 going to be on the final exam, R-E-P-I. And so is Susie Fang. She could be in a final exam, too, here on the military in Hawaii. And we're going to talk about repi in Hawaii and talk about the Navy repi project to train, test, operate, and conserve land. It's about land. It's about the military. It's a combination of things, all good. Hi, Susie. Welcome to the show. Hi, Jay. Thanks for having me. Absolutely. So tell us about repi. Tell us what you do for repi, and then we'll drill down and find out how it works. Okay. Get ready, because it's a mouthful. Okay. So repi stands for the readiness and environmental protection integration program. And it was established in 2003 by Congress in efforts to sustain the long-term operations of the military mission, which includes testing, training, training capabilities through the key word is partnerships and cooperative land use planning around the installation. This essentially reduces the military, community, and environmental conflicts, which can arise with urban sprawl that typically occurs and development that occurs outside of the installation or the basis. Since then, the program has really grown and expanded, and it now includes opportunities for off-based projects that address and aid in installation resiliency in response to climate change and extreme weather events, and also to restore habitats that are located off-based as well. But what do you do for repi? So I function as the joint-based Pearl Harbor Hickam repi program manager. So I'm the program manager at the local level. So I sit at the base typically, and it's one of the tools that I have in my tool belt. I also wear the hat of the community planning liaison officer in which I manage the land use and activities that occur outside of the base or fence line. But I really like to think of myself as a partnership builder in which I'm seeking ways to build partnerships amongst the Navy and other agencies for mutually beneficial opportunities. So your geographical concern is the area around the joint base. It's not, for example, the Pohakaloa. No, not for a joint base. The Army may have an interest in enacting the repi program at PTA, but for a joint base it would be lands that are affecting joint-based operations. So that's your area of activity around the joint base? Right. So why was this thing adopted in 2003? Why? What was the original purpose of the statute? So they needed a way to make sure that the military operations were going to essentially be sustained or continue in the long run. There's been, you know, obviously the trend of bases built and then you start experiencing urban sprawl and development outside of the base. And that really isn't, some of the land uses that result from that aren't really compatible with the operations that occur and the mission of the military. So they're looking for ways to seek compatibility with the military mission. And this all reminds me of Waimanu Home Road. I'll tell you the story of Waimanu Home Road. There was a home for people who had, what do you call it? Psychological problems, say, at the very top of Waimanu Home Road. And the comment was always like, oh, if you don't behave yourself, you're going to go to the Waimanu Home, which was at the top of the road. It was all by itself. It was miles away from the nearest residential area. But as Waimanu grew and IAEA and all that grew, there was development. Development crept up the hill and then the neighbors were right on the other side of the fence. The State Department of Health said, oh my goodness, they're right on the other side of the fence. And the people on the other side of the fence said we don't want to be near a place like that for people who have psychological problems and the like. And so they began to complain. It's very interesting. They began to complain, even though the Waimanu Home was there for decades and decades and decades before any homes were developed. But it was the same thing I think that you're talking about. You get urban sprawl that comes right up to the fence sometimes at the joint base. And the joint base used to be all by itself. There was nobody around. And then as the community grew and as residential development grew, all of a sudden there were homes right there on the other side of the fence. Same kind of thing. And so my guess, it's a guess, but I'd like you to have thought about it, is that they started this program because they saw this was a problem and that people would be on the other side of the fence and they would be controversy and they wanted to head that off at the pass, so to speak, and have a state-federal partnership, a public-private kind of partnership where somebody looked over what was happening in the other side of the fence and tried to take steps to avoid controversy with the neighbors. Am I right? Yeah, that's pretty spot-on. It goes both ways. The military obviously can benefit from having compatible lands right outside the fence line. And in addition, residents at what not, they may not want, like you mentioned, certain operations or activities to go on outside of the fence and are right next to their properties. And now that there's more, I guess, emphasis on conservation and land stewardship, that kind of goes hand in hand in what the program is kind of seeking to accomplish because the compatibility with preservation lands or recreational lands or open lands in general, that's very compatible with the military mission. So what did you study to get this job? And also, how can I get your job? It sounds terrific. What kind of training did you have to have be able to handle all the issues that go around the stewardship of land and the, what do you call it, the negotiation of good relationships? I think a lot of it is just on the job training, but my background is actually in urban planning as well as political science. So I think I've always had an interest in these types of, I guess, opportunities and relationship building. So it's pretty interesting. Why do you sound like you're perfectly suited for it? The thing about the stewardship of the land suggests that the state either has or should have an abiding interest in what you're doing because you can help them. DLNR has to be very interested in what you're doing because DOD is a big muscle. DOD can help the state and, for that matter, the county in dealing with stewardship issues. Am I right about that? How deeply involved is DLNR in these discussions? Absolutely. You're spot on with that. DLNR has a very vested interest in land stewardship and preservation for the island of Oahu and for the state of Hawaii in general. Their whole mission is to protect, conserve, restore, and that really aligns very well with the Navy mission for that compatible land use. So we recently partnered with them on a rugby project, which is a definite win-win, I think, for both agencies. So we maintain good relations with them. We look forward to working with them and we believe that where those mutual benefits and opportunities exist, we will continue to pursue them. Oh, yeah. That's part of your mission, isn't it? I mean, you've got to hold hands with the people on the other side of the fence. That's really important in a place where people were building right up to the fence and where there have been issues over the years. I mean, the Navy, I don't want to tell you anything you don't know, but the Navy came to Pearl Harbor in 1850. That was even before I was born. It was a long time ago and we have an inextricable intertwining of interests between the Navy and the military in general and the community, which we always have to be mindful of. But sometimes we forget. We get into controversies and all that. But the people in 2003 were smart. They realized that this phenomenon was going to go on is going on, and they had to keep everything cool. I think we see some of that popping up in the Red Hill water issue and now there's lawsuits about it. My general reaction, you don't have to tell me yours, but my general reaction is he was one. I want to give the Navy a break. What is the big argument now in lawsuits and everything? The fact is the Navy is protecting the country and we should be really delighted that they're here at all. That's just my feeling about it. I don't think we ought to take aggressive legal steps against them. We ought to work with them to the extent possible and understand their situation. Give me an example of a project, a repi project that you would organize so I can understand how you put the pieces together. Okay. So I will go into discuss our most recent project, which was the fiscal year 22 repi challenge project. I believe the title was expanding watersheds above joint base Pearl Harbor, Hickam. And this project is a project in which the Navy partnered with the state of Hawaii dealing our Division of Forestry and Wildlife with aims to protect and restore the Waialha watershed, which sits above joint base in efforts to- What is this picture we're seeing here, Suzanne? What is this? Okay. So this first picture is a picture of a destroy watershed, essentially. So watersheds are typically very green, lush, and thriving, which are important because they are home to our aquifers, which supply the potable water for the island. And this picture kind of depicts that the incapability of this watershed to effectively capture that groundwater, because there's no ground cover to essentially absorb that groundwater. And as a result, you're seeing all this soil. And since there's no ground cover, the contaminated runoff and the sediment loads, they just drain right into the harbor since they sit upland. The streams just empty right into Pearl Harbor, which impairs the water quality, increases the sediment loads into the harbor, which is not a good thing. And just it's not good for the island's capture of potable water either. Yeah. What would the Corps of Engineers say? Well, that's Army. Yeah. So for this particular project, I personally wasn't aware of the condition of our watersheds or the direction where our watersheds were headed. So it was unique in that the state came to the Navy and presented this opportunity or this project like, hey, we want to highlight the condition of the watershed. It's essentially broken, and it needs fixing. We have a project in mind that, for obvious reasons, can benefit DLNR or us the state. But we also think that you, Navy, may have a vested interest in this project because it can improve your harbor conditions and the water quality for your Navy personnel doing operations in the harbor. So then that kind of got the wheels rolling and we started our conversations to formulate what we thought would be a strong proposal to compete for rep funding. Okay. So what kind of actual work had to be done and who did it and who funded it? Okay. Let me just pull up some of my notes here because I want to ensure and capturing everything. So this project was recently awarded just, I want to say, a few weeks ago. So it's still in the process of formulating the program objectives and agreements or what we call the POAM. And it will involve a group of both Navy and DLNR stakeholders to kind of formulate a blueprint to ensure that the objectives of the project and the milestones are being met. But they have to work together then. Right. Right. And some of the benefits and the objectives that we're seeking for this project is increase the quantity and the rate of the groundwater recharge in the Yavo watershed, which would increase the potable water supply for the Pearl Harbor aquifer, which supplies water to approximately 60% of Oahu residents. Additionally, the project aims to reduce erosion and contaminated runoff that flows into the harbor, which helps to ensure the adequate harbor depths for vessel movements. What is this picture we see now? So that is a picture of the actual Yavo watershed. We had the opportunity to go out there and take a look at a healthy watershed or what a watershed should look like. And you can see that all this lushness and all this healthy native forest, it contributes to essentially more water, protection of protected habitats of threatened and endangered species and whatnot. So it's really great for just the island and people. Where is this lush area that we're looking at? Yavo watershed. So it sits upland of joint base. Okay. So we want to preserve those areas for sure, even though they're at some distance from joint base. Absolutely. What people don't realize is that many of these watersheds and the streams located in the watershed, they flow into Pearl Harbor. So Pearl Harbor essentially acts as a sink and captures all the runoff from the various types of activities and land uses that occur upland. And additionally, oh, sorry. That goes back to my story about the Waimanu Home Road. When Pearl Harbor was originally developed, there was nobody around, relatively speaking. And now over the years, it's become a very intense concentrated residential commercial area. And all this, you know, one call it activity has encircled Pearl Harbor. So Pearl Harbor is kind of like the victim of all of this. And it had very little control over what was being developed around it. And here we are. Sorry. Go ahead. I don't want to consider ourselves a victim. But definitely we are part of the community. And we have a vested interest as well in preserving the land to the best of our capabilities. So how much money has to be spent on the steps for this particular reprieve project? Well, it was a large reprieve project. And we were awarded 14.9 million dollars for this particular project. And what actual work is going to be done, you know, with the land, you know, involved? Who's going to go out and do what to preserve this area? Right. So this project area encompasses a little over 7,000 acres in the watershed area. And it's going to entail removal of ungulates or hooked animals. In this case, it would be the feral pigs, which destroy the watershed. It'll also erect three new fences to keep out the pigs from destroying additional areas. It will also remove invasive plants and species and then restore the area by doing some native out planting. And it also entails collection of aerial imagery and development of artificial intelligence capabilities to capture the occurrence of more native species, more invasive species. And then Akis will also entail eradicating the invasive coconut rhinoceros, you know, which is wreaking havoc to the island. Well, I mean, isn't it fair to say you can agree with this agreement? Isn't it fair to say without this reprieve project, these steps would never have been taken? Never. I'd like to think that. It may have happened, but it would have taken, I think, a lot longer. And the scope may have just been broken up. So this is a really efficient way, I think, to capture the needs of the project. Yeah. I mean, this is a combination of actions that, you know, maybe, maybe in the decades to follow, maybe one at a time, maybe. But, you know, this project is a cumulative kind of project with a number of elements in it. And it's, you know, it's a good thing. And it's a really good thing for the state of Hawaii, because otherwise, I'm right when I say it's federal money, right? This 14 million is all federal money, right? Yes. Yes. So without this project, the state would have to find the money. And the state, you know, would be burdened by that. So this is way better than having to find the money. Is there anybody pushing back on this? I mean, you talk about federal pigs, and I think about pig hunters. They love to go out there and hunt pigs. And I wonder how they feel about building fences so they can't hunt the pigs. Are they pushing back? We have not heard much pushback for this particular project, but I am aware that, you know, there is a pig hunter association, which, you know, may not, you know, light fences all that much. But I haven't heard too much pushback on the project. And I think in general, it's very much supported. I did want to go back to that piece about the federal funding. And I wanted to also highlight that the RAPID program, it's a cost share. So it's a mutually beneficial relationship, but the DOD enters into a cost share with its partner, which can be the state or local government agency or conservation organization on projects that would be mutually beneficial. Oh, so there'd be cost share on this one. And the state or the county, we'll kick something in. And I suppose that has to be negotiated? Yes. So they will be contributing as well. But, you know, the form of contribution can also be in the form of staff time or in-kind services. So there's creative ways to kind of leverage that contribution piece. So there's jobs, there's contractors, am I right? This 14.9, I think you said, is going to be fed into the Hawaii economy to do the work. Am I right about that? Yes. Yes, absolutely. The work that I've just described in the scope, it'll be done by the state of Hawaii dealing in our DOFA and who they choose to, I guess, employ to do the work, whether that be in-house or contracted out. So it's their procurement, not yours, is that right? Yes, they receive the funding. Okay. And then they go and they follow the procurement code and, you know, they get people to bid what have you and get contractors to take parts of the work and get it done. So it becomes a state procurement issue, right? I guess all that will be ironed out in the poem or the program objectives and agreement memo. Okay. So it's all going to be talked about. I like that because if you have a federal state, you know, collaborative effort, it always works better if you talk to the other government and work it out, work out the details. So, okay. So, you know, what I get out of this so far, this is really valuable to know about this, because I don't know if people really know about this. It's very beneficial for the state, obviously, and state government and county government and the watershed. And it's, you know, we ought to thank the Navy for doing it. But the Navy also has benefit. And of course, it starts out with better relations, which, you know, that part of your job as a political scientist, I suppose, you know, fostered better relations and conversations and collaborations. But the other thing you mentioned, which I think is worth mentioning is that if the runoff gets down into Pearl Harbor, it can be a real problem for Navy operations. And if this is not done, then the Navy's operations are in the long term, or maybe even in the intermediate term, they would be affected. And now the Navy would have to bring in dredging equipment and dredge the harbor, which is very costly. And it's always better to, you know, to stop the runoff before it gets into the, you know, before you have to dredge in the harbor. Am I right? Absolutely. This is a proactive project. We want to avoid things like compensatory mitigation costs and whatnot. We want to address the issue before it gets worse. And the program's just a really great opportunity to foster relations and, you know, leverage funding from folks and build that relationship and partnership and maintain, I think, land stewardship within the island of Oahu. Yeah. You know, if you were in some remote island in the South Pacific, you know, you wouldn't have the issue of people creeping up to the fence, you know, of development creeping up to the fence and having these, you know, negative effects on the land and the watershed. But, you know, I think underlying the whole thing, underlying our discussion today is that Oahu and Hawaii are very important to the military. And the military wants to, you know, improve its political posture, its social posture, you know, its commercial, industrial posture with the state and the county. And everybody around, because it wants to preserve the, what I'm going to call it, strategic benefit of having Pearl Harbor exactly will where Pearl Harbor is. And I'm sure the Navy does not want to leave for a variety of strategic reasons. And so if you were, if you find you're in a situation in a crowded, you know, 1.3 million people state and you want to stay there, this is the kind of thing you have to do. I'm sure as a political scientist, you see this very clearly. But talk to me about it. Yeah, absolutely. You're spot on with that. We need to find a way to collectively exist and work together on the island. Pearl Harbor is located in a strategic location, as you mentioned. It's vital for Pearl Harbor to be here to ensure national security for our country. And we recognize that we're a part of this community. We're honored to be a part of this community. And we want to do our best to be good neighbors and to be good land stewards because we know that so many residents on island have direct and indirect ties to the military here in Hawaii. You know, land stewardship is increasing the important in Hawaii, whether it's, you know, along the fence of Pearl Harbor or anywhere, whether it's, you know, this watershed or any other part of the state. And, you know, people on the mainland and everywhere they see photographs of those beautiful valleys like the photograph you showed, you know, of a special watershed area. And I think we forget that the more people, the more human activity in a given place, which is so beautiful, the more damage there is. And it's not just along the fence or involving the fence. It's the whole state, really, we have to. So you're actually setting a standard, I think. You're setting a standard. We have to care about this because if we don't do this, we collectively, that is federal and state government. If we don't do this, the land will suffer. And I think it's a leadership thing because, you know, if the federal government does this, if you do this kind of project, then you're really making a statement to state government and to everybody in the state is you guys all have to get involved in land stewardship. We cannot afford to lose the aside from the people, the most valuable resource and asset that the state has is so easy for us to become a what do you want to call it a place where the land hasn't been watched, it hasn't been cared for. So what kind of feedback do you get in general for stewardship? Do people come up to you on the streets, Susie, and say, wow, thank you for doing this. This is really important to all of us. You're getting recognition for that. Well, I think word about this project is just starting to get out at the local level. But I'm just excited to be a small piece of it. And it's a project that I think is doing good things, like you said. It'll help to maintain that beautiful landscape of Hawaii, that lush green forest, and those beautiful views that you want to see whether you live here or visit here. You bet. So I want to tell you a story before I ask you for your summary and take away points for people. So there's some great movies out these days. And in the time of staying at home, you know, COVID, you watch the movies. And there are movies beyond violence and vengeance and pulp fiction. They were actually very valuable movies. And one of the movies I was watching just last night, the serial on Netflix, is called Alone. This has been around for a while. But I hadn't seen it. And it involves a group of 10 people that were dropped off in disparate places around the Pacific Northwest and in Canada, Alaska, what have you, and asked to stay for as long as they could alone. And they were given cameras to document how it went. And they had very, very few pools and supplies and food with them. They got to make it by themselves. And the land is so incredibly beautiful. In all of these remote areas and you stay to yourself, how long will this last? How long will these visit views and this, you know, fantastic nature? How long will it be able to survive in the face of the human onslaught and climate change? And that's what it's about. And you know, if you have a chance, watch it alone, because it makes you understand exactly how precious all of this is. And so it must be very gratifying to do what you do. And I do want your job. I'm sorry. So tell us, give us a takeaway, Susie Fogg. Tell us what you want us to remember about this discussion about your projects with Repi. And I'll say that again for the final exam. Readiness and environmental protection. Integration. Integration. What do you want us to remember? What do you want us to carry away from this discussion? I think the key word is partnership. It's a willing partnership between the DOD and its partners. And it's a win-win. You know, it's mutually beneficial, not just for the DOD, but for its partners. They have just as much of a vested interest in pursuing particular projects that we have. So it's really working hand in hand for something that is, I think, the greater good. And then additionally, I just want to stress that for this program, the DOD, we're not dictating the terms. We're really seeking the compatibility and the building of relationships with our local people and communities. And we're just really, really grateful that for this opportunity that exists and for the local people to just work with us and we hope to continue working with them in the future. And we're really open to creative projects and opportunities and ideas. So I look forward to people bringing that to the table. That's great. And I would like to talk to you again about other projects downline, because I think this is really a wonderful example of cooperation and caring. Suzy Fang doing repis all over town. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Jay. Aloha.