Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-25 Meeting Minutes (EMC) ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAIʻI MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, April 25, 2018 9:04 a.m. to 11:36 a.m. Aupuni Center Conference Room 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 1 Hilo, Hawaiʻi 96720 Commissioners present: Richard Bennett, Ph.D., Chair Jon Olson, Vice Chair James Fritz Susie Osborne Luana Neff Rick Gaffney Staff present: William Kucharski, Director Keyra Wong, Deputy Corporation Counse Mary Fujio, Secretary Also present: Several members of the public 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. He stated to everyone that the EMC’s role and responsibilities are oversight of the Department of Environmental Management. They are to provide advice to DEM and the County as appropriate. They are not a decision- making commission and do not have the authority to make policy decisions or to approve or disapprove projects. He wanted to make that clear to everyone present. He then introduced Rick Gaffney, a newly appointed commissioner, and asked him to share some of his background. Commissioner Gaffney said he has been a student of environmental management for a long time. He started his working life as the sea grant agent on Maui, and a major event was when Mayor Carvalho proposed building a sewage treatment plant in a wildlife refuge. He did not think it would ever happen, but it did happen, and the plant today is a huge negative for Maui. Everything went wrong, mainly due to using steel pipes and pumps in a salt water environment. He now has concerns about the ocean adjacent to Honokōhau Harbor, as years ago it was categorized as class AA, the finest quality in the state. Today it is categorized as impaired. Some of the things that contributed to its degradation are within our control, so he is anxious to help assure the protection of the ocean. That is his primary focus: conservation of the ocean and advocating for it, because it can’t speak for itself. He added that he was born and raised in Honolulu, has a political science degree from Oregon State University, and won a fellowship from the University of Rhode Island Graduate School of Oceanography. 2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 28, 2018 Chair Bennett noted that a correction was needed on page 1, where Keyra Wong was incorrectly listed as secretary. There were no other comments about the minutes. Motion and vote: Commissioner Osborne moved to approve the minutes with the correction, Commissioner Gaffney seconded the motion, and all commissioners voted aye. 3. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Bennett pointed out that four people had signed up to testify, and he would call them in no particular order. Cory Harden: Ms. Harden said she would be speaking on agenda items 4, 5, and 6 involving water reuse. She thanked the commissioners for their service, support for water reuse, and interest in preventing water pollution, as a lot of powerful interests were working hard to do the opposite. For the Maui water case (Hawaiʻi Wildlife Fund vs. County of Maui), 18 states filed amicus briefs supporting Maui. Oil, gas, and coal companies don’t want stronger pollution controls, as it would mess up their injection wells. The EPA is now deciding if it should regulate pollution that goes from a point source and ends up in surface water through some kind of connection such as groundwater, so that it is not released directly into the ocean yet still gets there. As far as state laws, environmentalists are saying the local governments are too cozy with the industries and don’t have the financial resources to fight them. We need ways to reuse water and make money off of it. The EPA offers free assistance for some things, such as workshops on sustainable water. There are also rural development grants and other grants to hire experts to maximize water reuse. There are also funding sources such as the Safe Water Drinking Act. She suggested County officials report to the EMC on perhaps adopting requirements that all County facilities use local fixtures for all repairs and new construction, and also on the feasibility of building codes requiring local fixtures and plumbing codes that facilitate using recycled water. Sandra Demoruelle: Ms. Demoruelle said she appreciated the commissioners and that it was lovely to see a commission at nearly full strength. She said she would be speaking regarding the proposed Nāālehu Wastewater Treatment Plant, and she also had provided a writteʻn handout of her testimony. She was basing her testimony on an article that Pat Tummons put out in the first year of publishing Environment Hawaiʻi. It was from November 1990 and entitled “Lots of Pork, Little Sewage at the New Hilo Treatment Works.” Ms. Tummons wrote about the problems of overbuilding a treatment facility, and Ms. Demoruelle said it is sort of like a toilet that doesn’t have enough water to push the waste through. The treatment plants being proposed in Nāālehu. It would be ālehu and Pāhala are large, and there are only 153 properties in Nāʻʻ vastly overbuilt. When she looks at what the County is doing now and how hard it is to find staffing, the chances of getting qualified employees to run the plants are minute. The proposed Nāālehu Elementary School, and people there are up in arms ālehu plant is adjacent to the Nāʻʻ and do not know what to do about it, which is why she has come to them—to ask the EMC to provide guidance so the plant won’t be built. She provided information with her testimony on how it managed to make it to the top of the Clean Water Revolving Fund with 33 points. Those kind of points aren’t allowed without a green plant, and it does not show up as a green plant in 2 the AOC. As far as she’s concerned, the AOC is what the County is operating from, and they are condemning properties as we speak. She doesn’t see Resolution 412 (on the Director’s Informational Report), but it is to condemn property in Pāhala. She has been asking about the Nāālehu condemnation but ʻis guessing it has not been resolved yet. The County is off its timeline already. Jerome Warren: Mr. Warren said he would be speaking on item 7 on the agenda and item 4 in the Director’s Report, three minutes each. Earlier this month he was contacted by a consultant in regard to the Nāālehu sewer project. She called his home and said her company, ʻ Earthplan, was contracted by Brown and Caldwell to meet with the residents of Nāālehu in ʻ regard to the sewer project. He asked her to find the original 2004 promise between Mayor Kim and the Nāālehu homeowners, and tʻhen he asked her if the sewer plant next to the school would still go forward if residents opposed it. The meetings with the residents turned out to be listening sessions. The Earthplan woman did not bring copies of the 2004 promises from the mayor. The community opposes the new plan, which would put the sewer plant next to the elementary school. Earthplan’s three listening meetings attracted about 30 residents each night. The community’s councilmember did not attend, their commissioner did not attend, and their CDP members did not attend—and this is after they’ve already taken up $500,000 to make a development plant. Nobody from the Wastewater Division attended. At the end of each meeting, the Earthplan woman from Austin, Texas, made each resident stand up, state their name, and explain why they liked living in Nāālehu. She turned it into a 1970s eʻncounter session. Mr. Warren next spoke regarding item 4 on the Director’s Report. He was contacted yesterday at his home by a man who administers the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. He found out the Nāālehu project is on the State’s priority listʻ, but the County has not filled out an application. The State knows the County wants money for sewer lines and the pump station, but the loan form has not been filled out and signed. He said the 2004 plan with the promise was finalized in 2007. The 2007 final assessment would cost less than the new plan, which the community opposed at this month’s meetings in Nāālehu. The money has to be paid back. The ʻ County has been malfeasant for not telling the homeowners that the 2004 promise was broken and a much larger project planned for Nāʻ submitted with their AOC. It is apples and oranges. Again, the residents were not aware of the new large plan until it was discovered to be next to an archeological site on the Weatherford property. It’s an insider trading scandal. The County should have told them when they abandoned the 2004 promise. Tina Tuttle: Ms. Tuttle said she does not live in Nāālehu, but her grandsons do. Her ʻ grandson goes to Nāālehu Elementary School, and she has a picture, which has been passed out, ʻ of him pointing to where the proposed plant is. If you look at the arrow, it also goes to the gym. The plant is going to be a problem for the school. She is concerned about her grandchildren being placed in a school by a plant, and having to grow up there. She just wanted to make the commissioners aware of this. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Continued discussion on current wastewater chemistry at the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant. 3 Chair Bennett said this agenda item stemmed from a conversation at the last meeting. The State Department of Health has regulations and criteria regarding wastewater qualities, but missing is any expression on the chemistry of the nutrients—nitrogen and phosphorous in all their forms. The R-1 upgrade in progress is addressing these issues by implementing some technology to reduce the loads of these nutrients, but he would like to ultimately form a subcommittee to come up with some guidelines, goals, and objectives for the management of these nutrients, not only at Kealakehe but at all County wastewater facilities. He would also like to be able to provide guidance to the state in dealing with the issue of individual waste treatment systems and nutrient management. The State and County have yet to have a formal policy on how to manage the nutrients. He would like to know if any commissioners would be interested in serving on a subcommittee, which they would form under the rules of the Sunshine Law. The ultimate goal would be to come up with recommendations to the County regarding nutrient management, and the County could perhaps share the recommendations with the State. Vice Chair Olson asked whether he understood correctly that the State sets the standard, which is the floor, and the County can exceed that standard. Chair Bennett said his understanding is that the State has no standards for nutrients, nothing at all. As far as he knows, there is no policy. Director Kucharski said there are nutrient discharge requirements placed on NPDES permits in Hilo, and the only issue the County has is that the standards imposed are not achievable by any known technical means. Commissioner Fritz asked if the standards were federal or state standards. Director Kucharski said he does not know whether the federal standards were just accepted or whether the State went above them. However, states generally don’t exceed federal standards, they tend to adopt them. He can try to find an answer. Chair Bennett said given the Maui court ruling, NPDES permits will be required for indirect discharges because they constitute point source discharges which find a conveyance to the sea. It will be an ongoing, arduous process, and he is seeking to get ahead of the curve a little and come up with some policy recommendations and be proactive in attempting to manage nutrients. On the Kona side, all the accessible beaches, from Miloliʻi to Mahukona in the north, are federally listed as impaired. The law requires the State to come up with management plans so that further degradation does not occur, but the State has no such plan for this island. The EMC has an opportunity now to make recommendations about nutrient management in impaired water sheds, while realizing there are individual homeowner systems and County systems, which together represent a nutrient loading to the sea. Director Kucharski said he fully agrees and would like to try and put it into perspective. According to the DOH’s cesspool report to the legislature, cesspools on this island contribute between 20 and 25 million gallons per day of untreated wastewater. The County currently discharges approximately 4 million gallons per day from the treatment systems. The bigger problem is the unpermitted personal home systems, which are contributing multiple times more untreated wastewater of much lower quality than what is being discharged from the County’s permitted facilities. 4 Chair Bennett said Director Kucharski’s perspective is useful and accurate, and that citizens should be asked to step up in some way and be financially responsible. Even though the County’s share of the discharge is small, it offers leadership and should step up first. He asked the commissioners to think about whether they would like to participate in the subcommittee. b. Continued discussion regarding composting of old lumber and whether borate degrades the compost quality. Commissioner Fritz asked Director Kucharski if he had done some research on this, and Director Kucharski said it had not been on his to-do list. However, he will provide information at the next meeting. It definitely bothers him that there is no permitted construction and demolition (C&D) landfill for non-sanitary waste disposal. It would require a minimum five- to six-year permitting process. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee would be looking at it. For now, only untreated pallets go into the compost. Commissioner Fritz asked who would fill out an application for a new landfill, and Director Kucharski said a person or corporation can, or the County can. However, the County is not in the business of building but of operating, so it would have to be contracted out. Commissioner Olson said it should also fall under emergency response, as the island could end up buried in debris if it is hit with a tsunami or hurricane. Clean-up would be delayed without a C&D site. Director Kucharski said he fully agreed, and somewhere in Puna or Kaū ʻ would be a great location. Because the island is not highly industrialized, the waste is not as contaminated as it would be in more industrialized areas, so the debris would be much easier to deal with here. However, a site to take storm debris is needed. Commissioner Fritz said he would like a C&D site pursued and asked if there is an opportunity for public testimony on this. George Hayducsko, DEM’s Recycling Coordinator who was present, said yes. He is currently working on the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan, which is due every ten years. He can speak on it at a committee meeting. Commissioner Fritz asked about trucks coming in with lumber debris, and whether it is noted anywhere. Director Kucharski said he is not aware of a weight notation on construction debris. Payment is by the ton, not by content. Commissioner Fritz said he is a frequent user of Puʻuanahulu and is often asked what happens to the debris. Director Kucharski said asbestos and sewage sludge go into special cells which are noted. Commissioner Osborne said any solid waste plan needs data if it will be for a long term, and it will probably be expensive. In addition, data is needed to validate the need for the project. Director Kucharski explained that they do waste characterization studies periodically to determine the percentages of what is organic, metal, plastic, and C&D materials in normal solid waste entering the landfill. Mr. Hayducsko said the last study was for the last Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan (ISWMP) in 2008-09. The commissioners discussed recommending a system for data collection to support this ISWMP, and Director Kucharski said he did not know the mechanism for contracting and may 5 not be able to do so in time for the ISWMP. When a truck comes in, they don’t know how much of the contents are organic or how much metal, and everything could be compressed. Loads would need to be dumped out so they could get a statistically significant sampling base, and then broken down to get a percentage range, for example, of 30% organics, 20/% wood, etc. The contents of each load varies. It’s a hundred truck exercise. Motion and second: Commissioner Osborne moved to “recommend the County pursue a waste characterization study focusing on the data collected for C&D waste in support of the Integrated Solid Waste Plan for consideration.” Mr. Fritz seconded the motion. Chair Bennett asked if everyone understood the motion, and Vice Chair Olson said they got the gist of it. Mr. Hayducsko said they could target the waste characterization study to focus on C&D, which would reduce the cost of doing the study. They could also have a whole study, which separates out every item and costs more. They are approaching how to put in those types of recommendations into the ISWMP, since it is being updated. If they were to get additional funding, there is a possibility they could actually do the sorting for the ISWMP. An issue is whether to do a complete study or concentrate just on C&D. Chair Bennett said postponing it would not address their concerns, and there is a time value in the study. He asked if the motion should be amended to make a reference to when it might be done. Commissioner Osborne said they could try to narrow the scope to C&D and reduce the costs to make it potentially feasible. She asked about the ISWMP schedule, and Mr. Hayducsko said it is to be completed in December 2019, and the proposed schedule is to meet monthly until then. The approach being taken is to update the last plan, not to do an intense study like the previous time, but to update it with new information. Continued discussion was held on having a waste characterization study. Mr. Hayducsko said the data is obtained with the sampling that is done. If there is a major construction project happening on the day a sample is taken, results may not be accurate. Vice Chair Olson said his councilperson also chaired the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, and they were starting the process to initiate a point-of-purchase fee so they could capture the recyclables before they ended up in the landfill. His councilperson would support what they were discussing and could possibly help on where the money would come from. Motion revised and seconded: Commissioner Osborne revised her motion and moved to recommend that a waste characterization study focusing on C&D be conducted that can be integrated into the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan for consideration of the necessary next steps. Commissioner Fritz seconded the motion. Commissioner Neff asked whether there is a list of the money needed for all the different projects, and their priorities. Mr. Hayducsko said they do not have funds available for the study but will pursue looking at where to find them, if that is the wish of the Commission. Commissioner Neff said she just wanted a ballpark amount, and Mr. Hayducsko said he could not say, as he had only been with the department a little over a year. 6 Commissioner Osborne said she wants the EMC to be reminded when it becomes time to submit the budget, as the EMC would recommend this be included as an item in DEM’s next budget. Director Kucharski said they are in the midst of the next budget cycle, which will be finalized at the end of June. Commissioner Osborne said if the ISWMP is due in December 2019, it could go into next year’s budget or they could each go to their councilmembers and see if they could use a small percentage of their discretionary funds to contribute to the study. Vote: Chair Bennett called for a vote of all those in favor of Commissioner Osborne’s motion. All commissioners voted aye. Commissioner Gaffney asked Mr. Hayducsko if the ISWMP would be looking at how to deal with emergency disposal, and Mr. Hayducsko said it could be an item in the plan. After the Kauai flooding, it has become a heightened issue. Director Kucharski said that since the Hilo landfill will be closing, any plan will have to be modified to go to one central location rather than diverse locations. It is an issue that needs to be studied and added to the management plan. Commissioner Osborne asked if there was a contingency fund for emergencies, and Director Kucharski that there are no contingency funds in DEM’s budget. 5. NEW BUSINESS a. Presentation by the Department of Environmental Management’s Recycling Coordinator regarding recycling education at the schools. Mr. Hayducsko spread out several bottles, cans, and other samples out on a table. He explained there is good news and bad news. The bad news is that staff are not going into school classrooms to educate students, as they do not have the sources or financing to do that. Years ago there were funds available to contract with a nonprofit organization which went into the schools to educate, but they do not have the funds for that now. They have, however, given presentations to teacher organizations, service groups, and the university and provide low-cost services such as press releases, ads, and tours. They did approximately 12 tours of the landfills and recycling facilities last year. They would like to be able to reach the children but at this point are not able to do that. They recently had the Earth Day event at the university, which schools also attend, and they reached several thousand. Education is needed, and it needs to be constant. He spoke about the various containers on the table, showing how some may look the same but are not, and are categorized differently. Some are recyclable and some not, and there are numbers on the bottom showing what the category is. Individuals who recycle can truly make a difference. He explained further on what is recyclable and what is not. Commissioner Osborne thanked Mr. Hayducsko for his presentation, saying how important it is to her because she is an educator. Part of the EMC’s spirit and intent is to support DEM in securing extra funds. She would like to have on an agenda an item on the portion of contracts dedicated to education, as every contract should have a percentage going towards education. She would like a future agenda item to discuss how the EMC can recommend that 7 future contracts for the County have educational components. Chair Bennett said that was the next item on the current agenda. Commissioner Fritz suggested that DEM have glossy, laminated pictures posted at transfer stations showing the recycling information. Mr. Hayducsko said they do have some signage but it could be improved. Anyone who wants to see the signage can contact the office. Commissioner Neff said the EMC went through the issue of getting information into the schools when she first became a commissioner. Kids need to be taught their responsibilities regarding what they eat, wear, and live in. Education would be far more powerful if all the kids were involved. It is a vast void if we don’t have the funds. There has to be a plan to obtain the funds. Lack of funds is a lame thing to argue about. Commissioner Osborne said it would be a small investment with a huge long-term impact return. Vice Chair Olson said they need to come up with a methodology to get all the recycling funded at the point of purchase. The money needs to be obtained at the front end, not the back. Getting the information into the schools will make a difference. Commissioner Gaffney said he agreed with the concept of earmarking funds from the budget for education, but there should also be funding available at the state and federal level. He asked Mr. Hayducsko if there was a process for DEM to pursue other resources, and Mr. Hayducsko said yes, they devote time to researching and trying to capture additional funds. Commissioner Gaffney asked if there was a development person on staff, and Mr. Hayducsko said no. They have a long list of programs they manage, such as the HI-5 and recycling programs, and they could use more help. Commissioner Osborne said if the EMC can help, just let them know. b. Discuss recommending to DEM that when it contracts with contractors for things like recycling and reuse of water, an educational component is included. Commissioner Osborne asked how feasible it is to add a dedicated educational component to contracts. Director Kucharski the current HER composting contract requires an educational component. It takes a significant amount of money to compost and mulch. When the contract is renegotiated, he is not sure if that component will remain. When the Styrofoam bill was passed, part of it required an educational program as part of the implementation. They have a new recycling coordinator who will be used for Styrofoam education, and there are plans after the current budget cycle to go to the County Council with an anti-litter program. Commissioner Osborne asked if the educational component would remain in the HER contract, and Director Kucharski said he is not involved in the day-to-day negotiations on it, but it was part of the original contract. It says an educational program is required to incur utilization of the mulch and compost produced. It does not go into recycling greenwaste and has not been a problem to date. 8 Commissioner Osborne asked about the timeline of the contract, and Director Kucharski said it is being modified because of a change in location, and an EA will be done. Once that happens, people will be allowed to comment on the location of the new compost facility from an environmental standpoint. He does not know the status of the education component, but he can check and report back. Commissioner Fritz asked about whether there was a dollar amount in the contract for the educational program, and Director Kucharski said there was not a dollar amount set for it. Commissioner Gaffney said, as a point of clarification, that they went from recycling of plastics and other materials to focusing on greenwaste. They should not lose sight of the fact that they started with plastics. Commissioner Osborne said she wants a future agenda item to discuss the larger contract issue for an educational component, and the concerning issue that it is being deleted from the current contract. Motion and second: Commissioner Osborne moved that for the organics contract, it is ensured there is an educational component retained within it. Commissioner Neff seconded the motion. Director Kucharski said he could inform the parties that the EMC finds the educational part of the contract should be maintained. Ms. Wong said she was not clear on what the motion was. Commissioner Osborne said that the education component of the organics waste contract, in the renegotiations, should be retained within the contract. Vote: All commissioners voted aye. c. Discuss disposal of soil contaminated by arsenic from Hilo to the West Hawaiʻi Landfill, what the EPA regulations are, and how it will be managed to prevent air and water contamination. Chair Bennett said this item had been requested by former Commissioner Fear. Director Kucharski said there will be no hazardous levels of arsenic that will be disposed of in Puʻuanahulu, as it is a sanitary landfill. Whatever is disposed of there will be below the hazard level, which is specified by the EPA. Chair Bennett asked Director Kucharski to get the EPA’s level information so they can inform the community how it is below the hazardous threshold. Director Kucharski said they are in discussions with the DOH on how it will be monitored. Once it is removed and brought over, the analysis will show it is not hazardous. It is a special waste which will be handled in a different way and placed in a special waste area. Each day the special waste will be put together and covered in a special area of the landfill. It will be 9 wet so there are no air emissions or dust. Special waste also includes asbestos and sewage sludge. Commissioner Osborne asked about arsenic runoff from heavy rain, and Chair Bennett asked about the dredged spoils being taken to the landfill and whether it will be put where leachate will be recovered. Director Kucharski said there is a leachate recovery system in place, and it will be tested. Puʻuanahulu is quite dry, so it dessicates pretty quickly. A significant volume of leachate is not anticipated. Special waste that comes in will be covered quickly before it can be lifted and dried. Chair Bennett said that was encouraging. d. Formation of a permitted interaction group. Pursuant to HRS Section 92- 2.5, the Commission proposes to form a permitted interaction group whose members shall investigate how to address implementing the Commission’s resolution approved and adopted by the Commission on March 28, 2018, to adopt a proactive pollution elimination program consistent with Federal NPDES standards and practices. Chair Bennett asked Ms. Wong to give background on the steps needed to form a subcommittee. Ms. Wong explained that a subcommittee and interaction group are the same thing. They do not have public meetings and can be comprised of up to four commissioners. They would have specific investigation duties--in this case, to investigate how to address implementing the EMC’s resolution adopted on March 28, 2018, for a proactive pollution elimination program consistent with Federal NPDES standards and practices. Three steps are needed in order to form the group. At this first meeting, they will form the group. She advised that the scope of the investigation and each member’s authority be defined at this meeting. At the next meeting, they can come back and report to the other commissioners on the findings and recommendations from their investigation. At a final meeting, all the commissioners will deliberate and decide how they want to handle the findings, whether to make recommendations or propose something to the director. Chair Bennett said he was looking at who would be interested in participating with him in the subcommittee. Its purpose would be to see if they can come up with recommendations or guidelines on how the County can be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Clean Water Act relative to all of its activities. The scope would look at what the County is currently doing and proposing to do, and they could make recommendations where appropriate on how the County might upgrade, facilitate, and enhance its operations to be fully consistent with the objectives of the NPDES permit, even if a permit may not be required. Commissioner Fritz asked where they would meet, and Chair Bennett said they would probably mostly talk over the phone and perhaps get physically together near the end to get something written. Commissioner Fritz said he would volunteer. Chair Bennett told Commissioner Gaffney he wanted him on the subcommittee. Commissioner Gaffney asked for more clarification on why they would be doing this in a subcommittee format rather than as a commission. Chair Bennett said it would be cumbersome 10 for the whole commission to do this—it would be easier to have a little work group put together the goals and guidelines and then bring them back to the commission for consideration. Ms. Wong further explained that the Sunshine Law requires all boards to make decisions at an open meeting, but the statute does allow commissioners to meet as a subcommittee in order to get something done without violating the law. The subcommittee’s decision will occur in an open meeting, and all commissioners will be able to vote. Commissioner Gaffney said he was in. Chair Bennett announced that Commissioners Fritz, Gaffney, and he would be on the subcommittee. He said he’ll be in touch with them on the work. He did not anticipate it being lengthy or arduous, but he wanted the opportunity to work together in a smaller group so they can bring something written back. Ms. Wong said a motion was needed. Motion and vote: Chair Bennett said the motion would be to form an interaction group consisting of Commissioners Fritz, Gaffney, and himself, to develop some written recommendations about how the County might fulfill the objectives of their resolution dated March 28, 2018. Commissioner Gaffney so moved, Commissioner Osborne seconded the motion, and all commissioners voted aye. 6. REPORTS/CORRESPONDENCE a. Director’s Informational Report. Regarding the status of the maintenance at the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant, Director Kucharski said they are on the punchlist for the upgrades, repairs, and replacement of lines. Regarding R-1 water management, Director Kucharski said it will be a major issue for the department in next year’s budget. The water is to be available in 2020 and will require DEM to become the purveyors of the water. It will be DEM’s responsibility to ensure that users have DOH permits, and DEM will need to meter, distribute, and repair breaks. They will need to decide how to price the water and what to pay to bring it down to distribution points. Individual metering will be needed. The Wastewater Division will need to get into the distribution system in addition to the collection system. Planning has started on what will be needed. It is a large undertaking. They are also looking into the possibility of making it a requirement to use the R-1 water for commercial operations that have access to it, rather than using potable water. R-1 water can also be used to wash down boats, but a keyed card would be needed to unlock the hose bibs. It is doable, but regulations need to be put in place. Regarding legislative bills, Senate Bill 2567 and House Bill 2626 (regarding cesspools) are very similar and are before the Conference Committee. There is a large advisory group to study the cesspool issue. If anyone is interested in being a part of it, let him know. The main 11 bills were on funding, increasing, and extending tax credits for people converting from cesspools. Director Kucharski reported on questions that came up at the last meeting: - The ponds at the Kealakehe WWTP are 56 feet above sea level. There is a 10 to 15-foot buffer between the bottom of the ponds and groundwater. - The Planning Department will do a presentation on the rise in sea level impacts at the EMC’s June 27, 2018, meeting in Hilo. - Regarding the salt intrusion problem in Kona, he received some updated reports, which were handed out, from the Wastewater Division. There is a bill to allow counties to enter private property which is sewered to do inflow and infiltration testing and force owners to repair their lines if there is too much salt water coming into the system. - Regarding R-1 water, they are in the preliminary design phase. Once they’re out, they will get detailed designs. They are looking at having water which is not used go through the UV system prior to discharge, and he expects that to require an NPDES permit. He believes that at some point the DOH will require water upgraded to R-1 to have NPDES permits because of the Maui decision. It is not a promise but a prediction. - Regarding statistics on how many abandoned vehicles have been towed, a report had been handed out. Vice Chair Olson noted that in terms of local pricing and interest, the figures correlate exactly with what he knows about what the local scrap guys are doing. Director Kucharski said he has provided Councilmember O’Hara draft bill language to allow towing from private ungated subdivisions. - Regarding the discharge former Commissioner Fear was concerned about, Dr. Bennett has located where it is. They are in the process of trying to get the state out to sample the area. - Regarding the Keauhou regional study, he received some information from Planning and had it handed out. Regarding greenwaste, Director Kucharski said they have issued a press release on the fact that the greenwaste from East Hawaiʻi has been treated and is enhanced mulch. A majority of the vectors, such as coquis and fire ants, have been destroyed. The west side of the island, due to its dryness, appears to have few vectors. The mulch on both sides appears to be vector free. The EPA will have people coming over next month for an asset management program. They will be looking at the Wastewater Division’s equipment and lines and getting information on the funding that goes into repairs and maintenance to see if things are properly covered. He can provide more information on this at the next meeting. 12 Commissioner Osborne said she would like to discuss the Nāālehu Large Capacity ʻ Cesspool Replacement project, on page 8 of Director Kucharski’s report. She said she is very concerned and distressed by the testimony received today. At an earlier meeting she expressed her concern about condemning private property in Pāhala. Now she is distressed to hear there is consideration of condemning a family owned ranch which is located by a school. She is astounded this is happening and would like the director’s update on this. Director Kucharski said that for the Pāhala facility, it has been redesigned and the County will only take a portion of the property. They are in discussions with Kamehameha Schools, and there is no conflict at this point. For Nāālehu, over the past 12 to 1ʻ5 years they have looked at between 23 and 28 sites in the area. None of the sites were deemed acceptable, for one reason or another. When the process was started, the property in question was up for sale. It was examined and believed it could be an appropriate location. Before any property can be condemned, an EA needs to be done on it. Part of the EA review is to look an alternative sites that could be used. The talk story sessions that occurred recently were to bring the issue to the forefront in the community, and it was eminently successful in that regard. The EPA’s administrative order of consent was publicly noticed last year. There were full sets of comments received on the plan, and the EPA responded to each public comment received. What was going to happen was not a secret, and the proposed location is not the final location. The final location is unknown until such time as the EA is complete. If a facility is not constructed, the County is subject to $10,000 per day in penalties for violations. The cesspools were to have been closed by 2005, and they have failed miserably in doing their duty to the environment and local residents. Commissioner Osborne said she did not see how they could consider having the facility placed by a school. There are long-term issues these facilities face. She is also unclear on how the talk story sessions were successful. If 23 to 28 sites were looked at, surely something can be found that is not by a school. There has to be somewhere in the vast Kaū area that could be ʻ considered. She asked what the community’s recourse is, the timelines, and what the EMC can do to address this, as it is not sitting well with her. Director Kucharski said the talk story sessions were to talk to the community about the fact that an EA was about to be presented. It was not to come in and say this is what the County is doing. It was to come in and have the community understand what was under consideration and what the EA would look at. The EA has not started. Commissioner Osborne asked whether, if the County goes forward with an EA, the next step is serious consideration, and Director Kucharski said that is not correct. The EA is proceeding. Until it is completed, a final site will not be selected. This is part of the process. Commissioner Osborne ask if the EA would be on several sites. Director Kucharski said the EA will look at the site and do an engineering analysis of all the sites. This is what was done in Pāhala as well. It is based on having already reviewed the other sites, which for one reason or another were not acceptable. He explained that when he said the talk story sessions were successful, he meant the community became fully aware of what is potentially going to happen. A sewage treatment plant is going to happen. Where it will be placed is not yet determined. This location right now has been deemed, from an engineering perspective, an acceptable site. 13 They are looking at some other sites, including some mauka. The process is to come in and evaluate the alternative sites and then pick a preferred site. Commissioner Osborne asked whether the impacts of condemning a property whose owner is adverse to it and the fact that a school is nearby were considered, as DEM was looking at it from an engineering perspective. Director Kucharski said yes, an EA is designed to do that, to come in and evaluate those factors to see if the property is an acceptable location for the facility. They are not pre-determining the site. They are coming in and saying they need to look at it. The talk story sessions were also to find out the community’s concerns, so when the EA is structured and completed, those concerns can be addressed. The sessions were to get input from the community as to their feelings on what is being planned but not completed. It was to give them education and say talk to us. It was not “this is what we are going to do.” Commissioner Osborne that that was not what they heard from today’s testifiers and asked how the community could provide testimony now if they want an opportunity for their voices to be heard, and what mechanism they have now to provide input for the EA. Director Kucharski explained more on the EA process. They had pre-consultation meetings to talk about alternatives and what the EA should look at. There is a contractor who will go in and do the EA. In the EA process, there are ways to give public input. The EA process is designed for situations where the local community can provide input to the people who have to make decisions. As DEM director, he is required by a consent agreement with the EPA to construct a wastewater treatment plant such that open large-capacity cesspools, which continue to seep unabated into the environment, can be closed. It is now 13 years since they were to have been closed. This issue must be approached, and they must come up with a solution for what is, right now, a bad and inappropriate disposal of human waste product. Commissioner Osborne asked how people could provide input before the EA is drafted, if they did not have an opportunity to provide input at the public meetings. Director Kucharski said the public meetings were a preliminary first step before the EA starts. The only thing people can do now is say what they think. It is the start of the EA process, not the end. Commissioner Osborne said she understands that and asked where they could send their testimony. Director Kucharski said the next step after comments is public meetings. Commissioner Osborne said she would like this as a future agenda item—the steps on how the EA process is going and the community’s concerns. She would like to know if there is anywhere else that has such a facility located by a school. Director Kucharski said if the location is deemed in any way be a health or environmental hazard, it would not be built there. Vice Chair Olson said the testimony also raised the concern about how the scope of the facility exceeded the potential demand and asked if the plant was consistent with the CDP and potential growth. Director Kucharski said his understanding is the facility may be too little, as only about a third of Nāālehu will be sewered. It will allow for growth, but not a large growth.ʻ 14 7. COMMISSIONERS’ DISTRICT UPDATE REPORTS AND ISSUES Chair Bennett reminded the commissioners to let him know a couple of weeks before the next meeting if they wanted anything placed on the next agenda, so they would be consistent with the Sunshine Law. Regarding the proposed Nāālehu wastewater treatmenʻt plant, he reported that he was invited and did attend the first talk story session. He met with the consultants for a couple of hours before the session and learned things about the region and the project. He has been talking to people in the area for years and has walked various properties. The consultants encouraged him to drive through the neighborhood that is slated to be connected to the treatment plant. The area has significant challenges because of the way the existing sewer pipes were run through properties. At the session he attended, he felt the consultants did a good job of setting the tone. They could have done a better job of making clear that the drawings they were showing were not the final plan, that it was still in the process of being figured out. They could have said this is the current proposal and it is not finalized. However, they did a good job of listening to the residents. Many people who saw the boards mistakenly thought the decision was already made. Commissioner Osborne asked Chair Bennett if he had any concerns about the location by a school, and he responded that there is a potential for nuisance. However, there is a lot of data to suggest that there is not a potential for aerosol disease transmission. People who are employed in sewage treatment plants do not have a higher incidence of disease than the general population. Treatment ponds, from his point of view, do not constitute a significant uncontrolled public health risk. The aerosolization of wastewater is not a major route for transmission of disease agents. It is always a concern, but it is not a huge concern. In terms of proximity, he does not know the answer on how far away it has to be before all potential from transmission is gone. Commissioner Osborne said it just makes her want to cry, and Chair Bennett told her to rest assured that he will be vigilant on the issue. If he sees any data that suggests aerosol transmission of viruses downwind cause harm, she will be the first to know. He felt the talk story sessions were successful, with the caveat that the consultants could have been clearer about it being a proposal, not the final plan. 8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. Chair Bennett instructed the commissioners to email him if they wanted something placed on the next agenda other than what was discussed today. 9. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Bennett announced the next meeting: May 23, 2018, in Kona at the West Hawaiʻi Civic Center, Building G. 15 10. ADJOURNMENT Motion and vote: Commissioner Gaffney moved to adjourn, Commissioner Neff seconded the motion, and all commissioners voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 11:36 a.m. Respectfully submitted: Mary E. Fujio, Secretary (with her signature)