is greater than one month (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Munsell Soil Notations (Munsell 2021)were recorded for the soil matrix of each soil sample.The Munsell color system is based on three color dimensions: hue,value, and chroma. A brief description of each component of the system is described below,in the order they are used in describing soil color (i.e.,hue/value/chroma): 1. Hue—The Munsell Soil Color Chart is divided into five principal hues:yellow(Y),green (G),purple (P), blue (B), and red (R), along with intermediate hues such as yellow-red (YR) and green-yellow (GY). Example of commonly encountered hue numbers include 2.5YR, 10YR,and 5Y. 2. Value—Refers to lightness,ranging from white to grey to black. Common numerical values for value in the Munsell Soil Color Chart range from 2 for saturated soils to 8 for faded or light colors. Hydric soils often show low-value colors when soils have accumulated sufficient organic material to indicate development under wetland conditions, but can show high-value colors when iron depletion has occurred, removing color value from the soil matrix. Value numbers are commonly reported as 8/, 2.5/,and 6/. 3. Chroma—Describes the purity of the color, from "true" or "pure" colors to "pastel" or "washed out" colors. Chromas commonly range from 1 to 8, but can be higher for gleys. Soil matrix chroma values that are 1 or less, or 2 or less when mottling is present, are typical of soils that have developed under anaerobic conditions. Chroma numbers are listed,for example,as /1, /5, and/8. The NRCS Web Soil Survey (MRCS 2023) was consulted to determine which soil types have been mapped in the study area(Table 1,Figure 4). Detailed descriptions of these soil types are provided in Appendix B. 2.1.2.3 Hydrology Wetland hydrology encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. Wetland hydrology indicators provide evidence that the site has a continuing wetland hydrologic regime. Primary indicators might include visual observation of surface water (A1), high water table (A2), water marks (B1), and hydrogen sulfide odor (C1). Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 13 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Secondary indicators might include a passing score for the FAC-neutral test (D5), stunted or stressed plants (D1) and saturation visible on aerial imagery (C9). Each of the sample points was examined for positive field indicators (primary and secondary) of wetland hydrology, following the guidance provided in the Regional Supplement. Appendix C contains the wetland datasheets used to document the three parameter approach described above. Appendix D contains photos of the wetland delineation. 2.1.3 Identification of Other Waters Surveys were also conducted within the Project Area for"other waters",which includes lakes, streams, slough channels, seasonal ponds, tributary waters, non-wetland linear drainages, and salt ponds. Such areas are identified by the (seasonal or perennial) presence of standing or running water and generally lack hydrophytic vegetation. In non-tidal waters, the USAGE Section 404 jurisdiction extends to the OHWM which is defined in 33 CFR Part 328.3 as "the line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics, such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank., shelving, changes in the character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation or the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding area." "Other waters" extend to the OHWM on opposing channel banks in non-tidal drainage channels. In tidal waters, Section 404 jurisdiction extends to the landward extent of wetland vegetation of the high tide line (HTL).This can either be identified in the field from direct observations of the HTL via highest extent of wrack,or highest extent of shelving along undeveloped soil banks. Outside of direct observation HTL can be estimated using tidal guage and elevation data. In tidal waters, Section 10 waters include open water, mud flats, and adjacent special aquatic sites up to the limit of the mean high water (MHW)line in areas currently exposed to fully tidal or muted-tidal action. In concert with USACE's efforts to revise the wetland delineation manuals and make them more specific to different geographic regions of the United States,as described above,efforts have been initiated by USAGE to develop an OHWM delineation manual. In particular, two relatively recent publications have attempted to further refine the definition of OHWM: • Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05 (USAGE 2005) deals specifically with the topic of OHWM identification,and lists the following physical characteristics that should be considered when making an OHWM determination: (1) natural line impressed on the bank; (2) shelving; (3) changes in the character of the soil; (4) destruction of terrestrial vegetation; (5) wracking; (6) vegetation matted down, bent, or absent; (7) sediment sorting; (8) leaf litter disturbed or washed away; (9) scour; (10) deposition; (11) multiple observed flow events; (12) bed and banks; (13)water staining;and (14) and change in plant community. • National Ordinary High Water Mark Field Delineation Manual for Rivers and Streams: Interim Version (David et al. 2022), provides consistent science-based method for delineating OHWM in streams. This manual provides guidance to observe, evaluate, and select appropriate field indicators Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 14 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 to identify the OHWM elevation that can be applied to any type of stream system. It also introduces a(new) two-page data sheet to record these observations. Starting at the eastern boundary of the Project Area, close to where the stream enters the Pacific Ocean, we walked upstream past the overhead Hakalau Stream Bridge and past the concrete stream ford to where the stream enters the western boundary of the Project Area. We investigated the stream bed and banks and the surrounding area and gathered various geomorphic, vegetation, sediment, and ancillary indicators from both banks per USAGE 2005 guidance and the interim National OHWM Manual (David et al 2022) to delineate jurisdictional waters.In order to better characterize the stream and help with delineating the OHWM level,we established four OHWM transects perpendicular to the stream bed at representative different locations along the stretch of the channel in the Project Area.Appendix C contains the OHWM data forms for all four transects including representative pictures taken at these transects.We placed flags at the OHWM indicators on the left and right banks of each transect. Global Positioning System (GPS) data was collected in the field using a Trimble GeoXTTM GPS unit capable of submeter accuracy. We also took a set of photographs (left bank and right bank;viewing downstream) of the observed OHWM indicators on each transect(Appendix D).After the survey,the GPS data was processed using ARC GIS to map the extent of the Section 404 other waters. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 15 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 ,may'"".,'Tr Qt ar ! f M. O 0, N m .e� t ,:it-'" o -0" i �ka 5',511 • • �•' 8 > CB LE .*• , f ' • • I } ‘,. "}I ' v O ♦ �/�, ♦ O iI O ♦ �I. ' . c z. a) 1%11 • ,re Gd 4 I: c • .r. "l: i /�I •� ♦ I 3 r,� ft ,�•♦• "9 S t Iv � � , Vv ♦ ' w - �' ♦ Qi ♦ r ,r P , • •TS AAll �ri ` 4 U Y • O c -0 k ` 0 5 tn O p 4 4s` '." ra;'.y ," ♦ N P % S• W '- ♦% •, ict 7 N Q CD 1. S •, • C.) ,n •• • • C, O \ C _ • ¢0 ti `O `L o , k WE N U N 4rra ` IIQ o co' 0 _ �o X • + � �t aII�° d' qq j -- _ -0 c {� i. d e ' �� ;` Z A U 00 o H U p O U c _M a} o r N •— N e , i 4i 14 1 -g - 4 - 4 �' lie� ti J 2 I r epe6e1 de-Isc)am l0Q,0M\euodai,\.o-609t 009Veloeloid\N l , '" y , fir,ec, . r _ ' Project Boundary r a • 44N146,,,i ' 4 ® Photo Points O Sample Points ,Y Ordinary High Water Mark Transects (T) • °4'." "1,' , ,•^� ' • Ordinary High Water Mark/ Hightide Line , lat3®®933°W Upland (0.17 ac) �Ufl.9006033°N . Waters of the U.S. (2.46 ac) . "' ♦ Section 10/404 (1.28 ac) :. •w • ♦ Section 404 (1.01 ac) • f • Section 404 Wetlands • 1 . r , .„ti_ , ♦ Wetland (0.35 ac) 1 1 e y.n • n J 1 +• V ♦ P lJ �� �• x ,, ' r� -� ac►fic Ocean 1 0.-. ��. �, • , .• a ♦. y 111P • ` •MyM oaf* ,, '•*,• e% ' ... ✓r yf' ,Cw " gam'.:'' '� ,:: ♦ ♦ i afertiv , S�tea ` k ` ' �, V " nt . r � r , , Nay`°\a SP2 ' A .1 ;Y”„ ., • 4 . SP1 1 ilhio , .. fin= , a ♦ �� Photo 5 _ Photo 6, - t , 01 . - , '— 7tkv."ct;,, � � Photo4 � � fi q � � ♦ Photo 3 ' ,, , ♦• / 0 v ♦ 'gra, ,. fid'. - ♦ • fi. # ♦ - . ♦ . . ' 'OM 2.958r72°W k_ ,, x • •• '09.8979178°N ,�. » , ,. o . . -. 3 • -'! ' -• w.. . , - r gay n P «f A. o ti Map created by Mark Lagarde,C� ri JunK743. N 170 85 0 i 70 Wetland Delineation conducted CV A Y Shahin Ansari, Ph.D.and Terrell Erickson,Ga, Feet on March 16 and Fob ~ H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Figure 7. Preliminary ID of Section 404 Wetlands and Other Waters Hakalau Bridge Rehabilitation Project 0 — Ecological Consul i l' Preliminary Delineation of Wetlands and Other Waters (4639-01) March 2024 Section 3.0 Survey Results and Discussion The following vegetation types were identified within the study area: (1) Mixed Alien Forest; (2) Mosaic of Mixed Alien Forest, Alien-Dominated Paca Fernland, and Alien-Dominated Herbland; (3) Alien-Dominated Riparian Forest (Figure 6). Two sample points (SPs) and four OHWM transects (T1-T4) were examined to identify jurisdictional features (Figure 7) (Appendices C and D). Within the Project Area, approximately 2.64 acres of potentially jurisdictional waters regulated by USAGE were identified (Table 3). The results of the delineation are described below. Table 3. Summary of Jurisdictional Wetland and Waters Delineated Within the Project Area Habitat Type Area (acres) Total Section 404 Wetlands 0.35 Total Other Waters 2.29 Total Section 404 Other Waters 1.01 Total Section 10 Other Waters 1.28 Total potential Waters of the U.S. 2.64 Information assembled during this investigation and pertinent to the identification of jurisdictional Section 404 waters is further discussed below and presented in the five appendices of this report. • Appendix A—Plants Observed in the Project Area • Appendix B—Custom Soil Report for the Project Area • Appendix C—US ACE wetland data forms for wetland and OHWM delineations • Appendix D—Photographic Documentation The sections below describe the site conditions observed during this delineation survey, along with pertinent background information, assumptions and rationale. 3.1 Assumption and Background Information The preliminary delineation assumes that relatively normal circumstances prevailed at the time of this March 2023 survey, and results are based upon the conditions present at the time of the survey. The survey was performed using the "Routine Method of Determination"using three parameters, as outlined in the Regional Supplement for wetlands and the method described to identify OHWM level for streams in the National Manual. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 18 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Over the two-day field study,the weather was hot, dry, and with mild trade winds. Rainfall data suggests that in the several weeks leading up to the survey this area received heavy rains.The closest rain gauge is (National Weather Service Location ID: Piihonua [HI91]-PIIH1) about 12 miles to the south of the Project Area. Per this station,the 30-year average rainfall from January to March for this area is 45.5 inches (NWS 2023) and the area received about 61.9 inches; that is 136% of the average rainfall for this quarterly duration in 2023 (NWS 2023).The stream flow recorded a couple weeks before the survey was conducted was high;the USGS Hakalau Stream gauge (USGS 16717700 near elevation 1300 feet) recorded around 25 cubic feet per second(cfs) at the beginning of March.But,discharge rapidly decreased during the couple weeks leading up to the survey and was 0.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) on March 16th(Figure 8) USGS 2023). The stream thus had ordinary low flows at the time of the survey.Also the Project Area did not experience any recent extreme flood or drought events. USGS USGS 16717700 Hakalau Stream nr alt 1 SD0 ft, HI a 25 Lti G} 20 a. a= G} 11.1 15 • Chi 10 � � u AO 11 L 5 ii 1 Jan Jan Feb Feb Mar 14 28 11 25 11 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 ---- Provisional Data Subject to Revision ---- Median daily statistic (1 year) fE Measured discharge — Discharge — Maxinun Reporting Linit Figure 8. Discharge of Hakalau Stream Source: USGS Water data, 2023 (USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl) https://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis 3.2 Site Conditions and Observations The steep hillsides of Hakalau Gulch occupy the northern and southern portions of the Project Area and the stream flows through the gulch bottom in the center(Appendix D,Photo 1).The Project Area is accessed from Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 19 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 the top of the gulch on the southern side via the Old Mamalahoa Highway as well as by a set of stone stairs leading to the site of the old sugar mill.The alignment of this old highway loops just west of the Project Area, crosses Hakalau Stream and terminates at the base of the northern hill slope in the western corner of the Project Area. From here a gravel road runs through the upper northern bank between the base of the hill and the stream all the way to the ocean.A southern fork of this gravel road crosses the Hakalau Stream via a reinforced concrete ford and extends to the ocean in the southern portion of the Project Area between the stream and the bottom of the southern hillside. This southern fork used to be the old access road to the mill site in the southeastern corner (Appendix D,Photo 1).Both the forks pass under the Hakalau Stream Bridge. The upper banks on either side of Hakalau Stream are relatively flat for about 50-100 feet and then the terrain sharply rises to nearly vertical hillsides (Appendix D Photo 2). The entire Project Area except for the stream channel, the stream ford, the old Mamalaoha Highway and the old mill access road, is heavily vegetated, including the steep hillsides. Common canopy trees include gunpowder tree (Trema orientalis),African tulip tree (Spathodea campanulata), and common ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia). Blue trumpet vine (Thunbergia grandiflora) and golden pothos (Epipremnum pinnatum) were abundant and draped on the trees on the hillsides. Paca fern (Diplaium esculentum), cane grass (Cenchruspulpureus),wedelia (Sphagneticola trilobata), and guinea grass (Vlegathyrrus maximus) were abundant among the herbaceous ground cover found in the Project Area. Hakalau is a major perennial stream that drains the Hakalau watershed,which is a small to medium (about 9 square miles)watershed,steeper in the upper parts and with some embayment(Parham et al 2008).The stream enters the Project Area at the western boundary as a braided system meandering around rocky vegetated islands. Just upstream of the concrete ford, it splits around a vegetated rocky peninsula with the northern channel flowing over the concrete ford and the southern channel flowing through the concrete culvert of the old mill access road.Below the concrete ford there is a vegetated rock island and water flows around it and merges into a single channel below this rock island.The landscape position of Hakalau Stream in the Project Area is typical of streams entering the ocean in Hawaii. At the stream mouth the Hakalau Stream backs up against a gravel bar, forming a deep pool and is above the mean high water mark (Appendix D, Photo 3). During very high flows,it cuts through to the ocean but otherwise during regular flows it ponds behind this gravel bar or berm which is just outside of the eastern border of the Project Area. Hakalau Stream is not channelized with natural bed and banks in the Project Area, except for the concrete footings of the overhead Hakalau Bridge that are situated in the stream bed and the reinforced concrete ford toward the upper/western portion of the stream that affects stream flow (Appendix D,Photo 4). At the time of the survey, water was flowing over the ford and the stream had normal low discharge with exposed inner banks. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 20 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 3.3 Identification of Potential Section 404 Wetlands Areas that were considered to be wetlands were dominated by hydrophytes, possessed hydric soil characters, and demonstrated evidence of wetland hydrology. Approximately 0.35 acres of potential USAGE jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the Project Area (Figure 7). One continuous wetland feature was mapped in the southern portion of the Project Area (Figure 7). A narrow ditch runs parallel to the base of the southern hillside and at the eastern end it curves north toward the stream bank and terminates before reaching the old mill access road. From here the wetland extends over a concave stretch of this old mill access road up until there is a slight increase (6 to 12 inches) in elevation toward the stream bank. The old remnant infrastructure from the plantation time have resulted in this wetland that exhibited natural conditions with somewhat of an unnatural boundary around the old mill access road.It should be noted that during this 2023 delineation, only a portion of the wetland was mapped in the field. Given the safety concerns due to terrain,dense vegetation,and lead contaminated soils,we could not access and map the portion of the ditch that ran parallel to the foot of the southern hillside. (Appendix D,Photos 5 to 8).To map this portion of the ditch, we relied on topographic data gathered for this Project along with signatures of saturation and hydrophytic vegetation gathered in the field (described below in sub-section"Vegetation"). 3.3.1 Vegetation Obligate plant species of water smartweed(Persicariapunctata) was primarily found in the ponded portion of the wetland overlapping the old mill access road (Appendix D, Photo 5). The western portion of the narrow road leading up to the ponded area, as well as the stretch of road that continued east beyond this ponded area were mostly un-vegetated, dry bare ground. There were tire marks in the saturated areas and we also saw people drive up and down this ponded stretch indicating that it is used on a regular basis by people accessing the beach park in the southeastern corner of the Project Area. This also probably explains the lack of dense vegetation covering the ponded portion of the road. North of the ponded road (toward the stream), the boundary between ponded and non-ponded but still saturated areas was clear and the vegetation changed from obligate smartweed in the stagnant water to a dense mix of FAC species of wedelia, honohono (Commelina diffusa), California grass (Urochloa rrmutica), and FACW- status paca ferns (Appendix D,Photo 6). The boundary between saturated and upland dry area here followed the slight change in elevation; and although the vegetation continued to be dominated by FAC wedelia plants, it was mixed in with the upland-status guinea grass. South of the ponded road(toward the steep southern hillside)too,there is a clear boundary between the obligate plant species in the ponded water on the road to dense growth of a mix of FACW and FAC-status species of wedelia,honohono,and California grass. However,unlike on the north side the vegetation then transitions to obligate plant species (water smartweed and water primrose [Ludwigia octovalvis])in a ponded ditch. Other plant species in and around the ditch included FACW-status species of paca ferns,job's tears (Coix lachrynza joba),and honohono; and FAC-status ape (Alocasia macrorrhkos) and ti plants (Cordyline fruticosa) (Appendix D, Photos 7, Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 21 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 8,and 9). Of particular note were the thickets of the FACW paca ferns that dominated the banks of this narrow (- six feet) ditch. An interesting feature was also the presence of banana trees (FACU) along the banks of the ditch,perhaps remnants from the sugar plantation time. Because the remaining portion of the ditch that runs parallel to the southern hillside was not accessible,we used this vegetation signature of a row of banana trees amongst the paca ferns as seen from the old mill access road and from the Old Mamalaoha Highway on top of the southern hillside to determine the extent of the ditch in the east-west direction (Appendix D,Photos 10 to 14). We then relied on the most recent topographic data to verify the length and width (north-south) of this inaccessible ditch. 3.3.2 Soils Due to the lead contaminated soils in the Project Area,analysis for this 2023 delineation was mostly limited to visual observations of the soil matrix. Histic Epipedon (A2) was the hydric soil indicator in the soil pit representative of the portion of the wetland that was physically delineated in the field.The somewhat concave stretch of the old access road perpendicular to the ditch formed a restrictive layer.Depth in the saturated sample pit(SP1) was restricted to just three inches with color of 5 YR 2.5/1.The soil profile was composed of fibrous peat and mucky peat and texture also felt (through thick rubber gloves, given lead contamination) like slick muck(Appendix C,Appendix D:Photo 15).Moving north from the old road alignment and toward the stream bank,the dry unsaturated dy soils were observed where the elevation increased by about 6 to 12 inches.A soil pit (SP2) here revealed continuation of the restrictive layer however without the histic epipedon found in the saturated and ponded areas.Moreover this sample pit was mostly composed of mass of wedelia roots(Appendix C,Appendix D: Photo 16). On the east and western side of the ponded area too,we used the transition from saturated soils with histic epipedon to unsaturated dry soils to map the boundary of the wetland. 3.3.3 Hydrology Several primary hydrology indicators of surface water (A1), saturation (A3), drift deposits (B3), and aquatic fauna(B13) along with secondary indicator of drainage patterns (B10) were observed during the two-day field survey. The primary hydrology supporting the wetland appears to be surface water from the perennial stream via the ditch and also by rain water that seeps down from the southern hillside.The water flows from the ditch northward on to the concave portion of the old mill access road (perpendicular to the ditch) and gets ponded against the upslope (about 5-100/n) terrain toward the stream bank.The concave stretch in the old mill access road,over the decades since the plantation operations were abandoned in early 1970s,has served as a restrictive layer and created aquis conditions supporting obligate plant species as well as aquatic fauna—tadpoles and mosquito fish (Gambusia sp.). Formation of the slick mucky histic epipedon is indicative that these aquic conditions have persisted for a long time(Appendix D,Photo 17). 3.3.4 Rationale for Sample Point Choice Two sample points and were selected to document conditions in representative jurisdictional and non- jurisdictional areas (Figure 7). Rationale and findings for wetland data form sample point locations are summarized in Table 4. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 22 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Table 4. Summary of Sample Point Locations and Results Hydrophytic Hydric Wetland Overall Wetland Name Sampling Rationale Vegetation Soil? Hydrology? Assessment SP1 (Photo Placed in the saturated soils Yes Yes Yes This area met the 15) adjacent to the ponded three parameter area. wetland criteria. SP2 (Photo Paired point placed in the Yes No No This area did not 16) slightly elevated and meet the three unsaturated, dry area parameter wetland bordering the saturated criteria. edge. 3.3.5 Photo Points for Section 404 Wetland Photo point labels,coordinates,and rationales for photo documentation are presented in Table 5.Photo points 15 and 16 are associated with sample points SP1 and SP2 depicted on Figure 7. Photo points 10 to 14 were taken from the elevated Old Mamalahoa Highway in the Project Area to identify and document the signature of banana trees and hydrophytic vegetation along the banks of the ditch. Photos are presented in Appendix D. Table 5. Coordinates and Rationale for Section 404 Wetland Photo Points Label Latitude, Depiction Longitude Photo 10 19.898507°N Looking down and north from old Mamalahoa Highway on top of the 155.129967°W southern hill at the eastern end of the ditch as identified by the end of the row of banana trees. Photo 11 19.898320°N Looking down and north from old Mamalahoa Highway on top of the 155.129801°W southern hill at the ditch as identified by the row of banana trees. Point taken slightly east of Photo point 10. Photo 12 19.898436°N Looking down and north from old Mamalahoa Highway on top of the 155.129581°W southern hill at the ditch as identified by the row of banana trees. Point taken slightly east of Photo point 11. Photo 13 19.898572°N Looking down and north from old Mamalahoa Highway on top of the 155.129313°W southern hill at the eastern end of the ditch as identified by the end of the row of banana trees. Point taken slightly east of Photo point 12. Photo 14 19.899041°N Looking south from the old mill access road in the gulch bottom toward the 155.129392°W bottom of the southern hillside and the row of banana trees used to delineate the inaccessible ditch. Photo 15 19.899309°N SP1. Depicting saturated soils in the wetland. Mucky peat of Histic Epipedon (SP1) 155.129365°W restricted to three inches due to the old concrete road. Vegetation dominated by FAC wedelia, FACW honohono, and FACW California grass. Photo 16 19.899359°N SP2. Depicting dry upland paired point in dry unsaturated area bordering (SP2) 155.129392°W wetland north of the old mill access road. Vegetation dominated by FAC wedelia plants mixed with upland status guinea grass. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 23 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 3.4 Identification of Section 10/404 Other Waters Approximately 2.29 acres of potential other waters were identified along the Hakalau Stream flowing through the Project Area. At the time of the survey,water, at the mouth of Hakalau Stream was seen flowing toward the ocean. However, topographic data indicated the high tide line above the mean sea level elevation to be further upstream,past the rocky island but just below(east) the concrete ford.This spatially assessed high tide line was used to identify potentially jurisdictional Section 10 waters in Hakalau Stream. There appears to be a continuum of Section 404 to Section 10 waters in this stretch of Hakalau Stream in the BSA.Therefore,of the 2.29 acres, 1.28 acres were identified as potential Section 10/404 waters and the remaining 1.01 acres were identified as Section 404 waters. The average width of the stream channel in the Project Area is 150 feet. The bank slopes varied from less than 30%to greater than 60%.All four indicator types---geomorphic,vegetation, sediment,and ancillary contributed to delineating the OHWM levels along the Hakalau Stream. At its lowermost reach in the Project Area, Hakalau Stream forms a deep pool (Appendix D, Photo 18). Transect 1 was representative of this lower reach of the stream. The width of the stream here was about 169 feet and both the left and the right banks had gentle slopes of less than 30 percent.Along both banks,the main indicator at the OHWM level was the presence of large drift wood with the break in the slope on the bank being more subtle. Change in vegetation was documented below the OHWM as being absent and transitioning to a thick cover of wedelia.Wedelia is a fast growing prostrate ground cover which during low flow periods is likely to spread quickly and therefore was considered a poor indicator of the high water level mark. Rather,the collecting of drift wood and debris, particular at the base of large trees in combination with the sorting of sediment from boulders and cobbles in the stream to gravel and finer sediment was used to demarcate the OHWM level here (Appendix D Photos 18, 19,and 20). Transect 2 was representative of the stretch of stream where the water, after meandering around the upstream rock island, merges into a single channel. The width of the stream here is about 104 feet. The slopes on both banks were greater than 60 percent.Break in slope on the bank,matted down and bent vegetation,and exposed roots below intact soil layer were the primary indicators at the high water mark level here. Sediment sorting from boulders and cobble to gravel and finer sediment was more obvious on the right than left bank below the OHWM (Appendix D,Photos 21 and 22). Further upstream,Transect 3 overlapped the rock island in the center of the stream channel.It is representative of the stretch of the stream that meanders around this rock island just downstream from the concrete ford (Appendix D,Photo 23).The width of the stream channel here,including the vegetated rock island in the center was about 169 feet. The stream channel between the island and the left bank was narrower and the left bank had about 30 percent slope. Destroyed,matted, and/or bent down vegetation were the strongest indicators at and below the high water mark on the left bank.The stream channel between the island and the right bank was was wider with the right bank also being much steeper (>60 percent slope). Undercutting with exposed roots below together with shelving and obstruction of vegetation behind the tree trunks were better indicators of the high water mark level on the right bank. Both the upper banks as well as the rock island in the center of the Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 24 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 stream channel were heavily vegetated. The ground cover was mostly composed of thickets of FACW paca ferns and FAC cane grass. Scattered on the rock island were Colombian cuphea (Cuphea carthagenensis) plants that also have a FAC-status.Trees species mostly included albizia (Falcataria moluccana),African tulip (Spathodea campanulata),mango (1Vlangifera indica),and Chinenes banyan(Ficus microcarpa)—all with FACU indicator status. The fourth transect is representative of the western and uppermost reach of the stream where it enters the Project area and is upstream of the concrete ford. There were several small rock islands in the stream channel along this transect and a large triangular rock island against the concrete ford just below this transect.The width of the channel here was about 158 feet across and unlike the downstream transect,the left bank was steeper(> 60 percent) than the right bank(about 30%). On both the banks,destroyed,matted down,and bent vegetation were the strongest indicators at and below the ordinary high level mark. Exposed roots below intact soil was more evident on the steeper left than right bank while both banks showed some signs of wracking and presence of litter above the high water mark. 3.4.1 Rationale for OHWM Transect Choice Table 6 lists some of the frequently encountered characteristics used to identify OHWM along the Hakalau Stream channel in the study area. Table 6. Rationale for Transect Placement and Determination of Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Level Along Hakalau Stream (Section 404 Waters) Indicators Indicators Above OHWM At OHWM Indicators Below Name Sampling Rationale Level Level OHWM level OHWM Transect 1 Representative of the Drift wood and Drift wood Change in lowermost reach of the collecting of vegetation, change stream in the Project Area debris in sediment particle overlapping the pool of size and distribution water before the gravel bar (just outside the Project boundary) OHWM Transect 2 Representative of stretch of Accumulation Break in Exposed roots the reach just downstream of of debris bank below intact soil the rock island where the layer, destroyed flows around the island vegetation, merge and form a single sediment sorting channel (again) OHWM Transect 3 Representative of the stretch Accumulation Break in Undercutting of of stream stretch overlapping of drift wood bank bank with exposed the rock island in the center and debris, roots, destroyed of the stream channel wracking vegetation, immediately downstream of sediment sorting the concrete ford OHWM Transect 4 Representative of the Wracking, Break in Exposed roots uppermost reach of the accumulation slope below intact soil, stream in the Project Area of litter Destroyed, matted, above the concrete ford Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 25 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Indicators Indicators Above OHWM At OHWM Indicators Below Name Sampling Rationale Level Level OHWM level and overlapping rock island and bent in the stream channel vegetation 3.4.2 Photo Points for Section 10/404 Waters (Hakalau Stream) Photo point labels,coordinates,and rationales for photo documentation are presented in Table 7.Photo points 18 to 30 were taken to depict the OHWM indicators taken at the four transect locations. Photos are presented in Appendix D. Table 7. Coordinates and Rationale for Section 404 Waters (Hakalau Stream) Photo Points Label (As in Latitude, Appendix D) Longitude Depiction Transect 1 Photo 18 19.899560°N Looking north from the right bank toward the left bank. 155.129238°W OHWM indicators (R)—presence of drift wood (at and above), destruction of vegetation (below); (L)—sorting of sediment (below) Transect 1 Photo 19 19.899560°N Looking south at the right bank. OHWM indicators—sorting 155.129238°W from cobbles to fine sediment (below) and collecting of drift wood and debris (at and above) Transect 1 Photo 20 19.899560°N Looking south at right bank; OHWM level indicators—drift 155.129238°W wood (at),sediment sorting (below). Transect 2 Photo 21 19.899161°N Looking south at right bank; OHWM level indicators—break in 155.129903°W bank (at), exposed roots below intact soil layer(below). Transect 2 Photo 2 2 19.899161°N Looking north at left bank from the right bank. OHWM 155.129903°W indicator—break in slope and matted down and destroyed vegetation (below) Transect 3 Photo 23 19.898165°N Aerial view of transect 3 location right below the concrete 155.130195°W ford and with vegetated rock island in center of channel Transect 3 Photo 24 19.898995°N Looking upstream (west) at left bank. OHWM indicator- 155.130791°W destroyed and matted down vegetation (below) Transect 3 Photo 25 19.8986547°N Looking south at right bank. OHWM indicator—cut in bank 155.130442°W (at) and matted down vegetation (below) Transect 3 Photo 26 19.8986547°N Looking northwest from the right bank toward the rock island 155.130442°W and the concrete ford. Transect 4 Photo 27 19.8985635°N Just below (east) of Transect 4. Looking north at the rock 155.130625°W island and the concrete ford from where the concrete ford transitions into the old mill access road. Transect 4 Photo 28 19.8985465°N Looking west (upstream) at left bank. OHWM indicators- 155.1312053°W break in slope (at),wracking and presence of litter (above), matted down vegetation (below) Transect 4 Photo 29 19.8984336°N Looking south toward the right bank. OHWM indicator- 155.1307171°W matted down vegetation (at and below). Transect 4 Photo 30 19.8984336°N Looking northwest and upstream toward the rocky 155.1307171°W vegetated island in the center of the stream channel Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 26 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 3.5 Areas Not Meeting the Regulatory Definition of Waters of the U.S. The remainder of the study area does not meet the regulatory definitions of Section 404 wetlands or other waters. Non-jurisdictional uplands includes the vegetation types of Mixed Alien Forest.These vegetation types occur in upland landscape positions and do not meet the USAGE criteria for wetlands. While FACW species such as paca ferns and honohono and FAC species such as cane grass,wedelia,and sourbush(Pluchea carolinensi_r) dominated the gulch bottom; areas mapped as wetlands differed in that they contained obligate plant species, did not contain upland plants species,were in topographic depressions, and had clear indicators of hydric soil and/or active hydrology. 3.6 Conclusion In conclusion,H.T. Harvey and Associates'delineation of Section 404 waters in the Project Area is based upon our best professional judgement.Federal jurisdiction is solely dependent on the determination and confirmation by USACE. Acceptance may require a site visit by a USAGE representative to confirm the delineation data points gathered in the surveyed area. This delineation is not official until HDOT receives an acceptance letter from USAGE. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 27 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Section 4.0 References ASM Affiliates. 2023. An Archeological Inventory Survey for the Hakalau Stream Bridge Rehabilitation and Lead Remediation Project. Report prepared for WSP USA. Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States.U.S.Department of the Interior,Fish and Wildlife Service,Washington, D.C. David, G. C. L.,Fritz,K. M.,Nadeau,T.-L.,Topping,B.J.,Allen,A. 0.,Trier,P. H., Kichefski, S. L.,James, L.A.,Wohl,E.E.,Hamill,D.D.2022.National Ordinary High Water Mark Field Delineation Manual for Rivers and Streams: Interim Version (ERDC/CRREL TR-22-26). U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department of the Army. Giambelluca, T. W., Q. Chen, A. G. Frazier,J. P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu,J. K. Eischeid, and D. M. Delparte. 2013. Online rainfall atlas of Hawaii. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94:313-316. Google Inc. 2023. Google Earth Pro (Version 7.1.5.1557) [Software]. <http://earth.google.com>. Accessed Marcht 10. Imada, I. T. 2019. Hawaiian Naturalized Vascular Plants Checklist. Bishop Museum Technical Report 69. <http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/publications/pdf/tr69.pdf>.Accessed November 2021. Munsell. 2009. Soil Color Charts,Munsell Color X-rite. Grand Rapids,Michigan. Lichvar, R. W., D. L. Banks, W. N. Kirchner, and N. C. Melvin. 2016. Hawaii 2016 Regional Plant List. The National Wetland Plant List:2016 Wetland Ratings.Phytoneuron 2016-30:1-17.Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. [NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the U.S.: A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils (Version 8.2). U.S. Department of Agriculture. Prepared with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. [MRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2023a. Web Soil Survey. U.S. Department of Agriculture. <http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov>.Accessed March 10. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 28 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 [NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2022b. National Hydric Soils List. <http://www.nrcs.usda. gov/wps/portal/nres/main/soils/use/hydric/>. Accessed March 10,2023. [NWI] National Wetlands Inventory. 2023. Wetlands Mapper. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. <http://www. fws.gov/wetlands/Wetlands-Mapper.html>. Accessed March 10. [NWS] National Weather Service. 2023. Precipitation Summaries. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. <https://www.weather.gov/hfo/hydro_summary>.Accessed May 25. Office of Planning. 2017. Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. Streams (Perennial and Non-Perennial) of the State of Hawaii. <http://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/56046b3578064d989ffa485e4ed3dc46_1>. Parham,J. E., G. R.Higashi,E. K. Lapp,D. G. K. Kuamoo,R.T.Nishimoto, S. Hau,J. M. Fitzsimons,D.A. Polhcmus, and W. S. Devick. 2008. Atlas of Hawaiian Watersheds and Their Aquatic Resources. A Joint Project between the Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources and Bishop Museum. <http://hawaii watershedatlas.com/watersheds/oahu/36006.pdf>. [USAGE] U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter. No. 05-05. December 7. [USAGE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region (Version 2.0).Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program. [USAGE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016a. Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South PacificDivision Regulatory Program. [USAGE] U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016b. Information Needed for Verification of Corps Jurisdiction, San Francisco District. Revised April 2016. <https://www.spn.usace.army.mil/Portals/68/docs/ regulatory/2%20-%20lnfo%20Req.pdf>. [USGS] U.S.Geological Services. 2023.National Water Information System:Web Interface.USGS Water Data for the Nation. USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl]. <https://nwis.waterdata.usgs. gov/nwis>.Accessed May 25. Wagner,W.L.,D.R.Herbst,and S.H.Sohmer. 1999.Manual of the Flowering Plants of Hawaii.Two volumes. Revised edition. University of Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project- 29 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 • = d - 0 _ -0o o $ $ 4 e 4 e e V) % U 0 0 U U U 0 0 U U U U U s £ / 2 2 / / 7 7 / / / 2 2 / / / / / / ƒ _ 5 . 0 -a E \ E ( 0 ° \ W \ [ - \ 0 ' 2 / e \ o \ / \ % \ c \ 2 0 2 c z C E ) ƒ \ E \ 0 ƒ 3 f § ± _ 6 0 o / z e Z 0 / 9 \ a • ° \ \ 6 \ ® ) § D § E \ ca c c o / CO ' / \ / 0) ) 0) W E 0 \ 6 0 ) \ ° f ° § * 6 / » \ o o / / o / o ± 0 y o z o § c 2 ( - 0 / 3 c _ 0 z E e < u 2 3 R > £ > b \ 0 = 0 a C a / D c % j E 0 ; e = 3 s = / [ Q % \ o ' ® K ƒ e \ a / ^ / e = — £ 0 ( % ° \ 0) \ - f [ k § e E \ \ / 'E E — — » / E x j 5 . _ / \ / :0 '� c E \ _i \ \ \ I o o \ / \ \ \ $ / / U) E o / 0 F ) ' o \ \ • \ \ ƒ \ \ \ \ / \ E u > o a u o E \ \ \ C 0 E k® / \ E \ \ o ° \ \ \ \ % @ 5 E 2 E \ \ c g 2 » o / a \ c _c/ a k ' \ / \ 2 6 / oe / » 6 / / / 0 ° 0o e4 & $ ° / / 2 / ' \ o o o > 8 7 \ a \ [ o /G Q v) 3 \ _ _ < < u < £ U U U U G 7 = < U > 7 a / U) 4— C C c / / § 0 \ CL \ \ 0 0 0 0 \ . \ 0 0 0 0 o g 5 0 0 0 0 \ ^ % { @ / / / / / 0 0 Q / \ 0 o e 0 c 2 E g / 0 2 0 Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) 7 \ 0 0 / 0 \ \ N w \ / / / 0 § a \ / / % 4 < < < \ U U A ƒ 0 / / / 0 / t i C a) CI CI Q A-] -a 0 U - / & = z D _ _ _ = D D D D I U U U 0 U U U \ U 0 U U 000000 k 7 / / / / / / / 7y / < / / / // // ƒ ./ / \ o -o c p / / b 3 \ 9 0 \ p a a 0) \ - / \ 2 / \ 0 = o f ± - \ o f o z 3 o 2 « e o a) C E I / E / ® \ ° / 5 0 ƒ 9 \ $ 0 a) } & o / ) b { g 2 » I / ƒ \ 0 \ \ 0 I 0 z 9 9 2 2 2 2 5 » 2 » °v, o0 o m .% / ¥ g O % 0 E k 2 / \ TD 2= , ° / g 6 ,_ ƒ , \ E a 7 \ 0 o 0 / / >- \ 0 \ \ / - \ a f /ƒ \ \ / E o R E 5 3 c = 0 E _ _ / @ 2 2 9 @ ° ± e - e - / =o U 2 ., U > m 's E = U = z e I E - 3 E o * O m \ � O o = o CO \ / 0 a \ E / 2 c ---:- _c _ = 0 a o 3 » o ® _ = m = \ o § ® § j - O \ 0 c z d / \ / ƒ \ 0- / / ° _ * » £ o U 0 7 ®\ o 0 \ o \ / / a \ 2 / \ 0 4 / / e / . _c e - _i / o ± m < 2 2 re= / / J 5 ° \ ° o \ “-- C o e = 0 0 \ / .0 \ E 2 u = E 0) \ \ k \ \ 0 \ a 0 \ 2 0 0 z / » { 0 o \ 2 0 0 / a 0 \ 0 \ } [ » 0 k / 0 / \ e ƒ ƒ c / 9 \ / / I 0 [ _ 2 \ 2 0 . / g = \ x -0 \ >- g o 2 •( z z 0 0 £ o c { 2 a o 2 2 / ° \ » \ / ( U 0 \ o a / a 0 / a \ ( 0 c4 w e s I w > U u u t a O U t 2 E w x m w + » U c 0 I m \ 0 0 2 c c c e (1) I a) m a) 10 ° 0 \ \ 0 0 / » 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g o o e o 9 \ 2 c c c e e a) a) I I 10 0 c 2 ,< 0 o e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 > o o / y / \ 2 2 2 2 2 y E E 0 o 0 0 E c b E 0 0 0 = \ 3 3 ± ± ± ± a) ± ± ± 0) C E C 2 0 0 C < < < < < < \ < < < < < < c ; 0 0 0 A-2 S' / 00 a ƒ U z II - \ _ _ _ _ = D 4 = = z \ U U U U U U U U U U 00000 U I k / / / / / / / / / / 2 / / / / / 2 0 2 / / 0 ° S \ Cl) C 0 c 0 \ P / „ _E 0 b E k 0) 0 0 0 \ ' £ 6 \ ƒ 5 3 g E c Cl) - I o Cl) t = & • 0 o 3 2 2 T) ai a) . 2 d \ z / / ? \ \ \ % e \ / ° E 2 { \ § E E T ' 0 ° 0 a \ 0 2 • \ o 0 \ 6 9\ 't, \ % E 0 -c E •- 6 0 0 0 > 0 o y 0 _ •e a g e .P e u / y E \ 0 \ \ 0 a 3 0 c y \ \ ° / \ / /2 k t ' / o e _ \ _ ) c \ > 2 = R § o ± 0 0 2 \ a U \ e s a > E > z < 0 2 0 o \ sz / 5 u E & 2 .0 _ \ 2 > 0 _ 0 0 0 0 in 0) _ / C C / / o I = g z / 3 c ® f } ° 0 0 _ 8 / - S \ \ TD in 0 \ f 0 — - g / Zr) d C.> \ Cl) f [ \ § ƒ \ _\ , o — - a) \ 0 o § & 5 \ 0 ® 0 o E \ 2 \ } , \ % K » _c u \ \ \ o § \ [ 2 ° J \ / \ E 0 n ° ® ° o ' u / ° \ E c § \ 2 2 0 ./ g 3 0 0 .< E g \ 'r o b 9 / 2 F o / ° 0 & o ii u 9 0 \ » / \ \ 3 E & / \ \ / E / ° ° \ 9 9 ~ 5 I / > o 0 ,= o & _ '_ \ '\ .\ / 0 0 0 . b o y o . o ? c ° \ 0 \ 0 \ \ 0 0 � \ 2 [ 0 0 \ / / / \ / E 4 \ / \ \ £ / / -0 \ \ { w a > 4 u U U a \ a « _ IP_ > « k \ \ _ = U \ o I 0 0 0 0 0 ) O 0 0 0 0 o 0 o (1) e „ O 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 u 0 0 z 0 e 0 e o = 0 _ 0 c c 0 0 0 c o 0 0 0 0 o m 0 o 0 3 c c c c c c e m m E E E o 0 0 e .. o - \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ._ » C CO \ E / / e e 0 c c 0 o 2 > > > 0 0 0 / / / / 0 7 0 0 = z a o 2 £ £ 2 = c 0 o 0 I I = U 2 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 > > > > > > O CL / G 00 \ \ 3 \ A-3 Appendix B. Natural Resource Conservation Service Custom Soil Report for the Project Site Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— B_1 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 USDA United States Aproductofthe National Custom Soil Resource dim Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for \ CS States Department of Agriculture and other Island of Havvaii Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Area, I-I awa i i Conservation Stations, and local Service participants Hakalau Soil Report \ ,i ea 4111' I'''''''4,7 5 . y � r } I ,:0,,l,"4,10t : AI 4 .„-i-- 1kAt y . I 45 pp'��y 1111111111111111,111111111111111111111111111111111,111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111�UU rt March 15, 2023 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)should contact USDA's TARGET Center at(202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or(202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made 5 Soil Map 8 Soil Map 9 Legend 10 Map Unit Legend 11 Map Unit Descriptions 11 Island of Hawaii Area, Hawaii 13 901—Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, 0 to 10 percent slopes 13 903—Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, 10 to 20 percent slopes 14 909—Hilo-Rock outcrop complex, 35 to 100 percent slopes 15 References 17 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils.After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 6 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 z z 0061.07 MLEL oSST Z Z ZZZZ M,1£,L SSL 490 U' Fi N N u� I,.., -4, ,... O O IV IN` \ M •'%.._.__• \ NQ � v q9 E �� ct Etiii77, cnI '`9 O N ul U N '8 m P EnGQ 0— 6O GQ ;. 8 x L p 0 N , o _.,. o U O R v rr,: tri d L ,,, ,.,,�:. ,,y„ Q g o v O coo Oii �':: E nN r.'! O Lo MI gg � i o o `�S C�7/ 1 z Q M.6S.L oSST M.,6S,L oSST 0061OZZ Ot'LOZZ 08L60ZZ Fo OZLIOZZ 0991OZZ 00960ZZ ObSIOZZ z z m v 8+ CU C6 'oa) CoN a) 'Q ° Nc6 0 2 7 N i V) N Co Co 7 ° -o mo ° a) a) -ca) I > co U Q U o _° (6 O) N( ° >,O "' a aOwwcoO n a) "o (N .2 co NU E a) COs ( co_ co Zco U (Bco O r 70 co a) N 7 ° — E M N co o Q a°`i N co m N 3 L°n m C7 Q ° 2 0 w t y 7 ac) Co Z U E N a Q 3 Y o c-c t aco d a N Co m C6 Q N 3 0 ° ai 2 o— Q m m= ami) r Q c a y co ¢ o ° co 0 co o ° Q > Q o m Cl) m = 2 m ° L c o Y 3 .3 Q m o m u• co ° >, U o co �j p >, co cn LI-Z uu)i Q -a is o m 0 °n .oro a L = co Q Z oL -N -o Cl) (Y _o u) a) a°) ° u wa ° 0 o u°) ma CD a-0 a N D .5 0 o a) ° ° CO 2 — Z 0 ° 15 O N c co o ° ° a w c C �p Q Q m Co Q ° c o CO N o co o C °- E M L L a) Z D y °' c6 co .° 0 Y (6 `) Co "' a '0 w oo ° c N _c T s s 0 U m o ca id03 E ° a) o o a o '0 c u a CO CO > > ° co m .w -° m p .co o a m n o c ° o ac) 3 > C m m .a < CO E L L u°) E = cA a) L E >, E _ cn a) E co U ° _ > ° = o o n co _ o o) ° 'C E 2 ° 'o c o o a) ate) ° o ° > Q a o Co aai o o c -a co N > co o co O .E c a a 41 u) u) U -6 u) ° c i f6 a a) (n a) E O ° a ° c CO co = Co a.° @ Cl) C — i ° CV co -- _c N co CO c O U ° ° o a) o co ,c u) 4 U s Y 0 = 'O co Np Q E co w E — ° ol a E co 0 2 a-o ¢ co H o (D CD CO -,— ❑ CN I— ° ._ u) L 0 o_ N�a)/ I.A_ a) U L 0 U O NNa) COo 2 _N J N >. >` E @ C a) 0 o oa U L m a LL Cl) co a) -o a) N N O 7 > c a = N -0 U 2 a o o J ° a) CO Co ° ¢ c m E co p cc a o c - a) a) Co u) N a ° m Co a O N N L a y C Co- ° co .c U co Cl) > o co E in o CY ❑ 2 3 ¢ O R C ❑ fa N O 3 O Z a 43‘ 4 , a ` y cYi 'W^ w C LI R R m W J CO C U N a QT Co .0 ca U) 2 0 O O a 6 y a- J CL N E �' N Cl) a) ° , .. .. y d O CO O N a O II) C 0 C a a 3 Co 0 0 0_ = = a) ... (�) 3 N O a) 0 0 U (73 p 0 a a a (0 d a 0 d a O o d N CO O co T a) a o Co m Ca o 0 3 (n = a `o c o E o o CO Q@ '' u 3 o T N > > a Co � a) co) acs) v 0 a) Y a) a 7/1 i ° o 0 o c 0 o m o a c 32 < CO CO CO .o m m 0 0 0 0 J J 2 . . a C co co C/) in Cl) Cl) d a. co au 9 czEI) E1 El ¢ m Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 901 Hilo hydrous silty clay loam,0 0.7 2.8% to 10 percent slopes 903 Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, 10 1.6 6.4% to 20 percent slopes 909 Hilo-Rock outcrop complex,35 21.2 84.0% to 100 percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 25.3 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas.A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or 11 Custom Soil Resource Report landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Island of Hawaii Area, Hawaii 901—Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, 0 to 10 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2mclv Elevation: 0 to 1,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 130 to 200 inches Mean annual air temperature: 72 to 77 degrees F Frost-free period: 365 days Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland Map Unit Composition Hilo and similar soils:85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hilo Setting Landform:Ash fields on lava flows Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope, footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Parent material: Basic volcanic ash over basalt Typical profile Ap- 0 to 18 inches: hydrous silty clay loam Bw- 18 to 60 inches: hydrous silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 10 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.60 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very high (about 18.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R159AY003HI - Isohyperthermic Perudic Naturalized Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Hilo, gullies Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform:Ash fields, gullies 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear, concave, convex Hydric soil rating: No Hilo, very cobbly substrate Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform:Ash fields on lava flows Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Hydric soil rating: No 903—Hilo hydrous silty clay loam, 10 to 20 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2mclx Elevation: 0 to 1,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 130 to 200 inches Mean annual air temperature: 72 to 77 degrees F Frost-free period: 365 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Hilo and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hilo Setting Landform:Ash fields on lava flows Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope, footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Parent material: Basic volcanic ash over basalt Typical profile Ap- 0 to 18 inches: hydrous silty clay loam Bw- 18 to 60 inches: hydrous silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 10 to 20 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.60 in/hr) 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very high (about 18.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R159AY003HI - Isohyperthermic Perudic Naturalized Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Hilo, very cobbly substrate Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform:Ash fields on lava flows Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear, convex Hydric soil rating: No Hilo, gullies Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Gullies, ash fields Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave, linear, convex Hydric soil rating: No 909—Hilo-Rock outcrop complex, 35 to 100 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2mlwb Elevation: 0 to 1,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 130 to 200 inches Mean annual air temperature: 72 to 77 degrees F Frost-free period: 365 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Hilo and similar soils: 65 percent Rock outcrop, basalt: 35 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hilo Setting Landform: Gulches on lava flows 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope, footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave, linear, convex Parent material: Basic volcanic ash over basalt Typical profile Ap- 0 to 18 inches: hydrous silty clay loam Bw- 18 to 60 inches: hydrous silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope:35 to 100 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class:Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.60 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very high (about 18.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 7e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R159AY003HI - Isohyperthermic Perudic Naturalized Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Description of Rock Outcrop, Basalt Setting Landform: Gulches Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave, convex, linear Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 8s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s Hydric soil rating: No 16 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ n res/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 17 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=nres142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf 18 Appendix C. USACE Hawaii Pacific Wetland Delineation and OHWM Delineation Data Forms Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— C-1 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region Project/Site: Hakalau Stream Bridge Project City: Hakalau Sampling Date: 3/17/23 Time: 7.39 am Applicant/Owner: Hawaii Department of Transportation State/Terr/Comlth.: HI Island: HawaiiSampling Point: SP1 Investigator(s): Shahin Ansari and Terrell Erickson TMK/Parcel: Landform(hillslope,coastal plain,etc.): Riparian and coastal valley mouth Local relief(concave,convex,none): Concave Lat: 155.129365°W Long: 19.899309°N Datum: WGS84 Slope(%): 10 Soil Map Unit Name: Hilo-Rock outcrop complex,35 to 100 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No Remarks: VEGETATION— Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 3 3. Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 5. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100% (A/B) =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Total %Cover of: Multiply by: 2. OBL species x 1 = 3. FACW species x 2= 4. FAC species x 3= 5. FACU species x 4= 1 square meter =Total Cover UPL species x 5= Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) Column Totals: (A) (B) 1 Commelina diffusa(honohono) Yes FACW 50 2. Sphagneticola trilobata(wedelia) 50 Yes FAC Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. I Irochlna mutica(California grass) 20 No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. x 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6. _ 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0' 7. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain in 8. Remarks or in the delineation report) 120 =Total Cover Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 1. 2 Hydrophytic Vegetation =Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: Sample point was in saturated area with muddy standing water and 100 percent vegetative ground cover adjacent to the ponded area on the old mill access road. US Army Corps of Engineers Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region—Version 2.0 SP1 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-3" 5yr 2.5/1 Organic histic epipedon 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ Stratified Layers(A5) X Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Dark Surface(S7) _ Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _ Red Parent Material(F21) Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12) Muck Presence(A8) _ Redox Dark Surface(F6) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _ Redox Depressions(F8) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if observed): Type: Concrete old mill access road Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No Remarks: Peat-fibrous saturated and some muck also observed and felt in this histic epipedon, suggesting that wetland conditions exist for a long time. Ponding is over a stretch of the old mill access road that appears to provide the restrictive layer and has created aquis conditions over decades. Also, note due to concerns of lead contamination, it was not safe to handle the soil. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: (Explain observations in Remarks, if needed.) Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required) X Surface Water(Al) X Aquatic Fauna(B13) _ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) _ High Water Table(A2) _ Tilapia Nests(B17) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8) X Saturation(A3) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) X Drainage Patterns(B10) Water Marks(B1) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _ Dry-Season Water Table(C2) Sediment Deposits(B2) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Salt Deposits(C5) X Drift Deposits(B3) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1) Algal Mat or Crust(B4) _ Thin Muck Surface(C7) _ Geomorphic Position(D2) Iron Deposits(B5) _ Fiddler Crab Burrows(C10)(Guam,CNMI, _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) and American Samoa) _ FAC-Neutral Test(D5) Water-Stained Leaves(B9) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available: Remarks: Tadpoles and mosquito fish (Gambusia sp.) seen in the wetland which bumps against the higher Hakalau stream bank to the north. US Army Corps of Engineers Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region—Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region Project/Site: Hakalau Stream Bridge Project City: Hakalau Sampling Date: 3/17/23 Time: 8.09 am Applicant/Owner: Hawaii Department of Transportation State/Terr/Comlth.: HI Island: Hawaii Sampling Point: SP2 Investigator(s): Shahin Ansari and Terrell Erickson TMK/Parcel: Landform(hillslope,coastal plain,etc.): Riparian and coastal valley mouth Local relief(concave,convex,none): Concave Lat: 155.129392°W Long: 19.899359°N Datum: WGS84 Slope(%): <10%to north Soil Map Unit Name: Hilo-Rock outcrop complex,35 to 100 percent slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes X No X Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X Remarks: VEGETATION— Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 2 square meters ) %Cover Species? Status Cocos nucifera Number of Dominant Species 1. 5 yes FACU That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Pandanus tectorius 5 yes FAC Total Number of Dominant 3 3. Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species 5. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 66 6% (A/B) 10 =Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Total %Cover of: Multiply by: 2. OBL species x 1 = 3. FACW species x 2= 4. FAC species x 3= 5. FACU species x 4= 1 square meter =Total Cover UPL species x 5= Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) Column Totals: (A) (B) 1 Commelina diffusa(honohono) Yes FAC 95 2. Sphagneticola trilobata(wedelia) 3 No FAC Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. I Irochlna mutica(California grass) 3 No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. x 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6. _ 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0' 7. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain in 8. Remarks or in the delineation report) 101 =Total Cover Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 1. 2 Hydrophytic Vegetation =Total Cover Present? Yes X No Remarks: The sample area was representative of the dry and not saturated zone adjacent to the saturated portions. US Army Corps of Engineers Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region—Version 2.0 SP2 SOIL Sampling Point: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-3" 5yr 2.5/2 Organic on top, root mass. 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: _ Histosol(A1) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ Stratified Layers(A5) _Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Dark Surface(S7) _ Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _ Red Parent Material(F21) Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12) Muck Presence(A8) _ Redox Dark Surface(F6) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _ Redox Depressions(F8) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X Remarks: Project area has lead contaminated soils that preclude handling of soil. Sample point is immidiately upland of the saturated area and is dry and on a slight upslope toward the north. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: (Explain observations in Remarks, if needed.) Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required) Surface Water(Al) Aquatic Fauna(B13) _ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) High Water Table(A2) _ Tilapia Nests(B17) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8) Saturation(A3) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _ Drainage Patterns(B10) Water Marks(B1) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _ Dry-Season Water Table(C2) Sediment Deposits(B2) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Salt Deposits(C5) Drift Deposits(B3) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1) Algal Mat or Crust(B4) _ Thin Muck Surface(C7) _ Geomorphic Position(D2) Iron Deposits(B5) _ Fiddler Crab Burrows(C10)(Guam,CNMI, _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) and American Samoa) _ FAC-Neutral Test(D5) Water-Stained Leaves(B9) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available: Remarks: Sample point is upslope of and borders the saturated sample point (SP1). US Army Corps of Engineers Hawaii and Pacific Islands Region—Version 2.0 U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Form Approved- INTERIM DRAFT RAPID ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK(OHWM) FIELD OMB No.0710-0025 IDENTIFICATION DATA SHEET The proponent agency is Headquarters USACE CECW-CO-R. Expires: 01-31-2025 AGENCY DISCLOSURE NOTICE The public reporting burden for this collection of information,0710-OHWM, is estimated to average 30 minutes per response,including the time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and reviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense,Washington Headquarters Services,at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Project ID#: 4639-01 Site Name:Hakalau Bridge Date and Time: 3/16/23 7:30 AM Location(lat/long):Transect 1. 19.899560°N 155.129238°W Investigator(s):Terrell Erickson and Shahin Ansari Step 1 Site overview from remote and online resources Describe land use and flow conditions from online resources. Check boxes for online resources used to evaluate site: Were there any recent extreme events(floods or drought)? 7 gage data nLiDAR 7geologic maps Project Area is within the steep hillsides of Hakalau Gulch which was site of old sugar plantation and mill and is now an active recrcarronal site.llakalau is a perennial stream with non-channelized bed and banks.But ary land use maps the climatic data FX satellite Imag reach within the Project Area has a reinforced concrete ford toward the western/upstream end and there are also concrete bridge footings in the stream bed.Two weeks before the sunny this area received heavy rains (NWS 20231.Per the USGS Water Data(2023)r axer the twa-day survey period arc swam extdbited normal aerial photos 7 topographic maps Other: low flows.The Project Area did not experience any recent extreme flood or drought events. Step 2 Site conditions during field assessment. First look for changes in channel shape,depositional and erosional features,and changes in vegetation and sediment type,size,density,and distribution. Make note of natural or man-made disturbances that would affect flow and channel form,such as bridges,riprap,landslides, rockfalls etc. Low flows in stream at time of survey_Transect is located at the lowest/eastern most reach of the stream just before it enters the Pacific Ocean.There is a gravel bar/berm about 120 feet downstream of this transect.There is a concrete ford about 650 feet upstream.Both right and left banks slope gently to water.The left bank functions as a trail for people accessing the ocean. Step 3 Check the boxes next to the indicators used to identify the location of the OHWM. OHWM is at a transition point,therefore some indicators that are used to determine location may be just below and above the OHWM. From the drop-down menu next to each indicator,select the appropriate location of the indicator by selecting either just below'b',at'x',or just above'a'the OHWM. Go to page 2 to describe overall rationale for location of OHWM,write any additional observations,and to attach a photo log. Geomorphic indicators n Break in slope: x Channel bar: b erosional bedload indicators n (e.g.,obstacle marks,scour, non the bank: X shelving(berms)on bar:a smoothing,etc.) nSecondary channels: n undercut bank: nX unvegetated:b vegetation transition Sediment indicators 7 valley bottom:x I/\I(go to veg.indicators)b n Soil development: n Other: n X sediment transition (go to sed.indicators)b X Changes in character of soil:x 7 Shelvin a F upper limit of deposition b g' I/\I on bar: Mudcracks: Xshelf at top of bank:a Instream bedforms and other Changes in particle-sized /�I bedload transport evidence: X distribution: n natural levee: deposition bedload indicators n (e.g.,imbricated clasts, nX transition from gravel to cobble man-made berms or levees: gravel sheets, etc.) n bedforms(e.g., upper limit of sand-sized particles other 5 pools, b berms: X riffles,steps,etc.): silt deposits: Vegetation Indicators XChange in vegetation type Exposed roots below and/or density: x (orbs to: intact soil layer: Check the appropriate boxes and select graminoids to: Ancillary indicators the general vegetation change(e.g., graminoids to woody shrubs).Describe woody Wracking presence of the vegetation transition looking from shrubs to: organic litter: the middle of the channel,up the deciduous 13-< Presence of large wood: x banks,and into the floodplain. trees to: Leaf litter disturbed or coniferous I/VI washed away: b � vegetation trees to: I/�I graminoids absent to: X Vegetation matted down b n Water staining: moss to: and/or bent: Weathered clasts or bedrock: Other observed indicators? Describe: There is destruction of vegetation at the OHWM level.Litter/Debris and driftwood also accumulated at the OHWM level.Vegetation changed from either graminoids(left bank)or forbs and trees(right bank)above OHWM to being absent below OHWM.On the left bank sediment transitioned from fine gravel to cobble but was mostly cobbles on the right bank. ENG FORM 6250, DEC 2022 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 4 Project ID#: 4639-01 Step 4 Is additional information needed to support this determination? n Yes n No If yes,describe and attach information to datasheet: National Weather Service (2023) and USGS Water Data (2023) [USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl] Step 5 Describe rationale for location of OHWM OHWM level selected where either vegetation destruction and/or or deposition of debris and drift wood indicators were present. Transect representative of the lowermost reach of the stream in the Project Area overlapping the pool of water before the gravel bar (just outside the Project boundary) Additional observations or notes Transect is 169 feet wide. Plants above the OHWM were trees: Pandanus tectorius (FAC) and Hibiscus tiliaceus (NI); fern: Diplazium esculentum(FACW); herbs: Persicaria chinensis (NI) and Sphagneticola trilobata (FAC); and grasses: Megathyrsus maximus. Attach a photo log of the site.Use the table below,or attach separately. Photo log attached? n Yes n No If no,explain why not: See Appendix D List photographs and include descriptions in the table below. Number photographs in the order that they are taken.Attach photographs and include annotations of features. Photo Photograph description Number Appendix D, 18 Looking north from the right bank toward the left bank. Presence of drift wood(at and above),destruction of vegetation(below) Appendix D, 19 Looking south at the right bank.Sorting from cobbles to fine sediment(below)and collecting of drift wood and debris. Appendix D,20 Looking east at right bank;OHWM level indicators—drift wood(at),sediment sorting(below). ENG FORM 6250,DEC 2022 Page 2 of 4 U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Form Approved- INTERIM DRAFT RAPID ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK(OHWM) FIELD OMB No.0710-0025 IDENTIFICATION DATA SHEET The proponent agency is Headquarters USACE CECW-CO-R. Expires: 01-31-2025 AGENCY DISCLOSURE NOTICE The public reporting burden for this collection of information,0710-OHWM, is estimated to average 30 minutes per response,including the time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and reviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense,Washington Headquarters Services,at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Project ID#: 4639-01 Site Name:Hakalau Bridge,Hawaii Date and Time: 3/16/23 9:25 AM Location(lat/long):Transect 2 (19.899161°N 155.129903°W) Investigator(s):Terrell Erickson and Shahin Ansari Step 1 Site overview from remote and online resources Describe land use and flow conditions from online resources. Check boxes for online resources used to evaluate site: Were there any recent extreme events(floods or drought)? gage data LiDAR n geologic maps Project Area is within the steep hillsides ofBakal.Gulch which was site ofold sugar plantation and mill and is now an active reereatronet rite.llakalau is a perennial stream with non-channelized bed and banks.But the climatic data FX satellite imagery Mand use maps reach within the Project Area has areurforcedconcrete ford toward the westerrdupsheamend and there are also concrete bridge footings in the stream bed.Two weeks before the survey this area received heavy rains (NWS 20231.Per the USGS Water Data(2023);over the in o-day survey period dee stream exhibited normal aerial photos 7 topographic maps nOther: low flows.The Project Area did notexpeiienceartyrecentexhemefloodordraughtevents. Step 2 Site conditions during field assessment. First look for changes in channel shape,depositional and erosional features,and changes in vegetation and sediment type,size,density,and distribution. Make note of natural or man-made disturbances that would affect flow and channel form,such as bridges,riprap,landslides, rockfalls etc. Low flows in stream on day of survey.This transect/site is about 405 feet below the concrete ford and 375 feet above the gravel/sand bar.The concrete footings of the bridge are less than 100 feet downstream from here. The channel is straight with more erosion evident on the right bank(facing down stream) Step 3 Check the boxes next to the indicators used to identify the location of the OHWM. OHWM is at a transition point,therefore some indicators that are used to determine location may be just below and above the OHWM. From the drop-down menu next to each indicator,select the appropriate location of the indicator by selecting either just below'b',at'x',or just above'a'the OHWM. Go to page 2 to describe overall rationale for location of OHWM,write any additional observations,and to attach a photo log. Geomorphic Break in slope: x indicators i5 1 � Channel bar: b erosional bedload indicators n (e.g.,obstacle marks,scour, non the bank: shelving(berms)on bar: smoothing,etc.) � n Secondary channels: I/ undercut bank:bn unvegetated: vegetation transition Sediment indicators n valley bottom: n(go to veg.indicators) n Soil development: sediment transition Other: I/VI(go to sed.indicators)b X_ Changes in character of soil:b 7 Shelving: a n upper limit of deposition on bar: Mudcracks: Xshelf at top of bank:a Instream bedforms and other Changes in particle-sized I/�I bedload transport evidence: 7 distribution: n natural levee: deposition bedload indicators � n (e.g.,imbricated clasts, 1/�Itransition from silt to cobble man-made berms or levees: gravel sheets, etc.) nn e. n upper limit of sand-sized particles other ( g.,pools, b berms: riffles,steps,etc.): n silt deposits: Vegetation Indicators XChange in vegetation type n Exposed roots below and/or density: x (orbs to: I intact soil layer: x Check the appropriate boxes and select graminoids to: Ancillary indicators the general vegetation change(e.g., graminoids to woody shrubs).Describe woody Wracking presence of the vegetation transition looking from shrubs to: organic litter: the middle of the channel,up the n deciduous 13-< Presence of large wood: b banks,and into the floodplain. trees to: � Leaf litter disturbed or i " l b coniferous washed away: nvegetation trees to: absent to: graminoids 7 Vegetation matted down n Water staining: In n moss to: and/or bent: Weathered clasts or bedrock: Other observed indicators? Describe: There is more undercutting of the bank with exposed roots below intact soil on the left bank(viewing downstream)than on the right bank.There is a vertical bank on top of shelf on the left side.Top of both banks are heavily vegetated with 100 percent cover. ENG FORM 6250, DEC 2022 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 4 Project ID#: 4639-01 Step 4 Is additional information needed to support this determination? n Yes n No If yes,describe and attach information to datasheet: National Weather Service (2023) and USGS Water data. 2023 [USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl] Step 5 Describe rationale for location of OHWM On right side the OHWM level was chosen where there is undercut in the bank with exposed roots below intact soil layer. On left side the OHWM level chosen where either the undercut in the bank was visible or there was matted down and bent vegetation and/or deposition of debris and drift wood. Transect is representative of stretch of the reach just downstream of the rock island where the flows around the island merge and form a single channel(again) Additional observations or notes Vegetation on both banks is predominantly composed of Megathyrsus maximus [FAC]. Attach a photo log of the site.Use the table below,or attach separately. Photo log attached? n Yes n No If no,explain why not: List photographs and include descriptions in the table below. Number photographs in the order that they are taken.Attach photographs and include annotations of features. Photo Photograph description Number Appendix D,21 Looking south at right bank;break in bank(at),exposed roots below intact soil layer(below). Appendix D,22 Looking north at left bank from the right bank. break in slope and matted down and destroyed vegetation(below) ENG FORM 6250,DEC 2022 Page 2 of 4 U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Form Approved- INTERIM DRAFT RAPID ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK(OHWM) FIELD OMB No.0710-0025 IDENTIFICATION DATA SHEET The proponent agency is Headquarters USACE CECW-CO-R. Expires: 01-31-2025 AGENCY DISCLOSURE NOTICE The public reporting burden for this collection of information,0710-OHWM, is estimated to average 30 minutes per response,including the time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and reviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense,Washington Headquarters Services,at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Project ID#: 4639-01 Site Name:Hakalau Bridge,Hawaii Date and Time: 3/17/23 9:34 AM Location(lat/long):Transect 3 [19.898165°N 155.130195°W] Investigator(s):Terrell Erickson and Shahin Ansari Step 1 Site overview from remote and online resources Describe land use and flow conditions from online resources. Check boxes for online resources used to evaluate site: Were there any recent extreme events(floods or drought)? gage data LiDAR n geologic maps Project Area is within the steep hillsides ofBakal.Gulch which was site ofold sugar plantation and mill and is now an active reetuatronet rite.llakalau is a perennial stream with non-channelized bed and banks.But ery the climatic data FX satellite Imag Mand use maps reach within the PrajectArea has areinforcedconcrete ford toward the westerrdupsheamend and there are also concrete bridge footings in the stream bed.Two weeks before the survey this area received heavy tains (NWS 20231.Per the USGS Water Data(20231:over the bvo-day survey period the stream extdbitcd notal aerial photos 7 topographic maps n Other: low flows.The Project Area did notexperienceartyrecentexhemefloodordraughtevents. Step 2 Site conditions during field assessment. First look for changes in channel shape,depositional and erosional features,and changes in vegetation and sediment type,size,density,and distribution. Make note of natural or man-made disturbances that would affect flow and channel form,such as bridges,riprap,landslides, rockfalls etc. Ordinary low flows were observed on survey day.This transect/site is below the concrete ford.There is a densely vegetated rock island in the middle of the stream channel below the ford.The stream splits right below the ford,going around this island.This ford and a rock island affect stream flow at this site. Step 3 Check the boxes next to the indicators used to identify the location of the OHWM. OHWM is at a transition point,therefore some indicators that are used to determine location may be just below and above the OHWM. From the drop-down menu next to each indicator,select the appropriate location of the indicator by selecting either just below'b',at'x',or just above'a'the OHWM. Go to page 2 to describe overall rationale for location of OHWM,write any additional observations,and to attach a photo log. Geomorphic indicators n Break in slope: a Channel bar: h erosional bedload indicators n (e.g.,obstacle marks,scour,x non the bank: shelving(berms)on bar: smoothing,etc.) nSecondary channels: n undercut bank:b n unvegetated: �vegetation transition Sediment indicators n valley bottom: (go to veg.indicators)a n Soil development: sedimitio Other: I/VI(go to sed.enttransindicatorsn )b X Changes in character of soil:b 7 Shelvin a upper limit of deposition x g' /\I on bar: Mudcracks: X shelf at top of bank:a17 Instream bedforms and other b Changes in particle-sized I/�I bedload transport evidence: 7 distribution: n natural levee: deposition bedload indicators n (e.g.,imbricated clasts, nX transition from cobble to silt man-made berms or levees: gravel sheets, etc.) n bedforms e. n upper limit of sand-sized particles other ( g.,pools, b berms: riffles,steps,etc.): n silt deposits: Vegetation Indicators Change in vegetation type X b n Exposed roots below and/or density: fortis to: n intact soil layer: b Check the appropriate boxes and select graminoids to: Ancillary indicators the general vegetation change(e.g., graminoids to woody shrubs).Describe woody Wracking presence of x the vegetation transition looking from shrubs to: I/VI organic litter: the middle of the channel,up the n deciduous n Presence of large wood: banks,and into the floodplain. trees to: � Leaf litter disturbed or In l b coniferous washed away: nvegetation trees to: absent to: graminoids 7 Vegetation matted down b n Water staining: In n moss to: and/or bent: Weathered clasts or bedrock: Other observed indicators? Describe: Both banks had> 60% slope. Undercutting of bank was a stronger indicator or right than the left bank. On left bank sediment sorted from boulders to cobbles to a mix of gravel and silt. ENG FORM 6250, DEC 2022 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 4 Project ID#: 4639-01 Step 4 Is additional information needed to support this determination? n Yes n No If yes,describe and attach information to datasheet: National Weather Service (2023) and USGS Water data. 2023 [USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl] Step 5 Describe rationale for location of OHWM On the left bank the OHWM was chosen primarily based on matted down vegetation and washed away debris and litter at and below the high water mark. On the right side the OHWM indicator was mainly the undercut bank below soil layer with exposed roots followed by obstruction of vegetation and debris behind tree trunks at the high water mark level. Additional observations or notes Both upper banks were heavily vegetated predominantly with a mix of grasses, forbs, and trees. The island in the channel was also heavily vegetated. Species include Spathodea campanulata(FACU), Falcataria moluccana (FACU), Diplazium esculentum(FACW), Persicaria chinensis (NI), and Epiprenmum pinnatum (FAC). Attach a photo log of the site.Use the table below,or attach separately. Photo log attached? n Yes n No If no,explain why not: See Appendix D List photographs and include descriptions in the table below. Number photographs in the order that they are taken.Attach photographs and include annotations of features. Photo Photograph description Number Appendix D, 23 Aerial view of transect 3 location right below the concrete ford and with vegetated rock island in center of channel. Appendix D, 24 Looking upstream(west)at left bank.OHWM indicator—destroyed and matted down vegetation(below). Appendix D, 25 Looking south at right bank.OHWM indicator—cut in bank(at)and matted down vegetation(below). Appendix D, 26 Looking northwest from the right bank toward the rock island and the concrete ford. ENG FORM 6250,DEC 2022 Page 2 of 4 U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Form Approved- INTERIM DRAFT RAPID ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK(OHWM) FIELD OMB No.0710-0025 IDENTIFICATION DATA SHEET The proponent agency is Headquarters USACE CECW-CO-R. Expires: 01-31-2025 AGENCY DISCLOSURE NOTICE The public reporting burden for this collection of information,0710-OHWM, is estimated to average 30 minutes per response,including the time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and reviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense,Washington Headquarters Services,at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil.Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Project ID#: 4639-01 Site Name:Hakalau Bridge,Hawaii Date and Time: 3/17/23 10:32 AM Location(lat/long):Transect 4(19.8984336°N 155.1307171°W) Investigator(s):Shahin Ansari and Terrell Erickson Step 1 Site overview from remote and online resources Describe land use and flow conditions from online resources. Check boxes for online resources used to evaluate site: Were there any recent extreme events(floods or drought)? Xgage data LiDAR nery geologic maps Project Area is within the steep hillsides ofBakalau Gulch which was site of old sugar plantation and mill and is now an active recreational site.llakalau is a perennial stream with non-chaized bed and banks.But the climatic data FX satellite Imag Mand use maps reach within the Pioject Area has a reinforced concrete ford toward the western/upstream end and there are also concrete bridge footings in the stream bed.Two weeks before the survey this area received heavy rains (NWS 20231.Per the USGS Water Data(2023P over the two-day survey period the stream exhibited normal aerial photos 7 topographic maps nOther: low flows.The Project Area did not experience any recent extreme flood or drought events. Step 2 Site conditions during field assessment. First look for changes in channel shape,depositional and erosional features,and changes in vegetation and sediment type,size,density,and distribution. Make note of natural or man-made disturbances that would affect flow and channel form,such as bridges,riprap,landslides, rockfalls etc. This transect/site is just upstream of the concrete ford and the old mill road at the western most portion of the Project Area.There are several small vegetated cock islands in the channel.The stream bifurcates at the island.the northern folk flows over the ford and the southern fork flows through rho ford culvert.The ford crossing below affects flow as more ponding/pooling occurs from the ford with no riffles or waterfalls.Transect is left bankJright bank looking toward the ocean(downstream). Step 3 Check the boxes next to the indicators used to identify the location of the OHWM. OHWM is at a transition point,therefore some indicators that are used to determine location may be just below and above the OHWM. From the drop-down menu next to each indicator,select the appropriate location of the indicator by selecting either just below'b',at'x',or just above'a'the OHWM. Go to page 2 to describe overall rationale for location of OHWM,write any additional observations,and to attach a photo log. Geomorphic indicators 7 Break in slope: x Channel bar: b erosional bedload indicators (e.g.,obstacle marks,scour,x non the bank: X shelving(berms)on barb smoothing,etc.) nSecondary channels: 7 undercut bank:b n unvegetated: Fvegetation transition Sediment indicators n valley bottom: (go to veg.indicators)b n Soil development: Other: n sediment transition (go to sed.indicators) Changes in character of soil: Shelving: n upper limit of deposition on bar: Mudcracks: shelf at top of bank: Instream bedforms and other b Changes in particle-sized bedload transport evidence: natural levee: deposition bedload indicators distribution: n (e.g.,imbricated clasts, transition from to man-made berms or levees: gravel sheets, etc.) n bedforms(e.g., n upper limit of sand-sized particles other pools, b berms: X riffles,steps,etc.): n silt deposits: Vegetation Indicators Change in vegetation typeb X n Exposed roots below and/or density: fortis to: n intact soil layer: b Check the appropriate boxes and select i5 1 graminoids to:woody shrubs Ancillary indicators the general vegetation change(e.g., graminoids to woody shrubs).Describe woody Wracking presence of a the vegetation transition looking from shrubs to: I/VI organic litter: the middle of the channel,up the n deciduous n Presence of large wood: banks,and into the floodplain. trees to: Leaf litter disturbed or coniferous i " i washed away: b nvegetation n trees to: absent to: 7 Vegetation matted down b n Water staining: moss to: I/VI and/or bent: Weathered clasts or bedrock: Other observed indicators? Describe: Destruction of vegetation below the OHWM. Exposed roots of trees on the left bank below the OHWM. More undercutting of bank on right side compared to left bank. ENG FORM 6250, DEC 2022 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 4 Project ID#: 4639-01 Step 4 Is additional information needed to support this determination? n Yes n No If yes,describe and attach information to datasheet: National Weather Service (2023) and USGS Water data. 2023 [USGS 16717700 Hakalau Strean nr alt 1300 feet amsl] Step 5 Describe rationale for location of OHWM The OHWM on both banks is just above where vegetation is observed to be destroyed, matted down or bent. On the left bank this elevation is where large exposed hau (Hibiscus tiliaceus)roots are also visible. Additional observations or notes The upper right bank is mostly composed of thick cover of the fern, Diplazium esculentum. The left bank is mostly composed of guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus) and thickets of hau trees on the upper bank. Transect is representative of the uppermost reach of the stream in the Project Area above the concrete ford and overlapping rock island in the stream channel Attach a photo log of the site.Use the table below,or attach separately. Photo log attached? n Yes n No If no,explain why not: See Appendix D List photographs and include descriptions in the table below. Number photographs in the order that they are taken.Attach photographs and include annotations of features. Photo Photograph description Number Appendix D,27 Looking north at the rock island and the concrete ford from where the concrete ford transitions into the old mill access road. Appendix D,28 . Looking west(upstream)at left bank.Break in slope(at),wracking and presence of litter(above), matted down vegetation(below). Appendix D,29 Looking south toward the right bank.OHWM indicator—matted down vegetation(at and below). Appendix D,30 Looking northwest and upstream toward the rocky vegetated island in the center of the stream channel. ENG FORM 6250,DEC 2022 Page 2 of 4 Appendix D. Photographic Documentation of Wetland and OHWM Delineation d , ,' a , , , .. � j ,, . , h a N • „r_-$ *- $yj`}( ` „tl•" .. -.e ;;;44:." l'w '�'',1 "rw,wrR r: """I r }a - w h • .1S ms +,. ,+ar �. ", °A wt SS. S•.9''rr4.l"d •. "M I $ "..r Photo 1. View from Old Mamalaoha Highway toward the Northern Hillside Hakalau Stream flowing in the center of the gulch over the reinforced concrete ford (far left) and under the overhead Hakalau Stream Bridge (far right). The road in the foreground is the old (remnant) access road to the old sugar mill site. $ "x rvt • � /er aC 0� • . , � .- . .' 1 ' _ ; .i-,-1: i ' 6.v_ r • • .' '..c..":1 .w ,1 iA tr }.r K, �. } �, - j r'� fipL `�: 7 ...„...0,.. .„, .x- ,..04.,, ,. ..„, ,,,. ,.. r' Ji r 1 !A ) moi } lk • ,, f \..' iii,1- j d ,, i. -t./ * • k':'‘'''fk; r ::'''-: ' - 't71? :11i\Niki-A,.!? -;?-`1,,,..*:• +a '' ip .. � . r , N i; 't / � A Wit,s k. , C,+ --e :a - n / � - a. ....,gym. .r e 'u _ .:` " . it AO- t''' �. 1'. k. 4 mo _ ,,r; . F.:,,.. l .L V L psi Photo 2. Hakalau Gulch was Narrow with the Upper Banks Sharply Rising to Nearly Vertical Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D H.T. Harvey&Associates -1 Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 Hillside Note the footings of the bridge are in the stream bed. View to the north. L r Y6 �-, �'''�s :.y �. '�ex '1 q}JPzyUy4' ' aF R r `�. ' b ,t,. ♦ ,4 t .*ret' 4.' k Y-�.. es w5,5 •N. t _ , '�..- ,,� t ,m it f< \ ' � :'''.:4-,„,':''' , r"8{ ,. ' dtit ti.,"* v. r q, 4'- `r .+ ,i....-„,-....;.. ,os:r{ ` +r w 4"v , .0"J'; "rqi 44,0 44 y��- .t, `fir ? n t 7. ick .«�'G rr, �� ' r'a tw#� Fr' v 4 „t4:0,;-4,4,4=4,- f a .1by,. ,10,,,,,,I..„„ ..,,,,:: :_,;:„.....,.,, �1+ .� 4. ”! � iGl'� C; fit' 7,: .,a�„y 2 4 yc , p„ a 1, ,¢,� ,,„:'\ ,,,4 Ara; 1 ,1/47:c.,,,,, ,,,:_*,,,,, ,,..,,,.,,,,,, '4 ' i. ..f,,,-:..;, . .,,: _, - '.+. :.,'"N-,.I 6i..: t _ i 41e�I-r,c, y6^"'t• r #R i ° y,.,.. 1. ..;,' `fyr/,+ - S{ �,,�.f.�} `6, ro�n?@"y,,�,,„c (, 'T4+ n, . .', ''b�.4.,,.,..,,..4,e,...„, S q, '':""*10.�„ r'"q '-.4,t 4 i. �, � 14 Tr ' 11k,4.3+' t `t.&.„ r^.µti f � �.- '�k3 g.�{r �':„w } ` a+ vti x y S4b4, • , iti 4 N. T :t , k-, ' 4•. .p` `.`Td� It r - �', e. ;., .� �F'"�q r d Y K x *rf ' .- Yjjllyy�� yea. ''�' si,...1 :;,..,..t--.,:.:-,,,,,,,,,, ' rr+. • 1!{. i M fp J .M 1A ,,.„ rjX41.5, 4 v \C 1 .I J' tr . - ,. k% H ddlidOt t 1 ��4,:C”{yy \, Z *,(01 , y y/ .tri . J , 402 Photo 3. At the Stream Mouth the Hakalau Stream Backs Up Against a Gravel Bar(Red Arrow), Forming a Deep Pool and Is Above the Mean High Water Mark Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D 2 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 • 'N \ '."jb,\1,=•y ` /..'z' 'dra rqtr "!�' • 1'f „ '41(7w; �I�'' -P':'�l' F''y0 *"T�1k�i kJ{'a ° ...Jrhk"4 a- -4 v ' a.vii _ . Y • 4 • � 1 , `• ` r• • r ' � � : : t } • `Kr.-.a;4 .4 . . f . t ,, Ir . ' . /! ^ .•:" b, � 4i /i • i.( " •- � ` + ', .t'1 l�' •0.1".4 1,-.1-- 7i �:y ! . y , maqbe' ' '�'i ilk "vt-fi. T , i. 4. � . Ly '.F G _ 4J 4. st ItopiNN rye, ` � ' 1' ' rl'� '`ms'",',.k.. y ` •. ''�. . 'tr.,' 4 - }.::�4 ' "; ' '' do 17. -- * ,{ 1 ` ` �� 41 4 ' Cy 4„, ,v,` ,. Vi TF E ,*, J '_1 g,,, M1 r -- s i''''' fi... y,, ''\4s Zr _A Photo 4. Hakalau Stream Flowing Over the Reinforced Concrete Ford Situated in the Western Side of the Project Area Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-3 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 r° ren.„v m fi�'r.i,4 �n ....it °" -� t r 1 ro pP ' M it 1 ' 'n. n aim lit ,1$ YY,may'.[" �y e(� �p� r� f . P 1 Nm 4 t'1 ° 4 iiy "'k V' 'ate - ° �4 1� • ������AAA y` � 14 yy / my e, ' A.r. -0; ,-, - i, w. - wF r. °C4, ii 4, I 9 �. i. V Ti' Y -1• e t. k. ,� 4 id , err'tl.'t". .f +`ry �" =p•, `. "� i''''' '. : 5 " ', ' 1,4 4 44 r a ' 1 ' It — ry 1 ' r' + `rl „1 �+ v h. 1" v 7 , u � 1"o.�'% e. t i } F T . l f w v°h . � 11M11 YYa * teN 4 T ... p A e n ." tiWr!RIr ... �' .. "x — .eims ... '-x r47sn . ' �� , 4 a " e e e .. x. + r� ' • M e.. ■ B t : �1h k r + flu pp k. Photo 5. Ponded Stretch (Red Arrow) of the Old Mill Access Road in the Southern Portion of the Project Area Blue arrow points to the eastern end of the ditch where it curves toward the stream bank and terminates close to this old mill access road. View from Old Mamalaoha Highway on top of the southern hillside looking down and north. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D_4 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 "i.f yuk {.rt.,-.0 ''''''ii wy i'tirM par f I a�C SM d.; r.. 3 ' ''\°• L.�61a�� 1 y .. �r r. r; r. , • �, 4.` x ' "�' b y l; ,'11 ;k . , i^ r ! '`,+ YF i t " ., i �.. rs• y ek:•"--;,'-;,..4`,7,-,.,. F fr t' r `'• m' a „,..lat:':_. % t � v . N ! ! b 1'.1-_,''.1.. P d 4 b & wr., 1sNb • rr _'' ,,.l I. r i cy.• - �? x 1 n. r !r.' A i" P l'i p / -''s rr "5 -i A , �;r rrw ;as r'!•.i t4.. ti4xG� ",y - r " tr t$'d' f @ I, �y?,r.•� `'` _A rr,t ,r;-2—; +�v r.A.v tiro ',-,,, *x.. bii r ���""' ^t` ? t.,cal 4 ',„,• 5:. f r , °.• *€*' +i b i, r'�, r"•,# `fig•d a' r 1 f r r" - k;"rya ....`..",W:'E" ,. Photo 6. Ponded Portion of the Old Mill Access Road View to the west. The ditch (blue arrow) terminates to the south (left) of the ponded road. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-5 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 fiti ti ,} •�•, I - tr P� Ir �• ,, 1� y� "'•r al' rffe4 ,% a 1 ,a �,q�7i re 4 11 ,• , '1. -'x }' 9 • i7 f` , �. v S+1, a ypd11_ '. � a`,(al� i + n �. � :y � •r�},:,i1 -tt,y l 7 'WY'-t,"'.' � 4 .{ 1 ,r r-N�. 3 1'.'r a 1 1 r A; V I IiI ,Sf r'.'I ryil r y .r 1 #74 ry 4-. Ws r ,,.. k,x5r !�.7 q A.a+it2. t :g r,Ll +t F ,.S [r. rV `.,"+°-- R J",it' 3 I'z y., }'• lir -i: a n •1 4 .. ...,....-.... .1.01%.,.......,,,,,. � 6 fr- t. �'h ','4.-- '. 4, -.-:, ' iar l,.i, '. I " }, �tl rf 4 },k j,4 1i � r f d ' r i 't1 +r, f •.. Jay � . • r r f 1' ., rl I ��Y"" it }}at !"�Lb ^mow i..�d nk Y: a � Y( ° x'14 .. Ir ._'•'`• 4 4 7 +': 1�� ".: - ! ^ �i 1-r r p�.! t. t. r, �: I .. Or I. J , r I� Ila �q.t._ I .: �. r y' ! t 5 n k y l ,.! : hf. L"1krnr:L a r`. -''. + ga - *I . n1 ii w' ✓ Y $ Yet I YF. 5 -;� r• �, �'} ' s• �� , ,,, n__ .-4° _ w. .L IIS,- i".. Ire r'"- 4 K 4 •-'1-4,- I �r 41 ,, Ir Wf 3 r { P}.,�_s3_"^ . a-7�=•'I �d c 'I . f . / 4 ". .'`tI•' } . .0"aaFu ��_Y"e'ft'iti. 4 �• fr '. '"' '7"---r` 5 k .afi '`1_ < rf � ' :��r1JT} nMr' iT " '!S > : ' ayeax: a'a'•'Y "� op ,,,,,, ,,., • ,Lr.fr, "- .--"r"— "( terV �t Il .. x"lb:. a� ,7'. I . I ,I .4"-,•• ° e '15'* T S�, , . I ,, 4- nrf . , •• `fiy.. •,Iy .Pi '/ -,.-1 .,, r ' ','" fL v • y., , l -1 NyN lY .- 'Lw r I 6 ' . 0. 6e - , f .S. 5 �k e -4)1i , ) 4 yx `"r a ., y . "'rte,,. •,.-sx+. rr ..._ _ Photo 7. View toward the Ditch (Blue Arrow) on the Southern Side of the Ponded Road Old Mamalaoha Highway seen in the background (top left, white arrow) above the southern hillside. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D 6 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 ,; `,. � 4 y 1 1' Y 1 o F s'' w �k ..1 r.1 "`Mr%"'.1-1,1.A....., %n 7 , '' J'41g t I�l ,�,.{}�y 1„1 ,h1 11 4 .:.. « .":1.' PrV .- ' i' .� "'aib f sr fh .,Ir qji M•�•. , • ,t!''',( 4 1 1. 'to* }z .yy . ! -7.--.::".".,,i,v 'R �.!f 1 rf,',li r 46, t'.,'1',';''..1'1 g _ i Re �14'C� r .mo - s- f is f T. • a ,,• 1 A4 ..,int,.. 1,-% '' it'' /1„,'",'J.t., .. -i, , J _ I' ;y w Photo 8. View to the North from the Ditch (Blue Arrow)toward the Ponded Road and the Stream Bank(Now Seen Here) Northern hillside in the background. jite,16L4 11 11' �'�,+'C�d, f. •� �,.,,�, .�'�'. .e •a y � e� A �� 4,111r,,,, wo��k r � 'M!y. :,/„kms at • xi"► c I= •4 Jy ++. �- 7 ;rrw • .� fit ...144* f... r , � iii -•,,,, - v_ A� l . yGm f r '�" E :" rti �# 1 .,. u.fir AY Z;; ', ' l . '" ' • ,'r".-.4.:11' iia en' "'r,-. -a ... Iso s ,.I - Y- r � ,� ..F p ,yy x{j 4 •Wry!"t ;.� '�.',7 `.. "N•�'s # �r Y: �Sr + ✓ rz '� y�., F x• ter" ' o �T, ` • -� 'L v•••:...,Yi- "may,,, ----r- E,� Yom., r'� "� V �. •� 7 �, � f/ ' _7�, .'' I " Asa ,.E ti 7. '0 C! r• tir s Yry. . • asp : '. .li .4r,„,:~� *.. p S' C �,a- •A l 1;�, a�--- t4. ,,...c,p4Aot _oh- -,, Z4-p, .'4h ��� i fes r yflit - 1 � !!`M. 444, h"" ..r'y , fir-k ; 44., ,s; rt•, 711ilir:v '�,1 vim�', tit,:. 1*; �. :_--'-'141:rii .� .I.�$,'fie -� � � '� r p�y�..; �'9� �G 4 "� 1� r - 4.; .k.:._ ,i,' ' Ar \ , Photo 9. Close Up of the Water in the Ditch Dominated with Obligate-Status Water Smartweed (Persicaria punctate) and Surrounded with Facultative Wet-Status Paca Ferns (Dip um esculentum) Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D H.T. Harvey&Associates -7 Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 ¶ j; r t N -. , t a } g 416. O y1 " ��_ 3 O C 3 O F L.4 i -' ce H m O i r ° a 0 . ` Nt � z 3 = t y_ _-,-,--E--try I C s . r a c 5 .- `'Fi nvr,„ye 1!J "- 0 U r t , r N e,44.1 I.. p{i C a Pl" • ` t L N O ^r it _ O a to '` • •_ yN U h tN ` ' ri* , ateot . -. 0 * a E E O. . N . ' ,, .i Y_ .;y a =.N y .0'14*,,, N) 2 t i 1',",, 1• t ty. ' 1 iA.� . , a a . ,,. d w� '' ,k .* ' w a E O N y q- 00 t :r• � ' , R ' O 3 O Q �� " « ° a O H . s lNr.' 4• # y. H Tl�, Aye a) 4� b, t I- a Lu , ar fir` ,y O .?aka ,�- .,',^t % -, �G P # _ s O U it _ .� N O N . .• ,,- _. .-c„,,,, ,..:.., A t„,.., • 3 t ....„ , . • } d '. - ,.., ,,,,,,...,.., .• . _a 9 fr. ' w 2 �”oitm N y , f, l: t ,, d 0 . g GC ra Y ar40 a0'N'i ".1.1....','.'s,.-',..';'-•' ' . d -c"• 411, D-8 ' Aw, N iivi ,.:ii. r, tr , ___ .., 1 i _\wr.itvkv,iii : i .• 4..Alk : ,sr,i ty ti,, ,...-. .; :. a 1 ,v. s. , 'I, i / -- it, •,. : 1*.i 4 1 i 10!"10-* •tr ' , I , ' % . Ili " 'I .a / 1 � I. �•,.. �• �, "* a • ,"►'a may" / �I i .- r " 1 t‘k r4.4, , fit•,. ! ,i. :: .,,; I ti; T' �' '�A/ • • l b`i' ° :' Zr';‘,: ....„ .II.. .vi 4,4„, . - -. t )0, 1 f 1!1 r ' >,_ _ ...24P:v6,1'. .•. lit, ..1, --. . -,s474,-., i•‘ '' . fk ,,,, ! .,., t...., ., .:kr-'..,it. 1 1. . • a 1,1 i ' 1' '''''.1‘ / 4 1 fr liffli*f.1/44 • 1 4 IN 11;x ' i►.: ' h . M 1.. . i' t illp307 �: 4 441Yili,.111. A% iv 4 `.�. ,. ts' „• j i NSA 14. t • \ 1 4• i� SP y A ' -'E '`• Photo 13. Western End of the Ditch Estimated at the End of the Row of Banana Trees Seen from the Old Mamalaoha Highway on Top of the Southern Hillside 41111111114t I, r I }I u I , , t 4•y� +' ' 'NAY fierl ', 4 [ A "fir '• NI , '..''',. ' 4 • •:15 ,N. , I . . ..' --4, I'l 1111,40Pir. .V1114 ' lit Li. ..,0„,,,...J.ici.x .......nr,.. , , .:. , ,,:4,.. , ....',,,t,,.;, ..,„ ,, 1 . ie, . .......uomi,,,,.,... . Ai . ,.. iip-4_,wit_ ,.......,..1, Photo 14. Western End of the Ditch Estimated at the End of the Row of Banana Trees Seen from the Old Mill Access Road in the Gulch Bottom Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-1 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 `� 1 ! 'ri- , , . -.� f; � "fir[ N1 }i , ,,,,,t� 4 , ,, ,. a. !: 1, �,\0 4 ` ` • 1 Y a , 40 2,..,. . , 7 ,_7-. t.,T---:,----- ' , ti ,t. 7-----:',) )-,--' �''� '/�' • t7 _ +Y�\ ti I �� y ,. TSI ,=z ,.,aQ` \-, .i` 4 �^ r ",rT { i it t=AI j Photo 15. SP1. Saturated soils. Mucky peat Histic Epipedon on restrictive layer at three inches. Vegetation dominated by FAC wedelia, FACW honohono, and FACW California grass. yAf(f�' ypi)i , 11114 t r" 1 ., ,t.� I... Ei+M/ tr .--.. _5 , ms' s . '/ , • r!' y . Photo 16. SP2. Upland point in dry unsaturated soils. Vegetation dominated by FAC wedelia plants mixed with upland status guinea grass Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-2 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 v'' 4 -7- - k 5. ...., . , :i .., , y.4.::‘,.,..-A,j.„.i.;4, ,••' - • -- - 41, It,' '''''' ':.: illi' . . � - � '`►f�" "-- Photo 17. Aquis conditions in the ponded old mill access road with obligate water smartweed (Persicaria punctate) and aquatic fauna—tadpole and mosquito fish (Gambusia sp.) Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D_3 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 $... y' , . -AA,T- s s+ " • .ai } ', - % ' .' A' fp0h- " k * I• 17N•7- ~11{ r 4 . .21' 4e .i/f • -41!'°+'" • {'YWMI _ l li,. y d I� tlk rot yr ,yJ p �"• 1 �r.. *IL '. xy ir 7- tiMaF, . ,_ w f " • t� r Vit" t+ Ff ". P , A. d ' *. iP T `f.Pa 1 s t 'V _" ...., „Iv 30 L,'. .;,43.,.,,,..00,„4.,),114......f4V-J„:,',":4, ..7 Ili,•...,: ,,. r,,i. ' 'ai.r.4...4. - t .'.r", „ .,,,,,„:', ,," -,t,'4. ;,,,."'`ks —..., I , ' , - '' ..iiiii:..!_'.... .1" ,.P,... / 1 °'...' iit:-ie't ` , illot.:' .,,,,: 'Vb., triLl ' ,-. ..x .,. ' . y •:::-. . .. � * 4 � �^R -, „., 44.'' i . A, "'' ;J. � � � r:w .i Y"� r + ri * p � �• xy ` . ' ''� ' 1r , l•'4r k + , , a �; h ,p� a •Y„ e , ' , Nq 41 ▪ ri /s p 4P. T "I pMlf. tl P' + yam ,,^y ice'^ 1 oli,w+ l ....,V:. :"w r }� q- ;'�'l� l , '4 7M " r, y • ,bp.▪U* l♦ ." 1 f F tl .1,- --1. ' - Y` 1 � y . --..--4 -•,, � ,, 'r , •, ' p�,',PyMy. ' _... -' 514, °' / .,. drh. 44 '{ • rgy." iy p. . r .,f"�. *.,.f.1 k y� A-,. ? "`r., y �`,Str,- �: oli l' ,a , ' ,fir T °7Fr y�"I +�,. r ./..,',,. ..,, ,T.,:" �, , ,4 av q�w' . 5 -, - `� ;I s ale +, 1. e, n +■ '"!' r o ..w p �r .,..,..„.1,.....,...'„„t..7.,..,,,g ..t y ._ .. - "E Flow. r �� y *Y .F ., _ - _ " A. • .• s .+ ifr w ai w y � ir I " a es xY ry r y .. 1 ..�{p'p w � " M I k - d ti" ^ . ` 4a - : , - t iaV# : " � 'h � - • , N .441t * Photo 18. Transect 1. Looking north from the right bank toward the left bank. OHWM indicators Right bank—presence of drift wood (at and above), destruction of vegetation (below). OHWM indicator Left bank(foreground)—sorting of sediment(below) Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-4 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 111 I P ( r '1,11.\ ;Tie"' s ... .'' . .* ' wit.s. .-... :: #I, ' ...41.1 ' ic,,' . 't -phi": ''''-', .' -,. ,s1,',IpP:41: 41.,\,...'‘x-tif.,'-'1, 111.."1 " .: '.1: .1 . .,'. ,4''..-"....4 34,,,„ jil' ft,C30.allirt. i " 174 "f'M 12` 1 ''' °rered 1Y� K�'X51 1 ,,•+ , , . „1, •'''' kii' -" .. T;t: '1--';'. :,''. -r.g.•.,7) Vtli,17,11 f. 4 i •i y * .. : +,_. 111,7 7:4'4 yn , ' 11--)41--' *�`a `x, �{�a if ✓ "f..1-p ` I e . r , e ' * .+ 'Jo. +'�` s, T i a PSPAT 4(1 : W ,ea # {_- '' ry, } �feyr 1A It- ...: -_.• fes'°.L. J�",e jrriri.'.' y++.r. -,2..�Lr yl rrk '� Y + y .4.-ii-o'.-,.".0•43-y.h ,r.:4w {.+ -1.-..- ,rye y'" Y ,-„f',.....-d---1,.7. ii �� �,y, y��_. � .. +.. r a te'• wF "4L-.-,."--. .-'-'•'1:." .,r` �,�., $'' q!. •S'.� f+a ti..F1FF. rf+ ' + ,rte` 41 , ' Y ...,-7 , .. r •� a.rAill. ' .... ,iii... ,, :or 0,014. oz 4!, :tlykoi i4. . .....„ . 1c-A fr "'- Ci_ r Photo 19. Transect 1. Looking south at the rightbank.OHWM indicators—sorting from cobbles to fine sediment(below)and collecting of drift wood and debris(at and above) Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-5 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 • .. Gravel/sand bar • . Pool against • • the gravel lo•• ..".., • t,•:474/417\--',‘••:,,:.,:•:•4",.....:47v,tv•V-7-1,..#4';'44.,,V 4k.; '7. s ,-,--......„_. - . *Le .041ki N Photo 20. Transect 1. Looking east at right bank;OHWM level indicators—drift wood (at),sediment sorting (below). ` - tc \. _ • " 1. -- ,,. ,..;,-..),...:,.....A.,,,,.....r. . .,...:•:,..L,7: ...t.""..114 41,;:., 6: , ; , 11, ,....P..4- ',..t..."2-,-4.-:. ' \ ,,c..,,. , Itiliik* \\ 17141, 74,144401 .,* , ,. 1,-,„„,.,A ok-,..\., -„,,,. N.,,, _.-1„, - i,„ .,-",...;<:.\... . .. liti. , ..) ,•‘ N.NAVIIIiirdliZ-- , „.: , ) , Exposed roots Photo 21. Transect 2. Looking south at right bank;OHWM leveindicators—break in bank(at),exposed roots below intact soil layer(below) Hoko|uuStream Bridge Project— H.T Homey&Associates D-6 T. Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 1 • t• 'Ir, ,.. - i '1 v.,„,t. , - _ A tu 1,,j1„," 2.41t1I'Y-i: ',11. 114,i-' ... elp , , .,; Itt.F.,. -, 4._-itt‘...... - _ . le. , , , .1- pi, ,. ;:..f ■ • . �� „ . W 4. � •ti,'i LM art k f 1 R '� 1 •� ,• Y Ni. ct" R ti ' ,.t x µ 4.a.. Y-+y��,7]r� �M�[ #L • ' • k 4,4 ° ''i. : 7 vA 4' rw . :,{ „ .. yi„ . ,ity y q ., r , 4t,__,,,,.-_‘-: t' • Y _ c- } ,41I it; •;3'f.ii ie-leir .. * -.4;4' *IC% - — : '117,-;*' .... 4t t- , Y, • ''''I ca, t Mk �'-,mom .7 Jk •,'•. =� .• _ .:. AcG +' • - Flow ` - Photo 22. Transect 2. Looking north at left bank from the right bank. OHWM indicator—break in slope and matted down and destroyed vegetation(below) . „,.-7 ,„4,. ..,0,—,..-,,-.4,.0,–„--. 11., "'-'...'' - ev -.1....sw ,-*:3,--i"7.'ilT4F-,"'LAX-• ' ,..ii,•";::, ''12','' m1` w �' 7 ''-- :.'''',•-':,..**. "44 5. 1.d F.” r'rC r t ' '', �� , ,115: , r .. ".*. ;1•." � } `fir^ ,,. 1 j v .,... r• �' 4-t 40 ,�„ t�' 1� 1. .,y.{-:"..i.'" , 4 ,fir ht a..• 1� .;•�`f 1 =� k i.., � ., .. _lc,.. 5�y 4 -, a oftt, =' # * $ bank ---.- sig 1._ t �• 1 YF� a., j, ,may{ �... 1 `" .; 4 ✓,,. { � .4 n+ � � , '-ter � n i..I RigIrt bank -- , I, 7 ''p''ww' je'G'4.F; a:..gat� " :.Z : -k 1w-c '. .. Photo 23. Transect 3. Aerial view of transect 3 location right below the concrete ford and with vegetated rock island in center of channel Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D H.T. Harvey&Associates -7 Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 ''''!:-1,-,*, l'IL '-^ „ ' :441 '',c„,,,,,,,— . :,$,,, „..,,,„).,.,, ,,, _ . , ,... ,,,,,, ‘,. „.„,,•• •,,,, „, ,, : 4,,,,,.. ,„..tv-c;.• 1:1,„ .•,00' • , 4147Tir,„„,,, ..,,,., ,„4.1 -, ,41i/P.„&...•", .4,;,„,i,*, - - ',!.,,, '-,,, —,41.#.,''""i`*. ' Jt.,,,.'' *.-,, ' ';','-et XI' if too Air Photo 24. Transect 3. Looking upstream(west)at left bank. OHWM indicator—destroyed and matted down vegetation(below) 1r _VII roe, L• -,'1,„„711,- -:-•:' ti' ,°- f• ':-,,,,1 is;41 ,;',- j'''' ..„..-- , ivir:-', 1, ,-g-0 , s•---k,:i,1,..4;',. .-4.iise,--4- „-- '.v.co pt Avre.,,,AI•41, r,„,,,..,% .911 ,,1 i 1 lei: Ii...,,r•41...,$_ ' .'',,f... . -'•-. ir. ''r,f,,, 11!,•;y:.•*.;:... .1 „2,110.v......,„:„--- ir ,3 yi4.4 Lk:,,7,L-4z,„, L r,ff.r. ',-4- 4.t-,A4.1.,,,...444,4.44.*L c.,.. 47. It =_:,41.44,,,i,:4 ao .-A-:- 4 ii. ,••••ha; D., -.VA' • -..-- '.-.,- .:4-4.7. '-i-IV.17.---'-‘77.i'r - A . -- 1,,t, -,-.7 .- 01 1 • • _ - � � }� � / ' . �- _ . -' _~ - _^ Photo 25. Transect 3. Looking south at right bank.OHWM indicator—cut in bank(at)and matted down vegetation(below) Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— H T Homey&Associates D-8 �T. Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 ''s.. }t. u V.,.... V y1 II Y " ..I f-,/ �t- -'. .t .:- d L', 1,F Tom, 5^L.. Y �L" ;L~ a4 k F v3'"'1i� L r -7� �yx`�''L '�'p" � � i'. f� .5; AL� 'f , .r:16'ye .4- -- -" " L1 J.'{'7'J� '.' ,1IRS ' . me • `M<. e,•r'S � �i`. �� `,.-2,17r--4:41-. moi ',:l.,f_..-4'�'&� � •_1 a� * ,t1... I ;' +-� � 7!�M.4.-.4- ...7,'-_=, �r• jT .I ML ya i ]�. t� f l 'r r.•._4.eJ, �. F' { } i* \ Ir-' ' iY�' r i. d • a 17 .., a '."--"°•--.;•,-:".'::•-"' �, '�� � r R� � max ' +' � ,r: • to 6, 4 - s.'f; M ..} ", #IA4c=a nIL is " e. " `. ' eta Ford -• ' �` 44,`:1 'T` ' !y ` �� _ L.. . . w" fes. ._ .--"" 'Ir 411111Pjt. Photo 26. Transect 3. Looking northwest from the right bank toward the rock island and the concrete ford. x . :r 3 �o a i ra R ; k .r • y_.,. .{ .� .d_ }dr J4 �1<. .' \4.1 'S •Ml` y rc�''-a '.,. listy j Jam. x f 5 v d01 4. Y ��' { c* w � 1 ..dam rsf r � ,C , x%� i .,.i,-.:1. ''' '‘..: ' •' L ti r d�Aa-• 1j£1 1 1,,,B4 ?7 L lir- , --4,-„,.0--vp. / •-- . -Ir.," - - -- is- iiIIP.4-0- �f�. . : '. Nt 0t 9a"y Photo 27. Just below(east)of Transect 4. Looking north at the rock island and the concrete ford from where the concrete ford transitions into the old mill access road. Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— D-9 March 2024 H.T. Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report 4,,, , .„....-*i„.„.. . . ,4-.-w".: - ' - •t••. '''..,, ' . 'r _____`,,%0-__,L4'.Eyaref:ft-':"' _ . – ''` 0 4. ...,.....1116`.? lekr ..'yt ''''-1 '44 ' -- r-.l'il , ..,- 44.' • ,)'• 10..• ,___.,.., ,,,,,,,..,,, _ --__-------------- - - ., y - . ..):___,,if •,* „, . ...,,,,,.,, ,,;,„ ,_4 — _,,,,,,, ,nyffv., Photo 28. Transect 4. Looking wes (upstream)at left bank. OHWM indicators—break in slope(at), wracking and presence of litter(above) matted down vegetation (below) ~ ^� Photo 29. Transect 4. Looking south toward the right bank.OHWM indicator—matted down vegetation (at and below). Hakalau Stream Bridge Project— H.T.�'l0 T Harvey&Associates Wetland Delineation Technical Report March 2024 „, i,..0,17.04441WMV.:-,.-4 A.; .4'...--ig y.-_,.;.. -.4. •• ‘,,„„..,f ,,,-,,,...”. - , •••,. '-.,11 4.1,.015o*M,._-..."-T4, 4010,Wa4 '4...!!i•,*,-.*•..t.- ,.'' it' ,or.174A.174%;,..t,„ e,., ' ' ,'1'. 'pitv.;tre...•NP' -4-'",-..z.1):'-..• , ''';\:;" -'..4 'V'','Jit''',...1..."-015..r*WIN: ' ' sr,k--.4 C4 i,' '1 'ge,3'd lAh,i 16'04 , : .)‘ /11‘ii*`,1.:•-._`;`,:::, '-, _ •..'"',,V.",,,,,,g. ,..;-; -,"ii; '4 I-llaffir•n;r•Tfik.'"v• •'',V",'.7 .' 7.‘to*_,;.f.--,...f,,,k,,i;, '44 Yt 9)(VA --' 1-.1 ' „... ,,_,c,',,.0.,t:/.r:4•.1.,.,,:„...:.5,...*..t--ti4,r,,4i,e,,--„.4.7,.-t.,w.-:,,,..;.-.I.—.:r:,-.,-,.-,..n4..t,..4.z„its_.,,.'',_-.,,-..g.l,o.i:,t1v.,A-i,9it.,,,-,,1t..,1,_..-.t,r-4,i...4...1t,1,.,,I,'t*ii'1.,,-., .•,,,A9'-,r1,':.._,:t''i':',"'--;,,,,.4',.4',-,,-,W--,1,,.,.,.,.„,,.,,.-4'",,,4-"4'3.,7''r,,",.,,r,,,.',...s' v-•,-•„ s.! 4,t,k, _,o;..,j,,-;,,•,:. ;l5'A,t,3.s,-th..T..vt:i.;01.)l;t.-'o.•;4,'1t.,,1,14t,1i,„I.::.-i-vitr't.1:.jcf,ff ..,- ? I lt ,- c,.P.,, .4,Wk, ,. ,...,....,.' 1 „.... ''-ift .'1, A .,., ...- ` ,,„to 46;;# -,ivithiak,.. :„11,..-,4•,i14\ ,I. ll, 14?'-.`. . t..-'',/. t "Al'IAP":`, -114*‘` ' .4tt 144.7:i'-,,it.-.:,,,..'.•--v•-• . ,, ' '•.. ,••••••• 1,, ••,-.z.v..„-‘,4, --4-4„.,,,,-,...",,, ,,,i.-- -NI\4,,:ittit 1,.. •_. •„,.......p.ii, ) ' .-„,-,,,,' -' \ ';',- . lif ---1. , '...te -,:k.1,4 •.,. ,:... • , lt-v-, • sic -mt.,kx-.4.,..‘ •,,,:,..,-,•.,0, .s.,1 44 . . 4,,- ,.„!,•„„al..., -= ;....-„,-. ' -%:,s' - . --!‘78.2.,•:."....q r' ,4 .. t:t44%?../1.,;4?, ''' . ,-'/.1.:. ..-;,,i . . it ',N. .i.,:i,_''k.' ,54V1C1', %Ill 1 7.`'''...'•..k': i'. iA.'.ei ..',Fh,7,Tr'''''- ' C4 '•'.."'.4311,17:-.4 '! .•.. ik Wir,' .?,7':•.°''”. %,ir ''''1 ! oi,, . , ' ' \....-1, „rt.:ei446,41'../ - .1 w. .:7,-_, ,.. „..- - ,„,,...„-....,_, - :, , ii,g,,, , . .,t),...„4,., ----,_, ,--,,,, . .#4v Till '•-..,--, 2.1r;ift.t.,,k-s. - 4 , ' , ,.' 7e1 C? .'4":•-:17t::4!.•:•,,,•;," •' 't'-;1.'-71-11 ir''‘,.t,',.-oi..-Pki.14,\--,17,?",,,,.:I,''',-, 4.-' • ,”. ' 6t,.. ‘ 1-` ..,. Nz,,,:t,-, ,k;.,.,,,t, 11, , v..' §,,,,, .,-...4-, ..,,-..,,,,----,:._ ..,71.*.i-, .., ,..,lig''''L 1,fil rj..::C:'' .''''',..46',k' \--4$0,g,3;4, el,e• 4%, , /4,"•1-• 't, ''•... ' ce,,it. Ai '1•,....-f"? '''A-A.'••'.t'''l -A'tC'''''''''`A' -,..i-V '',.:Ofi ,-.1 1V11/0;A- ''''*lit $ (7e 4 '• ,A's,• 4. A ','A: .-Ik-i i'', ' - ;i-e..*•-•:;-'4 .,'-,:so,,,,i-• l''''W---',.1 .----."-$:.%,:$-----"'e- ',r-A't.1. ..,, ' til y.,i4hiAiA4hi;.., -',---f-,c4.:.•.-' :A ;- % 11, A,t,--,k.i•k 4,. :- , ii.t -. -.-•";;;,,r,,,'*,. ;-- .----. ...m-.---1--:-7.7fr4.,--- --.;.:,:lez,:. -*Ajeti r, ti ii\-,,ti4r-,.i.•lf,',-., , ' '..:;„ . ,...,', ,---,-,, , - „:,1;•,,1*-,. , '4'':4 !,'••?„.r,-,.°A -!'le,,,-•" , ' ,-„,„.7 1.-'°1*„,..,4;74,"orw 1‘It; r;,_ ',41„,., ,, ',',..".. ._. ?' .,- /.,,,,x- ' ° ' ' .c-•,;70, ;., 0.".„4_,,,,' :> •'‘1,1•`'.," --4--,----- -i' til"'-',04,lc---‘' t• '- •,', 1 .W;' Zo ...,r,. ,. y, x,' . ,' '.'''''',‘f: ' , 1.1. '..-. ,,,,-,.,,- ., ‘• ., 4, - 111...t.,.....i,, 2,' ,V,,.,,. '"A.,' 1.. 4..P.',`, '-4 ; A -.; ''A' ' Itt,...t..7,'cO,„ .''''' Ir v• ,.?, • .?.. .2., V,...., .., .0 ',-1;-'4' ' q--'''' J.4-; -s' t*: ' A3,' '—i.,1- -.; - • .01„i,44, ., •.• XJ, , i.).2. , •e-,_ ,, .1--K...„.4; , . ''4,--.-- • -•-", , 1 _ . lc *"---;:••' ... _----, - :/-fi ' ":"t`• -, i-VL ./. '''• • .-;•.'''- -- __, -"IC 411' ,..=-,14441, '• or-..- / •,„, rsi 1 tr. 44•4^4c,..F • t4 r.ti.,,. ., 41" / - , .. -.,%•• -ot,":"` - os. - ' -- ... -- '** v -'AtIt ''''-,4;:.''JeC • `,-, - , a.• c-.4A-A*,,, •-•*,..' •,,,'„,,,„- . -..-'",' .,,,..4'-'.- t .#6,'I`g•1 -1"- ----7,'"- 1 - -..,,,,,r '5, 04 i'' 61 ."i'i,,, •-•441.3i.•;). _ -'', ,, • ,-- -;" .. . - '• _ 1:`,:..."N **AN-,,0-0'., liT , '.'‘-.,.%,.---"A 'A‘V•'''• ' 7 .-•.,-.--• -, ":..,-•'-. ' , ...., ).41,041.;• ., ';- 44,,,. '...- ---, ,,,,-- ,---- -... _- • ": , : .,.,'e-7..4` (4p,C ',..,./' A ` .: ''4 ' . 4-',,,,.1..1 ,1 ...*,'4if q '''''`:- •-,,, , pt. i .., .,, . ',,-- - -•r) %\ • -•$- • /,' .:A" i••• • kw.; ....1--,,i,... -. ,_.,, ,,,iiik's , - ,- p !. ,'P) 'P, .40LIF Photo 30. Transect 4. Lookingnorthwest and upstream toward the rocky vegetated island in the center of the stream channel H.T. Harvey&Associates D-11 Hakalau Stream BridgTeecPrhonj Wetland Delineation Project —Report March 2024