Opinion ID: 2519241
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The sustainable yield

Text: Specifically, DHHL argues that the Commission failed to apply the requisite level of scrutiny insofar as it relied on the 5.0 mgd sustainable yield determination in spite of evidence that the Kualapu`u Aquifer may be overdrawn and that the sustainable yield may actually be as low as 3.2 mgd. The Commission counters that the 5.0 mgd sustainable yield is statutorily deemed to be the appropriate planning guideline when balancing such competing interests. Utilization of the sustainable yield, the Commission claims, is neither rigid nor inflexible to the extent that any uncertainty as to the accuracy of the sustainable yield is adequately addressed by the fact that any party may petition for, or the Commission may on its own order, a hearing to show cause as to why the permitted amounts of water should not be reduced. KMI also argues that the sustainable yield is the appropriate guidepost when allocating water from the Kualapu`u Aquifer. KMI points out that the sustainable yield was set by rulemaking procedure, and that any challenge to the accuracy of the sustainable yield must be made via a petition to amend or modify the sustainable yield pursuant to HRS § 174C-31(p). We agree with the Commission and KMI that the Commission did not err by relying on the sustainable yield determination. The Commission is mandated by the Code to determine a sustainable yield for each hydrological unit within the state. See HRS § 174C-31(f)(2) (1993). The term, sustainable yield, is defined by the Code as the maximum rate at which water may be withdrawn from a water source without impairing the utility or quality of the water source as determined by the commission. HRS § 174C-4 (1993). The Commission is instructed to calculate the sustainable yield using the best information available. HRS § 174C-31(f)(2). At the time of KMI's application, the sustainable yield for the Kualapu`u Aquifer was determined to be 5.0 mgd. As the Commission and KMI suggest, the Code precludes the ad hoc revision of the sustainable yield. The sustainable yield figures are critical components of the state water plan, see generally HRS § 174C-31, and may not be modified absent notice and a public hearing. See HRS § 174C-31(m) (1993) (The commission shall not adopt, approve, or modify any portion of the Hawaii water plan which affects a county or any portion thereof without first holding a public hearing on the matter on the island on which the water resources are located. At least ninety days in advance of such hearing, the commission shall notify the affected county and shall give notice of such hearing by publication within the affected region and statewide.). Moreover, in Waiahole I, this court has impliedly endorsed reference to sustainable yield determinations in the context of ground water permit applications: Early designation of instream flow standards furthers several important objectives. First, it fulfills the Commission's duty of protection under constitution and statute, ensuring that instream uses do not suffer inadvertent and needless impairment. It also preserves the integrity of the Commission's comprehensive planning function. If the Commission decides instream flow standards and permit applications at the same time, private interests in offstream use will have already become highly particularized, risking an ad hoc planning process driven by immediate demands. See [Douglas W. MacDougal, Private Hopes and Public Values in the Reasonable Beneficial Use of Hawai`i's Water: Is Balance Possible?, 18 U. Haw. L.Rev. 1, 66 & n. 302 (1996)] (citing United States v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 182 Cal.App.3d 82, 227 Cal.Rptr. 161, 180 (1986)). Finally, initial designation of instream flow standards relieves the Commission, as well as existing and potential offstream users, of the complexity and uncertainty presented by the unsettled question of instream flow requirements. See id. [at] 58-59, 66. Once the Commission translates the public interest in instream flows into a certain and manageable quantity [, t]he reference to consistency with the public interest in the definition of reasonable beneficial use likewise becomes a reference to that quantity. Id. at 62. 94 Hawai`i at 148-49, 9 P.3d at 460-61 (emphasis added) (some brackets added and some in original). Although the foregoing excerpt expressly refers to surface water instream flow standards, this court has analogized ground water sustainable yield determinations to instream flow standards. See id. at 148, 9 P.3d at 460 (These provisions confirm what the Commission recognized in its decision, that the Code contemplates the instream flow standard as the surface water corollary to the ground water sustainable yield. (Quotation marks omitted.)). Hence, contrary to DHHL's assertions, it would be inappropriate for the Commission to reevaluate the sustainable yield figure in a permit application proceeding.