The Hawaii Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) rejected the Army’s final environmental impact statement (FEIS) regarding the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA) on Hawaii Island, citing significant shortcomings. This decision, stemming from concerns about omissions and outdated data within the report, has implications for businesses and individuals involved in land use and development on the island. The ruling, made after extensive public comment overwhelmingly opposing the report, underscores the importance of rigorous environmental review processes.
The Army's proposed retention of approximately 23,000 acres of State-owned land at PTA has been a subject of intense scrutiny. The purpose is to ensure the continuation of ongoing activities on the State-owned land, as stated in the Army's project home page. However, the BLNR's rejection of the FEIS indicates that the Army's plan requires further refinement and a more thorough assessment of its potential environmental impacts. The rejection highlights the critical role of public input in the environmental assessment process.
This development has immediate implications for real estate investors and developers. Any projects potentially affected by the PTA's activities or land use must account for the uncertainty created by the FEIS rejection. Furthermore, the decision by the BLNR suggests a heightened sensitivity towards environmental concerns, potentially indicating stricter regulations for future development projects in the area. A previous editorial in the Star Advertiser had already advocated for scrutiny of the Army's lease on the land at Pohakuloa, highlighting previous concerns.
The rejection of the Army's report aligns with a broader trend of environmental consciousness in Hawaii. The military's use of land has faced criticism due to environmental harm, as noted in a 2017 editorial in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, reinforcing the importance of thorough environmental assessments. With the FEIS rejected, stakeholders can anticipate further debate over the Army's land use and potential impacts on future development projects. The Army's final environmental impact statement was deemed inadequate by the state, setting a new precedent for environmental due diligence.
