Opinion ID: 2629221
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Reservations: a public trust purpose

Text: We have consistently recognized the heightened duty of care owed to the native Hawaiians. See PASH, 79 Hawai`i at 451, 903 P.2d at 1272 (holding that the Hawai`i Planning Commission must protect the reasonable exercise of customary and traditional rights of the native Hawaiians); Pele Defense Fund v. Paty, 73 Haw. 578, 620-21, 837 P.2d 1247, 1272 (1992) (holding that native Hawaiian rights protected by article XII, section 7 may extend beyond the ahupua`a in which a native Hawaiian resides); Kalipi v. Hawaiian Trust Company, Ltd., 66 Haw. 1, 7-8, 656 P.2d 745, 749 (1982) (interpreting HRS § 7-1 to assure that lawful occupants of an ahupua[`]a may, for the purposes of practicing native Hawaiian customs and traditions, enter undeveloped lands within the ahupua[`]a to gather those items enumerated in the statute); Ahuna v. Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, 64 Haw. 327, 338, 640 P.2d 1161, 1168 (1982) (holding that DHHL assumed the obligation to implement the state's fiduciary duty under the HHCA on behalf of eligible native Hawaiians). Native Hawaiians' water rights are no exception. Waiahole, 94 Hawai`i at 137, 9 P.3d at 449 (upholding the exercise of native Hawaiian and traditional and customary rights as a public trust purpose). Our analysis in Waiahole, however, begs the question whether a reservation of water constitutes a public trust purpose with respect to the state's continuing trust obligation to ensure the continued availability and existence of its water resources for present and future generations. 94 Hawai`i at 139, 9 P.3d at 451. We answer the foregoing in the affirmative and hold that, pursuant to article XI, sections 1 and 7 of the Hawai`i Constitution, HHCA § 220(d), and HRS § 174C-101(a), a reservation of water constitutes a public trust purpose. As discussed supra in section III.A.3.a, the Commission bears a duty to protect the continued availability of water resources in balancing the competing interests for a water use permit. In addition, HHCA § 220(d), see supra note 2, expressly requires that sufficient water shall be reserved for current and foreseeable domestic, stock water, aquaculture, and irrigation activities on tracts leased to native Hawaiians.... Moreover, HRS § 174C-101(a) states in relevant part that [d]ecisions of the commission on water resource management relating to the planning for, regulation, management, and conservation of water resources in the State shall ... incorporate and protect adequate reserves of water for current and foreseeable development and use of Hawaiian home lands as set forth in section 221 of [HHCA]. (Emphasis added.) See also HRS § 174C-49(e), supra note 1 (All permits issued by the commission shall be subject to the rights of the [DHHL] as provided in section 221 of the [HHCA], whether or not the condition is explicitly stated in the permit.). Inasmuch as a reservation of water is an essential mechanism by which to effectuate the State's public trust duty to ensure the continued availability and existence of its water resources for present and future generations, see Waiahole, 94 Hawai`i at 139, 9 P.3d at 451, we hold that DHHL's reservations of water throughout the State are entitled to the full panoply of constitutional protections afforded the other public trust purposes enunciated by this court in Waiahole. To hold otherwise would undermine the public trust doctrine, which is a state constitutional doctrine, and the relevant policy declarations set forth in the Code. See HRS § 174C-101(a), supra note 4 (Traditional and customary rights of ahupua'a tenants ... shall not be abridged or denied by this chapter.); HRS § 174C-2(c), supra note 21 ([A]dequate provision shall be made for ... the protection and procreation of fish and wildlife, the maintenance of proper ecological balance and scenic beauty, and the preservation and enhancement of waters of the State for municipal uses, public recreation, public water supply, agriculture, and navigation....). [29] (c) Although the Commission discharged its public trust duty to protect DHHL's existing legal uses in the Kualapu'u aquifer, it failed adequately to discharge its duty to protect DHHL's reservation in the Kualapu'u aquifer. In light of the foregoing, we now address whether the Commission discharged its duty to protect DHHL's reservation rights in the Kualapu'u aquifer system against competing interests in the state's water resources trust. To begin, we recognize that, generally, agency decisions affecting public trust resources carry a presumption of validity. Wai&amacr;hole, 94 Hawai`i at 143, 9 P.3d at 455. Moreover, [t]he presumption is particularly significant where the applicant challenges a substantial decision within the agency's expertise as `clearly erroneous,' HRS § 91-14(g)(5), `arbitrary,capricious,' or an `abuse of discretion,' HRS § 91-14(g)(6). Id. However, the foregoing presumption of validity presupposes that the agency has grounded its decision in reasonably clear FOFs and COLs. In the present matter, the record is void of a single FOF regarding whether MR-Wai`ola established that the proposed use would interfere with DHHL's reservation in the Kualapu'u aquifer as mandated by the Code. The Commission concluded that, because (1) HAR § 13-171-63 granted DHHL an aquifer-specific reservation in the Kualapu`u aquifer and (2) the proposed use was located in the Kamiloloa aquifer, MR-Wai'ola need not meet its burden with respect to DHHL's reservation. As discussed supra in section III.A.1, the aquifer-specific nature of DHHL's reservation, as set forth in the HAR, does not eliminate MR-Wai`ola's burden under HRS § 174C-49(a)(7), and, consequently, the Commission was duty bound to hold MR-Wai`ola to its burden. Inasmuch as the Commission failed to render the requisite FOFs and COLs with respect to whether MR-Wai`ola had satisfied its burden as mandated by the Code, it violated its public trust duty to protect DHHL's reservation rights under the HHCA, the Code, the Hawai`i Constitution, and the public trust doctrine in balancing the various competing interests in the state water resources trust. Accordingly, we vacate and remand for the entry of further FOFs and COLs on the matter. Notwithstanding the foregoing violation of the public trust doctrine, we believe that the Commission upheld its public trust obligation to protect DHHL's existing legal uses in Kualapu'u i.e., DHHL's existing wellsagainst the competing private commercial use proposed by MR-Wai'ola. As this court observed in Waiahole with respect to offstream uses, article XI, section 1 of the Hawai`i Constitution mandates that all water uses, public or private, promote the best economic and social interests of the people of this state. 94 Hawai`i at 141, 9 P.3d at 453. Moreover, as discussed supra in section III.A.3.a, private commercial use for economic development, although not a cognizable trust objective, may produce important public benefits and ... must figure into any balancing of competing interests of water. Id. at 138, 9 P.3d at 450. Unquestionably, our decision in Waiahole does not preclude the controlled development of water resources for private commercial use. Id. at 141, 9 P.3d at 453 (The public has a definite interest in the development and use of water resources for various reasonable and beneficial public and private offstream purposes[.] (Emphasis added.)). Instead, Waiahole ensures (1) that any balancing between public and private purposes begin with a presumption in favor of public use, access, and enjoyment, id. at 142, 9 P.3d at 454, and (2) that the planning and allocation of water resources for purposes of economic development must account for the public trust and protect public trust uses to the extent feasible. Id. (recognizing that the public trust establishes use consistent with trust purposes as the norm or `default' condition). Consequently, we stated that reason and necessity dictate that the public trust may have to accommodate offstream diversions inconsistent with the mandate of protection, to the unavoidable impairment of public instream uses and values. Id. at 141, 9 P.3d at 453. The Commission, however, owes a duty to consider the cumulative impact of existing and proposed diversions on trust purposes and to implement reasonable measures to mitigate this impact, including the use of alternative sources. Id. at 143, 9 P.3d at 455. In the present matter, the Commission clearly addressed the potential impact of MR-Wai'ola's proposed water use in the Kamiloloa aquifer system on DHHL's existing wells in the Kualapu'u aquifer system. First, the Commission considered two hydrological studies in rendering its FOFs and COLS. In particular, the McNulty Model (proffered by MR-Wai`ola) predicted that the impact of pumping 1.25 mgd from the proposed well in Kamiloloa will result in water level declines of 0.17 to 0.32 feet at the existing Kualapu'u well field with [t]he largest impact ... at the nearest well in Kakalahale. Accordingly, the Commission found that the [w]ater level declines at the levels predicted by the McNulty Model would have no measurable effect on the quality or quantity of water drawn from existing wells  in Kualapu`u. (Emphasis added.) The USGS Model, the study proffered by DHHL, predicted that pumping 1.326 mgd from the proposed well in Kamiloloa (0.076 mgd more than the amount requested by MR-Wai'ola) would result in a drawdown greater than 0.1 feet and less than 0.5 feet and that [s]uch change is likely to be less than normal seasonal fluctuations of the groundwater level and of the same order of magnitude of normal semi-diurnal water level fluctuations created by varying barometric pressure. In other words, the impact is relatively small.  (Emphasis added.) Second, the Commission granted MR-Wai`ola a water use permit for only 655,928 gpd, approximately one-half of the requested quantity, thereby diminishing the foregoing predictions with respect to water-level declines in Kualapu'u, and only for the proposed future uses that were consistent with state and county general plans and land use designations and county land use plans and policies. Finally, in recognition of the importance and need for long-range planning for the efficient and effective use of water, the Commission's decision proposed a municipal reservation in the Kamiloloa aquifer system, which would not be limited to any one user but would be set up for municipal uses as defined in the Water Code. Thus, to the extent that the Commission's decision compromised DHHL's existing wells in the Kualapu'u aquifer system, we believe that the Commission did so with a level of openness, diligence, and foresight commensurate with the high priority these rights command under the laws of our state. Waiahole, 94 Hawai`i at 143, 9 P.3d at 455.