June 5, 1998 Department of the Navy United States of America Mr. Don Rochon Navy Public Affairs Officer C/O Pacific Special Contracts, Code 0223 Pacific Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command Pearl Harbor, HI 96861-7300 RE: Comments on Kaho'olawe Cleanup Plan Aloha, We are writing to you on behalf of the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana to recommend changes and additions to the Clean Up Plan, UXO Clearance Project, Kaho'olawe Island Reserve, Hawai'i, Contract No.: N62742-95-D-1369 prepared by Parsons-UXB Joint Venture April 27, 1998. We offer these recommendations, based upon the 22 years of experience that the 'Ohana has collectively accumulated while steadfastly working to protect the island from the abuses of the U.S. and foreign military forces and to heal Kohemalamalama O Kanaloa. We consider the recommended changes and additions to be essential for the restoration of natural and cultural resources of the island with aloha and in a manner consistent with our ancestral values of aloha 'aina and lokahi. In fact, our suggestions are based on a common sense reading of the plan, matched up again our hands-on experience with the island, from month-to-month, season-to-season, and year-to-year. We looked at the plan and thought through the ramifications of the suggested cleanup methods for the natural resources of the island and for the safety of the workers. What we raise are issues of serious concern for the healing of the land and for the safety of the workers. We hope that these recommendations are considered constructive and will be given serious consideration. Aloha 'Aina The plan needs to approach the clean up of the island in a manner consistent with aloha 'aina. The following changes need to be made in order to acknowledge that the island is a wahi pana and a pu'uhonua for the perpetuation of Hawaiian cultural customs, beliefs, and practices for eventual stewardship by a Native Hawaiian sovereign entity. p.1 - 1.1.2 The plan states that Kaho'olawe is considered to be a wahi pana (sacred place) and a pu'uhonua (place of refuge and spiritual regeneration) by "some". This is a gross understatement and implies that this is not a valid point of view. It also implies that this is NOT the perspective of those who are writing the document. The Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance Commission (KICC) and the State of Hawai'i Kaho'olawe Island Reserve Commission (KIRC), together with the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana and the Native Hawaiian people as a whole, recognize Kaho'olawe as a wahi pana (sacred place) and a pu'uhonua (place of refuge and spiritual regeneration. The cleanup of the island needs to flow from this understanding in order to accomplish the restoration of the island. p.1 - 1.1 and 1.2 The plan correctly states that the island is 28,800 acres. The presentation at the public meeting had the incorrect figure of 28,700 acres. The plan is correct. p.6 - 1858 - 1910 Skips over, yet should include the 1893 illegal overthrow of the duly established and internationally recognized Hawaiian monarchy by U.S. naval forces. Also, this section should include the fact that the Provisional Government confiscated the Crown and Government lands of the Kingdom of Hawai'i. That government set up the Republic of Hawai'i in 1894. It is the Republic which ceded the Crown and Government lands of the Kingdom of Hawai'i, including the island of Kaho'olawe to the U.S. government in 1898. However, the Hawaiian people, neither through the monarchy nor through any kind of referendum, approved of the transfer of their national lands. Also, no compensation was ever made for these lands by the U.S. government. One can reference Public Law 103-150 (which we have attached) for the account of this history as officially acknowledged by the U.S. Congress and the President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces. p.7 Military Period 1941 - 1993 This section should be broken into 2 periods - (1) Military Period from 1941 - 1979 and (2) Joint Use Period from 1980 through 1990. The joint use period is very distinct from the military period with regard to use of the island. Under the Consent Decree with the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana, initial surface clearance of 14,000 acres was conducted; ordnance impact was limited to the central third of the island; and the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana safely brought over 4,000 persons to the island for cultural, religious, educational, and scientific purposes. The final report of the KICC, Kaho'olawe Island: Restoring a Cultural Treasure also breaks these years into two distinct periods (see KICC report pp. 25 - 27) Under Military Period from 1941 - 1979: This section should make note of statehood in 1959. The KICC report notes that the Statehood Admission Act specified that lands such as Kaho'olawe were part of a larger corpus of former Crown and Government Lands ceded to the United States by the Republic of Hawai'i in 1898. Under Joint Use Period from 1980 to 1990: This section should note the re-establishment of Hawaiian customs and practices; rededication of religious and cultural sites; and establishment of new religious and cultural sites by the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana. This section can also note that the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana brought over 4,000 persons to the island for cultural, religious, educational, and scientific purposes. Current Period, p. 8 This section should note that the Apology Law of 1993, Public Law 103-150 acknowledged the illegality of the overthrow. It also acknowledged the claims of the Native Hawaiian people to the Crown and Government lands of the Kingdom of Hawai'i. (see attached) Current Period, p. 8 This section should also note that Chapter 6K states that the island will eventually be transferred to a Native Hawaiian sovereign entity. This is important to mention, yet it was left out. In citing this section of the law, can point out that the State of Hawai'i is, by statute, merely a temporary landlord. Because of the temporary nature of their stewardship of the property, the State has a set of obligations and responsibilities to the eventual final owner of the property, that are over and beyond it's obligations and responsibilities as a property owner. Current Period, p. 9 The plan should mention here that the MOU also guarantees ongoing access by the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana under the Consent Decree. This is important to note, as access will be ongoing throughout the clean up. In addition, this section might mention that the model clean up aimed at cleaning areas regularly accessed by the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana religious and cultural practitioners. COMMISSION IN DECISION-MAKING, p.36 - Figure 6 The commission itself should picture into the organizational structure of the KIRC as a box at the top, above the executive director. Since decisions about the clean up will continue to be made as the clean up is actually conducted, including the task orders for priority areas to be cleared and when available new technology should be used in the clean up, it is essential for the KIRC to be part of the decision-making. The KIRC is representative of the user groups and the landowner and it is the primary point of input for the general public. HISTORIC MILITARY, p.56 The document states that targets made from tires representative of Vietnam mock-up targets which are a type now rare have a potential to become eligible for inclusion on the National Register. This is an insult and an outrage. First of all, the Vietnam era was 30 to 35 years ago. Therefore, these sites are not eligible for the inclusion on the National Register as they are not 50 years old. Secondly, it is unclear under what criteria these would become eligible. The very fact that they were used for a brief period of time and are no longer used shows that they are NOT significant. Third, these targets if anything are a monument to the arrogance of the U.S. armed forces toward the Native Hawaiian people and the abuse of the natural and cultural resources of the island. We don't find these targets worthy of protection as a property on the National Register. THE TARGETS MUST BE DISMANTLED. As long as they are in place, they are a symbol of the abuse of the Native Hawaiian people, lands, culture and religion. They should be photographed and documented, and then removed. Legal Obligation Executive Order #10436 covenants that Department of the Navy shall render the areas of Kaho'olawe used for naval purposes of the United States "reasonably safe for human habitation." The Executive Order mentions no limitations as to the amount of funds or time required for the United States of America to complete this obligation. Title X, FY 1994 Department of Defense Appropriations Act, Public Law 103-139, 107 Stat. 1418 (Title X) assures "meaningful, safe use of the Island" and "clearance or removal of unexploded ordnance." The Memorandum of Understanding Between the United States Department of the Navy and the State of Hawaii Concerning the Island of Kaho'olawe, Hawai'i dated May 6, 1994 (MOU) states, "The Navy's cleanup plan shall provide for the removal or clearance of all unexploded ordnance from the surface of the island . . . " and "Particular sites or areas totaling in aggregate no more than 25% of the surface of the island, may be specifically identified to be cleaned up to the Tier Two standard described in Section VI.C, . . . and "An additional 5 percent of the surface of the island may be designated by mutual agreement between the Navy and the KIRC for trails or roads . . ." The Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana acknowledged that clearance of unexploded ordnance from 100 % of the surface of the island and from 30% of the island to Tier Two designated standards was as much as the U.S. Navy was willing to accomplish at that time, given the state of the technology and the moneys which had been authorized by Congress. We also realized that these were the conditions mutually agreed upon by the State of Hawai'i and the U.S. Navy in order for title to the island to be immediately transferred to the State of Hawai'i. We can accept the 100 % surface clearance of the island and the 30% Tier Two clearance as the necessary goal for the clean up under this MOU. We fully expect that this is the minimum to be fulfilled and accomplished by the U.S. Navy. Nothing less is acceptable. Should the U.S. Navy not fulfill this minimum obligation, the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana will return to insisting that the obligation that the U.S. Navy assumed under Executive Order #10436 be fulfilled. Incomplete Plan, Ongoing Process ? This is NOT a complete clean up plan. It only describes the proposed technology and method of clean up. The Plan also presents many options for possible actions. Many of the decisions as to the use of these options will be made later, after this plan is finalized. This plan should include maps of the areas to be cleaned up, in phases. The public should be able to give input on the clean up areas and phases of the clean up too - either through another series of public meetings or at the KIRC meetings. We want to see how you plan to do 100 % surface clearance and 30% Tier Two clearance. What are the phases? Will it be done simultaneously? The standard operating procedures are part of the clean up process as shown on p. 10. However, the standard operating procedures are not made available to the public. At this time the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana officially requests that the standard operating procedures be made available to the public for the cost of duplication. The Navy needs to improve the public input process. The Navy's monthly report to the public via the KIRC meetings should be more informative and it should be posted on the Internet one week before the meeting. In the 5-21-98 meeting of KIRC, the commissioners passed a motion to make documents relating to any clean up decisions they will make, one week in advance at the Honolulu and Maui offices. The Navy report should be made available at the same time in these offices of the KIRC. WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT CLEAN UP PLAN? THE REVISED PLAN, WITH RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS AND TESTIMONIES SHOULD BE CIRCULATED OR POSTED FOR PUBLIC REVIEW FOR 30 DAYS BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL. IF THE CORE ISSUES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE FINAL PLAN, WHAT IS THE APPEAL PROCESS? p. 47 Figure 11 Where it shows that the scope of work for task orders and any changes to the task orders will be done in consultation with KIRC, this should be done with the Commission and not just the staff. It should be discussed in a public meeting so that the public may keep informed of the progress being made on the clean up. Incomplete Plan - Where is the Budget? The Cleanup Plan should show the projected proposed budget for the entire project. It should show where the money is coming from and where it is going. The plan should show what the contractor paying for and what the Navy is paying for? Who is paying for infrastructure such as the airstrip and desal wells? The Navy is basing its projections on the cost of the model clean up. The cost figures for the model clean up should be made available to the public. Out of $400 million, the KIRC receives $44 million; the RFP Contract is for $280 million; and the U.S. Navy receives the balance of $76 million. The Navy states that $20 million was spent on the model, $10 million has been spent on infrastructure and camp maintenance; that still leaves $46 million. How will this be spent? Access to Data There should be a Navy/Parsons Joint Venture/KIRC WEBSITE DATA LINK. Reports on Open Burn/Open Demolition activities and Open Burn/Open Demolition Monitoring should be made available. Information on the monitoring of historic sites and reports relating to unexploded ordnance should also be made available to the public. Public data relating to the clean up should be regularly posted on a Navy/PUXB/KIRC WEB Site for public review. Quality Assurance/Quality Control As one of the primary end users of the island, and the only non-government group with recognized access to the island through 2003 we reserve the right to conduct periodic independent quality assurance/quality control checks at sites which have been cleared throughout the island, particularly in and around areas of projected human activity and the roads and the trails. We also reserve the right to do UXO assessment throughout the island. Outside Assistance We note that the project should draw upon the resources and expertise of other federal agencies and departments where it can advance the clean up and restoration of the island. These agencies would include the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Interior, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Agriculture, the National Parks Service, and Hawai'i National Guard. Safe and Healthy Working Conditions Work Day/Week, p. 43 /1.6.2.3.1 All of the workers should be treated with respect. 10 hour work days during the summer months on Kaho'olawe is impractical, inefficient and unsafe. It is unreasonable to expect the workers to get up at daybreak, ride the plane or helicopter to the island (without compensation), then work for 10 hours at an efficient level in the middle of summer under the blazing sun (for minimum pay levels); ride back to Maui or Moloka'i (without compensation). and then expect to repeat that for another three days in a row. The 8 hour schedule is more humane, practical, and safe. It is especially impractical if the operators are expected to listen for audio blips indicating anomalies for 10 hours in the hot summer sun. They need to be alert and sharp. Moreover, many workers will be operating dangerous tools and handling very dangerous materials for ten hours a day. It is not smart, productive, efficient, or safe to push the workers in such a manner. Will the workers receive overtime pay if they work more than 8 hours a day? Will the workers be getting hazardous pay? If the workers are required to get Hazmat and Hazwopper training, doesn't this mean that they are working under hazardous conditions. Doesn't the "Haz" in those words stand for hazardous? How can the work site not be considered a hazardous work area? The workers should receive hazardous pay compensation. TRANSPORTATION p. 169 and p. E-11 Should provide inter-island fixed wing transport directly to and from Moloka'i also so that Moloka'i trainees can also be hired. Site Health and Safety Plan, Appendix B, The plan speaks of forming a Kaho'olawe Volunteer Fire Brigade? Will the workers be paid to train and to function as a volunteer fire brigade? Will a volunteer fire brigade be sufficient to protect the health and safety of the workers? We insist that both PUXB,JV and the Navy individually and completely present in the Cleanup Plan their legal positions relating to the potential personal legal liabilities to be incurred by individuals acting in their capacities as members of the Kaho'olawe Volunteer Fire Brigade. What about the air landing strip? Will there be trained fire fighters to be deployed in case of an emergency? Will there be fire fighting gear, equipment, materials such as foam? The plan allows for a total of 1,050 gallons of water to be available for firefighting. Past experience with fires on the island and with airport safety indicates that this is not sufficient. Will the airstrip conform to FAA standards? The Cleanup Plan needs to include a medical evac and treatment plan for the scenario of a catastrophic crash of the largest capacity aircraft they project to use. Maui Memorial would be hard pressed to deal with 20 seriously injured persons at once. We also, request that the Cleanup Plan state the number and consequences of aircraft failures and related injuries and fatalities they project for the duration of the Cleanup. Project Methodology: UXO Detection EM-61 p. 98 - 102 The EM-61 in the field discrimination mode is an outmoded technology. We challenge your assertion that the EM-61 in the field discrimination mode is the most accurate system available. The audio mode alone is not sufficient for developing a lasting electronic record of anomalies detected by the machine. It will only provide a record of the coordinates for where the operator thinks there was something, not where the machine detected an anomaly. Relying on the audio mode, leaves so much open to human error and fatigue. Will the hearing abilities of the personnel be checked regularly? The equipment used for detection of UXO must produce and store a lasting electronic record which can be reviewed. It is arbitrary to rely on the hearing abilities of the operators to produce a lasting record of the anomalies detected by the machine. If the Navy indicates that it is open to new technologies, how does this get assessed? How will this be determined? How will it be implemented? Project Methodology: Source, Nature, and Extent of Contamination p. 71 map Figure 13 Torpedoes were also tested from Lae o Kaka to Lae o Kuakaiwa according to oral history sources All of the lae or points were used as targets - one can still see the white paint markings. Yet, there is no indication that there is ordnance along the coast. There is a lot of ordnance off Lae O Kealaikahiki. This is the area of highest concentration of ordnance in the ocean. The map should indicate that there is probably a lot of ordnance on the land too. The other area of high concentration of ordnance in the ocean was by Pu'u Koa'e. There is probably a lot of ordnance in the land areas here too. Project Methodology: Model Clearance Project p. 86 2.3.3 UXO Model Clearance Project Will the areas cleaned under the model clearance project be re-swept? The roads are being re-swept, will Hakioawa also be re-swept? Or will it be certified? What was the cost for the Model Clean Up? p.105 3.2.8.1.1 in comparison with Table 11 Hazard Severity Categories p. 105 states that the quality control manager will require 90 % confidence that the areas are 85% detected. Was this standard applied to the model clean up? Is this the standard for the "V. no hazard category" or the "IV negligible hazard category" in the Table 11 chart? If so, how does the model clean up areas measure up? Should the model clean up be category IV or V? If the model was cleared to the 90% confidence level that 85% of the unexploded ordnance was detected, then why don't these areas fall under the Category V? Will areas end up in Category V as they are cleaned up? Or will they just be category IV? Please describe the process and projected timetable for certification of areas addressed during the Model Cleanup. Project Methodology: Waste Disposal Open Burn, Appendix C, p. 84 Open burn treatment is the recommended treatment method for UXO/OE and related remnants. Please state the projected quantities and compositions of hazardous materials estimated to be disposed. How much is estimated to be disposed of using the open burn/open detonation method? Appendix C, p. 22 notes that there are different prevailing wind patterns for the island. In light of this, what are air emission standards - for tradewind days? for kona wind days? for days when there are vog conditions? We insist that the burn & burn emission monitoring reports be posted on the Navy's website On-Island Landfill? p. 134 and Appendix C, p. 97-98 Will there be on-island landfilling? If yes, where? Will Waikahalulu be cleaned up? 3X Material, p. 136 What happens to the 3X material? The presentation in the public meetings indicated that 3X materials would be treated by steam cleaning or equivalent on Kaho'olawe and Figure 24 indicates that steam cleaning will be part of pathway 1 and pathway 2. Steam Cleaning, p. 124 -125 How much and what kind of water will be used for the steam cleaning? How will seepage be controlled? How will the residue be disposed? CHASSIS, p. 145 The plan states that these will be staged on island. Where on island will these be "staged". Does "staged" mean that they will remain on the island forever? This is not acceptable. TIRES, p. 145, 149-150 and Appendix C, p. 98 TIRES should not be used for erosion control. We suggest that tires be used for markers, in place of those plastic orange posts. The tires could also be used as planters for protecting young seedlings. However, the tires are not effective for erosion control. Please indicate the estimated number of tires which are on the island. We strongly suspect that even if the tires were used for markers and in plantings, there would still be thousands of tires left over. We insist that the cleanup plan also provide for removing from the island the tires which cannot be reused in appropriate ways on the island. Metal Landfill, Appendix C p. 101 Table 26, p. 101 - 108, p. 137, p. 149 P. 137 and p. 149 states that metallic debris will be staged on-island as non-contaminated solid waste. Does this mean that the non-contaminated metal remain on the island forever? Where will it be staged? All of the metal should be removed from the island. Stockpile Areas p. 56 2.1.8 Will these stockpile areas be cleaned up? Especially the stockpile at Waikahalulu and Seagull should be removed Project Methodology: Controlled Burn???? p. 116 - 118 We do not believe that there can be such a thing as a controlled burn on the island. Experience shows that most fires on the island have run out of control very quickly. Can you give a case scenario of the kind of conditions where a so-called controlled burn might be considered feasible? Can you please explain how you will control these fires? We do not believe that 1,050 gallons of water deployed on 1 truck and 2 wheeled vehicles is sufficient to control a fire in most parts of the island. These would only be useful on the hard pan and along roads. How would you get such water equipment into other areas? That's why we ask for criteria as to the conditions where a so-called controlled burn would be allowed. Also, you will only be using volunteers to control the fire? What if ordnance is set off? How will that be handled by these volunteers? Again we ask, will these volunteer firefighters receive special pay? After the fire, how will the impact be mitigated? Such areas would have to be planted within days of the fire, especially during the rainy season. Where is the map showing the areas that are off limits to such a methodology? What then is the projected number of acres that so-called controlled burns will be allowed? What is the projected number and acreage of controlled burns that can be estimated to go out of control? We must ask, what is the purpose for using this reckless method of clearance? The plan to call Pac Helo for in-the-field fires needs to include an assessment of the capacity of Pac Helo to deal with such an occurrence. How much fire can they, through experience, deal with? What has been the Navy's experience in dealing with in-the-field fires? The use of salt water to control the burn will make it difficult to replant. We strongly suggest that the contractor consult with Hawaii Volcano's National Park staff concerning controlled burns that go out-of-control. Project Methodology: Defoliation p. 116 - 118 Again, we ask for the purpose of using this method. Please present scenarios of the kinds of conditions under which this method would be resorted to. What is the percentage of the island to be defoliated in this manner? After defoliation, how will the impact be mitigated? Such areas would have to be planted within days of the defoliation, especially during the rainy season. What zones, where is the map showing the acres that will be off limits to such a method? What is the projected number of acres for defoliation? p. 102-103 Tier I clearance should include clearance of UXO remnants. Tier II clearance should include clearance of metallic debris. If the metallic debris is not cleared, how will we know what might be under the identified anomaly? We can assume that most of the ordnance impacting the island would have exploded. Yet, if the debris is not removed how can we use metal detecting devices in the future for quality assurance/quality control to assure that a given area has been cleared of UXO? Tasking Authority Who has the final authority for task order sequencing - the KIRC or the Navy? It is not clear in the charts. Who has final authority for on-island activities? REVIEW BOARD, p. 118 At what point does the Review Board make determination as to which flags are explored more, which are marked into the GPS, etc.? REVIEW BOARD, p. 122 Whose historic preservation personnel is involved in the Review Board? The Review Board should include the KIRC culture specialist in addition to the contract personnel. REVIEW BOARD, Whose natural resource personnel is involved in the Review Board? The Review Board should include the KIRC natural resources specialist in addition to the contract personnel What is the projected task order progression? As we have noted above, opportunities for public input should be made available. The maps for the task order progression should also be made available to the public. Historic Preservation Plan - Appendix D Overall, there are too many positions for curation of artifacts. The general rule should be to leave Hawaiian artifacts in place. Hawaiian artifacts should not be removed from their original sites. Military sites, especially the tire targets should be documented and then dismantled. However, the Hawaiian artifacts should not be removed. This is a clean up plan not an archaeological field survey. It appears as if the archaeological team is trying to create tasks to create positions which are unnecessary. We agree that some artifacts may have to be removed if it is necessary to blow a piece of ordnance in place. Such artifacts should be curated and kept in a safe place on the island. The land use plan calls for a repository to be temporarily at Honokanai'a and ultimately at Kuheeia. 2.3.8.3; 2.3.8.4; 2.7.1; 3.9; 3.10 Large scale laboratory analysis should not be necessary, as Hawaiian artifacts should remain in place in the field. Why is the archaeological team planning to come up with a re-interpretation of the history of the settlement and land use on the island? That is not their responsibility. They are primarily being hired to protect the sites during the clean up process. We would hope that a field school will be organized after the clean up is completed so that a new survey of the island can be conducted in a thorough and comprehensive manner. Security, 2.7 There should be a clear no take policy which should be enforced with periodic searches. As for potential vandalism of sites from off island, we agree that the Navy should contribute to the cost of enforcement of the ocean regulations to prevent illegal access to the island. 3.10, p. D-43 This section states that historic preservation reports will not be released without prior approval of the Navy, but the KIRC should automatically be provided with this information. Infrastructure Honokanai'a Base Camp, p. 57 - map 2.1.9.1 p. 162 Should locate the generator to the back of the camp. It is too noisy to be along the shoreline. Honukanaenae place name indicates that it is a resting place and possible nesting place for the endangered species turtles. However, they have not been observed along this shore probably because of the generator noise and the lights. For the protection of these endangered species, the generator should be moved to the back of the camp. The remnants of the pier along the shoreline should also be removed. Kuheeia The proposed vehicular trail to Kaulana-Kuheeia needs more thought and discussion before a final decision is made. The development of the vehicular trail would lead to the development and use of Kuheeia as a major staging area. This could lead to major impact upon the 'ili - from the pristine nearshore reefs to the coastal and upland historic sites, and the stable vegetated ridges and slopes. The 'Ohana has discussed the proposal and we have not yet reached a consensus on whether the vehicular trail and staging area at Kuheeia is necessary. We are not yet, as a group, convinced that the impacts to Kuheeia must be endured for the longterm ongoing benefit of restoration of the island as a whole. Right now that 'ili is well vegetated and stable. We are concerned that the grading of a road would generate massive erosion of the Kuheeia 'ili. We are concerned that the design of the road going straight down from Moa'ulaiki rather than switchbacking will surely open a pathway of erosion. Some of us think that what we have at Honokanai'a is sufficient for the ongoing restoration work of the future. We would greatly appreciate more discussion to assess projected impacts and better designing and planning before a final decision is rendered about the Kaulana-Kuheeia vehicular trail. HAKIOAWA, p. 66 2.1.9.2 There is also a weather station at Kealialuna Water Development The plan for development of water resources is inadequate to meet the needs of revegetation for erosion control, for fire control, and steam thermal treatment as well as the needs of the base camp. The erosion control plan speaks of planting to mitigate cleanup impacts. However, there is no plan for ongoing watering of the plants which will be essential for their survival. If the contractor is serious about doing revegetation for erosion control, then a watering plan must be included. As we pointed out above, there is not enough water for the so-called controlled burn. It would be inappropriate and unsuitable to use salt water for the so-called controlled burn, so more water is needed for the fire control. We understand and appreciate the need to use salt water for in-the-field burns that go out of control. We hope we all agree that the use of salt water should be minimized. We also disagree with the use of salt water for dust control. We understand that this would only be used on the roads, but the salt residue would prevent the roads from compacting and would reduce the amount of vegetation along the roads. p. 53 2.1.4.4 Groundwater This section should also cite PKF Water Resources Study, 1990 Transportation Plan AIRSTRIP SAFETY Will the airstrip comply with FAA and DOT standards? Again, we raise concern about the provision of trained fire and rescue personnel to be ready to respond with the proper equipment and supplies in case of an emergency. While the rapid mat system is good for low impact to the land, is it also safe? We know how muddy the island gets when it rains. Will the planes be able to safely land in rainy weather? Perhaps asphalt is necessary for the safety of the workers. These are civilian employees not troops who are expected to land under adverse conditions for battle training. p. 169 Should provide fixed wing interisland transport directly from Moloka'i also Appendix E, p. E-1 The reference to the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana method of access to the island as inherently dangerous and not permitted under Hawai'i OSHA standards is an unnecessary slur and slander upon the 'Ohana. Our access transportation method is as much a cultural rite of passage for entry as it is a reasonable method. In 18 years of access, the 'Ohana has been guided by our akua and 'aumakua in having a safe entry and access to Kaho'olawe. It is insulting and totally inappropriate for the contractor/Navy to comment upon our access transportation method. Since our access transportation method is irrelevant to the clean up and at any rate could not be considered an alternative since it would not be permitted under Hawai'i OSHA standards then reference to it should be taken out. p.16 Administrative Chart For the Memorandum of Understanding, with regard to "Access" the third column should note that the PKO Consent Decree access is also guaranteed under the MOU. There is also a Letter of Understanding between the KIRC and the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana which guarantees continued access by the 'Ohana. p.27 1.5.4 f - The plan speaks of escorting by qualified contractor UXO escort personnel of visitors authorized by COMNAVBASE. Will this include PKO access? p. 37 PUXB Team Member Organizational Structure BPI is not shown in the chart. Yet, BPI was one of the few Section 8 local contractors in the Joint Venture. During the model cleanup BPI was one of the main firms hiring grassroots local workers. What was the role of BPI in the scoring of the Parsons-UXB Joint Venture? Are they to be included in the joint venture? If not, who will take their place? The chart does not show a replacement. Environmental Restoration/Mitigation by Navy The KIRC should have the final authority for approving activities undertaken for environmental restoration and mitigation by the Navy and the contractor. We are especially concerned that the contractor may use non-native species for revegetation. This option should only be undertaken with the approval of the KIRC staff and from the list of non-native plants approved by the Kaho'olawe Island Reserve Commission. Please indicate in the plan, the projected types, quantities, and anticipated sources for native species to be used in restoration/mitigation. Please indicate in the plan the projected types, quantities and anticipated sources for non-native species to be used in restoration/mitigation. Closeout and Certification p. 127-128 The actual process and standards for certification are vague. It is of particular concern because the model cleanup areas have not been certified, nor has the process to consider certification of the model cleanup area been defined. The document for the process of transfer of access control to the state by the U.S. Navy was to have been completed by May 9, 1998. It is not completed. The cleanup plan refers to the possible extension of transfer of access control beyond November 11, 2003. Under what conditions would such an extension be necessary? Erosion and Runoff Control Standards p. 191 and Appendix C We will also submit our comments on the erosion and runoff control standards directly to the KIRC before it meets to approve the standards. RAINFALL DATA AND MAPS The rainfall maps and distribution charts are based on rainfall on Lana'i from 1962. Lana'i has a very different rainfall pattern. Besides, more recent data is available and for Kaho'olawe from Tom Giambellucca or Dave Penn at the UH Manoa Geography Department. The rainfall distribution chart does not seem to accurately reflect the seasonal rainfall pattern that we are familiar with on Kaho'olawe. TIRES, 3.5.4.5 Tires are not effective for use as erosion control. Out of all the places that the tires were used, there are only a few areas where they were actually effective. The proposed design will promote channeling. Unless the proposed design can be actually be shown to be effective on Kaho'olawe, they should not be used. What is being suggested? Will the tires be thrown into the pits created by Blow In Place Detonations? That won't work. In the few places that tires have been effective, they can stay in place. In the other areas they should be removed. The plan states that the use of tires will only be limited by available basis of discarded tires. There are thousands and thousands of tires on the island. Please do an estimate. The availability of the tires should not be the limit. There should be a limit to the use of tires. As we note above, we could agree with their use as markers for corridors and for plantings, but not for erosion control. SOIL MAP Tom Giambellucca and Keith Loague's work on the Kaho'olawe soils and soil permeability should be considered in decision about erosion control measures which would be appropriate at different points of the island. Their data and maps should be incorporated into the plan so that the information is factored into the decision-making about what is appropriate mitigation measures in any given soil type area. INTERIM MITIGATION, 3.4.1 You cannot wait 30 days before planting soil areas exposed due to clean up activities, especially as a so-called interim measure. Interim measures need to be implemented within 3 days, at most. If the area is exposed in a windy area, or during the rainy season, planting should really take place immediately or the following day DUST CONTROL, 3.4.1.5 Ocean water can only be used on the roads for dust control. If it is used elsewhere then it will cause serious erosion problems because no planting could occur. Ocean water cannot be used anywhere that future vegetation will occur. This would limit its use to the roads. PLANTING WITH NATIVE PLANTS, 3.4.2.1 There is no provision for the watering of plants. The source and method and frequency of watering the plants should be included if this is to become a reality. RIPRAP APRONS, 3.5.4.1 What will be the source for the rocks and stones for the riprap aprons? CONTROL MEASURES FOR SOIL DISTURBANCE CAUSED BY "BLOW IN PLACE" AND DIGGING UXO DISPOSITION Depression pits created by the detonation or excavation of UXO should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to assess the erosion threat. If a depression pit increases the risk of erosion in an area, mitigation measures should be initiated in and around the pit. As a general rule, ordnance depression pits and the surrounding area should be seeded or planted with appropriate native species. This measure should be done no less than 3 days after the impact. In windy areas and during the rainy season, planting should take place as soon as possible. Protocol The protocol for those working on the island should be noted in the Cleanup Plan. This should include a prohibition of alcohol and illegal drugs on the island. It should encourage the chanting or some form of acknowledgment upon entry and departure of the island, in acknowledgment of the land as wahi pana and pu'uhonua. It should prohibit taking anything off of the island that was not brought over by the workers or the contractors. It should prohibit consumption of the marine resources of the reserve. Mahalo for this opportunity to comment on the Cleanup Plan. Due to time constraints we were unable to carefully review all of the appendices and may address additional issues as they arise for discussion in the meetings of the Kaho'olawe Island Reserve Commission. During the omnibus cleanup the Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana will continue to access Kaho'olawe to fulfill our role as steward of the island. We plan to develop the kahua kauhale, water catchment systems, and revegetation areas at Hakioawa. This will involve extended stays on the island for longer periods of time. We will monitor the health of the natural resources throughout the island and we will continue to care for the cultural sites and use areas throughout the island. As mentioned above, we also reserve the right to conduct quality assurance/quality control checks during the course of the cleanup. Please contact Dr. Davianna Pomaika'i McGregor if you have any questions regarding this document. She compiled the document based upon the mana'o of the 'Ohana Cleanup Plan Review Committee expressed in discussions and in written comments. Malama pono, Dr. Davianna Pomaika'i McGregor for Protect Kaho'olawe 'Ohana As Prepared by: 'Ohana Cleanup Plan Review Committee Henry Hildebrand Leslie Kuloloio Manuel Kuloloio Burt Lum Davianna McGregor Joe Neilson Mary Neilson Burt Sakata Adrienne Tsukiyama cc Kaho'olawe Island Reserve Commission Hawai'i's Congressional Delegation Senator Daniel Inouye, Senator Daniel Akaka, Congressman Neil Abercrombie, Congressman Patsy Mink