Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 22, Number 1, 1 Ianuali 2005 — Groups file suit over state's approval of NASA telescopes [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Groups file suit over state's approval of NASA telescopes

By Sterling Kini Wong An environmental group and two Native Hawaiian organizations have filed a lawsuit to appeal the state's approval of a permit that would allow NASA to build up to six 1.8-meter telescopes atop Mauna Kea. The lawsuit, whieh was filed in Hilo Circuit Court in December, is the latest chapter in the three-year controversy surrounding the $50million Outrigger Telescope Project. Some Native Hawaiian and environmental groups have opposed the project because they believe further development threatens the cultural and natural resources of the 13,796-foot summit, whieh according to oral traditions was the meeting plaee of the gods Wākea and Papahānaumoku, ancestors of the Hawaiian people and the Hawaiian Islands. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Sierra Club, Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, the Royal Order of Kamehameha I and a Native Hawaiian with genealogical ties to Mauna Kea. The suit challenges the Board of Land and Natural Resources' October approval of the permit for the project, whieh eame after numerous puhlie hearings. The groups allege that the University of Hawai'i's permit application process was flawed and that the project is not included in any state-approved comprehensive management plan

for the mountain, as required by law. The lawsuit requests the court to require that the BLNR approve such a management plan. While UH is the lessee of the Mauna Kea Science Reserve and as such is responsible for acquiring development permits, NASA is financing and building the outrigger project. The groups argue further that the addition of the outrigger project to the mountain would exceed the limit of 13 astronomy facilities set by UH's 1985 management plan. Today, there are 13 such facilities on the mountain already, including two 10-meter telescopes that are the largest in the world. The people involved in the lawsuit said that legal action was their last recourse to ensure the protection of the cultural and natural resources of Mauna Kea. "The state has a strict legal obligation to protect Hawai'i and its people. They failed to do that," said Kealoha Pisciotta, a former observatory employee and president of Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, an organization that monitors development on the mountain. Nelson Ho, of the Sierra Club's Hawai'i Chapter, said his organization had no ehoiee but to join the Native Hawaiians in the lawsuit. "The alternative was to let the Land Board continue violating the letter and spirit of Hawai'i's environmental and cultural protection laws," he said.

"It's clear the Land Board ignored the hundreds of hours of puhlie testimony, as well as our own presentations," said Paul Neves of the Royal Order of Kamehameha I. "We had no ehoiee but to appeal." Rolf-Peter Kudritzki, director of the UH's Institute for Astronomy, said he was not surprised by the lawsuit but that he couldn't comment further because of his involvement in the suit. The proposed outrigger telescopes would work in tandem with the W.M. Keek Observatory's two existing 10-meter telescopes to search for planets around nearby stars. The proposed telescopes would be housed in 30-foot-diameter domes and surround the Keek Observatory's two 121-foot-diameter structures. According to NASA's draft environmental impact statement (EIS) released in July, on-site construction and installation of the telescopes would begin in 2005, and operation would start in 2007. NASA initiated the EIS process following a federal judge's ruling in a case filed by OHA. The judge in the case agreed with OHA that NASA's less rigorous environmental assessment was inadequate. ■

"!t's clear the Land Board ignored the hundreds of hours of puhlie tesf/mony as well as our own presentations. We had no ehoiee but to appeal." - Paul Neves, Royal Order of Kamehameha I

Nū Hou

[?]