Navy says EPA report that found low-level contamination proves water is ‘safe’

The Navy released Wednesday a report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that was the result of an inspection of its water system that serves more than 93,000 people on Oahu.

The inspection found small but detectable traces of petroleum and of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, dubbed PFAS. The report, which had several redactions, also detailed assorted maintenance problems and missing documents.

But given the relatively low detection levels, the Navy touted the report’s findings as evidence of success on its part. In a statement, the Navy said that “the inspection, completed over the summer, determined the JBPHH (Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam) water remains safe for consumption.”

“Importantly, the Navy has strengthened its sampling and analysis programs as well as customer service practices for those on the water system,” the Navy statement continued. “Working together with the EPA and Hawaii Department of Health, the Navy drinking water system in Hawaii has been at the forefront of drinking water testing over the last two years … The Navy remains committed to the safety and well-being of every consumer on the JBPHH drinking water system now and for future generations.”

Residents on the water system have reported a series of ailments ever since fuel from the Navy’s Red Hill fuel facility tainted its Red Hill water shaft in November 2021. The Navy shut off the Red Hill well, but fuel made its way into the Navy’s water system. Several families affected by the spill took the U.S. government to court this summer as part of a mass tort lawsuit, with a verdict still pending.

In March 2022, the Navy and the state Department of Health said they had successfully cleaned the contaminated water system, but many residents had doubts — and some were still reporting symptoms. In December, the EPA released a report after testing four homes of residents complaining of symptoms, and found three of them had traces of petroleum in the water, and in each case previous Navy testing had shown no traces.

In January, an influx in complaints from residents on the Navy water system prompted the Navy to extend its water monitoring programs for an additional year.

Marti Townsend, the chair of the Red Hill Community Representation Initiative, said “I find it interesting that (the) Navy wants the public to trust them, and so they issued a redacted report on the water system where they concede to not giving the EPA all the documents they requested, and that also shows that they’ve made little progress on the major system failures (that) were identified in 2022 by the EPA.”

The CRI, which was created as part of a federal consent decree regarding the closure of Red Hill, has clashed with the Navy and accused it of a lack of transparency.

According to the latest report, EPA inspectors tested the Navy’s Waiawa and Aiea Halawa water shafts for contaminants.

The testing found small traces of PFAS, widely known as “forever chemicals” because they are slow to degrade in the environment. The findings were below “environmental actions limit” — the amount that requires a water system’s owner to act — but the report noted that at least one test at Aiea Halawa Shaft exceeded the EPA’s and the state of Hawaii’s “maximum contaminant level,” the level at which is considered the highest acceptable reading.

The report said EPA inspectors also found small readings of petroleum in both the Waiawa Shaft and the Aiea Halawa shaft, but the levels were low and inspectors noted that their “compositions were unknown and could not be confirmed at the time of this report.”

Townsend said “it’s an extremely small amount, but the important thing to keep in mind is that it only takes a small amount,” and asserted that the long-term effects of exposure to these chemicals in drinking water aren’t well known.

The EPA’s report said the Navy raised several concerns regarding EPA’s collection of PFAS samples, which Navy officials “believed exceeded EPA’s authority.” According to the report, EPA’s inspection team “acknowledged the concerns and its intent to move forward with the inspection and sampling plan under the authority granted by the (Safe Drinking Water Act)” and told military officials “any concerns may also be communicated to EPA’s leadership.”

The report noted that while both Army and Navy officials opposed sampling, “both clearly stated they would not impede the collection of any samples.”

Wayne Tanaka, director of the Sierra Club of Hawaii, said “the Navy’s objections to PFAS sampling suggests that they would rather not know about what they’ve done to our water instead of having to actually deal with their forever contaminants they have introduced into our environment that could threaten the health of our residents, including generations yet unborn.”

Townsend said, “I think it speaks to the importance of having agencies like the EPA and the state Department of Health. Remember that they serve the public’s interest and not the Navy’s, and the Navy is clearly trying to run interference. And I think there should be kudos given to the EPA for pursuing the PFAS question over the Navy’s protests.”

The EPA report noted that the team did not always receive documents and records when asked, and occasionally received incomplete ones. It also documented several examples of facilities falling into disrepair and potentially exposing the water to contaminants.

Inspectors found that “the coating on the sidewalls of the Halawa S-1 Reservoir had failed, exposing a substantial percentage of the reservoir sidewall primer layer and steel to the weather, and resulting corrosion has impacted the sidewall structural integrity. The sidewall has evidence of dozens of exterior patch repairs. The sidewall also has unrepaired areas of corrosion with metal loss in multiple locations that ranged in size from 1 to 6 inches in diameter. The reservoir base is corroded with metal loss around the perimeter.”

When the EPA team asked for an operation and maintenance manual for the system, or for a list of standard operating procedures (or SOPs), the Navy provided 15 individual SOPs. The report said that the “The SOPs did not fully address the proper operation and maintenance of the shaft treatment facility startup and shutdown, booster pump stations, storage tanks, daily inspections, or operator daily log requirements.”

The report also said that the Navy did not provide the EPA inspection team with the requested water tank inspection reports and that representatives of the Navy water system “stated that several tanks had not been cleaned or inspected since 2013.”

Inspectors found that one component of the system, which was not named in the report released to the public due to redactions, but that “accounts for the majority of the System’s finished water storage capacity,” has advanced corrosion with metal loss at multiple locations. The same component’s sidewall had “unrepaired areas of advanced corrosion with metal loss in multiple locations that ranged in size from 1 to 6 inches in diameter.”

Inspectors also noted that a reservoir base “was corroded with metal loss around the perimeter,” that an exterior reservoir “coating had failed down to the primer and bare steel on large surface areas around the reservoir,” and that “various reservoir’s floors had a sediment layer.” Regarding the sediment, the report notes the amount “could not be estimated due to limited visibility through the access hatch.”

At the Halawa Shaft, the EPA inspection team “observed corroded electrical conduit connections near floor level into openings of an access point that were not sealed from contaminants. There was also a plug inserted into a penetration in the pump room floor above the shaft supply, which was loose and potentially not sealed from contaminants.”

Tanaka said that the Navy’s statement accompanying the report’s release “reflects the same misleading messaging strategy we saw in the years leading up to the Red Hill crisis.”

“It focuses on point-in-time water sample results, and fails to mention the litany of issues raised by the EPA, including missing records, reports, and resilience assessments; deficient SOP documents; corrosion issues; admissions that water tanks had not been cleaned for over a decade and with observable sediment layers; and multiple places where contaminants have the potential to enter their water distribution system,” Tanaka said. “This kind of messaging is not only self-serving and disingenuous, but highly irresponsible, especially for consumers who deserve to know the full picture of what is going on with their water system.”

—

What’s in the water?

The latest U.S. Enironmental Protection Agency report resulting from the inspection of the Navy’s Waiawa and Aiea Halawa shafts revealed:

>> Traces of petroleum were found in both shafts.

>> Traces of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), known as “forever chemicals” were found. At least one test at Aiea Halawa Shaft exceeded the EPA’s and the state’s “maximum contaminant level.”