At the May 20 Zoom meeting of the state\u2019s fuel tank advisory committee, Hawai\u02bbi Sierra Club attorney David Kimo Frankel cracked up laughing at what Capt. Gordie Meyer, commanding officer of NAVFAC Hawai\u02bbi and regional engineer, told Asami Kobayashi, legislative office manager for state Sen. Donna Mercado Kim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Kobayashi had asked Meyer how many gallons of fuel were released during a May 6 spill at the Navy\u2019s Red Hill fuel tank facility before the loss was detected. It had been reported that around 1,000 gallons of fuel had leaked into the lower access tunnel beneath the tanks, which hold about 180 million gallons of jet fuel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe were told by the Navy they installed safeguards,\u201d Kobayashi said, referring to measures implemented in recent years to prevent a repeat of what happened in January 2014, when 27,000 gallons of fuel leaked from faulty patch weld in Tank 5 and facility personnel chose to silence the fuel release alarm that went off, rather than immediately respond to it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhen the event occurred, the release was stopped immediately. All fuel was captured,\u201d Meyer answered to Kobayashi\u2019s question. He said this despite Department of Health staff reporting that soil vapor monitoring data suggest that some fuel made its way out of the facility and into the ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At Frankel\u2019s outburst of laughter, mediator Peter Adler asked Frankel to mute himself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhy don\u2019t you ask him<\/em> to mute himself? He doesn\u2019t give us any answers!\u201d Frankel replied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Throughout the meeting, Navy representatives stymied efforts by Frankel, Honolulu Board of Water Supply manager Ernie Lau, and others to learn exactly what had happened. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In response to Lau\u2019s question about when and how the Navy notified the Health Department about the spill, Meyer would only say that notification happened \u201crapidly, very quickly.\u201d It took the department\u2019s Joanna Seto to explain that the Navy called to report the spill twelve hours after it happened.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When Lau tried to probe why the call came so late, given the department\u2019s 24-hour reporting hotline, committee member and Navy official Brian Bennett cautioned, \u201cWe probably need to be careful with this line of questions. \u2026 [It] now becomes part of the record associated with the reopening of the contested case hearing. \u2026 Ernie is a litigant in this.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Out of concern for O\u02bbahu\u2019s main drinking water aquifer, which lies just 100 feet below the tanks, the Sierra Club and the Board of Water Supply have contested the Navy\u2019s 2019 application for a Department of Health permit to continue operating the Red Hill facility for at least the next five years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A contested case on the Navy\u2019s application is ongoing. Although the week-long case hearings concluded in early February, hearing officer Lou Chang ordered that information on this most recent spill be added to the record. That information, including correspondence, vapor monitoring data, and other documentation, was due to be submitted by the parties on May 27. The DOH did not make any of it available to Environment Hawai\u02bbi<\/em> by press time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the May 20 meeting, Bennett assured participants, \u201cIn due course, the information will become available,\u201d adding that the DOH is also investigating the incident.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This seemed to assuage no one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Frankel still pressed Meyer on whether or not the leak had anything to do with the small nozzles at the base of each tank that connect to the pipes down to Pearl Harbor. A 2018 Quantitative Risk and Vulnerability Assessment of the tank system prepared for the Navy by ABS Consulting had identified the nozzles as the most likely source of a fuel leak. An administrative order on consent between the Navy, the federal Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Health calls for the decommissioning of those nozzles, which are too small to properly internally inspect, coat or repair.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Meyer would only admit that the leak occurred at a pipe coupling near tanks 18 and 20, but would not say anything more, citing the Navy\u2019s ongoing investigation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this way, Meyer deflected Frankel\u2019s follow-up questions about whether any of the fuel had flowed near or above any of the tunnel\u2019s well lids, and whether the Navy detected the leak visually or with monitoring software. The same went for Lau\u2019s questions about how fast the Navy was able to stop the leak and whether parts of the pipeline are controlled remotely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Slow Progress<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If it turns out that the May leak was due to an issue with the kind of nozzles that are to be decommissioned, it would underscore a point Frankel and attorneys for the BWS made repeatedly during the contested case hearing \u2013 namely, that the Navy\u2019s planned inspections and upgrades are occurring at a snail\u2019s pace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It seems incredible to imagine that there aren\u2019t going to be things that aren\u2019t fixed.<\/p>ELLA Foley Gannon, COUNSEL FOR BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt seems incredible to imagine that there aren\u2019t going to be things that aren\u2019t fixed. The risk is way too high. It\u2019s just not a reliable system,\u201d BWS attorney Ella Foley Gannon said during the opening day of the hearing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That day, Navy Commander Blake Whittle, regional fuels center officer at Naval Supply Systems Command Fleet Logistics Pearl Harbor from 2017 to June 2020, said that the pipes below the tanks, and not the tanks themselves, are the most likely site of a catastrophic release of fuel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With regard to the nozzles, Pearl Harbor fuels deputy director John Floyd testified that only a single nozzle has been decommissioned to date, the one in Tank 5. As for the dozen-plus tanks with fuel currently in them that also have the small nozzles, he said that those will be decommissioned as each tank goes through the \u201cclean, inspect, repair\u201d process, over the next decade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/strong>So the risk remains for those tanks in the meantime? Frankel asked Floyd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cYes. We cannot take them out of service until we complete their maintenance cycle,\u201d Floyd replied. He added that because the nozzles are an extension of the tank, they are included in the facility\u2019s semi-annual tank tightness testing, which is aimed at detecting tank leaks greater than 0.5 gallons per hour. And so far, all of the tanks tested have passed, according to that standard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/strong>Frankel noted that the operating permit the Navy has applied for is only good for five years. If the permit is granted and the Navy requests another in 2026, \u201cI\u2019m going to want to know how many of these nozzles have been replaced,\u201d Frankel said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Floyd said that four tanks are currently undergoing the clean, inspect, repair process and that at least six tank nozzles should be decommissioned during the permit period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So the vast majority of the tanks will still have these small nozzles that pose a risk?<\/p>DAVID KIMO FRANKEL, COUNSEL FOR SIERRA CLUB OF HAWAI\u02bbI<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n \u201cSo the vast majority of the tanks will still have these small nozzles that pose a risk?\u201d Frankel asked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cYes,\u201d Floyd replied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Chronic Release<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n While the May 6 release of possibly less than 1,000 gallons grabbed headlines, the fact that the facility might be leaking thousands of gallons of fuel a year through tiny holes in the quarter-inch-think steel tank liners is also a major concern of the Sierra Club and BWS. \u201cCoupons\u201d cut from the tanks at Red Hill confirm that despite its concrete casing, the exterior of the sheet metal liner corrodes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The same ABS report that identified the nozzles as high risk points also estimated how much fuel could be released through chronic losses, should corrosion create holes in the tanks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cHave you looked at the ABS report that estimates that over 5,000 gallons of fuel are expected to leak every single year through chronic conditions?\u201d Frankel asked Floyd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI\u2019m not sure it said that. If there is a release below the minimum detectable threshold, of .499 gallons per hour, I think, if the tank was releasing, it would release up to 4,300 gallons I believe the math comes out to,\u201d Floyd replied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Chris Caputi, an engineer with Michael Baker International, which helps oversee Red Hill\u2019s tank tightness testing process, testified that while the method used by its contractor is aimed at detecting leaks as small as 0.5 gallons per hour, in practice, it can detect leaks as small as 0.36 gallons per hour. <\/p>\n\n\n\n While no leaks have yet been found under this process, Frankel pointed out that even Michael Baker engineers believe a groundwater threat exists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Frankel read from a 2008 report by the company on the Red Hill facility that Caputi helped write. It stated, \u201cOne thing has remained constant since these tanks were commissioned in 1940, and that is the technology to detect leaks in the tanks still lags behind the required level of measurement needed to protect the groundwater aquifer system.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDid I read that correctly?\u201d Frankel asked Caputi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThat\u2019s what it says,\u201d Caputi replied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Secondary Containment<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n To prevent fuel from reaching the environment through either a catastrophic or chronic release, the Sierra Club wants the Navy to stop using the underground tanks altogether and transition its fuel to above-ground tanks, while the BWS would be satisfied with the installation of a secondary containment system within the existing tanks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thick concrete and gunnite walls surround the tanks. Below them is a concrete plug 20 feet thick, according to Floyd. But concrete is porous and also cracks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cConcrete \u2026 cannot possibly do the job that the Navy says it does,\u201d BWS attorney Gannon said during the hearing. She also noted that under the Department of Health\u2019s administrative rules regarding fuel storage tanks, a concrete encasement did not seem to qualify as the kind of corrosion protection required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At Tank 5, there is a large stain on a wall where fuel, presumably from the 2014 spill, had penetrated. Navy witnesses estimated that the fuel traveled through at least eight or nine feet of concrete to make that stain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Commander Whittle testified that he never saw any evidence of cracking or spalling in the concrete at Red Hill, but admitted that only a very small fraction of what\u2019s there has been inspected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Are you aware of any tightness test of the lower access tunnel?<\/p>David Brown, COUNSEL FOR BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n Given concrete\u2019s porosity, BWS attorney David Brown seemed to question the Navy\u2019s plans, mentioned earlier in the hearing, that the lower access tunnel beneath the tanks could hold a catastrophic release of fuel. \u201cAre you aware of any tightness test of the lower access tunnel?\u201d Brown asked Floyd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n No, Floyd replied, but added that an oil pressure door the Navy has installed within the tunnel was designed to hold the contents of one full tank.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To avoid any leaks due to tank corrosion, the Navy has committed to installing some kind of secondary containment system within the tanks or shutting down the facility by 2045. It\u2019s also entered into an agreement with Gaz Transport and Technigaz (GTT) to have the company conduct a feasibility study to determine whether its stainless steel membrane technology developed for liquefied natural gas containers and ships would work at Red Hill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Navy\u2019s Frank Kern, whose job it is to manage the integrity of the tanks at Red Hill, testified that he was not aware of whether GTT\u2019s steel membranes have been used to contain petroleum and that the Navy hoped to have the study results this month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the May 20 hearing, Meyer added that the GTT technology could potentially be installed in a single tank in the next few years, and in the remaining tanks between 2025 and 2045.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Meyer also noted the Navy\u2019s partnership with the University of Hawai\u02bbi College of Engineering. The college has received a $4 million grant for five initiatives to better understand and mitigate corrosion at Red Hill: 1) corrosion inspection and repair protocols, 2) advanced electron miscroscopy for corrosion products and assessment of remediation approaches, 3) concrete tank degradation inspection and retrofit, 4) hybrid multifunctional smart and adaptive nanocoating, and 5) friction surfacing coating and crack fill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mitigation<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Whether or not the Navy did, indeed, capture all of the fuel that leaked last month remains to be seen, although the soil vapor monitoring suggests that some of it escaped the tunnel somehow. If some of it did escape, it\u2019s questionable whether anything will be done to recover it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The 27,000 gallons of fuel that leaked in 2014 were never recovered, in part because the EPA and DOH felt that drilling holes into the basalt to look for the fuel to try to recover it might do more harm than good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although Meyer argued that none of the fuel from that release had been detected in drinking water, or at least detected at a level that threatened human safety, Charley Ice, retired from the state Commission on Water Resource Management\u2019s geology-hydrology section, countered, \u201cIt\u2019s actually in the aquifer right now. It\u2019s in the top of the aquifer right now.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lau said there was some debate over what monitoring data suggest about the threat to the drinking water supply. But in any case, \u201cwhere all that fuel went, that\u2019s a question we don\u2019t know,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When asked by meeting participant Melodie Aduja whether the Navy was doing anything to prevent further contamination as a result of the 2014 fuel leak, Meyer noted that natural attenuation is occurring right now. <\/p>\n\n\n\n For any future catastrophic releases, he said there has been significant discussion on building a water treatment plant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Water Commission staffer Ryan Imata pressed Meyer for more details on the Navy\u2019s mitigation plans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cDoes the Navy have enough of an understanding of groundwater flow to have a plan to do remediation in case there\u2019s a big spill? Presumably, I assume you would drill a well, treat the water, and dump it back in,\u201d Imata said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Meyer said more information would be included in a supplemental release detection document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Imata continued, \u201cDrilling a well and having a treatment facility is going to be kind of a long process to construct.\u201d He asked whether the Navy had a strategic plan for drilling remediation wells, since it doesn\u2019t know where the next large fuel release will come from.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Water Commission is in charge of approving all well drilling permits. And, Imata said, \u201cWe can\u2019t give a permit for a well tomorrow. We have to review to ensure it doesn\u2019t pose any risks in itself.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n We obviously want to protect the water.<\/p>CAPT. GORDIE MEYER, COMMANDING OFFICER FOR NAVFAC Hawai\u02bbi<\/cite><\/blockquote><\/figure>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe obviously want to protect the water,\u201d Meyer said, adding that there is a lot of discussion on groundwater flow in the area and different opinions about it. \u201cNavy studies show there could be mitigation. \u2026 When we agree on a plan, the Navy is ready to move forward,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To Meyer\u2019s claim that natural attenuation was mitigating the effects of the 2014 fuel release, Ice said that even though the fuel starts to break down once it enters the soil and rock, the constituents that result \u201care scary for public health. Our concern is people are drinking those constituents right now.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The DOH\u2019s Joanna Seto agreed that was a concern and said her department was requiring the Navy to monitor and sample for those constituents. \u201cWe are monitoring that closely. We want to ensure we are providing safe drinking water to the community,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the contested case hearing, the Navy\u2019s counsel, Karrin Minnot, stressed that monitoring shows that the water in the aquifer beneath Red Hill is safe to drink and no petroleum constituents have been detected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n BWS program administrator Erwin Kawata admitted that was largely true, but said the agency\u2019s worry is about the possibility of detecting something in the future. \u201cIt remains an ever-present concern due to the proximity to the fuel facility,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe Navy has identified several layers of protection. \u2026 Use of the Navy water source, Red Hill shaft, a pump-and-treat collection type well. All those processes are testing for something outside the tank after it\u2019s released. As of right now we have heard all of these approaches, the pump and treat. I\u2019m not aware of any type of design or pilot to demonstrate its effectiveness,\u201d he continued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When Frankel asked whether the Navy could treat fuel-contaminated water next week, Kawata replied, \u201cTo our knowledge, the treatment facility doesn\u2019t exist.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although it\u2019s not meant for drinking, Frankel asked if groundwater from monitoring well Number 2 beneath the Red Hill tanks was safe to drink.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNo,\u201d Kawata replied, adding later that the risk to the drinking water supply below was substantial. \u201cWe have an extremely large amount of fuel \u2026 180 million gallons, 100 feet above the groundwater aquifer, information showing past leaks, studies showing high probabilities of acute and sudden releases into the future \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n It could be months before hearing officer Chang issues his recommended decision in the case. According to Frankel, as of late May, no one had asked about cross examination with regard to the new information submitted about the May spill. Parties were set to submit their post-hearing briefs and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by June 14.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2014 Teresa Dawson<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" At the May 20 Zoom meeting of the state’s fuel tank advisory committee, Hawaiʻi Sierra Club attorney David Kimo Frankel cracked up laughing at what Capt. Gordie Meyer, commanding officer of NAVFAC Hawaiʻi and regional engineer, told Asami Kobayashi, legislative … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":13633,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[484],"tags":[3],"class_list":["post-13632","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-june-2021","tag-teresa-dawson"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13632","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13632"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13632\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/13633"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13632"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13632"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13632"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}