DRAFT FOR SC REVIEW

Southwest Maui Watershed Plan

Steering Committee Meeting #4
July 8, 2010, 3:00 pm - 5:00 pm
HIHWNMS (Humpback Whale Sanctuary) Education Center
726 S. Kihei Rd., Kihei, Maui

Summary
This was the fourth meeting of the steering committee (SC) of the watershed advisory
group (WAG) in the two-year Southwest Maui Watershed Planning project. There were
four topics discussed: 1) Status update; 2) Committees; 3) Project schedule and
expectations; and 4) Completing the Goals, Indicators, and Objectives worksheet. There
were 10 people present.

Upcoming meetings
The next SC and WAG meetings will be August 12, probably Upcountry. The SC will
meet from 1-3pm and the WAG will meet from 3-5pm.

Attendees
John Astilla, Michael Brady, Luisa Castro, Jacob Freeman, Daniel Kanahele, Robin Knox, Ellen
Kraftsow, Julia Staley, Richard Sylva, and Dave Taylor

Status update
Robin Knox, the project facilitator, gave a verbal report on the project’s current status. Overall,
we are probably a bit ahead of schedule on the WAG work, and a bit behind in the technical
work. Robin’s computer has been essentially inoperable for three weeks so she hasn’t been able
to get notes out or make much progress, but no project data has been lost, and the computer
problems may be nearly solved.
Project status to be turned in with our first quarterly report includes holding two WAG meetings,
two Steering Committee meetings, and the first public meeting. We have established the
Watershed Advisory Group (WAG) of watershed stakeholders, and the WAG is about two-thirds
of the way through filling in a worksheet of watershed goals, indicators, and objectives, including
descriptions of concerns and identification of sensitive areas.
On the characterization and assessment, Dr. Tufail has identified a wish list of data and is
working on a modeling approach. John Astilla is compiling a list of studies, reports, and data, and
Robin will identify the applicable federal, state, and local regulations.

Committees
The steering committee recommended at their last meeting that committees be established to
focus on specific aspects of project work. This will become more important as Robin needs to
devote more time to the technical phases of the project.
One committee was set up last time to plan the next public meeting, comprising Teri Leonard,
Richard Sylva, and Pamela Kantarova. They will coordinate participation by Liz Foote and the
County.
We will probably need some other committees. They should meet between steering committee or
WAG meetings, and report in those meetings. Brief Robin on what you’re doing, but she doesn’t
need to attend all committee meetings.

SC #4 7/8/2010 Page 1 of 4
 DRAFT FOR SC REVIEW

A grant-writing committee will initially focus on grants for monitoring. Additional data would be
helpful in this and future watershed projects. Wet season flows, and ground water concentration
of wells are examples of additional data that would be useful. Michael Brady will chair the grant-
writing committee and Luisa Castro and Julia Staley volunteered to work with him.
It would also be good to have a technical committee soon to review and analyze the data John is
identifying. Jacob Freeman volunteered to chair the technical committee. Ellen Kraftsow
volunteered to be part of it.
Summary of committees established so far:
 Public meeting planning: Teri Leonard, chair; Richard Sylva, Pamela Kantarova
 Grant-writing: Michael Brady, chair; Luisa Castro, Julia Staley
 Technical: Jacob Freeman, chair; Ellen Kraftsow

Project schedule and expectations

Dave Taylor asked about the project master schedule. He gave a rule of thumb from his
experience in engineering that by the time you’re 25% of the way into the project duration you
should have a detailed table of contents for your project’s final report, and if you don’t, it’s tough
to ever catch up. We’re 3 months into a 24 month project, thus at 12.5%. He’d like to see a
schedule, with tasks and timeframes and associated resources. Once we reach 6 months, he thinks
we should have a detailed table of contents for the final report, identifying the number of pages in
each section, and tables, graphs, and figures we can expect to include.
Robin listed the schedule of deliverables, which has due dates specified as months after NTP
(notice to proceed). She’ll check on the actual NTP date and translate the deliverable schedule
below into dates. She doesn’t have start dates right now. She’ll be able to develop and share a
project plan once her computer is stable and she can install the project management software. The
major phases in this project are the watershed characterization, the modeling plan and modeling,
then the watershed management plan.
Schedule of deliverables
Date* Deliverable
NTP Notice to proceed: start date of project
NTP + 2 Form WAG and SC
NTP + 4 Education and outreach plan – about the Clean Water Act and watershed planning
process, and what we’re finding in the watershed work
NTP + 6 Characterization /Assessment report – quantify current state
NTP + 8 Modeling plan – back of the envelope, lots of assumptions; runoff equations; may
not be able to ID subbasins in watersheds
NTP + 10 Draft Watershed Analysis – will include things like estimated mean pollutant
concentrations, pollutant loading estimates
NTP + 14 Goals and Objectives – get feedback from stakeholders. Where do we want to get
to?
NTP + 16 Pollution Control Strategy – How to get there. Who does what, target pollutant
load reductions. Each party will have to state their commitments. Discussion of
technical and community values, willingness.
NTP + 20 Draft Watershed Report – with supporting data and figures. Reviewed by WAG
and SC, then DoH, and approval by DoH.
NTP + 22 Final Plan – This will form the basis of future projects
* Draft is due to DoH at this point (NTP + x months), and they have some period of time for
review.
Ellen mentioned that the County has been funding USGS work on a “head and shoulders” model
of water on Maui, mostly focused on pumpage and flows in West Maui. They will start modeling

SC #4 7/8/2010 Page 2 of 4
 DRAFT FOR SC REVIEW

the Haleakala side in 2011. There may be some useful synergy for the SMWP project, and it
would be worthwhile for Robin and Ellen to talk in more detail.
There was a question about the timing of DOH reviews. They are understaffed and overworked.
The contract includes the possibility of two six-month extensions, largely in recognition that
DOH reviews may be slow. We’ll try to find out who in DOH will be reviewing this project, and
when we can expect feedback and of what sort.
There was also a question about DOH’s expectations of volume and quality of data. They expect
us to find “readily available data”. Even some old reports, like a 1942 USGS hydrology report,
may be valuable as it’s all we have on local hydrology. We’ll try to put some of these findings
into electronic form so they’re available to more people.

Completing Goals, Indicators, and Objectives worksheet

There was a discussion of what process should be used to complete the Goals, Indicators, and
Objectives worksheet. The decision was that Jake Freeman, as chair of the technical committee,
would integrate the current worksheet contents, as developed over the past few meetings, with the
version that he filled out, then send it to the steering committee for feedback. He will then collate
their responses into a version to be reviewed and discussed at the next WAG meeting on August
12.

Conclusions, summary of action items

The next meeting date is August 12, for both the steering committee and full WAG. The SC will
meet from 1-3pm and the WAG from 3-5 pm. It will be Upcountry at the Pukalani Community
Center again if Robin is able to reserve it.
Robin will focus on the watershed characterization. She’ll send out the list of data needed to the
full WAG. Let us know if you have some of the info we need. Work on the modeling plan has
started. It doesn’t have to wait for the Characterization/Assessment to be done. Robin insists that
it must be non-proprietary software.

Action items from July 8 SC meeting

#
Description Due date Person

1
Find out official “NTP” date and translate deliverable dates Robin

Robin and
2 Schedule a meeting to discuss modeling project synergies
Ellen
Contact DOH to find out who will be reviewing, feedback to expect, and Robin or
3
response schedule Richard
Prepare Goals, Indicators, and Objectives worksheet for review at August
12 WAG meeting:
Robin,
1. Robin get worksheet to Jake
4 August 12 Jake,
2. Jake fill in and send to SC
SC
3. SC send comments to Jake
4. Jake collate for Aug 12 WAG meeting

Notes prepared by Karen Bennett.

SC #4 7/8/2010 Page 3 of 4
 DRAFT FOR SC REVIEW

SC #4 7/8/2010 Page 4 of 4