Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-09-26 Meeting Minutes (EMC) ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAIʻI MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, September 26, 2018 9:05 a.m. to 11:18 a.m. West Hawaiʻi Civic Center Planning Department Conference Room, Building E 75-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway Kailua-Kona, Hawaiʻi Commissioners present: Richard Bennett, Ph.D., Chair James Fritz Rick Gaffney Luana Neff Justin Pequeño Staff present: William Kucharski, Director Diane Noda, Deputy Director Diana Mellon-Lacey, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mary Fujio, Secretary Also present: Dee Fulton, Georjean Adams Not present: Jon Olson, Vice Chair 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Bennett called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. and welcomed Dee Fulton, who has been nominated to serve on the commission and was present to observe. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 26, 2018 Motion, second and vote: Commissioner Gaffney moved to approve the minutes as drafted, Commissioner Pequeño seconded the motion, and all commissioners voted aye. 3. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS There were no statements from the public. However, Chair Bennett said that in the future, he would like statements from the public to be near the end of the agenda. He will have this placed on the next agenda for discussion. 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Continued discussion on the motion that any contracts entered into with the Department of Environmental Management contain a percentage of the contract dedicated to an education and outreach component for waste reduction. Chair Bennett explained this item had been on the agenda for several months and that Commissioner Pequeño was prepared to lead on it. Motion and second: Commissioner Pequeño’s motion is that whereas the Department of Environmental Management enters into contracts for source reduction, recycling, composting, and other similar services, the department shall include a mandatory consideration of education and outreach components weighted at a minimum of 15% of all criteria in the selection and awarding process. Commissioner Gaffney seconded the motion. Director Kucharski said everyone’s packet should have included the sample of evaluation criteria DEM is currently using for recycling contracts. These criteria are attached to bidding documents so that people preparing proposals know the criteria. He believes 15% is too high for outreach or education evaluation criterium, but that something between 5% and 10% would be reasonable. He fully endorses having public outreach be part of the bidding criteria, but the percentage should depend on the type of service to be provided. Also, the percentage would need to take away from somewhere, so he would welcome suggestions on where that would be appropriate. Commissioner Fritz said it was backward thinking to say that you have to take something away to give something more. He does not follow that theory. Director Kucharski explained he was talking about the evaluation criteria by which RFPs are judged. Each criteria is assigned a percentage, and the total has to come to 100%. Whatever percentage is assigned to the education component has to be reduced from another category, such as cost. Discussion was held back and forth about the evaluation criteria and where the education component percentage should go. Director Kucharski agreed that having the education as an explicit review criteria for evaluation of an RFP is appropriate. If it is buried within the cost, the value of saying it is important could be lost. Commissioner Pequeño agreed it should be a separate component and hoped to see more creative proposals with educational outreach. He also felt it should be weighed at more than 5%. Director Kucharski said certain RFPs would require a higher level of public outreach than others, and the department could set an appropriate level for the outreach necessary for a particular contract. If the outreach is part of the judging criteria, it will send a message. He supports the idea of making it explicit. Commissioner Gaffney asked whether the evaluation criteria is a DOH requirement, and Director Kucharski explained that it is required under the State Procurement Code. A department has to be able to justify any contract award, as it can be challenged. State procurement requires a department to document the basis for its award. Chair Bennett asked how they can fix the disagreement on the percentage. Commissioner Pequeño said the biggest heartburn was the percentage. He had suggested at least 15%, and Director Kucharski said he would be more comfortable with 5% to 10%. Director Kucharski said the EMC was making a recommendation to DEM, and DEM was interested in the EMC’s input, but a recommendation from the EMC did not obligate DEM to utilize a specific percentage. DEM could change its judging criteria in response to the EMC’s input and use what it feels is an appropriate percentage for a particular contract. Commissioner Pequeño said he would be comfortable to have it included with 10% being a lower limit. If the contract were for something where the educational component had greater need, the department could increase it. Director Kucharski said he supports that position and the proposal. Motion amended and seconded: Commissioner Pequeño amended the motion to say that whereas the Department of Environmental Management enters into contracts for source reduction, recycling, composting, and other similar services, the department shall include a mandatory consideration of education and outreach components weighted at a minimum of 10% of all criteria in the selection and awarding process. Commissioner Gaffney seconded the amended motion. Director Kucharski asked whether the word “shall” means there is any force in the recommendation, and Ms. Mellon-Lacey said no, it would still be a recommendation. Commissioner Fritz said he has been sitting on this commission for three and a half years, he sees projects come and go, and education is always dropped off because there is not enough money. He asked how it could be ensured that would not happen. Director Kucharski this is a function of DEM’s final budget. The budget process is such that DEM is granted a certain amount of money to run all the programs it has a responsibility to run. DEM did receive an increase in solid waste fees this last session, so there is more money coming in. However, there are a lot of things DEM would like to do and there are several things DEM has to do, and when you run out of money, your wants may not get done. He has no solution for that. Commissioner Pequeño suggested the Director include updates of examples of educational outreach components included in new projects in his director reports, and Director Kucharski said he would be happy to do that. Chair Bennett said that some recycling efforts lend themselves well to public education, but others do not. Director Kucharski said there are areas, such as with tires, where you pay upfront for its disposal, but you’re not obligated to return the tire. An education process would be worthy here, but it is additional activity that is not currently funded. Additional money is always needed. He feels it is a worthy endeavor to emphasize that education is important and needed as a component in a bid. Commissioner Pequeño asked Commissioner Fritz if including examples of education outreach in the Director’s Report would be sufficient, and Commissioner Fritz said it would be after the fact and that it cannot be that there is not enough money. If people aren’t taught to recycle, how will it be done? “Shall” or “might” don’t have any strength. Director Kucharski suggested that when it is time for the Council to evaluate DEM’s budget, Commissioner Fritz speak up to them. Chair Bennett asked Commissioner Pequeño if adding a 10-point category to this evaluation would satisfy him, and Commissioner Pequeño said adding a 10-point minimum with the opportunity to increase as appropriate would. Commissioner Fritz wanted clarification that it would be labeled as education. Director Kucharski said his understanding is that a separate category in the evaluation criteria of recycling contracts will have a section that covers the outreach program and education program of the contract by the contractor. Commissioner Neff commented that education is such an important factor, as it ultimately is what makes the shift and the change, not the points, money, and who is getting the project. Chair Bennett said there is an amended motion on the floor, with a second and discussion. He asked Commissioner Pequeño to restate the motion for the purpose of clarity. Commissioner Pequeño: “Whereas the Department of Environmental Management enters into contracts for source reduction, recycling, composting, and other similar services, the department shall include a mandatory consideration of education and outreach components weighted at a minimum of 10% of all criteria in the selection and awarding process.” Chair Bennett called for a vote. Vote: All commissioners voted aye. Chair Bennett told Director Kucharski that the EMC understands everything they do is advisory in nature, but in the spirit that it’s offered, he hopes the advice rings true for generations to come. Director Kucharski said his comment is that yes, he has heard and yes, they can move this forward. The Commission recognized the efforts of former Commissioner Susie Osborne to advance education and outreach at the Department of Environmental Management. b. Status report by subcommittee pursuant to its investigation on how to address implementing the Commission’s resolution approved and adopted on March 28, 2018, to adopt a proactive pollution elimination program consistent with the goals of the Clean Water Act. Chair Bennett said the original intent was to write a white paper, which will be long and comprehensive. He still plans to do so, but in the meantime has put together a slide presentation, and it will fold into the next agenda item, which is the request from the Charter Commission. Chair Bennett launched into his slide presentation, explaining that it is a draft for discussion purposes. It was entitled Water Quality Policies and Hawaiʻi Island. He has spoken with several county people, and the members of the subcommittee were also very helpful. A few of the highlights of the presentation: • There is an aspect of human psychology that when people are confronted with negative information, 85% to 90% of them will deny it. This is the case with climate change. We are up against a human psychological defense mechanism. • Water quality and the policies that influence it on this island are part of a maze of federal policies and agencies, which delegate to the State Department of Health, which interacts with property owners and county departments. From time to time the EPA interacts directly with a county and private property owners. • The Coastal Zone Management Act was an attempt to get the states and their planning departments to think about how to do things in the coastal zone. • The Clean Water Act of 1972 had some lofty goals, many of which have never been achieved. • Many of the CWA’s programs and policies are designed for mainland states. Hawaiʻi is surrounded by water, and the ocean is ultimately the repository of all the wastewaters that do not evaporate. This concept was not well incorporated into the CWA, but it is our reality. • Infrared photography of the Kona Coast shows where the colder and warmer waters are. There is an almost perfect correlation between water temperature and the nutrient composition of the water. Cold water is nutrient rich, and people are the main source of the nutrients. • We have impaired water bodies in West Hawaiʻi from Miloliʻi to Mahukona. Though East Hawaiʻi does not have a lot of accessible shoreline, there is a similar pattern. • For most people, the water quality degradation is out of sight and out of mind. • In 2007 the Keauhou Canoe Club told him the bay was green and brown. A turbidity study was done, which showed it was phytoplanktons being nourished by the nutrients in the water. • The Coastal Zone Management Act is an educationally oriented program administered by NOAA. The only teeth it has is through the SMA permitting process in the county. Minor SMAs can be approved by the Planning Commission, and major SMAs require an EIS. • Hawaiʻi state law has sections that deal with underground injection control, pollution control, and coastal zones. Agricultural activities in a coastal zone are categorically exempt from the Coastal Zone Management Program. • Injection wells are a big problem. There are hundreds on the island, and the state is just now digitizing where they are, what is being injected, and how much. Many of these wells have not been inspected in decades, though federal law requires annual inspections. • The ōkalaŌʻʻ Dairy is an example of an exemption from an SMA EIS under state law. The county allowed this dairy to be built. The dairy generates about 150,000 pounds of manure per day in an area that receives 100 inches of rainfall. Dairy operations are most successful in a desert climate, not in high rainfall areas, and many dairies on the mainland are moving to drier parts of the country for this reason. The ōkala Dairy is a clearŌʻʻ violation of the Clean Water Act, and the county could have anticipated the problem if it had the statutory authority to do so. • Our island has many impaired waters and not a single Total Max Daily Load (TMDL) program. The State has not been enforcing the CWA, TMDL, for impaired waters. • There are many activities along the Kona Coast where bad water is being returned to the ocean without an NPDES permit. There are cesspools and septic systems that are virtually unregulated. • State policy in HAR 11-54 says the marine waters off the Kona Coast are Class AA, which means they are to “remain in their natural pristine state as nearly as possible with an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality from any human-caused source or actions.” It is a noble policy, but it’s not happening. • There are underground injection wells in various places in our state. Research shows these wells transfer nutrients directly into the ocean as effectively as though they were flowing through a pipe built for that purpose. • An intrinsic conflict is being ignored. There are pristine waters where underground injection wells are not allowed. • The opportunity and need for water recycling exists, but it is not easy. It requires DOH approval. Kauaʻi County has asked for and been granted authority to do its own recycled water approvals. If Kauaʻi can, so can Hawaiʻi County. • There is a septic system/cesspit dilemma. Hardly any distinction can be found between the two on how they affect the environment. Alternatives are needed, and the ability to administer those alternatives locally. The state does not have the resources to do it. • Most of the nitrogen that gets into the sea originally comes from the protein in our food, and it has significant impacts. A 2018 study of Kailua Bay was conclusive that nitrogen, in addition to rising temperatures, synergizes to adversely affect coral. • Most of Kailua-Kona is not sewered. Though there is movement to increase sewer capacity, it takes a lot of money. • Huge volumes of nutrient-rich groundwater move unregulated into the ocean every day. The nitrogen is clearly human-sourced and has a human signature. It is conclusively shown on all the islands. • The state can do some things. The Land Use Commission and Planning Commissions need to consider the impacts of development, such as a request to convert conservation land to urban to develop a subdivision. This could significantly affect the ocean, and the developer would not be responsible for offsetting the adverse effects. If the water turns green and people don’t want to swim in it, it will be a huge cost to our tourist industry. Such a cost does not enter into the LUC’s or Planning Commissions’ decision-making. It is an avoided or deferred cost which gets foisted on us, the people. • Regarding the State Water Code, in Hawaiʻi County there is basically nothing done with water conservation. Every gallon that is conserved does not need to be disposed of. California is moving well ahead of Hawaiʻi in mandating water conservation. • Our county needs to be looked at holistically to see where in our management we can do a better job. It is difficult to manage water resources in highly compartmentalized departments that don’t have mandated responsibilities to each other. • There are park restroom facilities on the coastline that dispose of human waste in a septic system or leachfield, just feet from the ocean. It should be possible to retrofit some of them to disinfect the waste before it goes into recreational waters. • The Department of Water Supply does not currently have a conservation program, which is needed. The Uniform Plumbing Code of 2016 with the green supplements needs to be adopted. • The Department of Public Works could do a lot of things differently. All of the overly wide roads divert rainwater to drywells. A drywell diverts storm water runoff to a hole in the ground that ultimately goes to groundwater and then the sea. • The Planning Department can do a lot more. Urban design criteria to minimize storm water runoff could be adopted, as well as mandatory reclaimed water reuse zones, and statutory permits to use graywater in all zoning districts, and so on. • The Department of Environmental Management should have “no impact” wastewater disposal, outfalls, UIC, etc., so there is negligible nutrient release and all wastewater is disinfected to the R-1 virus standard. Commercial and residential reuse wastewater should be maximized, and localized wastewater treatment and reuse should be promoted. Reuse incentives should be created to compete with fresh water, and the R-1 water main should be extended to agricultural parks and elsewhere. • In concluding, there is a mishmash of policies and agencies, and the effective management of the ocean and its resources is not occurring. If our policies were implemented with the Public Trust Doctrine in mind, we would not be in this situation today. To the extent possible within the law, this County must assume responsibility and control of its water resources and their beneficial uses. It is a big order and a costly one. • To continue down the road we’re on is creating a huge liability to the economy and lifestyles of the island. Our bays are impaired, and at some point they will impact the tourist resources this island depends upon. We need to be willing to invest in our ocean to protect it. • Guiding recommendation: In order to protect ocean and fresh water resource values and institute resilience to climate change, the County of Hawaiʻi must attain comprehensive integrated policy and pragmatic leadership for the well-being of the island. The policies of the past are a prescription for grave economic consequences and resource degradation and scarcities. The security and welfare of the people are at stake. Inaction is not an option. Chair Bennett said he realizes much of this is outside the very limited scope of the EMC, but its limited scope is part of the problem. Though DEM is moving in the right direction, what it does is a small piece of the water quality pie. A lot of the problem is with the state and federal government. He plans to write up his report as succinctly as possible and share it widely with the mayor, council, and elected representatives to see if movement can be made. 5. NEW BUSINESS a. Request from the Hawaiʻi County Charter Commission for the Environmental Management Commission’s input on how the County Charter affects its role and operations within the County, and any proposals it may have to amend the Charter. Chair Bennett said the Charter Commission wanted EMC’s input a month ago, but Hurricane Lane came and scheduling was disrupted. He proposed that, with the EMC’s approval, he could give a brief version of his water quality presentation to the Charter Commission. The commissioners were provided a handout of Chair Bennett’s “Proposed Draft Language for Charter Amendments,” which was condensed into two proposals. The first proposed language is: Shall a Department of Water be created in the government of Hawaiʻi County? The Departments of Environmental Management and the Department of Water Supply shall be merged to provide sustainable water management for multiple uses, including drinking water, water for reuse, and sustainable practices to assure the economic and environmental sustainability of the County’s people and resources. Commissioner Gaffney said that Kauaʻi and Maui counties have done this already, so it is not a radical idea, and Chair Bennett said it is one way of elevating reclaimed water to be a mix of waters that can be used. A new Water Commission would be formed to have oversight and guidance for this new department, and its overview would be all water resource issues. Chair Bennett said the second proposal is: Shall Hawaiʻi County create an Office of Sustainable Water under the Managing Director, and shall this office function to oversee and coordinate all county policies that affect all water and coastal water resources to protect the economy and wise use of water resources to provide sustainable quality water protection and climate change resilience? He explained that the head of this office would report to the managing director, who has the mayor’s authority to require the departments to work collaboratively and integratively. The Planning Department and Public Works Department would need to be part of the discussion. The political reality check on his proposals is that whoever the messenger is will get shot. He has been shot before and bounced back. It would be nice to make it more palatable and reduce the perception of disruption. The oxen will get gored but will fight back. There is a very small window of opportunity for these to make it to the November ballot. Director Kucharski said the EMC will do what they will do, but he would point out the Department of Environmental Management has more than water responsibility; and merging recycling and solid waste into water might not be the best thought out idea. Commissioner Fritz said if they do nothing, they get nothing; and Commissioner Neff said they have to do something. Chair Bennett said he could make the argument that solid waste management potentially has grave water impacts. Commissioner Pequeño suggested that perhaps just the DEM’s Wastewater Division could be merged with Department of Water Supply, instead of the entire DEM. Commissioner Neff commented that when she joined the EMC, she thought she was joining the Water Commission and did not realize it was the Wastewater Commission \[sic\]. She had been working on a study of Mauna Kea, Kaʻohe, and the aquifers. They were doing a cultural mapping of all these old systems. However, it turned out to be a small blessing for her to be on the EMC, because it looked at the underworkings of the wastewater system. She feels combining the commissions would be good. Chair Bennett said the proposals needed some tweaking before being sent to the Charter Commission. Commissioner Gaffney asked Chair Bennett if he would be given time to present, and Chair Bennett said yes, probably within a week or two. Chair Bennett said he has been advised to stress sustainability and climate change resilience. An arctic lake has thawed and is bubbling carbon dioxide. The scientists did not anticipate this. They are saying the amount of carbon trapped in the permafrost is greater than the carbon generated by burning fossil fuels. This means the catastrophic future may come a lot sooner than previously thought. Commissioner Pequeño said the first proposal, merging the Department of Water Supply and DEM, makes sense to him. The second proposal, creating an Office of Sustainable Water, should perhaps come under the umbrella of climate change and be something like the City and County of Honolulu’s Office of Climate Change. Chair Bennett said that was advice well taken. Chair Bennett said if DEM’s Wastewater Division and the Department of Water Supply are merged, then DEM’s Solid Waste Division could either be a department of its own or be incorporated into another department such as Public Works. Director Kucharski asked what would happen to the EMC if DEM ceases to exist, and Commissioner Gaffney said that was a good question because of the nature of how the EMC was created versus other commissions. It would need to be a part of the recommendation. Chair Bennett said it would require amending the Charter, because the EMC is chartered. Commissioner Pequeño said he would prefer to keep the DEM, as focus is needed on not just solid waste but waste reduction in general. He did not feel those functions would fit in the Department of Public Works. Chair Bennett said the EMC will persist unless the Charter is amended to kill it, but it may have a more limited scope of dealing with solid waste issues. Chair Bennett said it was important to have the term “wastewater” changed to “reclaimed water.” He needed the EMC’s approval to make the adjustments so he could present the proposals to the Charter Commission, and he would need a motion to do this. Ms. Mellon-Lacey said the commissioners would need to agree on what is being presented. If the wording Chair Bennett had provided them was going to be changed, how would they know what was going to be presented? Chair Bennett said it could be wordsmithed now, which will take some time, or the EMC can pass a motion that would grant him the authority to incorporate the recommended changes and communicate them. There is a short time to act. Motion and second: Chair Bennett proposed that the subcommittee, which consisted of Commissioners Fritz, Gaffney, Pequeño, and himself, make the changes to the proposed charter amendments and authorize him to communicate them to the Charter Commission. Commissioner Fritz seconded the motion. Commissioner Neff said they weren’t able to really fully talk about it because the deadline is today. Chair Bennett said he needs to communicate to the Charter Commission chair today that the EMC is prepared to provide their recommendations, and he believes the motion would give them that authority. Commissioner Neff said she would support that. Ms. Mellon-Lacey asked if the whole commission was required to vote on what the subcommittee recommends. She apologized that she is new to this. Chair Bennett said he does not know if the rules address this. Basically, the EMC would be authorizing the subcommittee to complete the process. Commissioner Pequeño clarified that the Charter Commission’s request was two- part. The first part is how the Charter affects the role of the EMC and its operations, and the second part would be any proposals to amend the Charter. Under the first part, the EMC’s role would no longer look at the Wastewater Division. Chair Bennett said they did not have time to split this hair. Commissioner Fritz suggested the Chair ask for a delay, and Chair Bennett explained there would not be time because Election Day is November 6. Realistically, the proposals are kind of radical, and he suspects the Charter Commission will just vote no. However, at least the conversation would be started. Commissioners Neff and Pequeño agreed they wanted the conversation started. Vote: All commissioners voted aye. Chair Bennett said he appreciates their support very much. b. Discussion on the recent brown water advisory in Hilo (issued September 4, 2018) due to the heavy rain and storm runoff. Commissioner Pequeño said he requested this agenda item because the advisories seem to happen quite often, and he is curious about whether it has been happening more frequently as the years go by and what has been done to improve the situation, such as signage. Chair Bennett said that when it rains hard in Hilo, the sewers will take in about 30% to 50% more water, which causes them to overflow. The Department of Health is supposed to go out and take samples to check bacteria levels. However, since storm water is always dirty, when overflows occur the DOH just declares a brown water advisory and tells people to stay out of the water. It is valid. Commissioner Pequeño wondered whether efforts had been made to mitigate the amount of overflow during storms, and Chair Bennett said the question might be what the County has done to isolate its wastewater facilities from storm water. Director Kucharski said the County does not have combined sewers and storm water. Only one location, in Pāpaʽikou, has a connection of wastewater and storm water, and they are working on modifying it. A brown water event is not designed just for a sewer overflow, because every sewer overflow and discharge has to be reported and documented. During Hurricane Lane, in which 54 inches of rain was received in four days, the brown water advisory was because of the surface runoff due to the excessive amount of water. It is his understanding that the DOH puts the advisory out. There is a lot of runoff from rainwater which is not in any way, shape, or form associated with a wastewater treatment plant. DEM did have a discharge from the Pua Pump Station which went to the discharge point 3/4 a mile offshore. Minimal ground surface water was contaminated. Sewer lids popped due to the excess water coming into the systems. Those were discharged and reported. Brown water advisories are designed by the DOH to keep people out of the water. The brown water alert during Hurricane Lane was not directly associated with sewer system overflows, but rather because the storm water impacted the beaches. Director Kucharski further stated that Councilmember Chung has asked for a presentation from DEM and other departments on October 2, 2018, and he will be providing the data to the Council. He can provide the data to the EMC. Brown water does not mean it is from the sewer—it is from a rain event. Commissioner Pequeño asked about signage, as he went to the beaches a few days after the storm and there were homemade signs taped to poles. Director Kucharski said that signage was put up by individuals and was not from the state or county. The DOH has the legislative responsibility for determining when signage is necessary. Commissioner Pequeño said it is a shame when nothing is done because it is not required, as in the case of the state not putting up signage. Director Kucharski said the state made a determination that the signs were not necessary—it was not that they didn’t feel like it. Their responsibility is to determine when signage is necessary and required. Commissioner Gaffney asked about signage specificity. Director Kucharski said DEM has signage approved by the state. If there is a release and a beach needs to be closed or a warning sign is required, DEM posts signs. Where they are posted is determined and approved by the DOH. He can provide a picture of one of their signs at the next meeting. 6. REPORTS/CORRESPONDENCE a. Director’s Informational Report • Status of the proposed Pāhala and Nāālʻehu wastewater treatment plants: A lawsuit has been filed against the County. Therefore, any discussion in open session will be limited. If they want more of a breakdown, he can provide it in executive session. Chair Bennett said that the EA has been published in The Environmental Notice, and it contains statements the EMC should speak to. Director Kucharski said there is a 30-day comment period, and informational meetings are scheduled on October 8, 9, and 10 in Pāhala. The meetings on October 8 and 9 are geared toward people who will be connected. Chair Bennett asked the commissioners if they would like to review the EA between now and the next meeting, and then have discussion on it at the next meeting, and Commissioner Neff said yes. Chair Bennett said discussion on the Pāhala project EA will be an item under New Business at the next meeting. Director Kucharski continued with his report. • Clarification of two statements he made at the June 27, 2018, meeting: Director Kucharski said the EPA had alerted him to two misstatements he had made. For the first, he had indicated an EIS would be done for Pāhala, but that is imprecise. He had intended to partake that NEPA was triggered. However, NEPA does not require an EIS in all circumstances, so he had been imprecise. NEPA was triggered and was being handled with a Joint EA for Pāhala. The second misstatement was that he erred in saying when the EAs were to be done, as the dates he gave were for the closure of the LCCs. • Status of the closure of the Hilo Landfill: It looked like it would happen in late spring or early summer of 2019. Their compacting machine is out of commission for about a month, so more air space will be taken up until it is repaired. There has not been a big waste increase due to the hurricane or eruption, so he does not see a big change in the schedule for its closure. • Status of the proposed East Hawaiʻi Organics Facility: A public meeting was held on the EA, and there was robust discussion. • Status of proposed commissioners to the EMC: Dee Fulton is pending final approval by the Council, which will leave two slots open. • Information on what profit-making waste management opportunities may exist: Director Kucharski said two come to mind. One is to have a private C&D landfill, and the other is for collection of grease traps and grease interceptors from restaurants and commercial facilities. Pacific Biodiesel used to be the primary recycler of these grease elements into biodiesel, but because of wastewater issues and their inability to have an approved wastewater treatment facility, they have stopped taking new clients. DEM has received several calls on this. Septic haulers either have to not take a full truck full of septic or come in and just do the grease trap. Nobody is set up right now to do this, and it is particularly hard on the east side because haulers would have to drive over to Puʻuanahulu to dispose of it. • Additional updates: ᵒ The revisions to the Hawaiian Earth Recycling contract for composting have been completed and the contract is awaiting the mayor’s signature. They will be starting activities required by the contract for the compost facility building and dealing with the compost receiving areas on the west side. ᵒ DEM will be going to the Council to ask for an increase in sewer fees. They have not had an increase since 2007. If their $27 fixed fee is doubled, they will still be cheaper than Kauaʻi County, and much cheaper than Oʻahu and Maui. The fee increase is just a start to help in upgrading the system. He pointed out to Commissioner Fritz, who stated during Chair Bennett’s water quality presentation that Kealakehe’s discharge was not permitted, that the discharge is permitted and fully treated pursuant to standards set by the DOH. • Report on the Director’s testimony to the Hawaiʻi County Charter Commission: Director Kucharski pointed out that he cannot argue with all of the statements made during Chair Bennett’s presentation. However, it must be noted that all the authority resides with the state, not with the county. DEM has only five sections under the Charter—they have a very limited scope and obligation. DEM was established to protect, preserve, and enhance the environment by promoting the wise management of our waste. The Charter limits DEM to waste stream operations. Regarding DEM’s duties and powers, DEM shall manage the solid waste, wastewater, and recycling programs of the County and exercise other functions as prescribed by the mayor. DEM cannot be prescribed to do something it doesn’t have an obligation to deal with. For DEM’s Statement of Policy, he wanted to add “and regulating” the wise management of our waste. Though it is implicit that DEM is to do this, the added phrase provides clarification and makes it explicit. For DEM’s Powers, Duties, and Functions, he wanted to add “and enforce” the solid waste, wastewater, and recycling programs. They have been given enforcement requirements and obligations, such as with the Styrofoam ban. If an enforcement action is pursued, it would come before the EMC. Here again, the added phrase provides clarification and makes it explicit. Given the conditions, regulations, and obligations that are being imposed upon DEM, which he does not object to, he felt it should be more explicitly stated. He will be finalizing his response to the Charter Commission with costs and what sections of the Charter would need to be modified. 7. COMMISSIONER REPORTS a. Commissioner Neff: Report on the Hū Honua Bioenergy incinerator. Commissioner Neff said Hū Honua is a biomass energy plant in Pepeō and is ʽeke located at the old mill. It is not yet open but is getting its last permit to operate. It has been a thorn in the side of the Hāmākua Coast, especially the Pāpaō ʽikou and Pepeʽeke communities, because of the burning that will take place. A hundred massive truckloads of wood will be making the long trek over from Pāhala each day, going up through Volcano, down through Keaō. There are so many negative things ʻau, into Hilo, and out to Pepeʽeke about this energy plant, and people are concerned. Commissioner Neff questioned how effective it would be to talk about Hū Honua with the EMC today, as she is not sure the EMC is the right commission to speak to. Chair Bennett asked if an EIS was done, and Commissioner Neff said no. Director Kucharski said it is exempt from an EIS. Commissioner Neff said 300,000 tons of green gas emissions per year will be carried by the trade winds. The hundred truckloads per day of logs from Pāhala will impact the roads. 21 million gallons per day will be drawn from the Hakalau aquifer every day for the next 30 years. They are seeking a permit to dispose of 21 million gallons of contaminated water back into the ground. Injection wells are close to the cliffs at Pepeō, and the ʽeke ocean water and marine life will be destroyed. Scientists have been finding that injection wells are responsible for some earthquakes. Her community is calling for a public hearing. They are looking for public input and want to have a say on what is happening. There are so many levels to the project, and people are very concerned. She said this is the short version of her presentation, since the EMC may not be the right commission to hear it. Chair Bennett said the permit is being issued by the Clean Water Branch and will be under federal government authority. Therefore, she could appeal to the Region 9 EPA if there is a belief the permit is not being managed appropriately. However, the EMC cannot do much on this matter. Commissioner Neff thanked everyone for listening and for their suggestions. 8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Gaffney said he wanted a presentation on the process of creating a special improvement district for sewers, and Chair Bennett asked if he had anyone in mind. Commissioner Gaffney asked if the Director could do so, and Director Kurcharski said it is generally handled by Finance. He could request the Finance Director to send someone to do that at an upcoming meeting. There is a process that takes place, and he can show the EMC the process they went through for the Lono Kona district, and try to get someone on the financial side. There are special rules and a full process required for improvement districts. Commissioner Pequeño said he would like a report on how the meetings and discussions went with the Charter Commission. Commissioner Gaffney said that during Chair Bennett’s presentation he had mentioned that other counties had gotten the DOH out of the loop. He would like to discuss that as a possible recommendation down the line. It would give the County more flexibility to move forward. Chair Bennett said they could request that Sina Pruder fly over and give them the nuts and bolts on how this could happen, or they could take an oral report from her and report back at the meeting. He suggested she be invited, and Commissioner Gaffney agreed. Chair Bennett said he would invite her. Commissioner Pequeño said he’d like a progress report on implementing the resolution regarding contracts. 9. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chair Bennett announced the next meeting: October 24, 2018, at the Hawaiʻi County Building in Hilo, Suite 1501. 10. ADJOURNMENT Motion, second, and vote: Commissioner Gaffney moved to adjourn, Commissioner Neff seconded the motion, and all commissioners voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 11:18 a.m. Respectfully submitted: Mary E. Fujio, Secretary (with her signature)