Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Navy updates Red Hill closure plan; says monitoring shows no off‑site fuel migration
Loading...
Summary
Rear Admiral Lester Ortiz and Navy closure staff told the Commission on Water Resource Management on March 24 that tank cleaning, pipeline 'pigging' and groundwater monitoring are underway at Red Hill; Navy data so far report no evidence of contaminant migration and EDWM found no fuel in drinking water.
Rear Admiral Lester Ortiz, deputy commander of the Navy Closure Task Force Red Hill, and Navy technical staff briefed the Commission on Water Resource Management on March 24 about progress on decommissioning the Red Hill bulk fuel storage facility and related environmental cleanup.
The Navy described a four‑step cleaning process for tanks (degassing, interior inspection/sludge removal, pressure washing and regulatory verification). Capt. Rob Kleiman, decommissioning director, said 14 of the facility’s 20 tanks had held fuel when defueling began; 10 tanks are currently in a step of the cleaning process, tank 15 has been degassed and tank 12 began degassing last week. The Navy reported 390 gallons of sludge removed from eight tanks so far and described pressure‑washing and rinse‑capture systems designed to avoid introducing additional water to the aquifer.
"We took up 104,000,000 gallons of fuel from the facility," Kleiman said, adding that "99.9999% of the fuel is out" and that the small residual pockets are being collected during cleaning operations.
Navy staff also described pipeline cleaning and removal. The system linking Red Hill to Pearl Harbor includes roughly 11 miles of piping; Navy engineers said they have completed "pigging" — running foam cylinders to push residual fuel and sludge — on about 93% of targeted pipeline lengths and estimate roughly 2,500 gallons removed during that process. The task force said cutting and removal of pipe segments will begin once certified marine chemists and safety checks confirm personnel can work safely.
On monitoring and modeling, Navy environmental staff summarized a long‑running program of soil‑vapor monitoring, frequent air sampling during active tank venting and a groundwater monitoring network that now includes 49 Navy wells and additional sentinel wells off‑site. Ben Dunn, the task force’s environmental and remediation deputy, said the Navy has submitted updated groundwater flow, vadose‑zone and fate‑and‑transport models to state regulators and that the site‑investigation phase is ongoing.
"We have not detected fuel indicator compounds, any kind of trend or movement," Dunn said, referring to the Navy’s data to date. He added that multiple lines of monitoring evidence show "no indication of contaminant migration off or alongside or off‑site."
The Navy reviewed drinking‑water recovery and monitoring after the November 2021 release. Dunn said the enhanced drinking‑water monitoring program (EDWM) collected more than 16,000 samples from sources, hydrants and more than 9,000 homes and "never found any evidence of fuel in the drinking water." The Navy said it has submitted the EDWM report to EPA and is awaiting their endorsement so the program can be formally closed out.
On reactivation of production wells, staff described two joint‑base wells: the smaller IEA Halawa shaft, where the Navy has installed a granular activated carbon and ion‑exchange PFAS treatment system that is operable but still requires Department of Health inspection and formal approval before use; and the Red Hill Shaft, for which reactivation is not expected before 2027 because additional treatment infrastructure and approvals are required.
Navy presenters said pilot remediation studies (including soil vapor extraction and biodegradation research) are under way, that work plans are coordinated with DOH and EPA, and that many remediation steps require regulator concurrence. Rear Admiral Ortiz emphasized a focus on transparency and community engagement and pointed to dashboards, a document library, regular webinars and neighborhood outreach as tools to share data and progress.
Public comment at the meeting included appeals for a more trauma‑informed community engagement approach and better question‑tracking after the Community Representation Initiative was altered. The Navy said it would continue outreach, public reporting and regular updates to regulators and stakeholders.
The commission took no formal action on the presentation; the Navy brief was informational.
