BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI
REGULAR BOARD MEETING
THURSDAY, JULY 22, 2004
9:00 a.m.
Kahului Shopping Center
Kaahumanu Avenue
Kahului, Maui, Hawaii
Reported by: Katherine Eismann, RDR, CRR, CSR #439
APPEARANCES
Chairperson: MICHAEL VICTORINO
Vice Chairman: KENNETH OKAMURA
Board Members: KENT M. HIRANAGA
STACY HELM CRIVELLO
GINNY PARSONS
DOROTHY R. PYLE
SALLY RAISBECK
RALPH JOHANSEN
Corp Counsel: EDWARD KUSHI
Director: GEORGE TENGAN
Deputy Director: JEFFREY T. PEARSON
Board Secretary: CATHY HOWARD
Staff: HOLLY PERDIDO
PAUL SEITZ
ALVA NAKAMURA
JACKY TAKAKURA
(Thursday, July 22, 2004, 9:05 a.m.)
* * * * *
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I'd like to call this meeting
to order of the Board of Water Supply. This is July 22nd,
2004. Present today is Stacy Crivello, Kent Hiranaga, Ken
Okamura, Sally Raisbeck, Ralph --
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Johansen.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: -- Johansen. Got it. Just
want to catch you out. See if you got it. And Dorothy Pyle
and myself here, Mike Victorino.
I'd like to -- announcements, I would like to open
up the floor for announcements.
(Silence.)
Okay. None. Then I will go into approval of the
minutes from the June 23rd, 2004, regular meeting.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Ah, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I have corrections to the
minutes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Okay. We will take
note of the corrections.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: On page five --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It's not on, Sally. It's not
on. Sorry. We are having technical difficulties.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Hello, hello, hello, hello.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: All right.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay. Page five, line 22,
what is there is D-A-M-N, and it should be capital D-A-M, Dam.
On page 11, line 25, 12.7 gallons should be
12.7 billion gallons. Page 107, line 20, Kim, K-I-M, should
be Ken, K-E-N. On page 17, line 1, page 18, line nine, page
18 line 12, lead, L-E-D, should be lead, L-E-A-D.
On page 110, line 18 -- this was a really funny
one. What I read, power treatment, power treatment, and from
the context, it turned out to be Carl Friedman, but it sounds
a lot like.
(Laughter.)
Okay. Page 111, lines two, 20, and 22,
209 million should be $109 million. And page 111, line 6,
$250 million should be $150 million. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Ms. Raisbeck. Any
other corrections to the minutes of June 23, 2004?
(Silence.)
If not, could I have a motion to approve the
minutes with the corrections incorporated?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: So move.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It's been moved and seconded
that the minutes from the June 23, 2004, be accepted with the
corrections. All those in favor say aye.
(Chorus of ayes.)
Opposed.
(Silence.)
Okay. We will now go to public testimony, and we
have a few people that would like to testify, am I correct?
We have Sharon Elston? Am I reading that right? E-L -- is it
E-L --
MS. ELSTON: E-L-S-T-O-N.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Sharon, would you like
to come up and give your testimony, please?
MS. ELSTON: Okay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I apologize. Excuse me. If
you would like to, you can wait until the agen -- the item
that you are speaking on comes up on the agenda, if you so
want to wait to that point.
MS. ELSTON: I would like to.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay, Sharon. That's fine.
Thank you. You guys -- excuse me. I'm not a good
handwriting-reading-kind-of person. I know who you are. Do
you want to speak now or wait until your agenda item?
MS. KRASH: Later.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Later. Okay.
MS. KRASH: It will be shortly though.
(Boardmember Parsons entered the meeting room.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, we will wait. The public
testimony will come with their agenda item, if that's okay
with the Board. Please make note that Member Parsons is now
present at the meeting.
Okay. Moving right along to communications, we
will start with Item 04-07, letter from Fred Asuncion, Maui
Realty, requesting water meter for 11 Alea Street in Pukalani,
TMK (2)2-3-30-49. We have the letter here.
Okay. Is anybody here to speak on behalf --
Mr. Asuncion, would you like to -- I did not notice you.
Sorry, Mr. Asuncion.
MR. ASUNCION: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good
morning to all the Board Members.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Asuncion, speak into the
microphone, so that we can better hear you, please.
MR. ASUNCION: Okay. Testing. Testing. Testing.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: There you go.
MR. ASUNCION: Okay. Thank you. Again, good
morning to Chairman and Board Members. My name is Fred
Asuncion, broker in charge at Maui Realty Company.
And I am here representing the Nakamuras, who own
a vacant lot in Pukalani, for which I am requesting for a
waiver of requirements of Section 3-1 of the Department of
Water Supply Rules and Regulations in concerns to getting the
water meter. I want to thank you for placing my request on
your recent agenda.
To eliminate redundancies, all the facts and
issues of the situation are outlined in the report prepared by
the engineering staff of the Department. Just to make a few
observations, the existing vacant lot in question was a part
of a three lot residential subdivision that was approved in
1976.
With the approval, the owners paid the water
storage assessment and made deposits for service laterals for
the lot. However, there was a requirement for water
requirement -- improvements as required by Section 3-1 that
was deleted, for whatever reason, before the granting of the
final subdivision approval.
Now, the owners want to apply for a water meter
for this lot, and we were made aware that Section 3-1 must be
complied with before a water meter can be issued for this lot.
The requested water improvement, as explained by staff, is the
installation of a fire hydrant at the site.
This means an 8-inch waterline would be required,
because the existing waterline servicing the existing
subdivision is a 4-inch waterline. This situation further
means that the 8-inch waterline needs to be brought to the
site, and the closest source for an 8-inch waterline
connection is approximately 1500 feet away.
So, for the owners to get a water meter, they are
required to install 1500 feet of -- lineal feet of 8-inch
waterline to the site for a fire hydrant in a subdivision that
is currently being served by a 4-inch waterline and stand pipe
for fire protection.
This, no doubt, would be a costly proposition for
the owners to comply with the requirements of Section 3-1 in
order to get a water meter. To impose this requirement seems
unfair. Rules are necessary. However, there are exceptions
to the rules, and I believe this situation is an exception.
Again, your favorable consideration in granting a
waiver of Section 3-1, in conjunction with getting a water
meter, would be greatly appreciated by the owners. Again,
thank you for allowing me to present my request to you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Do any Board Members have
questions for Mr. Asuncion? Miss Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Never mind. I want to
review something first before I ask this. Okay. Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other questions?
Ms. Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I am sorry. I have
questions for the Department not Mr. Asuncion.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Let's start with Mr. Asuncion
first, and then, if not, go to the Department. Mr. Okamura.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Mr. Asuncion, you said that,
in this case, it is an exception. You feel that this
particular case should be exempted or is an exception from the
rule? Can you explain why you said that? Why do you think
it's an exception?
MR. ASUNCION: Well, I feel that the subdivision
was approved back in 1976. And the requirement for complying
with the Section 3-1 actually was deleted. And I feel because
of that -- and all the required fees have been paid. I feel
that it should be exempted. And I think the cost, to put all
of these improvements, would -- I would -- my guess would be
would exceed the value of the particular lot. It would be
useless for its purpose which is residential use.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Just for factual purposes,
you know that subdivision that's across the street from you,
the new one?
MR. ASUNCION: Kuaaina.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Yes. How far would you
say --
MR. ASUNCION: 1500 feet.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: How many?
MR. ASUNCION: 1500 feet.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: And you are right in the
middle of this subdivision area, and that's not really that
big. So, maybe another 500 feet of frontage, right? So,
maybe total, to the end of that, might have been 2,000 feet,
do you think?
MR. ASUNCION: Probably.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Thank you. I have a
question for the Department.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any others questions for
Mr. Asuncion before we move on to questions for the
department? Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Hi, Fred.
MR. ASUNCION: Hi.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Fred, you have had a
chance -- let me see. You have had a chance to review the
Upcounty Meter Issuance Rule for 2002?
MR. ASUNCION: I beg pardon? I didn't get it.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Did you have a chance to
review the Upcountry Meter Issuance Rule of 2002?
MR. ASUNCION: Not necessarily in detail.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: You should review that,
because it pretty much states why the Department came up with
their decision. And this was a rule that the Board of Water
Supply enacted in order to address the issue of the water
moratorium and the issuance of the meters to the Upcountry
area.
And it's been applied quite consistently, to the
entire Upcountry population, so it becomes very difficult
to -- for us to -- or for me to see a need for an exception.
There are many people caught in this situation, and it's
because of the lack of source. And it's the Department's
position that the distribution system must be adequate or up
to code before they will issue a water meter. And a lot of it
relates to, I think, the insurance issue of obtaining a
building permit.
Even if they were to receive a meter, they will
have issues with regard to a building permit. The other
question is what did you have the property listed at?
MR. ASUNCION: Well, when we first started listing
this property -- which, you know, we took it off the market.
It was listed at 145. And I would imagine today, if there was
a water meter, probably would be in excess of 200,000. And
the reason why we pulled the listing is basically because of
this requirement to bring in the 8-inch line, and it became
really unmarketable after that.
We had some -- we had an offer, and then we
dropped out of escrow because of that requirement. And there
is no reason for us to market it anymore, because there are no
takers for the property because of the requirement.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other questions for
Mr. Asuncion before I go to the Department?
(Silence.)
Okay. Mr. Asuncion, I will now, if you don't
mind, let the Department respond. I think Ms. Raisbeck had
the first question, as far as regarding the Department, and
then Miss Parsons next. Anyone after that, please just raise
your hand. Let me know.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, I wanted to first
thank the Department very much for providing a real memo
responding to this request. I have asked, in the past, to
have that kind of memo laying out the history and the reasons,
and I am very happy to see it. So, thank you very much.
I know it says there are no pipeline replacement
projects scheduled for the area within the next six years.
And this brings up the fact that this request is another
example of a whole class of requests where older areas that
would not be considered -- I mean, for the people who live
there now, the existing houses there are probably not -- the
fire flow requirements for them do not meet modern standards.
And, so, to me, this brings up a policy question
for this Board of -- and the Council, who will have the actual
authority -- as to how much of the Department's CIP should be
going to upgrade older areas, so that individual, unbuilt-upon
lots don't have to fund the entire cost of upgrading.
This has a personal interest to me, because I live
in an older area in Wailuku, where the houses -- the older
houses there are 50 years old. There have been a lot of
houses built, but the lots were divided. The lot right next
to me is a large lot that was told they would have to put in a
hydrant and an upgraded waterline if they wanted to subdivide.
The rest of the lots in the area had mostly been
subdivided earlier and weren't subject to that requirement.
So, it just seems to me that, to meet the needs of the people
who are already on the system, we should be considering
whether or not the Department should be investing more money
in upgrading systems, so that the individuals, in those older
areas, don't have to do it themselves.
This doesn't help Mr. Asuncion, but I think it's
an important question, since there is an entire class of
people who -- first of all, it's a safety issue, that areas --
older areas in the County don't have adequate fire protection,
and the Department, apparently, isn't doing anything about
that, unless someone like Mr. Asuncion's client comes in and
wants to build and, therefore, has to fund the upgrade. So,
just making that comment.
What would it take, George -- I will get to a
question now. What would it take, George, to have the
Department fund an upgraded fire protection for whatever area
there doesn't meet current standards --
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I don't think we can --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: -- in the Upcountry areas?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I don't think we can place a
figure on that right now. We haven't got any in-depth,
detailed study with regard to replacement of inadequate lines.
I do know that we had a study prepared back in the
early '90's, I believe. And to replace some of the lines or
most of the lines Upcountry would total nearly -- it was
County-wide -- total nearly $65 million.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: What?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: $65 million in early 1990
dollars.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Miss Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I'm going to say this,
because we are going to get into it in a little bit. But we
have a workshop coming up, which I think is going to be really
enlightening to the Board Members, because it's going to be
with Planning, and it's going to be with the Fire Department.
And it's my understanding that the Fire Department
has trucks that pump with pressure. And, so, they really
aren't concerned with how much pressure is coming into each
one of the hydrants, because their trucks are made to pump.
So, that, in itself, from a safety factor --
that's why the County invested in those type of trucks. And
while I agree that where we should look for improvements, we
should be looking at subdivisions, but I'm thinking more on
the line of developers making big subdivisions.
And that's why I asked Fred how far away was this
subdivision across the street that was built in the '90's,
right? I guess, late, mid-90's. Why in the world -- why in
the world we didn't have somebody say, okay, you want to put
this huge subdivision in here -- because there's a lot of
dollars that are made from these subdivisions -- take another
2,000 feet, and cover the subdivision that's across the
street.
It would make perfect sense. You know,
2,000 feet, when they already had to do whatever improvements
they had to do, if they had to do any to do this, should have
been done then, not at the penalty of residents with a
three-lot subdivision.
So, with that said, is there any way that that
improvement can be done if or -- or do we know if the property
across the street is asking to be developed, because that now
is field. Do we know that? And if it is, that's where the
dollars should come for the pipeline improvement.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any response, George, to --
do you have any knowledge as far as that question about
development across the street?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Chair, I'm not aware that there
is anything happening across the street, and I will wait
before I comment.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Maybe we ought to
investigate that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yeah, why don't we make a
request and see if we can check with Planning on that one.
Any other questions? Yes, Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Actually, it's question for
the applicant.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: A question for the applicant,
for Mr. Asuncion. Go ahead.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Have the owners applied to
be placed on the waiting list?
MR. ASUNCION: No, we decided not to because of
this. We haven't requested for -- to be on the wait list
because of this big hurdle that we need to clear. There's no
sense of putting our name on the wait list if we have to go
through all of this improvements.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Thank you. For the
Department, how many people, approximately, on the wait list
currently? How many names on the wait list?
MR. NAKAMURA: I believe the last time I checked
it was something in excess of 800.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Does that include the
applications since December of 2002?
MR. NAKAMURA: I believe so.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Have you cleaned out the
duplication in that list yet?
MR. NAKAMURA: I believe we are working on that,
the cleaning out of the duplications, yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Anything else for the
Department or for Mr. Asuncion? Then I gather -- I would like
a motion, if someone would make a motion, to recommend, I
guess, an exception. I guess what I am looking for is a
motion so we can --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Discuss it.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Or at least vote on it. If
someone can make a motion then we will move on that.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I would like to make a
motion that we recommend that the Department get together with
Planning and see what's in phases for development in that lot
across the street or in the near area, and see where we might
be able to come up with some pipeline improvements, and,
therefore, be able to help Fred Asuncion out with this issue,
and, also, take into consideration, in their review, that the
fire trucks have their own pumping capabilities for pressure.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. It's been moved and
seconded. I think the -- if I can kind of paraphrase the
motion, you are asking the Department to look into the matter
of whether there is any immediate development or some
development planned for across the street, first of all. And,
secondly, and if that's not possible, then what else would
you -- just to make sure the motion is correct. Check that.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Bring it back -- bring it
back here if it's not.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, what we are recommending
or what we are asking is if you can look at Planning, ask them
if there is anything to be developed across the street. If
so, when and if that could be tied in.
And I think the fire truck part, I don't think is
the real key in this. I think it's just a matter of whether
something is going to be done in that area immediately,
Mr. Asuncion, so that you guys would have some assistance in
getting the pipeline in, yeah.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Could I ask that the
Department could also specify how large an area there -- if
this is Pukalani, next to the old Haleakala Highway, before
the road that goes over to Pukalani Shopping Center, correct?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I'd like to know how much
of that area is inadequately served with water for fire
protection.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Let's not confuse the
motion with another request. Okay.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Let's save that for, you
know, under the requests for the Department. Maybe that is
better suited, Ms. Raisbeck, at that point. Keep that in the
background. We will bring it up at a later point. I know
what you are trying to get to.
I don't want the motion to be confused with
another request with the motion. Thank you, Ms. Raisbeck. I
am sorry.
Any other discussion on the motion itself?
Ms. Pyle.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I'm not exactly sure this is
exactly on the subject of this motion, but I think it's
related. I still am confused -- maybe it's just me -- what
the Fire Department's requirements are for fire protection,
the Water Department's requirements are for fire protection,
where or how can we get -- maybe this workshop that's coming
up is the way.
How can we get clarification about some of these
issues, because I know that when we talked about things in the
last meeting, that the Fire Department's requirements were
really different than the Water Department's requirements.
And, so, where is the hangup for the Building Department?
It doesn't seem like things are evenly applied
across the board. And that for someone, whether it's someone
like Mr. Asuncion, who is here, or the owner, the information
that they get is unclear and sometimes in opposition to
itself.
So, I don't know what role we can play as a board,
but I think that it's really important that this whole issue
be clarified for the general public. And I don't know how to
do that. I have asked, and I don't get any answers.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Just not to prolong
the discussion, and I don't mean to cut -- no, I understand
what you are saying, Dorothy. And what I would like to do
is -- I think one of the first steps, in your question and for
all of us, is that workshop. I think that will start us on
the right direction. Okay.
And, so, instead of belaboring the point, let us
start with that first, ladies and gentlemen, and then --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Defer this.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Whatever. I don't care. Let
me finish. And then from there, we can really maybe make some
educated decisions on this process.
Okay. So, right now, I think some of us grapple
with the whole system itself, and I think that's one of the
challenges we face. Unless there's other discussion on the
matter, I am going to call for a question.
Yes, Ms. Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Can you restate the motion?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons?
Can you restate the motion as was presented?
THE REPORTER: "Boardmember Parsons: I would like
to make a motion that we recommend that the Department get
together with Planning and see what's in phases for
development in that lot across the street or in the near area,
and see where we might be able to come up with some pipeline
improvements, and, therefore, be able to help Fred Asuncion
out with this issue, and, also, take into consideration, in
their review, that the fire trucks have their own pumping
capabilities for pressure."
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. That's the motion.
That's the motion we are voting on. Okay? Any other
questions? All those in favor signify by saying aye.
(Chorus of ayes.)
Opposed.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Opposed.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I count -- okay. I am going
to ask for hands. All in favor raise your hand. Five. All
opposed? Two.
Okay. The ayes have it. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Asuncion. Other than what I
have -- what was decided, we really got to look into the
matter and see what we can come up with to help you on that
one. Thank you, Mr. Asuncion.
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL: Mr. Chair, for
clarification for the Department, is that motion, I take it,
as a deferral on this matter?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL: So, it will be
continued.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, and that's what the
recommendation basically amounts to, yeah, a request.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Did we vote on that? We
didn't vote on the deferral. We voted on the motion.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Mr. Chair, I move that we defer
this item to the nearest closest next time after our workshop.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And the workshop is scheduled
for?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: That's what we are going to
decide.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: We need to decide. That's why
I can't give you a date or a meeting time, but the nearest
closest time after the workshop.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Instead of making a motion,
we will defer it.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: You have to make a motion.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I make a motion.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: All in favor of deferral say
aye.
(Chorus of ayes.)
All opposed.
(Silence.)
Okay. Moving right along, we go to item
Communication 04-08, letter from Danny Mateo, Chair of the
Water Resources Committee, requesting the Boards' comments on
the Department of Water Supply's plans to change the corrosion
control program.
I think you all have the letter on page 17, if I
am not mistaken. The letter was addressed to me, but to all
Board Members, so we want to -- I have not responded to it.
No, not yet.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: It's to you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It's to me and all members of
the Board.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, that's why I wanted it
placed on the agenda for you to review it.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I would love to make a
comment.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: At this point, Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: On Monday night, George, you
made a comment that bothered me when they asked you --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Please explain Monday night.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Monday night -- I am sorry.
This last week, when we had the Upcountry meeting for the
status on the -- Mr. Pang's study. And one of the community
members asked you what is the -- what are the -- you know,
what's in the water -- in the water right now.
And, number one, nobody that attended that meeting
had any details of what the pH levels were or where the --
where the chlorine levels were. We didn't know. We didn't
have it in hand.
But one of the comments they asked -- somebody
else asked you, have we flushed out all of the phosphoric
acid. And your remark was, well, we think we are getting it
all.
Now, I have been in contact with the EPA and
discussed the fact that one of the most important things we
did, before we put the soda ash in -- and I will state right
now, I was opposed to putting the soda ash in, as quickly as
we did, without a little more research.
One of the things the EPA said that we needed to
do was to make sure that the lines were thoroughly flushed,
everything, thoroughly, thoroughly flushed, without any
phosphoric acid in there at all, before we put soda ash in.
And there's no way that can happen in the timeframe that we
had.
And I know the DOH wrote you a letter and let you
off the hook, so you didn't have to complete a nitrification
study, and you didn't have to do a full flushing program.
But, if there was still the possibility of phosphoric acid in
the lines anywhere, and you added this in, what -- I mean, are
you -- are you looking at that possibility?
I mean, I have had several phone calls, in the
last week, of people that are just sick with one thing or
another, indigestion, diarrhea. There's a meningitis case in
Pukalani. And, no, you can't pin it to the water yet, but the
minute somebody does their own testing and finds bacteria --
which I understand Dr. Edwards did find some bacteria at a
point of entry -- once they do this, George, we have a
liability issue.
So, can you clarify that statement? We think we
got -- we got most? We are getting most of it?
By the way, I brought you all a little present. I
thought maybe you might be thirsty, and you might like to have
some water out of my tap. And I want to see who has got the
nerve to drink it.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons, Ms. Parsons.
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL: Mr. Chair, is that
necessary? Come on.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I would have to ask you to
put that over there, please. If you want to do anything of
this dramatic stage, I first would like to know that you are
requesting something of that nature. So, would you kindly
have your seat, and thank you very much. No theatrics will be
held in our meeting. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Help yourselves anybody who
would like it.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Ms. Parsons.
Appreciate it.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I drink it all the time.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: All right. Going back to
Director Tengan.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, I will only respond
by referring to this table that I have here.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: On June 24th, we established the
levels which the phosphates were in the system.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Subsequent to that, the first
readings we took was on June 24th, 2004, and they showed the
levels of phosphates in the water. June 28th, we stopped
adding phosphates, and we started with the soda ash treatment.
On July 21 -- I mean, July 1 --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Wait a minute. I missed --
I want to clarify. On June 28th, you stopped it, and you
started adding soda ash?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: We stopped on July 28th -- I
mean, June 28th.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: June 28th you stopped, and
you started with the soda ash?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: And on June 24th, you had
phosphates in the water?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: We had established the level of
phosphates in the water.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Geez.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Did you establish the levels
before you added the soda ash?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: That was the base level that we
had been working with right now.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: That was the base level.
There is no way. Okay. Go ahead. I am sorry.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: May I continue?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, go ahead.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I'd like a copy.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I'd appreciate it if I wasn't
interrupted, too.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Can we -- excuse me. I will
say this unequivocally to all in this room. As long as I'm
the Board Chair, I would like meetings to be conducted in a
business-like manner without emotions being carried forward.
Okay. Do I make that clear to all? If you do not
like that, you can vote me out. But I also like our business
meetings conducted as a business. You have a question, let's
keep the questions as questions and not have emotion or
theatrics. Okay. I do not want to see this happen again.
Thank you very much to all.
Go ahead, Mr. Tengan.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair. July 1st,
we took another sample of the water, and we measured the
phosphates in the water, and it showed a reduced amount of
phosphates in the water.
Then on July 8, we continued with the sampling.
And in several areas, we are now down to nondetect. That
means that's no traceable levels of phosphates in the water,
and that's at the Kamole Weir Vault C, Kokomo Tank, the Lower
Kula Treatment Plant, Kula Kai Tank, Omaopio Road Stand Pipe,
Piiwaie Stand Pipe, and the Upper Kula Treatment Plant. And
in all the other areas, we show a reduced level of phosphates.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Is it possible to get a copy
of that report? Is that possible, George?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Question.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Go ahead.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Anyway, first of all, point
of order. Why are we discussing this particular issue now?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: This was -- as it says here,
this was a request for our comments as far as the change in
the corrosion control. Okay. And it is addressed to myself
and all Board Members. So, I thought it only fitting that the
Board discuss it.
It wasn't to me -- I am sorry. I got to figure
out this phone yet. Sorry, gang. So, that's why I brought it
to the Board. It was -- it does say that it's to be discussed
for comments by the Board.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Right now, we are talking
about some other issue, which is why the phosphates were --
you know, why the soda ash was done at a particular time
versus having -- and what the problems might be in regards to
phosphoric acid.
I thought the particular item we are talking about
was what our comment would be to Danny Mateo regarding the
current water program. So, is this part of it, too?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I would concur it is part of
the discussion. Stacy. Okay. So --
MR. PEARSON: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Pearson.
MR. PEARSON: I would like to make a couple of
clarifications on Boardmember Parsons' statements concerning
nitrification and flushing.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: All right.
MR. PEARSON: The June 23rd letter, which was the
letter that directed the Department of Water Supply that we
could begin the soda ash treatment, listed a bunch of criteria
in the letter that was required by the Department of Water
Supply in conjunction with switching over to soda ash.
Criteria -- as Boardmember Parsons stated,
nitrification testing was one of the criteria. Flushing was
another criteria. And it wasn't just flushing. It was more
in detailed called unidirectional flushing, which meant that
you were to not just flush an area here and an area there, but
that you have a controlled flushing program where you work
your way down the line, unidirectional flushing, in order to
more or less flush the entire system in a controlled method.
That is what was discussed in that letter.
Under both of the paragraphs discussing those
items, it was -- I think it was even starred, but it stated
this is not a prerequisite for the Department of Water Supply
to change over to soda ash.
In other words, you could change over to soda ash
now, and begin that nitrification testing and the flushing.
It's a public letter, so I am sure we can make copies to
anybody that's aware of that, okay, that would care to see
that letter.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, we would like copies of
that. Okay. Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I would like to add
something to that. I have an e-mail from Bruce Macler from
the EPA on the Friday before you started this. And it was his
understanding that there would be a full, completed
nitrification study and a flushing program. And that he was
not aware that you were starting on Monday.
And, so, your letters from the DOH -- and this is,
you know, whether or not -- what's controlling is probably
semantics. But, when the community brings in the EPA -- it
wasn't the Department of Water that brought them in. It
wasn't -- it wasn't the County administration that brought
them in. It was the community that brought in the EPA,
because they weren't getting action.
I think the EPA should have been thoroughly
consulted. And it's apparent, because I have got the letter,
where -- you know, I got the e-mail. They weren't. And I
will be glad to share that with you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Member Parsons, that
will be ideal also. I mean, if you have information that
needs to be shared with the rest of us, we would appreciate it
and have that put on the agenda item.
Any other discussion in this matter? Ken.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: I think, from my perception
here, with the residents' problems with water, that the Board
did all right. Did well in trying to correct the issue as
quickly as possible. That was one of the things that was, I
think, the most important thing for them.
From the last -- not this past meeting, but from
the previous meeting, the community was really asking that
something be done quickly and not just fool around and wait
some more and do some more tests and things like that. And I
think that is what the Department was trying to respond to.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Pyle.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Actually, I agree on many
different things to agree or maybe disagree about here. But,
the bottom line is, is that the Council Member is asking us
for our comments on this program. And I feel like I can't
really actually make a good, honest comment about this,
because I feel like the information that I need hasn't really
been given to me.
And maybe I haven't sought it out actively enough,
and that's my fault. But I also feel that a lot of action was
taken, and maybe it needed to be taken, as Ken says. That the
public really was interested and wanted something to happen.
But on the other hand, we are discussing the health and
well-being of the people of our County.
And, so, I just think that perhaps if -- if the
Council wants the Board's comments, then the Board should be
informed better by the Department, perhaps by the Council, by
the EPA, by the public, in order to make these comments.
Because otherwise, we are just coming off out of our own
personal viewpoints and not really a very educated viewpoint,
and that concerns me.
I think Ginny has lots more information than maybe
any of the rest of us do, but that doesn't mean that if we had
all the same information, that we might agree or disagree with
her.
So, perhaps what we need to say to Danny Mateo is
that as a Board, we are not well enough informed, and I mean
this as a public statement. We are not well enough informed
to make a good assessment of this program. And why we are not
well enough informed is a big concern to me, and it's a big
issue as far as I am concerned.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Ms. Pyle.
Ms. Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
concur with Dorothy's comments. I think before the -- I
think -- I -- I would like to propose a little plan here, that
we should set up a work -- a different workshop from the
Planning Department workshop, a workshop in which we can be
informed about the issues involved here.
Four of us Board Members went to Orlando, Florida,
to a water conference, where I personally became aware of how
very complicated the subject of water chemistry and different
additives for disinfection, different additives for changing
the pH, what happens in old pipes when you add different
things, and when you add them together. It's an extremely
complicated, technical subject that many scientists are still
working on constantly, and it affects the water systems all
over the country.
So, I don't -- I agree with Dorothy. We don't
have enough information, as a Board, to even comment on the
actions the Department has been taking. I would like to have
the Board become better informed, and I would just add, of my
personal knowledge, I know that one of the disadvantages of
the Department acting as quickly as it did was that Dr. Pang,
of the State Department of Health, had planned out to do an
experiment that would give some scientific results as to
whether the rash was due to this, or that, or the other thing.
And that became impossible when it changed, so he
couldn't do a before and after. So, I understand that that
was one of the disadvantages of acting quickly.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Right.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: But I would like us to
authorize Mike, as Chair, to send a letter back to the
Chairman of the Water Resources Committee, saying, as a Board,
we really don't have -- haven't got all the information yet.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: To make a --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: And we will pursue it and
hope to be able to give you an informed reaction at some later
date.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: If I may first, Ms. Parsons.
Thank you, Ms. Raisbeck, and I think that's a
conclusion I am coming to at this point. We are not well
enough informed to go ahead and make comments. And, so, I
will do that, in a simple letter to Mr. Mateo, informing him
of that.
And not to belabor the point, I agree with you.
We do need some sort of workshop that can really give the
Department, State Department of Health, EPA, all these various
entities, along with ourselves, an opportunity to share
information. I think that's part of the challenge we face in
being able to share the information.
The governmental entities I have seen -- and this
just with the 9/11 Commission Report, the same thing comes
over and over. Governmental entities do not share with each
other what they are doing. Is it a fault of the entities?
No. I think sometimes they try.
And I am going to say this in all honesty, that I
don't know enough about the Upcountry water problem. However,
I have enough family and friends up there, and I drink the
water right off of the tap. And I will have some water a
little bit later, not to be theatric.
But I think the Department really tried their best
to work out some solutions for the public outcry up there.
Now, whether you agree with that or not, Ms. Parsons, I think
that's what they tried. Now, I think what I would like to do
is move on, on the subject, because --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I want to put something in
the record first.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay, and that will be fine,
so long as this is prevalent and something that we all --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: It is.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Is that something we
have copies of?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I will make sure you do. I
want to read it into the record, and I will give you copies --
have copies made, but I want to read it into the record. I am
just going to read this part right here.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Is that all right with
the rest of the Board?
(Silence.)
Okay.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: And I thank you. I am glad
you want to drink the water, Mike. It's not just drinking it,
which is one of the problems. It's showering with it as well.
And what the theory is, is that there may be
microbiology, microbacteria that is growing not only in the
biofilms but all the way through into the hot water heaters.
And that may be what's causing the -- not just rashes, but
there is indigestion. There's joint pain. There's muscle
pain. There's flu-like symptoms and headaches. So, I mean,
it's not just rashes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons, please.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: If you don't mind, Mike,
just let me finish.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: This is why this letter from
the EPA is so important, and that is why flushing was so
important in the mixture of all the chemicals. And this comes
from Bruck Minkler -- sorry -- Bruce Macler. Is that how you
say it, Macler -- of the EPA, who came here, met with the
community, had a major community meeting, and worked to get
the grant study for the lead and everything together.
We also met with him when we were in Orlando. And
I have kept him informed of all of the different utilities
that I have talked to that are going through the same kind of
problems. And it's chemical mixtures have caused some
problems, and they are finding different bacteria as well as
even viruses.
"Thank you for your string of e-mails." This is
on June 25th, Friday. "Thank you for your string of e-mails.
Most informative if only to bolster my own hypotheses. It
certainly would be useful for the Maui Department of Water
Supply to address the limitations in their distribution system
O and M. Hawaii DOH is requiring a nitrification -- requiring
a nitrification study and a unidirectional flushing program as
conditions to move from phosphoric to soda ash.
"I'd like to see them done first before switching,
because it may well be that condition -- it may well be that
the conditions leading to the skin and eye symptoms are only
tangentially related to the phos -- to the phosphoric and more
from the general O and M weaknesses. Certainly, if the
changeover isn't planned and conducted carefully, new problems
could result."
Now, I am -- I'm not saying that the Department
isn't trying their best, but I think we do have some
weaknesses that we need to address. And not only -- this is
an opportunity for us to look at maybe putting together an
entirely separate division that studies all the new pathogens
and emerging pathogens that are coming in. And we don't have
that capability right now.
So, when we make rash decisions, like the one we
did with soda ash, we could cause worse problems than what we
had before and, certainly, different problems. So, I'm just
giving you the information that I have had. I am giving the
Board the information that I had. EPA was under the
impression that this was going to be totally done. And I will
let it go at that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Ms. Parsons.
Ms. Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, I see that Paul Seitz
is here. He is in charge, I believe, of the water treatment
plants. And I would be interested to hear if he had any
comments on issues that he sees, that the Department is
working on, that the EPA is working on, that the DOH is
working on, and how it would affect the operation of the water
treatment plants. Would that be a request?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Let me ask Mr. Seitz. Are
you able to give us some comments today, or would you prefer,
at a later meeting, to bring in information? Because I don't
like to just throw something at somebody right off the bat
without giving them some heads up.
MR. SEITZ: The only thing I can comment on --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Can you please go to the
mike?
MR. SEITZ: The only thing that I can comment on
is the operation of the treatment facilities. As far as the
operation and the maintenance within of the distribution
system, that is another group. That is the water quality
people.
So, the only thing that I can actually comment on
is what we do at the treatment facilities. If you would like,
I would be happy to give you a rundown of the changeover as
far as what we have done at the treatment plants.
For what's going on in the distribution system, I
would prefer that you get that directly from the distribution
people and not from me.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay, Mr. Seitz. Thank you.
I appreciate that. And we will -- we will make a request for
that at our next meeting. Okay.
MR. SEITZ: Very good.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Mr. Seitz.
Mr. Tengan and Mr. Pearson, do you have any further comments
before we move on?
(Silence.)
Thank you. And again, I understand this matter is
a very touchy matter, and I would like everyone to know that
myself and all of us in this room are very concerned about
water quality, no matter where it is. Whether it's Upcountry,
Wailuku, Hana, it doesn't make a difference.
And I think you made some valid points,
Ms. Parsons. We are moving in a new direction in our whole
water distribution system, and we may have to look at some
changes. But that really comes down with our advice to the
Department. And, hopefully, they will look upon it and find
the funding to do some of the research and development changes
that you are requesting. Okay?
If no further comments, I will move on. Okay.
Next -- I am sorry, Miss --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: So, you will be writing a
letter to Danny Mateo --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: -- saying basically we
don't have the information.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Enough to comment.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Ms. Raisbeck.
I received a letter, on July 2nd, from the Maui
Collision for Safe Water, which kind of ties right into what
we are doing right now. This agenda worked well today.
And I'd like to call upon -- I think there is a
representative. That is you? Yes, Sharon. Let me get your
name. Ellison, right?
MS. ELSTON: Elston.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Sharon Elston is here on
behalf of the Maui Coalition for Safe Water, and she would
like to talk about groundwater supplies. Sharon, please. And
if you would speak into the mike, I would appreciate it.
MS. ELSTON: Okay. I will just read you a letter
that I -- is this on? All right. Okay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I don't think it's on.
MS. ELSTON: Okay. This is a letter to the
Members of the Board of Water Supply.
The reliance on surface water for the Upcountry
Maui water supply has long been the source of countless
problems, ranging from mere cosmetic quality to serious,
life-threatening health issues. Talk of the establishing
desalination plants, at the cost of millions of dollars,
promises to make a small request on behalf of the 33,000 plus
residents of Upcountry Maui.
We need to replace our surface water with
groundwater. We need to utilize existing Pookela Well and
drill more wells in safe areas, areas unpolluted by toxins,
pesticides, fumigants and sewage. With adequate groundwater
supplies, Upcountry Maui would not have the threat of possible
revisitation of phosphate corrosion inhibitors.
If we had had adequate groundwater supplies, we
would not have had the issue of lead leaching, or dramatic pH
fluctuations, or bacterial overgrowth, and we would have
spared the expense of corrosion control additives, pH
adjusters, and heavy-duty disinfectants.
It is the source water that is the problem as well
as the plumbing. If we had had adequate groundwater supplies,
the Department of Water Supply would not have to admit that
their distribution system contributes to the total lead level,
or that the trial and error application of disinfection and
corrosion control may have contributed to possible bacterial
overgrowth, nor would their sampling techniques need to come
under scrutiny. And the County of Maui would not have to
suffer the expense of replacing the distribution lines, nor be
faced with the question of who is to be responsible for
replacing the plumbing in individual homes, since it is,
indeed, the source water that causes the leaching of lead, the
poisoning of our children, the necessity for corrosion control
and its attendant health issues.
And it is the apparent lack of concern and failure
to respond to this issue, in a timely manner, that fuels the
anger, the resentment, and the ultimate mistrust aimed at the
Department of Water Supply and the administrative officers of
the County of Maui.
We ask the Members of the Board of Water Supply to
press for an adequate supply of clean groundwater sources, to
be put on line immediately, along with the replacement of
distribution lines, to prevent the further deterioration of
the health and well-being of the residents of Upcountry Maui.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Sharon, before you sit down,
thank you for coming. And I know you have worked really hard
with the Coalition in putting efforts forward to bring this to
everybody's attention.
I'd like to clarify, for the Board Members, how --
and you can tell us -- how many people do you think have been
infected, and by something -- along with -- other than along
with rash. And can you explain the overall picture of this to
the Board Members, so they understand the magnitude, the
seriousness? I mean --
MS. ELSTON: I would -- I would think that there
must be thousands of people who are being affected. The
Department of Health, Dr. Pang's phone calls and pleas for
people to show up at the community centers to have their
photos taken have concentrated mainly on the rash, because it
is the only visible thing that, you know, can be photographed,
while there are numerous other symptoms that are popping up
all over Upcountry Maui. And I would say there are thousands
of people.
And there are a lot of those people who, for one
reason or another, are hesitant to come forward and speak for
themselves, to show up and have their names, and numbers, and
addresses taken down for the record. It's a problem for them,
because --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Explain some of the
symptoms.
MS. ELSTON: The symptoms that we have been
hearing from -- we have received phone calls, as the Maui
Coalition for Safe Water has developed -- we have received
phone calls from all over Upcountry Maui. People suffering
from -- besides the, obviously, the rash, or the eye
irritations, or the mucous -- all of the mucous membranes are
being affected. Therefore, you are talking about eyes, nose,
mouth, throat, vaginal, rectal areas. There are people with
severe lung congestion.
And now we are starting to see an increase in the
number of people coming forward who say they have had problems
with digestion, with diarrhea, and with acid reflux, and also
there have been a number of cases of women -- particularly
women -- I guess maybe the men are more hesitant to come
forward. I'm not certain. But women who have had operations
for mysterious rapidly growing cysts.
We have -- you know, we know of a couple of women
who have come forward and actually been operated on, within
the last month, who have had these situations that developed
inside their internal organs that are so rapidly growing, that
they have to be operated on. No medication, no supplements,
no natural remedies work on these things, and the doctors have
recommended surgery for this.
And there seems to be an increasing number of
internal problems that are starting to pop up. And whether or
not this is directly related to the water, and we can't say,
but it just seems like there's a whole lot of these things
going on Upcountry.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other comments or
questions from the Board Members? Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: What percentage of the
population, that is served by the Upcountry water system,
would you say have registered complaints or symptoms? Is it
50 percent, 80 percent?
MS. ELSTON: Of the people who have being affected
or --
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: That is being serviced by
the Upcountry water system.
MS. ELSTON: What percentage of them have come
forward?
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: In your estimation.
MS. ELSTON: That would be difficult for me to
say. In a study that Dr. Pang did last year, with the
University of Hawaii, with the Quentin-Burdick Program, it was
estimated, by the number of respondents to that study, that
there may be 10 percent of the people Upcountry who are
symptomatic.
I would say that there's still a lot of people out
there who haven't put it all together that their problems may
be coming from the water, because they continue to drink the
water. They expect that their little Brita water pitcher is
going to take care of all of the whatever that may be in the
water, and, so, they continue to drink the water.
And if they are not reacting to it in obvious
ways, like a rash, where they can test themselves, that is
where the danger lies. There's just internal things happening
that will surface very slowly over the long run.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Thank you.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, Ralph, go ahead.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I would ask -- I understand
that there are a lot of studies. Department of Health, in
conjunction with community members, are attempting to put
together a study. And I think that we should be informed of
the continuing progress of that study, how efforts are being
made to quantify, to evaluate, to document the problem, and to
break it down into component parts, so that we can have an
informed opinion about this problem.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: One question for Sharon.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Let -- I would like everyone
to have an opportunity, please, if you don't mind. Stacy,
please.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: I guess going back to our
earlier discussion, we recognize that, as a Board, we are very
uninformed of this issue. And not to dispute what studies and
findings that are going through, but I would like to move that
we defer this recommendation until we become more educated and
informed on this. I am completely ignorant about this matter.
I would like to put that motion out.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think this was more
informational. They weren't asking us to take any particular
action.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: They were asking us to
press for an adequate supply of clean groundwater sources to
be put on line immediately. Coming to the Board of Water
Supply according to this.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: No, according to my original
request. But, okay. That's fine. That's fine. Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Sharon, when you gave the
Mayor and, I think, the EPA representatives and the Department
of Health a list of folks on a petition, because they knew
that this was what we were going to go for, and they knew what
the issues were, how many people were on the list at that
point?
MS. ELSTON: There were about 2,000 people that
signed it, that list.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Okamura.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Mr. Chair, I wasn't there at
the last meeting that was held with Dr. Pang, but what has
been, you know, the group's reaction to the changeover to soda
ash? I read someplace -- I don't know where -- that Dr. Pang
said there seems -- there were some students -- three students
that came down and did some study, I guess, just asked people
about the problem. And they said there was a reduction or
whatever. Can you comment on that, please?
MS. ELSTON: What would be my comments on that?
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Or your group's comments.
MS. ELSTON: The group's comments. I think it
still remains to be seen whether or not Dr. Pang's report of
90 percent improvement is accurate. I don't know how many
people he actually counted for that. You can get 90 percent
of eight people, you know, and so statistics really -- don't
really speak for me.
I would also like to comment, though, that when
these three students approached me and interviewed me, they
did not really particularly ask me about my symptoms or that
sort of thing. They asked me for my perspective on the
problem.
And one of my perspectives is that aside from all
the medical concerns, there has -- this whole problem with the
phosphoric acid, and all the other water additives, and the
symptoms that we have been suffering has taken a tremendous
emotional toll on the Upcountry residents. And that, you
know, has to be tallied also, when all of the numbers come
together.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Crivello, would you like to make a motion now to defer
this matter?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Can I ask the Department a
couple questions?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Do you want more
information?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Make the motion to
defer the matter.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: I move to put this -- the
correspondence is asking the members of the Board of Water
Supply to press for an adequate supply of clean groundwater
sources, to be put on line immediately, along with the
replacement of distribution lines, et cetera. So, I would
like to move that we defer any kind of response to this
request.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Is there a second?
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Now, we can go on with
discussion, Ms. Pyle.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I just have a couple of
questions perhaps I can get short answers to. It's my
understanding that Upcountry is not the only place on Maui
that uses groundwater, correct?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Surface water.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Surface water. Excuse me.
Correct. Are there similar numbers of issues and complaints
about the residents that are using surface water in other
areas of Maui County? I'm just asking for information, and
other areas use surface water. Are there similar types of
issues in the areas that use surface water in other places?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: We have treatment plants in the
Lahaina area. We also have a small plant in Wailuku, and we
haven't received any complaints with regard to the same kinds
of issues that we are dealing with in Upcountry.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: This is what I wanted was just
a brief answer. I guess what I am trying to bring forward is,
since one of the requests is to establish groundwater sources,
as an alleviation of this particular issue, perhaps it's
really not the surface water that's the problem.
Because if the surface water is being used in
other places, and there don't seem to be those kinds of
problems, there's something missing in there. So, I just
think that that also needs to be figured out.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, there are those that
would argue that we don't have the same kind of problems, and
that's because there is a certain amount of blending that goes
on between the surface and groundwater in these areas.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Miss Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, that was the point I
wanted to put on the record. That in the West Maui area, I
believe the supply is a third groundwater and two-thirds
surface water. Is all of that blended, or are there areas in
West Maui that are going only on surface water?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes, Mr. Chair. Lahainaluna
High School is serviced entirely by surface water, and we are
not aware of any complaints from the school.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: And my question also would
be that particular -- the high school, are the same things --
the same chemicals used for that water that are used for
the -- is it an identical profile of chemicals you might say?
MR. NAKAMURA: No, there is no corrosion control
in Lahaina.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay. So, there is no
control. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Boardmember Pyle, let me
give you a little bit of background, because I understand what
you were asking, why would it be different.
Well, the problems didn't occur until after the
corrosion control was put in, when the C-9 was put in. And
they didn't really become paramount until the fall.
We put it in in June, and in the fall, once it had
really come to its peak in the system, that's when people
started noticing rashes and problems. So, here it is. The
corrosion inhibitor has coated all the pipes, right? And
whatever it mixed with, and it may have mixed with -- this is
the theory. It may have mixed with chloramines, up in the
Kula system, for example. And it's like putting bleach and
ammonia together, and it caused a blooming, which then the
bacteria just went to heaven, right? And then it started
spreading through the system, and that's when it came into the
homes. And it may have gone from there into the hot water
heaters.
And when we first got the first complaints, as far
as I can remember, Pukalani was huge in complaints in the very
beginning. And we found chloramines coming down into the
Pukalani system somehow. DOH tested for that. So, there was
a bottle one of the women -- one of the ladies brought from
Pukalani, at the last meeting -- not the last one, the one
before that, the one where the Mayor was there.
And they gave it to the DOH, and it had all these
little black specks in it. And when the DOH tested it, it was
chloramines. So, somehow, the systems integrated. And Paul
maybe can tell you how that happened. I am not sure. But
anyway, the chloramines, apparently more so than even the
chlorine, tended to make this go quicker. So, that may be why
Pukalani got a faster reaction and Kula area got a faster
reaction to this.
Now some people aren't going to have major
problems, because their immune system is really, really good.
And if your immune system is great, you are fighting
bacteria -- good and bad bacteria all over the place. And you
fight it constantly anyway. But if you have a weakness,
that's where bacteria and virus will head.
So, that's where the theory is right now, that
because of the chemical mixtures is why we are having the
problems. And the surface water is really difficult to treat.
I mean, it's a real chemist's -- you know, you need
high-quality chemists that know what they are doing. You
know, it's rocket science.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Pyle.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yeah, and I understand a lot of
that, and I -- thanks, because that's a good background. I
still would like, for myself, lots more information --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: -- that has to do with the
mixing of the surface water and the groundwater, because I am
not convinced, myself, without a lot more information, that
the island's water -- groundwater supply is sustainable enough
to switch completely to groundwater and to give up using
surface water.
I think that this is a slippery slope to go down,
as we can tell by the concept of overpumping in Iao and other
areas. So, while I think this is a really serious issue, that
needs to be dealt with, I am not convinced that switching to
groundwater is the solution that is going to help the County
in the long run.
So, I think a lot more work needs to be done and a
lot more research needs to be done to try and figure out some
method that will be sustainable as well as immediate. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Pyle.
And at this point, I think the discussion has covered all the
gamuts, and I will call for the question as far as deferring
this. I think all of us agree that more information is needed
to go and make an informative decision.
So, without any other discussion, all those in
favor of deferring this matter, signify by saying aye.
(Chorus of ayes.)
Opposed.
(Silence.)
Okay. The item will be deferred.
I am going to ask for a quick 10-minute recess. I
think we have gone long enough. I think some of us need a
little break.
(Recess, 10:19 a.m. Resumed, 10:32 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. I would like to
reconvene the meeting. And moving to item number VII --
MS. KRASH: Excuse me. I think I was listed for
that item VI C.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I apologize. I am sorry.
You did give your public testimony. Go ahead, Elliott. I am
so sorry.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Mr. Chair, before we leave
the last item --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: We are not leaving the last
item.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I want to make a request
and make it more definite.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Could we reserve that, Ralph,
until after she speaks? And you can make your request at that
point, please.
MS. KRASH: Actually, probably Mr. Johansen's
request would stop me from doing my testimony, because that
was what I was going to ask, too.
My name is Elliott Krash, and I am here this
morning speaking as an individual, though I have the
perspective from the Kula Association, having worked with the
Uncountry Water Ohana that developed the 500,000-dollar plan
that's recently been funded. And also, I have worked with --
attended meetings with Maui Coalition, so I have been involved
with this issue since fall of '02.
And I thought, as you consider this request from
Suellen Barton, from the Maui Coalition for Safe Water, that
it might be helpful to have a little background information,
because I feel it's important to do, as you all just, I think,
decided that you are going to do, which is to hold workshops
and become better informed, so that you can participate more
fully in the process, so that you can collaborate with the
other agencies, so that we are all in the same page.
And that is one of the things, in fact, that we
have recently written into the work plan that we developed for
spending the $500,000 that we received from the government,
that we all need to collaborate. Do I need to hold it up?
I'm not sure it's on.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Just so that everybody can
hear. I am sorry.
MS. KRASH: I speak loud enough. Hopefully, it
was picking up there. I don't know.
At any rate, I could, at this point, give a few of
the highlights, over the past two years, in two minutes, I
think is what it would take, or I could just simply leave it
at that, and you will get on with your motion and get on with
the rest of your business. And when you have your workshop,
you would have your history of what's been happening here.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think I'd like to say the
workshop is what we would like to do. Not that we don't want
to -- you know, because we will just belabor the point, and
then more questions will come up, and we will still go back to
that.
If, before you move, Ralph, is your request
basically along the same lines as what we are talking about,
so that we incorporate all of this in one motion?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I had said, and I don't
know if I made it definite enough or explicit enough, that
there are studies being done.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: We are getting scuttlebutt
before this Commission, before this Board. I don't like to
characterize, but that's essentially what we are getting. We
are not getting documented studies. We are not getting any
kind of professional, or informed, or expert evaluation.
We are not getting this itemized according to
occurrences and according to time and place and severity and
that sort of thing. And I think, in order to proceed at all
in this matter, this is what we need. And I think we should
make a formal request for this kind of information.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Mr. Johansen, I thank
you, and I think that's what we are moving towards right now.
I think I agree with you, and I think many of us Board
Members -- not to perceive what you are saying as inaccurate
or not correct, but, again, facts are what we are looking for.
And I think -- no, and I want to make sure that I make this
perfectly clear.
MS. KRASH: No, that's exactly what I was going to
say, too. Because in fairness to all of you, it's difficult
for you to keep informed on this with the monthly brief report
on some aspect of it. Because not all of you can, at any one
time, attend some of the public briefings that have been held
where a lot of information has been shared.
And to try and jump into this and read any one
piece of information or any one report, it is mind boggling.
There are very few people who have mastered some of it.
Sharon -- I think she's left now -- but Sharon is one who has
mastered from the lay person's perspective. There are a few,
but it's very difficult.
And then there are still the gaps, so it needs to
be put together with all the information. Because since '02,
you all began -- I think this began here when Diesel and Lois
Laird appeared at your meeting. Some of you were on the Board
then and remembered that. And she was affected. And at that
time, I was in the audience for another matter. So --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, what the Board will do,
and with the concurrence of all the members, we will try as
expediently as possible, to get a workshop together. We can
bring these entities together, get factual reports, along with
what has been studied, so that we can start making what we
call educated decisions in this matter.
And Mr. Johansen, we will work hard to do that in
a very expedient way. I am not sure. I cannot put a
timetable. I would have to look into this matter, but I will
guarantee I will report, at the next meeting, on what I can
come up with. And, hopefully, we can put this together so
that we don't belabor the point.
Thank you very much, and I appreciate your
assistance, and you will hopefully be a part of this and help
us in this area. Yes. You just said yes. Thank you.
Okay. Moving along, I think now we have kind of
completed all this area of items C in Section VI. Moving to
item VII, unfinished business, correspondence, 04-04, a letter
from Wayne Arakaki regarding the approval of the Brian -- I
mean Robert Fevella subdivision.
MS. HOWARD: There is a letter from --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, I see the letter. Would
the Director like to comment? I don't think anybody is here
from Arakaki or Fevella.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, I believe that with
the current allocation of water meters, we would be able to
meet Mr. Fevella's request. So, he has withdrawn his request,
at this time, regarding the agreement between Mr. Fevella and
this Department. I believe that's per request.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Do we need a formal motion on
that? Mr. Hiranaga.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Mr. Chair, I have a
question. Where is the additional 200,000 gallons of water
coming from?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Basically, it's on the reliance
of getting Pookela Well on line. We are ready -- we will be
ready to bid on the project within a month or so, maybe a
month and a half. And based on that well getting on line, and
most of these people wanting meters will have to do some kind
of improvements in order to get the meters. So, by the time
they complete their improvements, Pookela Well should be on
line.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: So, if Mr. Fevella
completes the infrastructure requirements, prior to Pookela
coming on line, would he still need to wait till Pookela comes
on line before he is actually issued the two water meters?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: No, as soon as we get the letter
out to him that he can receive his meters, he will be able to
get those meters.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: So, the additional hundred
thousand gallons we purchased from Dowling, that's already
been assigned to other users?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I don't have any recollection of
that.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Well, weren't we working on
the list, because we found an additional capacity to purchase
from --
DIRECTOR TENGAN: No, I believe the Director, at
the time, made a recommendation that there was an additional
capacity of 300,000 gallons per day. And based on that, the
Board authorized the issuance of meters.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: And that's been assigned;
that capacity has already been assigned?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes, that's been gone through
already.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Any other discussion?
Ms. Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, I did go through the
minutes, and I had made a request that we be provided with a
copy, I believe -- yeah. This one was similar to the
subdivision last December that Bill Crockett came in -- came
in to us about. And an agreement was worked out involving an
elevation agreement. And that's this one, isn't it, or was
that Carter? This was Fevella. Hum. Wasn't there a question
of an elevation agreement?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You know, I am going to say
this right off the top. I don't remember anything of an
elevation situation with this one.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: Not with Fevella.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I am sorry.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: There may have been with some
other.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: It was the one before that,
before Fevella, because they were up here with a tank. We
were trying to move it down.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: My recollection is
Mr. Fevella has met all the requirements, and the Department
has requested and is just basically waiting for the meters to
be issued.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay. I am sorry. I was
confused.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, basically, what the
Department is saying, that with this letter, basically,
Mr. Fevella is withdrawing his request; is that correct,
George?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: That's correct, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, I don't see any need for
any action. We can move on.
Okay. Going to other business, item VIII A,
update on EPA lead and copper rule compliance for the
Upcountry water system. Boy, are we running into this one a
lot. Hello, Miss Jacky.
MS. TAKAKURA: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: If you would introduce
yourself.
MS. TAKAKURA: Jacky Takakura, the Administrative
Officer. This is an update on the EPA lead and copper rule
compliance for the Upcountry water system.
The use of phosphoric acid and all phosphates was
stopped on June 28th, 2004. Soda ash replaced phosphate.
Soda ash is a common name for sodium carbonate. It is a
sodium salt, and it is alkaline. It is commonly used in water
treatment for pH adjustment and for corrosion and scale
control. And we have used it for many year at the Piiholo
Water Treatment facility in Makawao.
The way it works is soda ash, in addition to
water, produces an increase in the final sodium content, pH,
and alkalinity. The combination of higher pH and alkalinity
can dramatically reduce lead solubility relative to lower pH
and lower alkalinity water.
This strategy is supported by scientific theory,
laboratory data, and the practical experiences of hundreds of
U.S. utilities. And that is from Professor Mark Edwards from
Virginia Tech.
And the question arose about using the two
together, phosphate and soda ash, because one was stopped and
the other was started on the same date. Soda ash and
orthophosphate -- which is pretty much all kinds of
phosphates, different phosphates that you can add to the
water. Soda ash and orthophosphate are often added to
drinking water at the same time, and there are no known
adverse consequences of having both chemicals present either
temporarily or permanently.
So, the pH target that we are aiming for, in the
Upcountry water, is 8.8. Other things that we are doing is
nitrification testing, and we have results from that, and a
copy was sent to one of the Board Members, to Ginny, and that
shows that it is not an issue. And it also did not show any
ammonia or any chloramines or anything coming down into the
lower systems.
So, if there is data showing that, it would be
really important for us to see that, because it must be
conflicting data with what we have.
We are testing for lead to make sure that this
works, and that will probably be in August. And the
Department of Health Safe Drinking Water Branch, in Honolulu,
will be letting us know when they think it is the right time
to do those tests. So, we are waiting for them to tell us
when. They make that decision.
And we are also checking for pH daily. Some of
you might have noticed we are flushing a lot more. You can
see our trucks out there. And we had placed tankers at some
of the community centers, and those had Kahului tap water in
them. Those we are going to discontinue on Friday. We are
just going to have one. The plan is to just have one at the
Hannibal Tavares Community Center in Pukalani.
According to the Maui District Health Officer,
they had surveyed a hundred and 14 names or people. Of those
114, they were able to talk to about 40, and 90 percent had
shown improvements within five days. And based on that, he is
saying the rate for rash Upcountry is now the same as Central
Maui. The Department will continue to work closely with the
community, the Department of Health, and the EPA on this.
And I want to make some points of clarification.
I don't normally toot my own horn, but the community did not
call the EPA to come out here. I did. When I found out that
EPA was going to be in Hawaii, I told them you need to come to
Maui. Okay. What date are you going to be here? And then I
set up the meeting, and I told the community they are coming.
Come and say what you need to say to them.
Lead comes from customers' plumbing, not from the
water. If a customer does not have lead in their problem --
in their plumbing -- excuse me -- they are not at risk of lead
exposure. So, if a customer does not have lead plumbing in
their home, and we are providing whatever kind of water it is,
they are not going to get lead exposure. If they do have lead
plumbing in their home, then they are possibly going to have
lead exposure.
Okay. The water does not have lead in it. We
don't have lead pipes. There are a few places where there's
lead-poured joints, but the lead is not in contact with the
water. There is something in between the water and the
lead-poured joints. So, there is no contact with lead and
water.
Viral meningitis was brought up. The Maui
District Health Officer pointed out that the rate on Maui, the
one case in Pukalani, is the same rate as on Oahu. Therefore,
it cannot be the water. It has to be something else that is
similar on Maui and Oahu.
C-9 began in June 2001, and that's the first
orthophosphate that we used, and that's June '01. Customer
complaints began in fall of 2002. So, it was over a year that
the orthophosphate use was going on before people started
reporting any type of reactions.
And as I had mentioned before, the Department of
Water Supply, in our tests, have not detected chloramines
below the Upper Kula system. We have checked for ammonia, and
that has not been found. So, if there are other test results
that show that, we need to know that, because that is in
conflict with what we have done, the tests that we have done.
So, that's the update on the lead and copper rule
compliance. I had received a total of 148 complaints, over
the last year or so or year and a half, and now I'm just
getting questions. I don't have people calling and
complaining.
So, that's what's going on right now. Like I
said, we are continuing to work with EPA and the Safe Drinking
Water Branch over in Honolulu. And another point about that
is it's the Department of Health Safe Drinking Water Branch
that has primacy. The EPA makes the rules, but they do not
enforce them. So, even if someone from the EPA says, well, I
think you should do this study or something, they must direct
the Safe Drinking Water Branch to implement that. Because the
way those rules work, the EPA gives each state the
responsibility to fulfill those rules.
And, so, we do what the EP -- what the Safe
Drinking Water Branch says. And, in fact, when I have asked
them, can you guys help us? They said, no, you have to work
with the Safe Drinking Water Branch. So, if Bruce Macler or
somebody wants some study, he can certainly make a
recommendation, and we can do it. But like I said, it's the
Safe Drinking Water Branch that we work with hand-in-hand, and
our lab works very closely with the Safe Drinking Water Branch
to make sure we meet all their rules. Any questions?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I do. Jacky, let's go back
to the meningitis causes, the viral meningitis. And the
symptoms are very, very bad headache, flu-like symptoms, and
you feel miserable.
A lot of what I have been told -- and we have had
other cases in Hawaii -- on Maui -- maybe of a different
strain of that, but still other cases -- that some people may
not even go to the doctor to report it. They may stay home,
or they may have gone to the doctor, and the doctor has
diagnosed it as just a bad flu-like symptom.
And in Hawaii, unlike California and Washington
and, I believe, Oregon, as well, it's not mandatory to report
viral meningitis where it is with bacterial. Bacterial is the
one that will kill you immediately or very soon thereafter.
So, we don't know how many people may have had the
same kind of symptoms. We lucked into the one woman up in
Pukalani that had the meningitis, because her father sells
ultraviolet, and we met him at the convention in Orlando.
And I had called him that morning, because I
needed some ultraviolet information on how the system worked.
And he asked if his daughter could come to one of the
coalition meetings that night, and I gave him the address and
said we would be delighted to have her.
And the next morning he called me back. She
didn't make the meeting, and he called me back. And he said,
you know, I called my daughter to give her the address. And
she had such a bad headache that she had for two -- you know,
for over two days, that I told her -- my instincts kicked in,
and I told her to go to the hospital, and they had quarantined
her with viral meningitis.
Now, we lucked in to knowing about her, and she's
at the end of the line in Pukalani. It would have, to me,
been the best thing to do just to go test the point of entry.
So, with that said, my question is -- and this may
be more for George or Jeff. Dr. Edwards, has anybody been in
touch with him recently?
MR. PEARSON: Not recently.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: When was the last time that
we have talked to Dr. Edwards?
MS. TAKAKURA: I had asked him for some
information on this maybe a week ago, two weeks ago.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Okay.
MS. TAKAKURA: Not on meningitis but on corrosion.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: When do we expect his study
to be completed?
MS. TAKAKURA: In a couple of weeks.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Okay. Nobody else has
talked to him since, is that correct? And will we get a copy
of that study for the Board?
MR. PEARSON: Sure.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: When it's completed.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: When it's completed?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Correct.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Thank you.
MS. TAKAKURA: Well, if we have the person's
address, we can certainly test that water. I would expect
that you would see several cases if it were because of the
water or -- you know, because it could be anything.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: So, Jacky, 150 complaints.
Do you require that they provide you with their name and
address?
MS. TAKAKURA: I do ask them for that, and almost
all of them I do have their first name, last name, address and
phone number.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: But it's not required then
to file a complaint?
MS. TAKAKURA: No, it's not required.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: So, 150 complaints. What
would you estimate is the population being serviced by the
Upcountry water system?
MS. TAKAKURA: 33,000.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: So, what percent of the
population is being affected or had complaints?
MS. TAKAKURA: Very, very small. But they do say
that for everyone that calls, there's a certain number who
don't call. But --
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Okamura, go ahead.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Jacky, in regards to those
complaints, over what period did those complaints come in?
MS. TAKAKURA: The first inquiry about water
quality came in May 2002. So, it was nearly a year after we
began the C-9. After that, that person who was doing the
inquiry started publicizing her symptoms. And then in the
fall, I would say October, November of 2002, people started
coming forward. And it was from that fall 2002 up until now
that I received the 150.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: And these are the same
people that complained and the Department of Health is using
in their study?
MS. TAKAKURA: I believe there's similarities, but
when they did their survey of 114, they cross-referenced my
list and theirs to make sure there were no duplicates. So,
they may have some that I don't have.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I would like to share with
you all, too, some of the meetings that we went to at the AWWA
on --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I am going to call --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Wait a minute.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I am going to -- at this
point, I am going to ask you, like I have stated earlier, we
are going to have a workshop, where we go over all of these
things. Now we are getting to a point where, again, we are
going back and forth. And he said, she said, they said. I am
going to stop it at this point. I am sorry, Ms. Parsons.
I want this meeting to be business-like, and I
think a workshop is necessitated. I think that has come to a
final conclusion. And all of this information needs to be
shared. We need facts. I think all of us are looking for
that.
So, at this point, I am going to accept your
report as given. Okay. And I'd like to move on. And really,
at the most earliest convenience, I will have a workshop
bringing all these departments together. Because you brought
some valid points, EPA, but the State Water Safety is the one
that does the compliance. There's so many things we need to
know to understand this whole process. Okay.
Thank you, Jacky, for your report.
Okay. Moving right along. Update on the water
rate study. That will be item B, and that's in pages 26 to
29. George, would you like to give an update?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes, Mr. Chair. The committee
had its meeting on Tuesday. The primary issue that the
committee was dealing with or dealt with, at that meeting, was
the ability of the Department to do CIP. And there was quite
a lengthy discussion as to what level of CIP should the rate
study provide for. An amount was determined.
And another issue that came up was relating to
individual projects, you know, so that the committee could see
what these projects were for. And, so, we offered to provide
to the committee a listing of the CIP, as it was related to in
the old manner that we did our budget, like source
development, taking care of safety compliance, and all those
categories that we did in the past.
And it seems as though the committee would be
satisfied with that breakdown to see as to how the projects
relate to what we are doing in our department. So, we will be
providing them that.
So, those were the two main things that were
discussed from my perspective. I don't know if Elliott has
anything to add. Elliott is --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Board member.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: -- is a member of the committee,
too. She might have something to offer.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Elliott, if you would,
please.
MS. KRASH: My name is Elliott Krash, and I am a
member of the water rate stakeholders' committee, and George
asked me to chime in here.
It's not on yet? I'm sorry. Do you need me to
repeat that?
George mentioned the revenue requirements portion
of our discussion. For several meetings, we agonized over
what level to set our revenue needs, and that was contingent
on making a decision about the amount needed to fund the CIP.
And you can imagine how tedious and difficult that discussion
was.
During those discussions, many other issues came
up that the Board -- that the committee is grappling with.
For example, leveling the amount of increase per year. One of
the initial charts we saw showed a higher amount in year one
and lower amounts. We wanted it not to hit all at once, the
level of increase.
These are things that are still under discussion,
but I just wanted to give you a flavor for some of the kinds
of important things that are being discussed. A need that if
the money isn't used, for whatever reason, legal issues
regarding land acquisition or whatever, then perhaps there
would be a way that we would not encumber it the following
year. We would not kick in the rate increase. The people
wouldn't be hit with a rate increase if there were carryover,
if it -- because we are talking a five-year plan here.
Another condition that we were looking at was a
way to protect the poor who have trouble meeting their basic
needs every month. Another factor that we looked at was
protecting agriculture, a favorable rate for ag.
And bottom line, as we move on with this process,
we are going to need support as we go forward to the public.
We are all going to have to be on the same page, and
understanding what the issues are, and speaking to the public,
and speaking for this need, because it has become clear, to
the members of the group, that there is a need for a rate
increase.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Elliott. I think,
again, not to belabor the point. Again, these are just
preliminary studies they are working on. I thank them very
much for the reports. That keeps us abreast of what's
occurring. I think Member Raisbeck attends most of these
meetings also, so, I think -- and --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: And Stacy.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And Stacy also is on the
committee. So, we have information that if any individual
Board Member would like to get more details, Elliott, Sally,
and Stacy are available for that. Okay?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I have a question for Sally.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, I just wanted to say
that there was a summary of CIP by program passed around at
that meeting. There is only one copy, so they just had to
pass it around. And I believe that Cathy is going to send
copies of that to the stakeholders committee.
MS. HOWARD: I think they are going to redo it
with the other numbers. They have to redo it with the other
numbers.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: With the other numbers?
MS. HOWARD: With the new CIP level.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: George.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, that's the list that
I was talking about. The list that Sally is referring to is a
summary of -- you know, just showing the category totals
rather than the individual projects and total. So, the
information sheet I passed around that date just showed the
one total for the different categories.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, you are breaking it -- in
other words, then you are breaking it down by --
DIRECTOR TENGAN: By project.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: -- by projects.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Right.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So then we would have an idea
what each project was costing.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: No, not quite. They did
pass out to everybody a list of all projects, you know, multi
pages. I don't know how many pages. But that was not as
helpful as the single sheet that had summarized the amounts
spent for source development and the amount spent for water
quality issues, you know.
That summary was the one that I would hope that
the Board would receive when they send it out to the Safe
Drinking Water, the Board could get a copy of that summary.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You mean to the stakeholders
you are referring to. You said Safe Water.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: What?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You said Safe Water. I want
to clarify stakeholder.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay. I think that
summary -- that one-page summary of how the CIP is laid out,
by the different program categories, summarized, that was very
useful, and I would like to see the Board get a copy of that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: If that can be done. Okay.
George, I make that request, please. Dorothy?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: This is actually kind of just a
question and a comment. I know that you have been attending
meetings, and, so, you know more about what's going on. But I
remember that when we discussed the Department's budget, it
was in -- kind of in passing, and that the Department had
prepared the budget, because we were in flux, and we were
given a copy of it kind of after the fact.
And, so, the Board really hasn't had, at least up
until this point, very much of an opportunity to have any
input into CIP directions that might be useful. And that's in
relation to the comment you made earlier today about how much
money might it cost to upgrade the fire protection in older
subdivisions and so on.
And, so, I think that all I am really asking is
that as the budget for the coming year -- not the one we are
in right now, but for the coming year is developing, it would
be great if we could have an opportunity to see it, work on
it, comment on it, and participate in it, before it's a done
deal.
Because we may have some ideas. They may not be
valid, but we might have some ideas that might be useful to at
least discuss. So, I thank you for considering that. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, what you are asking,
Ms. Pyle, is for the 2004-2005 fiscal year --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: 2005-2006.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you, just so we
get that.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: The rates have a lot to do with
that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I don't think that's a hard
request to fulfill that, George.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: No, Mr. Chair. That's something
that we will be providing the stakeholders committee anyway.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. And will we get copies
as Board Members; is that possible?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Anything else, Sally?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, I just wanted to say,
additionally, that the stakeholders are considering revenue
requirements for the next five years. And that's sort of the
biggest budget figure, you might say. And they will be -- you
know, and they are coming up with figures for expenses and so
on. So, getting copies of that information is useful.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. I think, George,
that's not a major request, right? We can have copies of
that.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: If not, if that discussion is
over, I will move on to item C and for discussion on possible
dates of a joint meeting between the Planning Commission and
the Board of Water Supply. And I thought we were going to try
to include the Fire Department.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Please, yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Also, yeah, it doesn't say
that. So, okay. I think there is a copy back there of some
possible dates.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Question, Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Mr. Hiranaga.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: I note that this letter is
from Suzanne Freitas, Commissioner, to the Planning Director,
dated February 23rd, 2004. Just wondering if the Chairman of
the Planning Commission is in agreement with this request,
because it's a request.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Would you like me to call
him?
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Sorry. Is someone saying
something?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: No, please finish,
Mr. Hiranaga.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Okay. Thank you. So, I am
just curious or wondering if the Planning Commission is in
agreement with this request, by a specific commissioner on the
Planning Commission, and also if the Director of the Planning
Department is in favor of this request before we start
discussing possible meeting dates.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. I think some of the
question that you just asked, Mr. Hiranaga, can be answered by
the letter dated June 28, 2004.
There is consensus that they would like to, and
Mr. Foley is in compliance, because this letter came from him
to bring the parties together and have a joint workshop. I
have had the chance to speak to him last week, and he did
reiterate to me that he thought this was a great idea, and
most of the Planning Commissioners thought it was a great
idea.
So, I did contact, and it's not like it's hearsay
or anything. The letter as well as my personal contact with
Mr. Foley has concurred. Okay. Ken.
BOARDMEMBER OKAMURA: Mr. Chair, I am thinking
that it's a good idea. Maybe sometime we can pick some dates.
But would it be advisable to sort of -- maybe either you or
some people to sit down with a group from the Planning
Commission and propose like an agenda or a meeting topic, so
that we don't -- you know, we agree on what we want to talk
about before we spend the time to have a workshop.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: That may be a good idea, as a
proposed agenda for that meeting, and then that be brought
back to not only their people and the Planning Commission, but
also to us here at the Board of Water Supply -- I mean the
Board of Water Supply, so that we have concurrence that we are
not, you know, wasting time.
Dorothy, you have something you want to say.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: All I wanted to suggest is that
I think this may lead to more than one workshop. I think that
there are so many complicated issues, I think we could spend
an entire workshop on fire protection, especially if we had
the Fire Department as a participant.
I don't think any of us are anticipating that
these workshops are going to be from 8:00 to 4:00 each day.
So, if we set aside a few hours a few times, I think we can
focus on a particular issue more clearly. And, so, exactly
what Kent said, setting up some kind of an agenda process
would be really helpful for everybody. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: If you guys are in agreement
then, I will contact Mr. Foley, along with Clayton Yoshida and
the Fire Department, and maybe sit down with them and maybe
agendize certain categories, and then bring it back to you.
With your approval, we can maybe make these workshops, and
then find some dates that we can work on. Is that all right
with everybody? Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I just wanted to make a
general comment. I see this as we are on the transition point
from where land use was done without any consideration of
water considerations, to where water use is going to drive
land use approvals. So, I'm real happy to see this
cooperation suggested by Ginny and her friend on the Planning
Commission.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Freitas, yes. Go ahead,
Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Just for the sake of timing,
can we put some deadlines as to when you can meet, and when we
will make the decision, and what -- let's shoot for a date,
even if it's in September that we do this, so that we can --
we can get this on the calendar, and get everybody prepared,
and have them clear their schedules so we can get together?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: That would be fine. Why
don't we say this. I will meet with Cathy, and we will then
try to coordinate a meeting with Mr. Foley, Mr. Yoshida, the
Fire Department, whomever, and then have that meeting, and
agendize, and come back to you hopefully -- I will say
hopefully by the next meeting, by our next Board meeting in
August, and have something to present to all of you.
Now, again, depends on people's schedule,
including mine. I cannot promise anything, but I am shooting
for August's meeting to have an agenda for everybody to look
at. Is that fine? Okay. Yes, Mr. Kushi.
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL: I need to say this.
When you do speak to Director Foley, please have him
understand that both of you need to consult with our offices
and the attorney who represents the Planning Department,
because I am just thinking this out.
You have two separate Boards. You need two
separate agendas. You want to have one mass meeting. Call it
whatever you want, but who is going to run the meeting, and
what is the quorum? And I can just say you guys might be here
for days if you don't have specific agendas. The public can
testify on both boards.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Right.
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL: So, you need to work
this out. But it's a good idea. I don't want to rain on your
parade, but there might be some Sunshine problems.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think the specific agenda
items is important, and including their attorney and yourself
or whoever, that also can be incorporated. I mean, I don't
want to leave anybody out, because once we present it that we
feel comfortable enough to go ahead and do it, not be
presenting something, and then have a lot of legal ramblings
to go through.
So, Mr. Kushi, we will include you, and I will
talk to Mr. Foley on that. Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Maybe I am mistaken, but I am
thinking that a workshop is an information situation, and it's
not an action session. And, so, I don't -- I'm not sure there
would be issues about quorums. I am sure we need
representation and having people from the Corporation Counsel
Office there, but I'm not sure t