Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility 

Pearl Harbor, Oahu, Hawaii 

Latitude: 21o

22’15” N 

Longitude: 157o

53’33” W 

HDOH Facility ID No. 9-102271 

HDOH Release ID No. 99051, 010011, 020028 

August 2010 

Prepared by: 

TEC Inc. 

1003 Bishop St. Suite 1505 

Pauahi Tower 

Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 

Prepared for: 

Commander 

Navy Region Hawaii 

Environmental Department, Code N45 

850 Ticonderoga Street, Suite 110 

Pearl Harbor, Hawaii 96860-5101 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

i 

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. i

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 3

1.1 Project Objective .............................................................................................................. 3

1.2 Previous Reports .............................................................................................................. 3

1.3 Background ...................................................................................................................... 4

1.3.1 Site Description ......................................................................................................... 4

1.3.2 Facility Information .................................................................................................. 4

1.3.3 UST Information ....................................................................................................... 4

1.4 Previous Environmental Investigations ............................................................................ 4

1.5 Regulatory Updates .......................................................................................................... 8

1.6 RHMW05 Installation ...................................................................................................... 8

2.0 Sample Collection and Analyses .......................................................................................... 8

2.1 Monitoring Well Purging ................................................................................................. 8

2.2 Groundwater Sample Collection ...................................................................................... 9

2.3 Groundwater Sample Analyses ........................................................................................ 9

3.1 July 2010 Sample Analytical Results ............................................................................... 9

3.2 Groundwater Contaminant Trend ................................................................................... 11

3.3 Results of Oil/Water Interface Measurements ............................................................... 13

3.4 Groundwater Status ........................................................................................................ 14

4.0 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................................. 17

5.0 References .......................................................................................................................... 21

List of Tables 

Table 1 Analytical Results for Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Release Response Report ..10 

Table 2 Oil/Water Interface Measurements ..............................................................................14 

Table 3 Action Levels for Compounds of Concern ..................................................................15 

Table 4 Results Categories and Responses to Groundwater Monitoring Results .....................15 

List of Figures 

Figure 1 TPH Trends in Groundwater, Round 20 (July 13, 2010) .............................................19 

Figure 2 PAH Trends in Groundwater, Round 20 (July 13, 2010) ............................................20 

List of Appendices 

Appendix A – Laboratory Analytical Reports 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1 

Executive Summary 

Introduction

There are 18 active and two inactive, 12.5 million gallon, field-constructed underground storage 

tanks (USTs) located at the Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility (the Facility). Previous environmental 

site investigations indicated a release has occurred and contaminated the groundwater underlying 

the Facility. 

The United States (US) Navy implemented a groundwater monitoring program, which includes 

collecting groundwater samples quarterly from US Navy Well 2254-01 (RHMW2254-01) and 

four wells installed in the Facility lower access tunnel (RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, and 

RHMW05). The US Navy Well 2254-01 is located approximately 3,000 feet downgradient from 

the Facility and provides approximately 24 percent of the potable water to the Pearl Harbor 

Water System (PHWS). The groundwater samples were analyzed for petroleum constituents and 

compared against State of Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) Drinking Water 

Environmental Action Levels (EALs) (HDOH, 2008). 

This groundwater monitoring report presents the analytical results and compares them to HDOH 

Drinking Water EALs for samples collected on July 13, 2010. Contaminant trends that have 

exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs are also provided in this report. 

July 2010 Sampling Event Results 

Laboratory analytical results from the July 2010 sampling event indicate Total Petroleum 

Hydrocarbons (TPH) as Diesel Range Organics (TPH-DRO), Polynuclear Aromatic 

Hydrocarbons (PAHs), and Volatile Organic Hydrocarbons (VOCs) are present in the 

groundwater beneath the Facility at concentrations that exceed HDOH Drinking Water EALs. 

Specifically, TPH-DRO was detected in RHMW01 at 228F μg/L [F indicates that the compound 

was identified, with the concentration above the laboratory method detection limit (MDL), but 

below the reporting limit (RL), therefore it is considered an estimate]. At RHMW02, TPH-DRO 

was detected at 3,085 μg/L (i.e., the average of normal and duplicate samples). The HDOH 

Drinking Water EAL for TPH-DRO is 210 μg/L. Also during the July 2010 sampling event, 1-

methylnaphthalene was detected at RHMW02 above the HDOH Drinking Water EAL at an 

average concentration of 7.24 μg/L (HDOH Drinking Water EAL is 4.7 μg/L). Naphthalene was 

also detected at RHMW02 above the HDOH Drinking Water EAL at an average concentration of 

104.5 μg/L (HDOH Drinking Water EAL is 17 μg/L). 

Conversely, during the July 2010 sampling event at RHMW2254-01 and RHMW03, no 

compounds were detected above the laboratory MDLs. In addition, at RHMW05, only a trace 

concentration of naphthalene was detected significantly below the respective HDOH Drinking 

Water EAL. 

TPH-DRO Contaminant Trends 

Regarding TPH-DRO contaminant trends, since January 2008 TPH-DRO at RHMW01 has 

fluctuated between the historical range established from September 2005 through September 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2 

2007. However, in July 2010 at RHMW01, TPH-DRO decreased to the lowest concentration 

observed to date (228 μg/L). At RHMW02, TPH-DRO concentrations were relatively stable 

prior to 2008, after which significant variations in the measured concentrations occurred. In July 

2010 at RHMW02, TPH-DRO showed an increase in concentration; however the latest observed 

TPH-DRO concentration remains within the historical range for this well. Since February 2009, 

TPH-DRO at RHMW03 has not been detected above the MDL. At RHMW05, TPH-DRO had 

been increasing since it was first sampled in May 2009. However, in April 2010 and July 2010, 

TPH-DRO at RHMW05 was not detected above the laboratory MDL. 

Other Contaminant Trends

Regarding other contaminant trends, the concentrations of three PAHs detected at RHMW02 are 

discussed. Since October 2008, the concentration of 2-methylnaphthalene has remained below 

the HDOH Drinking Water EAL. In addition, Naphthalene and 1-methylnaphthalene 

concentrations decreased to below the HDOH Drinking Water EALs in May 2009 and October 

2009, respectively. However, the average concentrations for Naphthalene and 1-

methylnaphthalene have since increased and in July 2010, remained greater than their respective 

HDOH Drinking Water EALs of 17 μg/L and 4.7 μg/L. 

Summary

At RHMW01 and RHMW02, TPH-DRO concentrations have fluctuated, but remain lower than 

or within their historical ranges. At RHMW03 and RHMW2254-01 during July 2010, no 

compounds were detected above laboratory MDLs. At RHMW05 TPH-DRO was not detected 

above the laboratory MDL. Finally, no light-non aqueous phased liquid (LNAPL), otherwise 

known as “free product”, has been observed in any of the Facility groundwater monitoring wells 

since January 2008. 

Based on the results of the July 2010 sampling event, continued quarterly groundwater 

monitoring is warranted so that overall groundwater quality trends may be observed and 

proactive action taken if the groundwater quality shows evidence of deterioration. In addition, 

monthly oil/water interface measurements and soil vapor monitoring should continue within the 

Facility. Although the US Navy Well 2254-01 is not imminently threatened at this time, 

monitoring should continue to assess contaminant migration from up-gradient locations. 

 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3 

1.0 Introduction

This report presents the results of the 20th groundwater sampling event, conducted in July 2010 

at the Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility, Oahu, Hawaii (hereafter referred to as “the Facility”). The 

Facility consists of 18 active and two inactive underground storage tanks (USTs) operated by the 

Fleet and Industrial Supply Center (FISC), Pearl Harbor. The groundwater sampling and 

analysis event is part of a groundwater monitoring program for the UST site in response to past 

UST releases, previous environmental investigations, and recommendations from the State of 

Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). 

1.1 Project Objective 

This groundwater sampling project was performed to evaluate the presence of chemicals of 

potential concern in groundwater underlying the Facility. The project was conducted to ensure 

the Navy remains in compliance with HDOH UST release response requirements as described in 

Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) 11-281 Subchapter 7, Release Response Action. The 

groundwater sampling program followed the procedures described in Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage 

Facility Groundwater Protection Plan [TEC Inc. (TEC), 2008 updated in 2009], also referred to 

as “the Plan”. 

This groundwater sampling event was conducted by TEC under United States (US) Navy 

Contract Number N47408-04-D-8514, Task Order No. 54. 

1.2 Previous Reports 

The following groundwater monitoring reports were previously submitted to the HDOH: 

1. Groundwater Sampling Report, First Quarter 2005 (submitted April 2005); 

2. Groundwater Sampling Report, Second Quarter 2005 (submitted August 2005); 

3. Groundwater Sampling Report, Third Quarter 2005 (submitted November 2005); 

4. Groundwater Sampling Report, Fourth Quarter 2005 (submitted February 2006); 

5. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2006 (submitted September 2006); 

6. Groundwater Monitoring Results, December 2006 (submitted January 2007); 

7. Groundwater Monitoring Results, March 2007 (submitted May 2007); 

8. Groundwater Monitoring Results, June 2007 (submitted August 2007); 

9. Groundwater Monitoring Results, September 2007 (submitted October 2007); 

10. Groundwater Monitoring Results, January 2008 (submitted March 2008); 

11. Groundwater Monitoring Results, April 2008 (submitted May 2008); 

12. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2008 (submitted October 2008); 

13. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October and December 2008 (submitted February 

2009); 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

4 

14. Groundwater Monitoring Results, February 2009 (submitted May 2009); 

15. Groundwater Monitoring Results, May 2009 (submitted July 2009); 

16. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2009 (submitted September 2009); 

17. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October 2009 (submitted December 2009); 

18. Groundwater Monitoring Results, January, February, and March 2010 (submitted April 

2010); and 

19. Groundwater Monitoring Results, April 2010 (submitted May 2010). 

1.3 Background 

The following sections provide a description of the site and information on the Facility and USTs. 

1.3.1 Site Description 

The Facility is located in Red Hill, Oahu, Hawaii. Land adjacent to the north of the Facility is 

occupied by Halawa Correctional Facility and private businesses. Land to the south and west of 

the Facility includes the Coast Guard Reservation. Moanalua Valley is located east of the 

Facility (Dawson, 2006). 

The Navy Public Works Department operates a potable water infiltration tunnel approximately 

1,550 feet downgradient from the Facility (Dawson, 2006). The US Navy Well 2254-01 is 

located approximately 3,000 feet down-gradient (west) of the Facility and provides 

approximately 24 percent of the potable water to the Pearl Harbor Water System (PHWS), which 

serves approximately 52,200 military consumers (TEC, 2008). 

1.3.2 Facility Information 

The Facility consists of 18 active and two inactive USTs operated by Navy FISC Pearl Harbor. 

Each UST has a capacity of 12.5 million gallons. The bottom of the USTs is located 

approximately 100 feet above the basal aquifer (Dawson, 2006). 

1.3.3 UST Information 

The USTs were constructed in the early 1940s. The tanks were fabricated from steel and 

currently contain Jet Propulsion (JP)–5 fuel, JP-8, and F-76 (diesel marine fuel). Previously, 

several tanks stored Navy Special Fuel Oil, Navy Distillate, aviation gasoline, and motor 

gasoline. Each tank measures approximately 245 feet in height and 100 feet in diameter. The 

upper domes of the tanks lie at depths varying between approximately 100 feet and 200 feet 

below the existing ground surface (TEC, 2006). 

1.4 Previous Environmental Investigations 

1998 to 2001: From 1998 to 2001, the Navy conducted an investigation at the Facility to assess 

potential releases from the fuel storage USTs and piping systems. In February 2001, the Navy 

installed a one-inch diameter RHMW01 (previously known as MW-V1D) to monitor for 

contamination of the basal aquifer underlying the Facility. The well was installed and completed 

at approximately 100 feet below grade within the lower access tunnel. At the time of well 

completion, depth to water in RHMW01 was measured at 86 feet below grade (Dawson, 2006). 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

5 

In February 2001, groundwater samples collected from RHMW01 contained total petroleum 

hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations ranging from 883 micrograms per liter (g/L) to 1,050 g/L 

and total lead ranging from 10.4 g/L to 15 g/L. The maximum total lead concentration in the 

samples was equal to the primary drinking water standard of 15 g/L for lead and exceeded the 

HDOH Tier 1 groundwater action level of 5.6 g/L (Dawson, 2006). 

2005 – Groundwater Sampling: The Navy began quarterly groundwater sampling at existing 

monitoring wells in 2005. Dawson Group, Inc. collected groundwater samples from RHMW01 

and the Red Hill Navy Pump Station (US Navy Well 2254-01) in February, June, September, and 

December 2005. 

Samples collected in February and June 2005 were not filtered in the field prior to analysis for 

lead. Analytical results for samples collected from RHMW01 indicated concentrations of total 

lead were above the HDOH Tier 1 action level of 5.6 g/L. The results were not considered 

appropriate for risk assessment since the sample had not been filtered. In addition, lead was not 

a component of fuels from the tanks near RHMW01, but was a component is fuels stored in other 

tanks during the history of the Facility. Lead may have been part of the Facility construction 

material (TEC, 2007). Previous sampling efforts showed elevated lead when analyzed as 

unfiltered samples. Subsequent efforts where the lead samples were filtered has resolved this 

issue. 

Samples were filtered in September and December 2005, and dissolved lead concentrations were 

below the HDOH Tier 1 action level. Concentrations of all other contaminants of potential 

concern were below HDOH Tier 1 action levels. 

2005 – Site Investigation: As part of a site investigation, TEC installed three groundwater 

monitoring wells at the Facility between June and September 2005. Well RHMW02 was 

installed in the lower access tunnel near Tanks 5 and 6. Well RHMW03 was installed in the 

lower access tunnel near Tanks 13 and 14. Well RHMW04 was installed north of UST tank 20 

to provide contaminant chemistry data for water moving through the basal aquifer beneath the 

Facility. Wells RHMW02 and RHMW03 were completed to depths of approximately 125 feet 

below the tunnel floor, and well RHMW04 was completed to a depth of approximately 300 feet 

below ground surface outside the tunnel. Groundwater samples were collected from the three 

newly installed wells and two existing wells (RHMW01 and RHMW2254-01) in September 

2005. 

Naphthalene and trichloroethylene were detected in samples collected from RHMW02 at 

concentrations greater than the HDOH Tier 1 action levels. Lead was detected in the sample 

collected from RHMW01 at a concentration greater than the HDOH Tier 1 action level; 

however, the sample was not filtered in the field prior to analysis. Analytical results for filtered 

samples obtained by Dawson during the same period indicated concentrations of dissolved lead 

were below the HDOH Tier 1 action level. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

6 

2006 – Site Investigation: Dedicated sampling pumps were installed in five wells (RHMW01, 

RHMW02, RHMW03, RHMW04, and US Navy Well 2254-01). TEC collected groundwater 

samples from the wells in July 2006. The groundwater samples were analyzed for petroleum 

constituents. Naphthalene was detected in samples collected from RHMW02 at concentrations 

above the HDOH Tier 1 action level. 

In September 2005, with concurrence from the HDOH, the Navy decided to use the newer 

HDOH Environmental Action Levels (EALs) for the Red Hill Site Investigation and Risk 

Assessment project. The EALs provide action levels for more chemicals, and are more useful 

for conducting screening risk assessments. Since the HDOH (HDOH May 2005) Policy Letter 

stated that the two sets of action levels should not be mixed, the Tier 1 screening levels presented 

in HAR Section 11-281-78 would no longer be used to evaluate environmental impact at the 

Facility. 

An overall summary of Facility groundwater sampling data by year follows: 

2006 – Groundwater Sampling: Groundwater samples were collected in December 2006. 

Analytical results indicated the following: 

 No chemicals were detected in groundwater from US Navy Well 2254-01 or RHMW03; 

 TPH as diesel range organics (TPH-DRO) was detected in groundwater above the HDOH 

Drinking Water EALs in RHMW01; and 

 TPH as gasoline range organics (TPH-GRO), TPH-DRO, and naphthalene were detected 

in groundwater above the HDOH Drinking Water EALs in RHMW02. 

2007 – Groundwater Sampling: Groundwater samples were collected in March, June, and 

September 2007. Analytical results indicated the following: 

 No chemicals were detected above HDOH Drinking Water EALs at US Navy Well 

2254-01; 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW01 during all three 

sampling events; 

 TPH-GRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02 in March; 

 TPH-DRO and naphthalene exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02 during 

all three sampling events; 

 1-methylnaphthalene and 2-methylnaphthalene exceeded the HDOH Groundwater Gross 

Contamination EAL at RHMW02 during all three sampling events; and 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW03 in June. 

2008 – Groundwater Sampling: Groundwater samples were collected in January, April, July, 

and October 2008. Analytical results indicated the following: 

 No chemicals were detected above HDOH Drinking Water EALs at US Navy Well 

2254-01; 

 Trace detections of 1-methylnaphthalene and naphthalene prompted a resample event in 

December at US Navy Well 2254-01, no chemicals were detected above the laboratory 

method detection limit (MDL); 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

7 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW01 during all four sampling 

events; 

 TPH-GRO did not exceed HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02; 

 TPH-DRO, naphthalene, 1-methylnaphthalene, and 2-methylnaphthalene exceeded 

HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02. Additionally, the SSRBL of 4,500 g/L for 

TPH-DRO was exceed in the October sampling event; and 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW03 during all four sampling 

events. 

2009 – Groundwater Sampling: Groundwater samples were collected in February, May, July, 

and October 2009. Analytical results indicated the following: 

 No chemicals have been detected above HDOH Drinking Water EALs at US Navy Well 

2254-01; 

 Trace TPH-GRO at US Navy Well 2254-01 was detected above the laboratory MDL and 

significantly below the laboratory reporting limit and HDOH Drinking Water EAL, in 

February and May 2009; 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW01 during all four sampling 

events; 

 TPH-GRO has not exceed HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02; 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02 during all four sampling 

events; 

 Naphthalene, 1-methylnaphthalene, and 2-methylnaphthalene exceeded HDOH Drinking 

Water EALs at RHMW02 in February 2009, however only 1-methylnaphthalene 

exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EALs in May and July 2009 and only naphthalene 

exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EAL in October 2009; 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW03 in February, but not in 

May, July, or October; and 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EAL at RHMW05 during the July and 

October 2009 sampling events. 

2010 – Groundwater Sampling: Groundwater samples were collected in January and April 

2010 (and TPH-DRO was resampled for at RHMW02 in February and March, 2010). Analytical 

results indicated the following: 

 No chemicals have been detected above HDOH Drinking Water EALs at US Navy Well 

2254-01; 

 Trace naphthalene at US Navy Well 2254-01 was detected above the laboratory MDL 

and significantly below the laboratory reporting limit and HDOH Drinking Water EAL, 

in January; 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW01; 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW02 in January, February, 

March, April, and July however, significant increases in January and February were 

attributed to tentatively identified compounds (TICs) apparently not associated with 

petroleum from the Facility; 

 Naphthalene and 1-methylnaphthalene exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs in 

RHMW02 in January, April, and July; 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

8 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs at RHMW05 in January, however, 

the significant increase was attributed to TICs apparently not associated with petroleum 

from the Facility; and 

 TPH-DRO at RHMW03 has not been detected above the laboratory MDL. 

1.5 Regulatory Updates 

During the summer and fall of 2008, HDOH updated their EALs, which resulted in significant 

changes to the action levels associated with methylnaphthalenes. The drinking water toxicity 

EAL for these compounds was 240 g/L. This concentration presumed that methylnaphthalenes 

were non-carcinogenic. Evidence that they are human carcinogens has now been accepted by the 

US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). As a result, HDOH adopted more rigorous 

EALs of 4.7 g/L for 1-methylnaphthalene and 24 g/L for 2-methylnaphthalene, corresponding 

to a residential tap water scenario, and a 1 in a million cancer risk (HDOH, 2008). 

Also, the drinking water EAL for naphthalene was increased from 6.2 g/L to 17 g/L (HDOH, 

2008). Finally, the HDOH Drinking Water EAL for TPH-DRO was increased from 100 g/L to 

210 g/L, although the HDOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL for TPH-DRO remains 

100 g/L. 

1.6 RHMW05 Installation 

In April 2009, a new groundwater monitoring well, RHMW05, was installed by TEC under US 

Navy Contract Number N47408-04-D-8514, Task Order No. 54. RHMW05 is located within the 

lower access tunnel between RHMW01 and RHMW2254-01(located at the US Navy Well 2254-

01). It was installed to identify any contamination migrating past RHMW01 prior to it reaching 

the US Navy Well 2254-01. 

2.0 Sample Collection and Analyses 

Field activities relating to groundwater sample collection were conducted on July 13, 2010. 

Groundwater samples were collected from four monitoring wells located inside the Facility 

lower access tunnel and one monitoring well located at the US Navy Pump Station. Sampling 

and analysis were conducted according to Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Groundwater 

Protection Plan (TEC, 2009). A total of eight samples were collected as follows: 

 one environmental sample from RHMW2254-01 (i.e., located at the US Navy Well 

2254-01), RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, and RHMW05; 

 one duplicate sample from RHMW02 (sampled as RHMWA01 and reported as 

RHMW02D); and 

 one matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate from RHMW2254-01. 

2.1 Monitoring Well Purging

All groundwater monitoring wells were purged and sampled using a dedicated pump system. 

Well purging was considered complete when no less than three successive water quality 

parameter measurements had stabilized within approximately 10 percent. Field parameters were 

measured at regular intervals during well purging and included pH, temperature, specific 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

9 

conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity. Purge water was collected and disposed in the 

Facility oil/water separator system. 

2.2 Groundwater Sample Collection 

Each monitoring well was sampled immediately following purging. All wells were sampled 

directly from their dedicated bladder pump system. Samples were placed into sampling 

containers with appropriate preservatives [i.e., hydrochloric acid (HCl) for volatile organic 

analysis, nitric acid (HNO3) for dissolved lead]. Dissolved lead samples were filtered in the field 

and placed in preserved bottles. Sample containers were labeled with the date, sample 

identification number, type of analysis, and sampler’s name. The containers were placed on ice 

in sample coolers and transported under chain-of-custody procedures to the certified laboratory 

for analysis. 

2.3 Groundwater Sample Analyses 

Groundwater samples were analyzed by SGS Environmental Service, Inc. in Anchorage, Alaska 

for TPH-DRO and TPH-GRO by EPA Method 8015B, VOCs by EPA Method 8260B, PAHs by 

EPA Method 8270C SIM, and dissolved lead by EPA Method 6020. 

3.0 Groundwater Sample Analytical Results 

This section provides a summary of analytical results for groundwater samples collected from 

four monitoring wells located in the lower access tunnel of the Facility and one monitoring well 

located at the US Navy Pump Station. Duplicate sample results from monitoring well RHMW02 

are reported in this document as RHMW02D. A summary of groundwater analytical results for 

TPH-DRO, TPH-GRO, VOCs, PAHs, and dissolved lead is included in Table 1. Complete 

analytical laboratory reports are provided in Appendix A. 

3.1 July 2010 Sample Analytical Results 

Groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH-DRO, TPH-GRO, VOCs, PAHs, and dissolved 

lead. Data qualifier “F” indicates the result is between the laboratory MDL and reporting limit 

(RL), therefore, should be considered an estimated value. The results for each groundwater 

monitoring well are discussed below. 

RHMW01

TPH-DRO at 228F μg/L exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EALs of 210 μg/L. Estimated 

trace concentrations of acenaphthene and flourene were detected at 0.0321F μg/L and 0.035F 

μg/L, respectfully (Table 1). Naphthalene was detected via USEPA Method 8270C SIM at 0.184 

μg/L. These concentrations are significantly below the HDOH Drinking Water EALs for each 

constituent. No other constituents were detected above the laboratory MDL. 
Page 1 

Table 1. Analytical Results for Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Release Response Report (July 13, 2010)

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii

Result Q MDL RL Result Q MDL RL Result Q MDL RL Result Q MDL RL Result Q MDL RL Result Q MDL RL

TPH as DIESEL RANGE ORGANICS 210 100 228 F 163 435 3060 163 435 3110 160 426 ND U 162 432 ND U 160 426 ND U 160 426

TPH as GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS 100 100 ND U 30 100 46.5 F 30 100 45.4 F 30 100 ND U 30 100 ND U 30 100 ND U 30 100

1-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 4.7 10 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 7.43 0.645 2.15 7.05 0.628 2.09 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 24 10 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 1.06 0.0161 0.0538 0.937 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

ACENAPHTHENE 370 20 0.0321 F 0.0158 0.0526 0.287 0.0161 0.0538 0.309 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

ACENAPHTHYLENE 240 2000 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

ANTHRACENE 1800 22 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 0.092 4.7 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

BENZO(a)PYRENE 0.2 0.81 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

BENZO(b)FLUORANTHENE 0.092 0.75 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

BENZO(g,h,i)PERYLENE 1500 0.13 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

BENZO(k)FLUORANTHENE 0.92 0.4 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

CHRYSENE 9.2 1 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

DIBENZ(a,h)ANTHRACENE 0.0092 0.52 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

FLUORANTHENE 1500 130 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

FLUORENE 240 950 0.035 F 0.0158 0.0526 0.159 0.0161 0.0538 0.165 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

INDENO(1,2,3-c,d)PYRENE 0.092 0.095 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

NAPHTHALENE 17 21 0.184 0.0326 0.105 59.9 1.33 4.3 61.1 1.3 4.19 ND U 0.0333 0.108 0.0643 F 0.0326 0.105 ND U 0.0332 0.107

PHENANTHRENE 240 410 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

PYRENE 180 68 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0157 0.0524 ND U 0.0161 0.0538 ND U 0.0158 0.0526 ND U 0.016 0.0535

1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE 0.52 50000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 200 970 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE 0.067 500 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE 5 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,1-DICHLOROETHANE 2.4 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE (TCP) 0.6 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 70 3000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,2-DIBROMO-3-CHLOROPROPANE (DBCP) 0.04 10 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2

1,2-DIBROMOETHANE (EDB) 0.0065 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 600 10 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,2-DICHLOROETHANE 0.15 7000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE 5 10 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE 180 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE 75 5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

BENZENE 5 170 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4

BROMODICHLOROMETHANE 0.22 50000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

BROMOFORM 100 510 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

BROMOMETHANE 8.7 50000 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3

CARBON TETRACHLORIDE 5 520 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

CHLOROBENZENE 100 50 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

CHLOROETHANE 8600 16 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

CHLOROFORM 70 2400 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1

CHLOROMETHANE 1.8 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE 70 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

cis-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE 0.43 50000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE 0.16 50000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5

ETHYLBENZENE 700 30 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE 0.86 6 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

M,P-XYLENE (SUM OF ISOMERS) 10000 20 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2

METHYL ETHYL KETONE (2-BUTANONE) 7100 8400 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10

METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE (4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE) 2000 1300 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10

METHYLENE CHLORIDE 4.8 9100 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5

NAPHTHALENE 17 21 ND U 0.62 2 107 6.2 20 102 6.2 20 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2 ND U 0.62 2

STYRENE 100 10 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

TETRACHLOROETHYLENE(PCE) 5 170 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

TOLUENE 1000 40 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

trans-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 100 260 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

TRICHLOROETHYLENE (TCE) 5 310 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

VINYL CHLORIDE 2 3400 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

XYLENES, TOTAL 10000 20 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3

6020 LEAD 15 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1

PAHs - Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons MDL - Method detection limit

VOCs - Volatile organic compounds RL - Reporting limit

UG/L - Micrograms per Liter TPH - Total petroleum hydrocarbons 

Q - Data qualifier ND - Indicates that the compound was not detected above the stated method detection limit

U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not detected at or above the stated limit

F - Indicates that the compound was identified but the concentration was above the MDL and below the RL

- Result exceeds one or both HDOH EALs

1

2

July 13, 2010 July 13, 2010 July 13, 2010

Final Drinking Water Action Levels for Human Toxicity, Table D-3a, Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with 

Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, HDOH, 2009

Groundwater Gross Contamination Action Levels, Table G-1, Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with 

Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, HDOH, 2009

8015B (Petroleum)

8270C SIM 

(PAHs)

8260B 

(VOCs)

RHMW05

UG/L

July 13, 2010 July 13, 2010 July 13, 2010

RHMW2254-01

UG/L

RHMW02

UG/L

RHMW02D

UG/L

RHMW03

UG/L Method

HDOH Drinking Water 

EALs1

for Human Toxicity 

UG/L

HDOH Groundwater 

Gross Contamination 

EALs2

UG/L

Chemical

RHMW01

UG/L

200
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

11 

RHMW02

In July 2010, TPH-DRO was detected in RHMW02 in the normal and duplicate samples at 3,060 

μg/L and 3,110 μg/L, respectively. These results exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EAL of 

210 μg/L, but not the site-specific risk based level (SSRBL) of 4,500 μg/L. The average 

concentration between the normal and duplicate samples for TPH-DRO was 3,085 μg/L, slightly 

greater than half of the SSRBL. The concentration of TPH-GRO detected in the normal and 

duplicate sample from RHMW02 averaged 45.95F μg/L, less than the HDOH Drinking Water 

EAL of 100 μg/L. 

Naphthalene was analyzed by USEPA Method 8270C SIM and USEPA Method 8260B. USEPA 

Method 8260B produced the highest naphthalene concentrations, which averaged 104.5 μg/L 

from the normal and duplicate sample (HDOH Drinking Water EAL is 17 μg/L). In addition, 1-

methylnaphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, acenaphthene, and flourene were detected in the 

normal and duplicate samples at averaged concentrations of 7.24 μg/L, 0.9985 μg/L, 0.298 μg/L, 

and 0.162 μg/L, respectively (Table 1). All of these concentrations are below the HDOH 

Drinking Water EALs for each constituent, except for 1-methylnaphthalene (HDOH Drinking 

Water EAL is 4.7 μg/L). No other constituents were detected above the laboratory MDL.

RHMW03

No parameters were detected above the laboratory MDLs in RHMW03 (Table 1). 

RHMW05

Naphthalene was detected above the laboratory MDL, but below the RL, at an estimated 

concentration of 0.0643F μg/L. This concentration is below the HDOH Drinking Water EAL for 

this compound (17 μg/L). No other constituents were detected above the laboratory MDL (Table 

1). 

US Navy Well 2254-01

No parameters were detected above the laboratory MDLs in RHMW2254-01 (Table 1). 

3.2 Groundwater Contaminant Trend 

Groundwater samples have been collected and analyzed by TEC since September 2005. Figure 1 

shows TPH trends in groundwater at the Facility. Figure 2 shows PAH trends in groundwater at 

the Facility. In these figures, open icons (without data) represent locations where the compounds 

being analyzed were not detected. 

The following is a discussion of compounds that exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EALs during 

two or more recent consecutive sampling events of increasing or decreasing concentrations, thus 

establishing a trend: 

 

RHMW01

At RHMW01, concentrations of TPH-DRO have been greater than the HDOH Drinking Water 

EAL since September 2005, but less than 25 percent of the SSRBL of 4,500 g/L. TPH-DRO 

had exhibited a decreasing trend since October 2008 with the lowest historical concentration (i.e., 

248F μg/L) recorded in July 2009. Since July 2009, this trend began increasing with 299F μg/L, 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

12 

312F μg/L, and 377 μg/L detected in October 2009, January 2010, and April 2010, respectively. 

In July 2010, TPH-DRO decreased to 228F μg/L the lowest concentration detected at RHMW01 

to date. 

RHMW02

At RHMW02, from September 2005 through February 2009, TPH-DRO exceeded the HDOH 

Drinking Water EAL and was greater than 50 percent of the SSRBL (estimated solubility limit of 

4,500 g/L). Specifically, the concentration of TPH-DRO was relatively stable at RHMW02 

until July 2008, ranging from 2,250 to 2,995 μg/L. However, during the July and October 2008 

sampling events, these average concentrations increased. The July 2008 average concentration 

was 4,055 μg/L and the October 2008 average concentration was 5,420 μg/L. Both of these 

values were significantly above the HDOH Drinking Water EAL of 210 μg/L, with the October 

2008 average also exceeding the SSRBL of 4,500 μg/L. 

However, TPH-DRO at RHMW02 had shown a decreasing trend from October 2008 through 

July 2009. In May and July 2009, TPH-DRO remained above the HDOH Drinking Water EAL, 

but was below 50 percent of the SSRBL of 4,500 μg/L. In October 2009, TPH-DRO began an 

increasing trend greater than 50 percent of the SSRBL which continued through February 2010 

when it exceeded the SSRBL due to tentatively identified compounds (TICs) apparently not 

associated with petroleum from the Facility (TEC, 2010). In March and April 2010, TPH-DRO 

exhibited a decreasing trend and the TICs detected in the two previous sampling events were not 

observed (i.e., average TPH-DRO concentrations of 2,490 μg/L and 2,215 μg/L respectively). 

During July 2010, TPH-DRO concentrations at RHMW02 increased to an averaged 

concentration of 3,085 μg/L, above 50 percent of the SSRBL of 4,500 μg/L. 

 

For other parameters, the average concentration in July 2010 for 1-methylnaphthalene (i.e., 7.24 

g/L) exhibited an increase, after decreasing in April 2010 (to 6.255 μg/L) from the January 

2010 average concentration (i.e., 8.65 g/L). Consequently, the July 2010 1-methylnaphthalene 

concentration remains above the HDOH Drinking Water EAL of 4.7 g/L. Naphthalene had 

shown an increasing trend through 2008 before decreasing to its lowest average concentration in 

May 2009 (1.125 μg/L). Since October 2009, average naphthalene concentrations in RHMW02 

have remained relatively stable between 20 μg/L and 22 μg/L, exceeding the HDOH Drinking 

Water EAL of 17 μg/L. In July 2010, the naphthalene concentration increased significantly to an 

average of 104.5 μg/L, however remains less than the concentrations observed during 2008 (e.g., 

October 2008 average concentration was 242 μg/L). 

RHMW03

At RHMW03, historically, concentrations of TPH-DRO have fluctuated around the HDOH 

Drinking Water EAL, but have been significantly lower than corresponding values observed at 

RHMW01 and RHMW02. However, TPH-DRO concentrations have decreased since October 

2008 dropping below the laboratory MDL in May 2009. Inclusive of the July 2010 sampling 

event, there has been no detectable TPH-DRO result since May 2009. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

13 

RHMW05

At RHMW05 there had been an increasing trend for TPH-DRO since it was first sampled in May 

2009. Starting with the July 2009 sampling event, TPH-DRO concentrations at RHMW05 were 

greater than the HDOH Drinking Water EAL (i.e., 210 μg/L) with the highest concentration of 

2,060 μg/L being observed in January 2010. It is important to note that the January 2010 

concentration contained TICs apparently not associated with petroleum from the Facility. 

However, in April and July 2010, TPH-DRO concentrations exhibited a significant decrease and 

in both sampling events, were not detected above the laboratory MDL. 

US Navy Well 2254-01

At US Navy Well 2254-01 (i.e., RHMW2254-01), no compounds were detected above the 

laboratory MDLs during July 2010. Additionally, no compounds have ever been detected at this 

sample location at concentrations greater than any of the HDOH Drinking Water EALs. 

3.3 Results of Oil/Water Interface Measurements 

The presence and thickness of light-non aqueous phased liquids (LNAPL), otherwise known as 

“free product”, released from the USTs is monitored at the Facility (see Table 2). Static water 

levels and fuel thickness is measured to a precision of ± 0.01 feet. 

In January 2008, fuel was measured in monitoring wells RHMW01 and RHMW02 at a thickness 

of less than 0.01 ft, but has not been observed in other monitoring wells. Measurements to 

determine the presence and thickness of fuel were conducted at RHMW01, RHMW02, 

RHMW03, and RHMW05 prior to and following the July 2010 sampling round. Since the trace 

amounts observed in January 2008, no free product has been observed in any of these Facility 

wells (Table 2). 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

14 

Table 2. Oil/Water Interface Measurements 

            

Date 

RHMW01 RHMW02 RHMW03 RHMW05 

SWL 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

SWL 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

SWL 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

SWL6 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

 January 2008 17.74 < 0.01 18.78 < 0.01 NT1 NT1 ---- ---- 

 July 2008 19.04 0.00 18.91 0.00 18.86 0.00 ---- ---- 

October 2008 18.61 0.00 18.56 0.00 18.82 0.00 ---- ---- 

November 2008 18.50 0.00 18.45 0.00 18.51 0.00 ---- ---- 

January 2009 19.28 0.00 19.22 0.00 19.27 0.00 ---- ---- 

February 2009 NT2 NT2 18.66 0.00 18.75 0.00 ---- ---- 

March 2009 18.59 0.00 18.57 0.00 18.67 0.00 ---- ---- 

May 20093 18.69 0.00 18.64 0.00 18.72 0.00 NT5 NT5

May 2009 18.91 0.00 18.86 0.00 18.90 0.00 NT5 NT5

July 20094 18.66 0.00 18.59 0.00 18.64 0.00 18.63 0.00 

August 2009 18.37 0.00 18.30 0.00 18.47 0.00 18.21 0.00 

September 2009 18.20 0.00 18.17 0.00 18.24 0.00 18.11 0.00 

October 2009 18.17 0.00 18.14 0.00 18.24 0.00 18.10 0.00 

November 2009 18.50 0.00 18.45 0.00 18.50 0.00 18.47 0.00 

December 2009 18.29 0.00 18.26 0.00 18.31 0.00 18.19 0.00 

January 2010 18.05 0.00 18.01 0.00 18.09 0.00 17.97 0.00 

February 2010 18.17 0.00 18.12 0.00 18.17 0.00 18.12 0.00 

March 2010 17.88 0.00 17.86 0.00 17.93 0.00 17.76 0.00 

April 2010 17.66 0.00 17.64 0.00 17.71 0.00 17.55 0.00 

May 2010 17.61 0.00 17.58 0.00 17.65 0.00 17.49 0.00 

June 2010 17.54 0.00 17.50 0.00 17.57 0.00 17.42 0.00 

July 2010 17.38 0.00 17.35 0.00 17.42 0.00 17.24 0.00 

SWL - Static water level, elevation above mean sea level 

LNAPL - Light Non-Aqueous Phased Liquid, fuel product on groundwater attributed to the Facility 

ft - Feet 

NT - Not Taken 1

 - The January 2008 measurement at RHMW03 was not taken due to equipment malfunction 2 - During the February 2009 measurements, RHMW01 was inaccessible due to extensive work being conducted at Tank 02 3

 - The measurements scheduled for April 2009 were postponed until May 6, 2009 due to RHMW05 drilling activities 4

 – The June 2009 measurements were skipped due to the installation of dedicated oil/water interface probes 5 - Oil/water interface measurements were not taken at RHMW05 until the installation of the oil/water interface probe was completed 6 – Elevation at RHMW05 is estimated from the difference between RHMW01 and RHMW05 during a survey conducted in January 2010 

---- - Time period prior to the installation of RHMW05 

Oil/water interface measurements were not taken in April 2008 

3.4 Groundwater Status 

Facility-specific contaminants of concern are defined as petroleum-related chemicals that have 

been observed in the groundwater samples above the HDOH Drinking Water EALs. In 

accordance with the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Final Groundwater Protection Plan

(TEC, 2008), Table 3 defines these Facility-specific compounds and their associated SSRBLs 

and updated EALs (HDOH 2008). 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

15 

Table 3. Action Levels for Contaminants of Concern 

Chemical EAL (μg/L) SSRBL (μg/L) 

Petroleum Mixtures 

TPH-DRO 210 4,500 

TPH-GRO 100 4,500 

Semi-Volatile Compounds 

1-Methylnaphthalene 4.7 NA 

2-Methylnaphthalene 24 NA 

Naphthalene 17 NA 

NA – Not applicable or not determined 

SSRBLs are applicable at RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, and RHMW05 

EALs are applicable at US Navy Well 2254-01 

In addition, the Plan defines four Results Categories of groundwater status for the Facility, based 

on concentrations of constituents of concern in RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, RHMW05 

and the US Navy Well 2254-01, and requires specific responses when these categories are 

observed during quarterly groundwater sampling. Table 4 describes each of the four Results 

Categories and identifies response actions to be taken in accordance with the Plan. 

 Table 4. Results Categories and Response Actions to Changes in Groundwater Status 

Results Category RHMW02 

RHMW03 or 

RHMW05* 

RHMW01 US Navy Pumping 

Well 2254-01 

Results Category 1: Result above 

detection limit but below drinking 

water EAL and trend for all 

compounds stable or decreasing 

A A A,D,M,E 

Results Category 2: Trend for any 

compound increasing or drinking 

water EAL exceeded 

A, B A, B A,B,C,D,E,F,G,K, 

L,O 

Results Category 3: Result 

Between 1/10X SSRBL and 

SSRBL for benzene, or between 

1/2X SSRBL and SSRBL for TPH 

A,B,G,H,I,J A,B,E,G,H,I,J A,B,C,D,E,F,G,I,J,

K,L,O 

Results Category 4: Result 

Exceeding any SSRBL or 

petroleum product observed 

A,C,D,E,F,I,J, 

K,M,N 

A,C,D,E,F,I, 

J,K,M,N,O 

A,C,D,E,F,G,I,J,K,

L,O 

*RHMW05 was installed in April 2009 and has been subsequently been added to this Table. 

Specific Responses: 

A. Send quarterly reports to HDOH. 

B. Begin program to determine the source of leak. 

C. Notify HDOH verbally within 1 day and follow with written notification in 30 days. 

D. Notify FISC Chain of Command within 1 day. 

E. Send Type 1 Report (see box below) to HDOH. 

F. Send Type 2 Report (see box below) to HDOH. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

16 

G. Increase monitoring frequency to once per month (if concentrations increasing). 

H. Notify HDOH verbally within 7 days and follow with written notification in 30 days. 

I. Remove sampling pumps, measure product in pertinent wells with interface probe, re-install 

pumps if product is not detected. 

J. Immediately evaluate tanks for leaks. 

K. Collect samples from nearby Halawa Deep Monitoring Well (2253-03) and OWDF MW01. 

For permission to sample 2253-03, call DLNR Commission on Water Resource Management 

808-587-0214, DLNRCWR@Hawaii.gov. 

L. Provide alternative water source at 2254-01. 

M. Prepare for alternative water source at US Navy Well 2254-01. 

N. Re-measure for product every month with reports to HDOH. 

O. Install additional monitoring well downgradient. 

Report Types 

HDOH Type 1 Report 

 Re-evaluate Tier 3 Risk Assessment/groundwater model results 

 Proposal to HDOH on a course of action 

HDOH Type 2 Report 

 Proposal for groundwater treatment 

Free Product Measurements

In response to the previous Category 3 status at RHMW02, free product measurements have 

been collected at the Facility monitoring wells. As Table 2 indicates, free product has been 

observed only during the January 2008 monitoring event (i.e., at both RHMW01 and RHMW02 

at less than 0.01 foot each). Since the trace amounts observed in January 2008, no free product 

has been observed in any of these Facility wells (Table 2). 

US Navy Well 2254-01

Based upon the July 2010 sampling event, the US Navy Well 2254-01 is not eligible for any 

category status change since no compounds were detected above the laboratory MDLs. 

RHMW03

Based upon the July 2010 sampling event, RHMW03 is not eligible for any category status 

change since no compounds were detected above the laboratory MDLs. 

Category 1 Status Locations

RHMW05

Based upon the July 2010 sampling event, RHMW05 is assigned a Category 1 status. This is 

because estimated trace concentrations of naphthalene (i.e., 0.0643F μg/L) was detected above 

the laboratory MDL, but not above the HDOH EAL of 17 μg/L for this compound. 

Category 1 response for RHMW05 requires: 

1. Quarterly reports to be sent to HDOH 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

17 

Category 2 Status Locations

RHMW01 

The July 2010 sampling event indicates that RHMW01 should remain in Category 2 status. This 

is because the TPH-DRO concentration of 228F g/L is greater than the HDOH Drinking Water 

EAL (210 g/L), but less than half the SSRBL of 4,500 g/L (estimated solubility limit of JP-5). 

 

Category 2 response for RHMW01 requires: 

1. Quarterly reports to be sent to HDOH; and 

2. Initiation of a leak determination program to identify if tanks are leaking. 

Category 3 Status Locations

RHMW02

Based upon the July 2010 sampling event, RHMW02 has been upgraded to Category 3 status. 

TPH-DRO concentrations remain greater than the HDOH Drinking Water EAL (210 g/L) and 

the July 2010 averaged concentration (3,085 g/L) is greater than half the SSRBL of 4,500 g/L. 

However, the July 2010 TPH-DRO average concentration is within the historical range for this 

well. 

Category 3 response for RHMW02 requires: 

1. Send quarterly reports to HDOH. 

2. Begin program to determine the source of leak. 

3. Increase monitoring frequency to once per month (if concentrations increasing). 

4. Notify HDOH verbally within 7 days and follow with written notification in 30 days. 

5. Remove sampling pumps, measure product in pertinent wells with interface probe, reinstall pumps if product is not detected. 

6. Immediately evaluate tanks for leaks. 

 

Category 4 Status Locations

There are no Category 4 status locations. 

4.0 Summary and Conclusions 

Summary

There is no indication of an immediate threat of disruption to drinking water resources of the US 

Navy Well 2254-01 as a result of the July 2010 data. Based on the July 2010 sampling event, the 

US Navy Well 2254-01 does not fall into any Results Category of the Plan. 

TPH-DRO was detected at RHMW01 during July 2010, at the lowest concentration to date. 

Although TPH-DRO concentrations at RHMW02 increased relative to the previous respective 

sampling events (excluding the February 2010 concentration that was elevated due to TICs not 

associate with fuel from the Facility) it remains well within the historical range. In addition, 

RHMW02 naphthalene concentrations have increased and remain above the HDOH Drinking 

Water EAL. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

18 

Conclusions/Recommendations

 To date, fuel on the groundwater has been observed only once (i.e., in January 2008 in 

RHMW01 and RHMW02 at less than 0.01 ft.). Continued monitoring of Facility wells 

for the presence of fuel on groundwater is recommended. 

 The concentration of TPH-DRO measured in the newest monitoring well, RHMW05, has 

drastically declined since exhibiting an increasing trend between May 2009 and January 

2010. 

 TPH-DRO at RHMW01 decreased to its lowest concentration at this location to date, 

while TPH-DRO at RHMW02 has slightly increased since April 2010. However, July 

2010 TPH-DRO concentration is within the historical range for RHMW02. It is 

recommended that quarterly monitoring of the Facility wells continue so that overall 

groundwater quality trends may be evaluated and proactive action taken if the 

groundwater quality shows evidence of deterioration. 

 The US Navy Well 2254-01 is not imminently threatened at this time; however, sampling 

should continue to monitor and assess contaminant migration from up-gradient locations. 

 Consideration should be given to having future samples analyzed using both 

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) analytical methods in 

addition to TPH-GRO and TPH-DRO analytical methods. 

In conclusion, the following activities are recommended to continue to monitor and clarify the 

groundwater contamination situation at the Facility: 

1. Continue monthly free product measurements at RHMW01, RHMW02, 

RHMW03, and RHMW05; 

2. Continue monthly soil vapor monitoring; and 

3. Continue quarterly groundwater monitoring of Facility wells for parameters of 

concern. 
The HDOH toxicity EALs were updated in •TPH DRO Residential Tap Water EAL is 21•TPH-DRO Residential Tap Water EAL is 21•TPH-GRO Residential Tap Water EAL is 10(HDOH, 2008).
The HDOH toxicity EALs were updated in • Naphthalene Residential Tap Water EAL 

1 th l hth l R id ti l T W t 

• 1-methylnaphthalene 

Residential Tap 

Wat

• 2- methylnaphthalene Residential Tap Wa(HDOH, 2008).
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility August 2010 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

21 

5.0 References 

AMEC. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Investigation Report, Prepared for NAVFAC 

Pacific, August 2002. 

Dawson Group, Inc. Fourth Quarter 2005 Groundwater Sampling Report, Red Hill Fuel 

Storage Facility, Hawaii. February 2006. 

Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 281, Subchapter 7. 

HDOH. Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and 

Groundwater, Summary Lookup Tables. March 2009. 

HDOH. Use of May 2005 Environmental Action Levels (“EALs”) at Leaking Underground 

Storage Tank Sites. Memo. July 2005. 

HDOH. Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and 

Groundwater. Summer 2008 (updated October 2008). 

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP). Implementation of the 

MADEP VPH/EPH Approach. Final Policy, October 2002 

The Environmental Company, Inc. and AMEC. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Work Plan, 

Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. June 2005. 

TEC, Inc. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Final – Addendum Planning Documents, Pearl 

Harbor, Hawaii. May 2006. 

TEC, Inc. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Final Technical Report, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. 

August 2007. 

TEC, Inc. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Final Groundwater Protection Plan, Pearl 

Harbor, Hawaii. January 2008 revised in December 2009. 

TEC, Inc. Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report, Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility, Pearl 

Harbor, Hawaii. April 2010. 
Appendix A 

Laboratory Analytical Reports