Red Hill: More Revelations and Unanswered Questions on the Days Leading to the First Mass Environmental Case Against the US Government
by Madison Owens, Red Hill Organizer, Rosalie Luo, Chapter Volunteer, and Wayne Tanaka, Chapter Director | Reading time: 7 minutes
Hawaiʻi Commission on Water Resource Management Meeting
In the last week of March, the federal district court unsealed an extensive complaint by the Red Hill whistleblower, with extensive factual allegations in support of a False Claims Act case against Navy contractors who had done work at the Red Hill facility in the years leading up to the November 2021 fuel release. While the Department of Justice ultimately declined to prosecute the case, the details outlined in the complaint included a number of revelations including:
The alleged occurrence of multiple prior PFAS spills in 2019 and 2020, and the repeated failure of a contractor to adequately remove older, even more dangerous aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) from the facility, rendering its fire suppression system inoperable for years.
The connection between the March 2020 Hotel Pier leak and the November 2021 disaster, allegedly due to a contractor “sealing off” the Hotel Pier defuel line that led to the pressure surges that ruptured the JP-5 fuel line in May 2021 (releasing the fuel that would end up in a fire suppression drain line that then ruptured in November 2021).
The alleged failure of contractors to adequately inventory much less maintain all of the components needed to operate the Red Hill facility, leading to the over two hundred backlogged repairs that had to be completed by the Joint Task Force Red Hill just to defuel the Red Hill fuel tanks.
These and other revelations also raised a number of associated questions, such as:
What happened during the prior PFAS spills, how and to what extent were those spills cleaned up, where did any contaminated materials and residue get sent to, and why were these spills not included in the recent Pearl Harbor PFAS Preliminary Assessment?
Why were contractors who repeatedly failed to remove the “bad foam” AFFF in the facility’s fire suppression system rewarded with extra contracts - and extra money - to do the same job they had failed to complete?
Why did the Navyʻs “root cause analysis” or any subsequent investigations of the May and November 2021 spills fail to identify the contractor actions associated with the defuel line at Hotel Pier?
Which of the contractors identified in the complaint are continuing to do work for the Department of Defense, at Red Hill or elsewhere in the islands, and what is being done to ensure the quality and adequacy of their work, especially on matters that may affect our environment and communities?
Defense Logistics Agency Fuel Facility Failures Outlined in Inspector General Report
During the second week of April, the Pentagon Inspector General quietly released a report on the Defense Logistics Agency’s (DLA’s) handling of fuel facilities across the globe, the result of an investigation triggered by the Red Hill crisis. The report found that the lack of site visits or comparable oversight by DLA staff in recent years placed its fuel facilities “at an increased risk of fuel leaks and spills, which could endanger public health, harm natural resources, and lead to mission failure."
While the report identified 172 spills that had occurred across the DLA’s 591 fuel facilities in the last two years, it did not provide any information about the amount of fuel leaked (other than one instance of 186,000 gallons), the specific causes of leaks (other than "equipment failure," "human error," and "unknown"), and whether or how site visits could have actually identified any issues leading to these leaks - including those at Red Hill and possibly other facilities in Hawai‘i.
As with the whistleblower complaint, the contents of this report raised additional questions including regarding the safety of other fuel facilities in Hawai‘i and across the Pacific - including at locations where the 105 million gallons of fuel from Red Hill have been transported to.
Community Representation Initiative
Unfortunately, the Navy and EPA declined to participate in the one opportunity for the public to meaningfully ask the questions raised throughout the month of April.
The last Community Representation Initiative (CRI) meeting convened on April 18th at the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and virtually on Zoom. As it had in January, the Navy conveniently chose not to participate in this meeting, which was also scheduled less than two weeks before the bellwether Red Hill hearings that marked the beginning of the first mass environmental tort case against the US government. The EPA likewise declined to attend. As result, CRI members and the public had no opportunity to gain clarity on the pressing environmental and public health and safety concerns that had arisen in the prior weeks.
Despite these challenges, the CRI persisted in addressing whatever community needs it could. Members took the time to discuss on the record the urgent need for clean water for families on the Navy’s water lines, and the ongoing difficulties some families were encountering when requesting their water to be tested. Members also described and clarified their concerns regarding the Navy’s and EPA’s request for private mediation sessions, which would conflict with their commitment to operating with full transparency, and further delay pressing matters such as the need to provide alternative water. Commander Shannon Bencs, former Red Hill fuel director and special guest presenter, also educated community members on whether their homes may be connected to the Navy water lines.
If you would like to learn more information about the CRI, please visit their website here. The CRI is also seeking community input via a Red Hill CRI Survey here regarding their efforts thus far, future potential discussion topics, and whether and how they should respond to the requests for mediation.
Navy Medical Reports
Just three days before the Red Hill trial, the Navy released medical reports related to the aftermath of the November 2021 fuel spill. These reports included information on water quality data, medical visits, and mental health visits between November 2020 until November 2022. The report described how, of the 93,000 residents affected by the fuel spill, 27,797 sought medical care from the military health system after the incident. According to the report, the frequency of those medical appointments “returned to pre-release levels” by the end of December 2021. However, the report did not include any data from outside the military’s health system, and accordingly neglected to account for the many impacted individuals who sought treatment elsewhere after military doctors could not or would not adequately address their fuel exposure-related health issues.
You can read the Navy medical reports here: 1) Technical Memorandum, 2) Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental Report, and 3) Medical Encounters.
Red Hill Injury Trial
The much-anticipated Red Hill trial finally began on Monday, April 29 and is expected to continue for approximately two weeks. More than 7,500 residents affected by the November 2021 spill have filed a lawsuit with Just Well Law, led by Kristina Baehr, and her local counterpart Lyle Hosoda, against the US government; these plaintiffs are seeking to recover damages in three separate suits for the mental and physical health consequences of being exposed to fuel- contaminated water. This trial, overseen by US District Court Judge Leslie Kobayashi, will include testimonies from over a dozen bellwether plaintiffs, or individuals whose claims for damages may be representative of the thousands of others seeking relief.
The monumental trial is the first large-scale environmental case against the US government under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which contains exceptions to the legal immunity typically held by the federal government. The bellwether plaintiffs include many residents that have continued to lead the community response to the spill more than two years ago, as well as members of the Red Hill Community Representation Initiative, such as Army Major Mandy Feindt and Lacey Quintero. In the weeks leading up to Monday, the trial has received an enormous amount of attention both locally (i.e., Civil Beat, Star Advertiser, and Hawaii News Now) and nationally.
On the morning of opening arguments, dozens of local water protectors and community members demonstrated their support for the impacted families, and many entered the courtroom to observe the trial unfold themselves. Community support was so substantial that the courtroom became full almost immediately after it opened, and eventually required an overflow room to accommodate additional attendees. The trial is expected to continue until May 13th.
Interested community members are welcome to attend the trial in-person and show their support for the plaintiffs seeking justice and accountability for their harms:
Location:
U.S. District Court of Hawaii
300 Ala Moana Blvd # C338, Honolulu, HI 96850
Aha Nonoi Courtroom
https://maps.app.goo.gl/nNg55aGa35ujG8gf9
Date/Time: May 7-10 and 13, between 9 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. (note: some days may be half days)
Attire: Business casual if can.