# Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Repor t
- Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells
R ED HILL BULK FUEL STORAGE FACILITY, JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR

- HICKAM, O‘AHU, HAWAI‘I

Latitude: 21 ° 22’15”N Longitude: 157 ° 53’33”W

DOH Facility ID No. 9

- 102271 DOH Release ID No. 99051, 010011, 020028

July 2012



### Department of the Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Hawai‘i 400 Marshall Road JBPHH HI 96860

- 3139

Environmental Technical Services Contract Number N62742

- 08

- D

- 1930, CTO HC21

# Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

- Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells RED HILL BULK FUEL STORAGE FACILITY, JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR

- HICKAM, O‘AHU, HAWAI‘I

Latitude: 21 ° 22’15”N Longitude: 157 ° 53’33”W

DOH Facility ID No. 9

- 102271 DOH Release ID No. 99051, 010011, 020028

Ju ly 2012

Prepared for:



### Department of Navy Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Hawai‘i 400 Marshall Road JBPHH HI 96860

- 3139

Prepared by: 

### Environet, Inc. 650 Iwilei Road, Suite 204 Honolulu, HI 96817

- 5318
Prepared under: 

### Environmental Technical Services Contract Number N62742

- 08

- D

- 1930, CTO HC21Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Table of Contents July 2012

i 

# Table of Contents

List of Acronyms

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... iii Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ v Section 1 Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 1

- 1
1.1 Project Objective

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1

- 1 1.2 Background

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 1

- 1 1.2.1 Site Description

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 1

- 2 1.2.2 Facility Information

................................ ................................ ................................ 1

- 2 1.2.3 UST Information

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 1

- 5 1.2.4 Regulatory Updates

................................ ................................ ................................ . 1

- 5 1.3 Previous Reports

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1

- 6
Section 2 Monitoring Activities

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 2

- 1
2.1 Groundwater Gauging

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 2

- 1 2.2 Groundwater Sampling

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 2

- 1 2.2.1 Monitoring Well Purging

................................ ................................ ........................ 2

- 1 2.2.2 Groundwater Sample Collection

................................ ................................ ............. 2

- 1 2.2.3 Sample Management and Shipment

................................ ................................ ........ 2

- 2 2.3 Analytical Program

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 2

- 2 2.4 Field Quality Control Samples

................................ ................................ ......................... 2

- 2 2.5 Laboratory Quality Control Samples

................................ ................................ ............... 2

- 2 2.6 Equipment Decontamination

................................ ................................ ........................... 2

- 3 2.7 Investigation

- Derived Waste Management

................................ ................................ ...... 2

- 3
Section 3 Groundwater Analytical Results

................................ ................................ ................ 3

- 1
3.1 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results

................................ ................................ . 3

- 1 3.1.1 Data Quality Control Results

................................ ................................ .................. 3

- 2 3.2 Groundwater Contaminant Tr end

................................ ................................ .................... 3

- 2
Section 4 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

................................ ....................... 4

- 1
4.1 Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 4

- 1 4.2 Conclusions

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 4

- 1 4.3 Recommendations

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 4

- 2
Section 5 References

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 5

- 1

Tables
Table 1

- 1: Outside Monitoring Well Information

................................ ................................ ...... 1

- 5 Table 3

- 1: Analytical Results for Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring

- Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells, April 2012

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 3

- 5 Table 3

- 2: Field QC Results

- Outside Wells, April 2012

................................ ............................ 3

- 7 Table 3

- 3: Historical and Current Groundwater Sample Analytical Results, August 2009 through April 2012

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 3

- 9Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Table of Contents July 2012

ii Figures Figure 1

- 1: Groundwater Monitoring Well Location Map

................................ ......................... 1

- 3
Appendices Appendix A: DOH Correspondence Appendix B: Field Notebook Appendix C: Groundwater Sampling Logs Appendix D: Laboratory Analytical Results, April 2012 (on CD

- ROM)Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i List of Acronyms July 2012

iii 

# List of Acronyms

μg/L micrograms per liter % percent amsl above mean sea level bTOC below top of casing COPC chemical of potential concern CTO Contract Task Order DL detection limit or method detection limit (MDL) DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources DOH State of Hawai‘i Department of Health DON Department of the Navy DRO diesel range organics EAL Environmental Action Level EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPH extractable petroleum hydrocarbon F

- 76 marine diesel fuel FLC Fleet Logistics Center GRO gasoline range organics HAR Hawai‘i Administrative Rules IDW investigation

- derived waste J Estimated result. Indicates that the compound was identified
, but the concentration was above the DL and below the LOQ. JBPHH Joint Base Pearl Harbor

- Hickam JP Jet Propellant LOD limit of dete ction LOQ limit of quantitation or reporting limit (RL) MADEP Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection MS matrix spike MSD matrix spike duplicate NA not available NAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering Command NAVSUP United States Naval Supply Sys tems Command ND not detected PAHs polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons pH hydrogen activity PHWS Pearl Harbor Water System PPE personal protective equipment Q data qualifier QC quality control RHSF Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility RPD relative percent difference TEC The Environmental Company, Inc. TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons U Indicates the compound or analyte was analyzed for
, but not detected. The result is reported as ND. U.S. United States USGS United States Geological Survey UST underground storage tank VOC volatile organic compoundQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i List of Acronyms July 2012

iv This page is intentionally left blank.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Executive Summary July 2012

v 

# Executive Summary

There are 18 active and two inactive, 12.5 million gallon capacity, field

- constructed underground storage tanks (USTs) located at the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility (RHSF). Previous

en vironmental site investigations indicated a release had occurred and contaminated the groundwater underlying the RHSF.
The United States (U.S.) Navy implemented a groundwater monitoring program, which includes collecting quarterly groundwater samples from U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01 (RHMW2254

- 01) and four groundwater monitoring wells (RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, and RHMW05) installed in the RHSF lower access tunnel. The U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01 is located approximately 3,000 feet downgradient from the RHSF and provid es approximately 24 percent (%) of the potable water to the Pearl Harbor Water System (PHWS). The groundwater samples are analyzed for petroleum constituents and compared against State of Hawai‘i Department of Health (DOH) Drinking Water Environmental Act ion Levels (EALs) (DOH, 20 09 ).
In response to increasing concentrations of chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) in the groundwater monitoring wells within the facility (specifically RHMW02) during 2008, plans were made to conduct four quarterly monitorin g events starting in August 2009 and ending in April 2010 at the following outside (non

- tunnel) monitoring well locations:

**•** RHMW04;

**•** Oily Waste Disposal Facility Monitoring Well 01 (OWDFMW01); and

**•** Hālawa Deep Well 2253

- 03 (HDMW2253

- 03).

The four consecutive quarterly monitoring events indicated that all COPC concentrations were below the EALs for samples collected at monitoring well RHMW04. In January 2010, concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) diesel range organics (DRO) were above the EALs a t OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03. As a result, quarterly monitoring was discontinued at RHMW04 and continued at the two remaining outside monitoring wells. This groundwater monitoring report presents the analytical results for samples collected on April 26, 20 12 at the two outside monitoring wells (OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03).
Laboratory analytical results indicate that all COPC concentrations during the April 2012 monitoring event were below the DOH Drinking Water EALs with the exception of TPH

- DRO at a concentration of 220 micrograms per liter ( μ g/L ) in monitoring well OWDFMW01. TPH

- DRO was detected at a concentration of 160 μ g/L in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 above the DOH Groundwater Gross Conatamination EAL but below the DOH Drinking Water EAL. L ead was detected at a concentration of 0.71 μ g/L in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03. Acetone was detected at an estimated concentration of 2.8 μ g/L in monitoring well OWDFMW01. Benzene was detected at estimated concentrations of 0.71 μ g/L in monitoring well OWDFMW01 and 0.20 μ g/L in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03. All other COPCs were not detected at or above the limits of detection (LODs) or the limits of quantitation (LOQs). LODs and LOQs were below the EALs for the majority of COPCs. In the case where an E ALQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Executive Summary July 2012

vi for a specific COPC is less than the LOQ, it is generally acceptable to consider the LOQ in place of the EAL (DOH, 2009).
All COPC concentrations prior to the April 2012 monitoring event had been below EALs for at least the past six consecutive quarterly monitoring events dating back to October 201 0

. However, the April 2012 event showed TPH

- DRO concentrations increase above the DOH Drinking Water EAL in monitoring well OWDFMW01 and above the DOH Gross Contamination EAL in both monitoring wells. In both of these TPH

- DRO results, the analyst noted that the chromatogram of the samples were mainly non

- diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fue l. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) ext ractable petroleum hydrocarbon (EPH) analytical results in the October 2011 monitoring event indicated that the detected hydrocarbons were most likely from non

- petroleum sources. T he reported TPH

- DRO concentrations are not considered TPH

- DRO, but

non

- petr oleum hydrocarbons. T he groundwater monitoring program results still indicate that concentrations of COPCs detected within the facility are not impacting the two outside monitoring wells. It is recommended that quarterly sampling remain the same and atte ntion be paid to COPC concentrations at both monitoring wells for sign s of contaminant migration

.

.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 1 Introduction

July 2012

1

- 1 

# Section 1 Introduction

This report presents the results of the April 2012 quarterly groundwater monitoring event at the two outside monitoring wells (OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03) at the RHSF, Joint Base Pearl Harbor

- Hickam (JBPHH), O‘ahu , Hawai‘i (Figure 1

- 1). The groundwater monitoring was performed by Environet for the Department of the Navy (DON), Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Hawai‘i under Environmental Technical Services, Contract Number N62742

- 08

- D

- 1930, Contract Ta sk Order (CTO) HC21.
This groundwater monitoring event is considered supplemental to the quarterly groundwater monitoring program conducted within the tunnels of the RHSF. This supplemental groundwater monitoring was conducted in response to increasing co ncentrations of COPCs in a groundwater monitoring well within the RHSF, specifically RHMW02, during the October 2008 groundwater monitoring event. The field activities performed for the April 2012 quarterly groundwater monitoring event were conducted in a ccordance with the procedures described in the Work Plan, Long

- Term Monitoring, Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Pearl Harbor, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i (Environet, 2010). 

## 1.1 Project Objective

The groundwater monitoring was performed to evaluate the presence of COPC s in groundwater surrounding the RHSF. The groundwater monitoring was conducted to ensure that the DON remains in compliance with DOH UST release response requirements as described in Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) 11

- 281 Subchapter 7, Release Respons e Action. 

## 1.2 Background

The U.S. Navy implemented a groundwater monitoring program, which includes collecting quarterly groundwater samples from U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01 (RHMW2254

- 01) and four groundwater monitoring wells (RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, and RHMW05) in stalled in the RHSF lower access tunnel. The U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01 is located approximately 3,000 feet downgradient from the RHSF and provides approximately 24% of the potable water to the PHWS. The groundwater samples are analyzed for petroleum constit uents and compared against DOH Drinking Water EALs (DOH, 20 09 ).
In response to increasing concentrations of COPCs in the groundwater monitoring wells within the facility (specifically RHMW02) during 2008, plans were made to conduct four quarterly monitorin g events starting in August 2009 and ending in April 2010 at the following outside (non

- tunnel) monitoring well locations:

**•** RHMW04;

**•** Oily Waste Disposal Facility Monitoring Well 01 (OWDFMW01); and

**•** Hālawa Deep Well 2253

- 03 (HDMW2253

- 03).Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 1 Introduction

July 2012

1

- 2 The four consecutive quarterly monitoring events indicated that all COPC concentrations were below the EALs for samples collected at monitoring well RHMW04. In January 2010 concentrations of TPH

- DRO were above the EALs at OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03. As a result, quarterly mon itoring was discontinued at RHMW04 and continued at the two remaining outside monitoring wells. This groundwater monitoring report presents the analytical results for samples collected on April 26, 2012 at the two outside monitoring wells (OWDFMW01 and HD MW2253

- 03). The following sections provide a description of the site and information on the RHSF and USTs.



### 1.2.1 Site Description The RHSF is located on the island of O‘ahu, Hawai‘i, approximately 2.5 miles northeast of Pearl Harbor in Hālawa Heights (Figure 1

- 1). Land adjacent to the north of the RHSF is occupied by the Hālawa Correctional Facility and private businesses. Land to the south and west of the facility includes the Coast Guard Reservation and other residential neighborhoods. Mo analua Valley is located east of the facility (Environet, 2010).
The Navy Public Works Department operates a potable water infiltration tunnel approximately 1,550 feet hydraulically downgradient from the RHSF (Environet, 2010). The U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01 is located approximately 3,000 feet downgradient (west) of the RHSF and provides approximately 24% of the potable water to the PHWS, which serves approximately 52,200 military consumers (The Environmental Company, Inc. (TEC), 2008).



### 1.2.2 Facility Information Th e RHSF consists of 18 active and two inactive USTs operated by the United States Naval Supply Systems Command (NAVSUP) Fleet Logistics Center (FLC) Pearl Harbor. Each UST has a capacity of 12.5 million gallons. The RHSF is located approximately 100 feet above the basal aquifer (Dawson Group, Inc., 2006).
In 2002, the U.S. Navy installed a groundwater monitoring well (RHMW01) into the basal aquifer, directly down

- gradient from the RHSF, within the lower access tunnel. Groundwater samples from this well indicated that petroleum from the RHSF has migrated to the basal aquifer (AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc., 2002). In 2005, the U.S. Navy began quarterly monitoring of the aquifer to protect their down

- gradient drinking water resource associated with th e U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01.
By September 2005, the U.S. Navy had installed two more groundwater monitoring wells (RHMW02 and RHMW03) within the RHSF UST system, a groundwater monitoring well (RHMW04) north of the RHSF (adjacent to the U.S. Navy Firing Range) , and a groundwater monitoring well within the U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01 infiltration gallery (RHMW2254

- 01). Since 2005, RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, and RHMW2254

- 01 have been sampled quarterly for TPH

- DRO, TPH

- gasoline range organics (GRO), volatile organic comp ounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and dissolved lead.
Due to increasing concentrations of COPCs at the groundwater monitoring wells within the RHSF (specifically RHMW02) during 2008, response measures were warranted. In April 2009,

an other groundwater monitoring well (RHMW05) was installed within the lower access tunnel@ A @ A @ A @ A @ A @ A @ A @ A

@ ? @ ? @ ? @ ?

@ ? @ ? @ ? @ ?

@ ? @ ? @ ? @ ?

@ ? @ ? @ ? @ ?

@ ? @ ? ! (

OWDFMW01 RHMW2254-01

RHMW05 RHMW01 RHMW02 RHMW03 HDMW2253-03

SVMP02 SVMP03

SVMP04 SVMP06 SVMP08 SVMP10 SVMP12 SVMP14 SVMP16 SVMP18 SVMP20 SVMP05 SVMP07 SVMP09 SVMP11 SVMP13 SVMP15 SVMP17 Hālawa Industrial Park Hālawa Correctional Facility

Hālawa Stream RHMW04

U.S. Navy Well 2254-01

Hālawa Shaft Board of Water Supply Pump Station (2354-01)

Coast Guard Reservation
Moanalua Village Navy Firing Range @ ? Soil Vapor Monitoring Points @ A Groundwater Monitoring Wells ! ( Board of Water Supply Pump Station Hālawa Correctional Facility Red Hill Naval Reservation Hālawa Stream

1,000 0 1,000 500 Feet Figure 1-1 Groundwater Monitoring Well Location Map LEGEND



#  ̄ USGS, 2005 SOURCE

Pearl Harbor
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report-Outside (Non-Tunnel) Wells, Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O'ahu, Hawai'iQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 1 Introduction

July 2012

1

- 5 between RHMW01 and RHM W2254

- 01. It was installed to identify the extent of contaminant migration in groundwater before it reaches the infiltration gallery at RHMW2254

- 01.
Additionally, plans were made to sample three monitoring wells surrounding and outside of RHSF: RHMW04, O WDFMW01, and HDMW2253

- 03 (Figure 1

- 1 and Table 1

- 1). RHMW04 was installed to evaluate groundwater within the basal aquifer upgradient from RHSF. OWDFMW01 (originally known as MW08) was installed into the basal aquifer in 1998 for a Phase II Remedial Inve stigation/Feasibility Study for the Red Hill Oily Waste Disposal Facility (Earth Tech, Inc., 2000). It is located geographically down

- gradient of the USTs and U.S. Navy Well 2254

- 01. HDMW2253

- 03 is controlled by the State of Hawai‘i Commission on Water R esource Management. HDMW2253

- 03 is located between the RHSF and the municipal drinking water supply well
, which is operated by the City and County of Honolulu Board of Water Supply (Hālawa Shaft Pumping Station 2354

- 01) (Figure 1

- 1).

Table 1

- 1 : Outside Monitoring Well Information Groundwater Monitoring Well bTOC Elevation (feet amsl) Depth to Water (feet bTOC) Total Depth of Well (feet) RHMW04 313.03

--- 320 OWDFMW01 138.94 120.2 9 142.8 HDMW2253

- 03 225 207. 7 6* 1,575 Notes: *Depth to water provided by the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) on April 26 , 2012.

--- Depth to water was not gauged at RHMW04 on April 26 , 2012 because it is no longer a part of the sampling program. amsl

- above mean sea level bTOC

- below top of casing


### 1.2.3 UST Information The USTs were constructed in the early 1940s. The tanks were const ructed of steel and currently contain Jet Propellant (JP)

- 5 fuel, JP

- 8, and marine diesel fuel (F

- 76). Previously, several tanks stored Navy Special Fuel Oil, Navy Distillate, aviation gasoline, and motor gasoline. Each tank measures approximately 245 fe et 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).



### 1.2.4 Regulatory Updates During the summer and fall of 2008, DOH 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 μg/L. This concentration presumed that methylnaphthalenes

were non

- carcinogenic. Evidence that they are human carcinogens has now been accepted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As a result, DOH adopted more rigorous EALs of 4.7 μg/L for 1

- methylnaphthalene and 24 μg/L for 2

- methylnaphthalene, corresponding to a residential tap water scenario, and a one in a million cancer risk (DOH, 20 09 ). Also, the drinking water EAL for naphthalene was increased from 6.2 μg/L to 17 μg/L (DOH, 20 09 ). Finally, the DOH Drinking Water EAL for TPH

- DRO was increased from 100 μg/L to 210 μg/L, although the DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL for TPH

- DRO remains 100 μg/L.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 1 Introduction

July 2012

1

- 6 

## 1.3 Previous Reports

The following groundwater monitoring reports were previously submitted to the DOH for the groundwater moni toring wells within the RHSF:

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. Groun dwater 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 Re sults, 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); 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); 19. Groundwater Monitoring Results, April 2010 (submitted May 2010); 20. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2010 (submitted August 2010); 21. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October 2010 (submitted December 2010); 22. Gr oundwater Monitoring Results, January 2011 (submitted March 2011); 23. Groundwater Monitoring Results, April 2011 (submitted June 2011); 24. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2011 (submitted September 2011); 25. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October 2011 (submit ted December 2011); and 26. Groundwater Monitoring Results
, January

- February 2012 (submitted March 2012).Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 1 Introduction

July 2012

1

- 7 The following groundwater monitoring reports were previously submitted to the DOH for the groundwater monitoring wells outside the RHSF:

1. Groundwater Mon itoring Results, August 2009 (submitted September 2009);
2. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October 2009 (submitted December 2009);
3. Groundwater Monitoring Results, January 2010 (submitted April 2010);
4. Groundwater Monitoring Results, April 2010 (submitted May 2010);
5. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2010 (submitted August 2010);
6. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October 2010 (submitted December 2010);
7. Groundwater Monitoring Results, January 2011 (submitted March 2011);
8. Groundwater Monitoring Results, April 2011 (submitted June 2011);
9. Groundwater Monitoring Results, July 2011 (submitted September 2011);
10. Groundwater Monitoring Results, October 2011 (submitted December 2011); and
11. Groundwater Monitor ing Results, January 2012 (submitted March 2012).Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 1 Introduction

July 2012

1

- 8 This page is intentionally left blank.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 2 Monitoring Activities July 2012

2

- 1 

# Section 2 Monitoring Activities

Groundwater monitoring was conducted on April 26, 2012 in accordance with the site specific Work Plan (Environet, 2010). Field activities were documented in the field notebook (Appendix B). 

## 2.1 Groundwater Gauging

Groundwater gauging measurements were taken at the two monitoring wells (OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03) prior to purging and sample collection. A Solinst ® water level meter was used to measure the depth to groundwater (to the nearest 0.01 foot) within monitoring well OWDFMW01, according to the procedures described in Procedure I

- C

- 3, Monitoring Well Sampling (DON, 2007). The depth to groundwater for monito ring well HDMW2253

- 03 was measured by a Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) employee prior to well purging (Table 1

- 1). 

## 2.2 Groundwater Sampling Groundwater samples were collected from the two monitoring wells according to the procedures described in Procedure I

- C

- 3, Monitoring Well Sampling (DON, 2007).


### 2.2.1 Monitoring Well Purging Due to the well construction characteristics of OWDFMW01 (total depth of 142.8 feet below top of casing (bTOC)) and HDMW2253

- 03 (large casing diameter of approximately 12 inc hes from the top of casing to approximately 50 feet below the groundwater surface, and the well is open [not cased] from approximately 50 feet bTOC to 1,575 feet bTOC), three well casing volumes were not purged prior to sampling. Instead, water was purged using disposable bailers until three or more successive water quality parameter measurements had stabilized within 10%. A Horiba ® U

- 22 multi

- parameter water quality meter was used to measure hydrogen activity (pH), temperature, specific conductivity, dis solved oxygen, turbidity, and oxidation reduction potential. Readings were recorded on Groundwater Sampling Log data sheets (Appendix C).



### 2.2.2 Groundwater Sample Collection Groundwater samples were collected from OWDFMW01 using four

- inch and two

- inch disposabl e bailers directly into laboratory provided, specially cleaned sample containers.
Groundwater samples were collected from HDMW2253

- 03 using a four

- inch double stop disposable bailer directly into laboratory provided, specially cleaned sample containers. D ue to the well construction characteristics of HDMW2253

- 03, a grab sample was collected at a depth below the solid casing (which extends about 50 feet below the water table) and within the open

- holed portion of the well. Dissolved lead samples collected f rom HDMW2253

- 03 required laboratory filtration due to the double stop bailer required to collect the sample.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 2 Monitoring Activities July 2012

2

- 2 

### 2.2.3 Sample Management and Shipment Each sample container sent to the laboratory was assigned a project

- specific chain of custody identification number and a descriptive identification number. The sample identifiers provided specific data unique to each sample and were entered into the field notebook. The samples were labeled according to the procedures described in Procedure III

- E, Record Keeping, Samp le Labeling, and Chain

- of

- Custody (DON, 2007).
Following sample collection and labeling, the sample containers were packaged with bubble wrap and placed into individual ZipLoc **** bags, then immediately into insulated coolers with ice for preservation. The s amples were shipped via FedEx to the laboratory on the same day of collection. The samples were managed under standard chain

- of

- custody protocol and documentation from collection to delivery to the laboratory. Sample handling, storage, and transport were performed according to the requirements described in Procedure III

- F, Sample Handling, Storage, and Shipping (DON, 2007). 

## 2.3 Analytical Program During the April 2012 groundwater monitoring event, two sets of primary groundwater samples, one set of duplicate groundwater samples and one set of quality control (QC) groundwater samples were submitted to APPL, Inc. located in Clovis, California. Groun dwater samples were analyzed for VOCs and TPH

- GRO by EPA Method 8260B, TPH

- DRO by EPA Method 8015B, PAHs by EPA Method 8270D SIM, and dissolved lead by EPA Method 6020. The results of the laboratory analyses are presented and discussed in Section 3. 

## 2.4 Field Quality Control Samples Field QC procedures were followed to ensure viability and integrity of sample analytical data. Field duplicates were collected according to the procedures described in Procedure III

- B, Field QC Samples (Water, Soil) (DON, 2007) a nd the Work Plan (Environet, 2010). Field duplicate samples were collected at a minimum of 10% of primary samples and analyzed for the same COPCs. Field rinsate samples were not required since disposable bailers were used. 

## 2.5 Laboratory Quality Control Samp les Laboratory QC samples were analyzed as part of the standard laboratory QC protocols as presented in the Work Plan (Environet, 2010). Laboratory QC for the groundwater monitoring event consisted of matrix spike (MS)/matrix spike duplicate (MSD) sample s for organic analysis. Laboratory QC samples were collected and analyzed according to the procedures described in Procedure III

- A Laboratory QC Samples (Water, Soil) (DON, 2007). Laboratory QC MS/MSD samples are an aliquot (i.e., a subset) of the field sample; they are not separate samples, but a special designation of an existing sample. Laboratory QC MS/MSD samples were analyzed for the same constituents as the standard samples. At a minimum, one MS/MSD sample pair was required per 20 samples, includ ing duplicates.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 2 Monitoring Activities July 2012

2

- 3 

## 2.6 Equipment Decontamination Decontamination of monitoring equipment was performed to ensure data quality, to prevent cross contamination, and to prevent the potential introduction of contaminants into previously

un

- impacted areas. Decontami nation of monitoring equipment (i.e., Solinst ® water level meter and Horiba ® U

- 22 water quality meter) was conducted between monitoring locations according to the procedures described in Procedure I

- F, Equipment Decontamination (DON, 2007). Decontaminatio n water generated at monitoring well OWDFMW01 was disposed of in the RHSF’s lower tunnel oil/water separator sump. 

## 2.7 Investigation

- Derived Waste Management Investigation

- derived waste (IDW) was managed in accordance with the procedures described in Procedure I

- A

- 6, IDW Management (DON, 2007). The various potential waste streams included the following:

 personal protective equipment (PPE)
, including: nitrile gloves, etc.;

 liquids
, including: equipment rinse water and purged groundwater; and

 disposable sampling equipment and supplies, including: bailers, poly sheeting, etc.
Equipment rinse water and purge water from OWDFMW01 was disposed of in the RHSF’s lowe r tunnel oil/water separator sump. Purge water from monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 was disposed of in the surrounding grass (as directed by DLNR) since it was of drinking water quality. Spent PPE and non

- contaminated sample jars and bottles (acid

- free) were disposed of on a daily basis as solid waste.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 2 Monitoring Activities July 2012

2

- 4 This page is intentionally left blank.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel ) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 3 Groundwater Analytical Results July 2012

3

- 1 

# Section 3 Groundwater Analytical Results

This section provides a summary of analytical results for groundwater samples collected from the two outside monitoring wells on April 26, 2012. Complete analytical laboratory reports are p rovided in Appendix D. 

## 3.1 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Results

OWDFMW01
TPH

- DRO was detected in monitoring well OWDFMW01 at a concentration of 220 μ g/L, which was above both the DOH Drinking Water EAL (210 μ g/L) and Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL ( 100 μ g/L) (Table 3

- 1). The analyst flagged the result noting that the chromatogram of this sample was mainly non

- diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fuel

. The true TPH

- DRO concentration is likely lower, but is reported at a higher concentration due to non

- diesel hydrocarbons being detected by the analytical method.

Acetone was detected in monitoring well OWDFMW01 at an estimated concentration of 2.8 μ g/L, which is below the DOH Drinking Water EAL (22,000 μ g/L) and Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (20,000 μ g/L). Benzene was detected in monitoring well OWDFMW01 at an estimated concentration of 0.71 μ g/L
, which is below the DOH Drinking Water EAL (5 μ g/L) and Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (170 μ g/L).
No other COPCs were detected at or above the LODs and LOQs in monitoring well OWDFMW01. All LODs and LOQs were generally below the EALs. In the case where an EAL for a specific COPC is less than the LOQ, it is generally acceptable to consider the LOQ in place of the EAL (DOH, 20 09 ).

HDMW2253

- 03
TPH

- DRO was detected in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 at a concentration of 160 μ g/L, which was below the DOH Drinking Water EAL (210 μ g/L) and above the Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (100 μ g/L) (Table 3

- 1). The analyst flagged the result noting that the chromatogram of this sample was mainly non

- diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fuel. The true TPH

- DRO concentration is likely lower, but is reported at a higher concentration due to n on

- diesel hydrocarbons being detected by the analytical method.

Lead was detected in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 at a concentration of 0.71 μ g/L, which was below both the DOH Drinking Water EAL (15 μ g/L) and Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (5,000 μ g/L) . Benzene was detected in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 at an estimated concentration of 0.20 μ g/L, which is below the DOH Drinking Water EAL (5 μ g/L) and Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (170 μ g/L).

No other COPCs were detected at or above the LODs and LOQs in HDMW2253

- 03. All LODs and LOQs were generally below the EALs. In the case where an EAL for a specific COPC isQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel ) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 3 Groundwater Analytical Results July 2012

3

- 2 less than the LOQ, it is generally acceptable to consider the LOQ in place of the EAL (DOH, 20 09 ).


### 3.1.1 Data Quality Control Results The labo ratory quality control results were generally within the control limits. The relative percent difference (RPD) of field duplicates for all analytes were within the 50% criteria
, except for 1

- methylnapthalene, 2

- methylnapthalene, naphthalene, ethylbenzene , and lead

. The se analyte concentrations ranged from no t detect ed to very low concentrations below the EALs. Small variation in concentration s at very low (approaching decimal) levels will likely result in RPDs greater than 50%. T he RPD s greater than 50 % reported for this event woul d thus not have

a significan t e ffect on the overall data quality

. The trip blank that accompanied the outside well samples did not contain detectable levels of any COPCs. Therefore, the data quality control results indicate that the data obtained for this monitoring event are suitable for their intended use (Table 3

- 2). 

## 3.2 Groundwater Contaminant Trend

Concentrations of PAHs and VOCs were previously not detected above the EALs during the August 2009, October 2009, January 2010, April 2010, July 2010, October 2010, January 2011, April 2011, July 2011, October 2011, and January 2012 groundwater monitoring events. These constituents were also not detected above the EALs during this current groundwater monitoring event (April 2012).

TPH

- DRO concentrations in OWDFMW01 significantly decreased from January 2010 (1,490 μg/L) to April 2010 (288 μg/L). The concentrations of TPH

- DRO at this monitoring well have decreased to non

- detect in the previous six (October 2010, January 2011, April 2011, July 2011, October 2011, and January 2012) consecutive monitoring events (Table 3

- 3). D uring the April 2012 monitoring event
, the TPH

- DRO concentration increased to a level above the EAL. However, the elevated concentration was mainly due to non

- di esel hydrocarbons detected by the analytical method.

The concentrations of TPH

- DRO at HDMW2253

- 03 decreased to non

- detect for eight consecutive groundwater monitoring events from April 2010 to January 2012 (Table 3

- 3). D uring the April 2012 monitoring eve nt , the TPH

- DRO concentration increased slightly to a level below the EAL. However, the elevated concentration was mainly due to non

- diesel hydrocarbons detected by the analytical method.

The October 2010 detection of acetone at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL was the first at monitoring well OWDFMW01. Acetone was also detected at an estimated concentration in the trip blank sample during th at same event . This suggested that acetone was introduced to the samples during transpo rt to and from the laboratory and was not representative of groundwater at OWDFMW01. The concentration of acetone decreased to

non

- detect for five consecutive monitoring events from January 2011 to January 2012 . Acetone was again detected at an estimated concentration at monitoring well OWDFMW01 in the April 2012 monitoring event. The April 2012 detect ion mark ed the second event in which acetone was detected at an estimated concentration at th e monitoring well

. H owever, none of the trip blanksQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel ) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 3 Groundwater Analytical Results July 2012

3

- 3 for th is monitoring event contained traces of the analyte , indicating that acetone was present at very low levels in the groundwater.
The October 2010 detections of lead at concentrations below the DOH Drinking Water EAL were the first at these two monitoring wells (OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03). Lead was not detected in any of the samples in the January 2011 monitoring event or during April 2011. Estimated concentrations of lead below the DOH Drinking Water EAL were detect ed at both wells during the July 2011 and October 2011 monitoring events. Lead was detected at estimated concentrations below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 and in monitoring well OWDFMW01 in the January 2012 monitoring event. In the April 2012 monitoring event
, lead was detected at a concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL at HDMW2253

- 03 and was not detected at OWDFMW01. Lead concentration s in both monitoring wells have fluctuat ed below the DOH Drinking Water EAL

. T he concentrations
, at which lead has been detected, we re very low to be of concern re lative to the DOH Drinking Water EAL.
The January 2011 detection of benzene at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in OWDFMW01 was the first at this m onitoring well. Benzene was detected at an estimated concentration in the duplicate sample collected from OWDFMW01 in April 2011; however
, it was not detected in the July 2011 monitoring event. It was detected at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in HDMW2253

- 03 in the October 2011 monitoring event. During the January 2012 monitoring event, benzene was detected at an estimated concentration below the Drinking Water EAL in monitoring well OWDFMW01. During the April 2012 monitorin g event , b enzene was detected at estimated concentrations below the Drinking Water EAL at both OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03 (Table 3

- 1). Benzene concentration s have fluctuat ed below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in monitoring well s HDMW2253

- 03 and OWDFMW01

. T he estimated concentrations, at which benzene has been detected, we re very low to be of concern re lative to the DOH Drinking Water EAL.
The April 2011 detections of xylenes and toluene below the DOH Drinking Water EALs in OWDFMW01 were the first at these m onitoring wells. Xylenes and toluene were not detected in the July 2011
, October 2011 , January 2012, and April 2012 monitoring events (Table 3

- 1). Xylene and toluene concentrations have exhibited no trend s in both monitoring wells . The April 2011 xylene and toluene detections were estimated concentration s and were very low to be of

concern re lative to the DOH Dr i nking Water EALs.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel ) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 3 Groundwater Analytical Results July 2012

3

- 4 This page is intentionally left blank.Table 3-1: Analytical Results for Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring-Outside (Non-Tunnel) Wells, April 2012

Result Q LOQ LOD DL Result Q LOQ LOD DL
EPA 8015B (Petroleum) TPH-DRO 210 100 220 ++ 150 80.8 40.4 160 ++ 150 80.8 40.4 EPA 8260B (Petroleum) TPH-GRO 100 100 ND U 20.0 12.12 6.06 ND U 20.0 12.12 6.06 Acenaphthene 370 20 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 Acenaphthylene 240 2000 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 Anthracene 1800 22 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.092 4.7 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1500 0.13 ND U 0.2 b 0.16 0.08 ND U 0.2 b 0.16 0.08 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 0.81 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.092 0.75 ND U 0.2 b 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 b 0.12 0.06 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.92 0.4 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 Chrysene 9.2 1 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.0092 0.52 ND U 0.2 b 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 b 0.10 0.05 Fluoranthene 1500 130 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 Fluorene 240 950 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.092 0.095 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 1,-Methylnaphthalene 4.7 10 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 2,-Methylnaphthalene 24 10 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 Naphthalene 17 21 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 Phenanthrene 240 410 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 Pyrene 180 68 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 200 970 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.40 0.20 ND U 1.0 0.40 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane 2.4 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-Dichloroethene) 7 1,500 ND U 1.0 0.60 0.30 ND U 1.0 0.60 0.30 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 0.6 50,000 ND U 2.0 b 0.78 0.39 ND U 2.0 b 0.78 0.39 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 70 3,000 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 0.04 10 ND U 2.0 b 1.52 0.76 ND U 2.0 b 1.52 0.76 1,2-Dibromoethane 0.04 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.40 0.20 ND U 1.0 b 0.40 0.20 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 600 10 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.15 7,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 1,2-Dichloropropane 5 10 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 180 5 ND U 1.0 0.22 0.11 ND U 1.0 0.22 0.11 1,3-Dichloropropene (total of cis/trans) 0.43 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.36 0.18 ND U 1.0 0.36 0.18
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 75 5 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 Acetone 22,000 20,000 2.8 J 10.0 1.90 0.95 ND U 10.0 1.90 0.95 Benzene 5 170 0.71 J 1.0 0.32 0.16 0.20 J 1.0 0.32 0.16 Bromodichloromethane 0.12 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 Bromoform 80 510 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 Bromomethane 8.7 50,000 ND U 2.0 0.48 0.24 ND U 2.0 0.48 0.24 Carbon Tetrachloride 5 520 ND U 1.0 0.20 0.10 ND U 1.0 0.20 0.10 Chlorobenzene 100 50 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 Chloroethane 21,000 16 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 Chloroform 70 2,400 ND U 1.0 0.14 0.07 ND U 1.0 0.14 0.07 Chloromethane 1.8 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.84 0.42 ND U 1.0 0.84 0.42cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene (cis1,2-Dichloroethene) 70 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16

Dibromochloromethane (Chlorodibromomethane) 0.16 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 Ethylbenzene 700 30 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 Hexachlorobutadiene 0.86 6 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 Methyl ethyl ketone (2-Butanone) 7,100 8,400 ND U 10.0 1.20 0.60 ND U 10.0 1.20 0.60 Methyl isobutyl ketone (4-Methyl-2-pentanone) 2,000 1,300 ND U 10.0 3.80 1.90 ND U 10.0 3.80 1.90 Methyl tert-butyl Ether 12 5 ND U 1.0 0.52 0.26 ND U 1.0 0.52 0.26 Methylene chloride 4.8 9,100 ND U 5.0 0.70 0.35 ND U 5.0 0.70 0.35 Styrene 100 10 ND U 1.0 0.50 0.25 ND U 1.0 0.50 0.25 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2- 0.52 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.26 0.13 ND U 1.0 0.26 0.13 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- 0.067 500 ND U 1.0 b 0.20 0.10 ND U 1.0 b 0.20 0.10 Tetrachloroethylene (Tetrachloroethene) 5 170 ND U 1.0 0.48 0.24 ND U 1.0 0.48 0.24
Toluene 1,000 40 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene (trans-1,2-Dichloroethene) 100 260 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 Trichloroethylene (Trichloroethene) 5 310 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 Vinyl chloride 2 3,400 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 Xylenes 10,000 20 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 EPA 6020 Lead 15 5,000 ND U 0.5 0.22 0.11 0.71 0.5 0.22 0.11 Notes:

DRO - diesel range organics GRO - gasoline range organics

LOD - limit of detection LOQ - limit of quantitation or reporting limit (RL) ND - not detected PAHs - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Q - data qualifier TPH - total petroleum hydrocarbons

VOC - volatile organic compound LODs will be included in the final report. Bold - Result exceeds one or both DOH EALs J - Estimated result. Indicates that the compound was identified, but the concentration was above the DL and below the LOQ.

U - Indicates the compound or analyte was analyzed for, but not detected. The result is reported as ND. (ES076)

EPA 8260B (VOCs)

a DOH EALs (DOH, 2009): Table D-1b. Groundwater Action Levels (Groundwater is a current or potential drinking water resource; surface water body is not located within 150 meters of release site).

b In the case where an EAL for a specific chemical is less than the LOQ for a commercial laboratory, it is generally acceptable to consider the LOQ in place of the action level (DOH, Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater 2008, updated March 2009). All units are in micrograms per liter (μg/L).

++ - Analyst has noted that the chromatogram of this sample is mainly non-diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fuel. DL - detection limit or method detection limit (MDL) HDMW2253-03 (ES077) OWDFMW01

EPA 8270D SIM (PAHs) Method Chemical DOH Drinking Water EALs for Human Toxicity a DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EALs aTable 3-2: Field QC Results-Outside Wells, April 2012

Q LOQ LOD DL Q LOQ LOD DL Result Q LOQ LOD DL Result Q LOQ LOD DL

EPA 8015B (Petroleum) TPH-DRO 210 100 ++ 150 b 80.8 40.4 ++ 150 b 80.8 40.4 8.69 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- EPA 8260B (Petroleum) TPH-GRO 100 100 ND U 20.0 12.12 6.06 ND U 20.0 12.12 6.06 0 ND U 20.0 12.12 6.06 ND U 20.0 12.12 6.06 Acenaphthene 370 20 0.26 0.2 0.12 0.06 0.23 0.2 0.12 0.06 12.2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Acenaphthylene 240 2000 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Anthracene 1800 22 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo(a)anthracene 0.092 4.7 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1500 0.13 ND U 0.2 b 0.16 0.08 ND U 0.2 b 0.16 0.08 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo(a)pyrene 0.2 0.81 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.092 0.75 ND U 0.2 b 0.12 0.06 ND U 0.2 b 0.12 0.06 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.92 0.4 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Chrysene 9.2 1 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 0.10 0.05 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.0092 0.52 ND U 0.2 b 0.10 0.05 ND U 0.2 b 0.10 0.05 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Fluoranthene 1500 130 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Fluorene 240 950 0.14 J 0.2 0.12 0.06 0.12 J 0.2 0.12 0.06 15.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.092 0.095 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 b 0.14 0.07 0

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,-Methylnaphthalene 4.7 10 0.3 0.2 0.12 0.06 1.2 0.2 0.12 0.06 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2,-Methylnaphthalene 24 10 ND U 0.2 0.12 0.06 0.61 0.2 0.12 0.06 134 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Naphthalene 17 21 0.86 0.2 0.10 0.05 2.9 0.2 0.10 0.05 109 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Phenanthrene 240 410 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 ND U 0.2 0.14 0.07 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Pyrene 180 68 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 ND U 0.2 0.16 0.08 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 200 970 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 0 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 5 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.40 0.20 ND U 1.0 0.40 0.20 0 ND U 1.0 0.40 0.20 ND U 1.0 0.40 0.20 1,1-Dichloroethane 2.4 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 0 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-Dichloroethene) 7 1,500 ND U 1.0 0.60 0.30 ND U 1.0 0.60 0.30 0 ND U 1.0 0.60 0.30 ND U 1.0 0.60 0.30
1,2,3-Trichloropropane 0.6 50,000 ND U 2.0 b 0.78 0.39 ND U 2.0 b 0.78 0.39 0 ND U 2.0 b 0.78 0.39 ND U 2.0 b 0.78 0.39 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 70 3,000 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 0 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 1,2-Dibromo-3- chloropropane 0.04 10 ND U 2.0 b 1.52 0.76 ND U 2.0 b 1.52 0.76 0 ND U 2.0 b 1.52 0.76 ND U 2.0 b 1.52 0.76
1,2-Dibromoethane 0.04 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.40 0.20 ND U 1.0 b 0.40 0.20 0 ND U 1.0 b 0.40 0.20 ND U 1.0 b 0.40 0.20 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 600 10 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 0 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.15 7,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 0 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 1,2-Dichloropropane 5 10 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 0 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 180 5 ND U 1.0 0.22 0.11 ND U 1.0 0.22 0.11 0 ND U 1.0 0.22 0.11 ND U 1.0 0.22 0.11 1,3-Dichloropropene (total of cis/trans) 0.43 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.36 0.18 ND U 1.0 b 0.36 0.18 0 ND U 1.0 0.36 0.18 ND U 1.0 0.36 0.18 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 75 5 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 0 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 Acetone 22,000 20,000 ND U 10.0 1.90 0.95 ND U 10.0 1.90 0.95 0 ND U 10.0 1.90 0.95 ND U 10.0 1.90 0.95 Benzene 5 170 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 0 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 Bromodichloromethane 0.12 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 0 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 b 0.28 0.14 Bromoform 80 510 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 0 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 ND U 1.0 0.28 0.14 Bromomethane 8.7 50,000 ND U 2.0 0.48 0.24 ND U 2.0 0.48 0.24 0 ND U 2.0 0.48 0.24 ND U 2.0 0.48 0.24 Carbon Tetrachloride 5 520 ND U 1.0 0.20 0.10 ND U 1.0 0.20 0.10 0 ND U 1.0 0.20 0.10 ND U 1.0 0.20 0.10 Chlorobenzene 100 50 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 0 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 Chloroethane 21,000 16 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 0 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 ND U 1.0 0.42 0.21 Chloroform 70 2,400 ND U 1.0 0.14 0.07 ND U 1.0 0.14 0.07 0 ND U 1.0 0.14 0.07 ND U 1.0 0.14 0.07 Chloromethane 1.8 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.84 0.42 ND U 1.0 0.84 0.42 0 ND U 1.0 0.84 0.42 ND U 1.0 0.84 0.42 cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene (cis

1,2-Dichloroethene) 70 50,000 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 0 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16

Dibromochloromethane (Chlorodibromomethane) 0.16 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 0 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 Ethylbenzene 700 30 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 0.23 J 1.0 0.46 0.23 66.7 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 Hexachlorobutadiene 0.86 6 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 b 0.38 0.19 0 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 Methyl ethyl ketone (2-Butanone) 7,100 8,400 ND U 10.0 1.20 0.60 ND U 10.0 1.20 0.60 0 ND U 10.0 1.20 0.60 ND U 10.0 1.20 0.60 Methyl isobutyl ketone (4-Methyl-2-pentanone) 2,000 1,300 ND U 10.0 3.80 1.90 ND U 10.0 3.80 1.90 0 ND U 10.0 3.80 1.90 ND U 10.0 3.80 1.90 Methyl tert-butyl Ether 12 5 ND U 1.0 0.52 0.26 ND U 1.0 0.52 0.26 0 ND U 1.0 0.52 0.26 ND U 1.0 0.52 0.26 Methylene chloride 4.8 9,100 ND U 5.0 b 0.70 0.35 ND U 5.0 b 0.70 0.35 0 ND U 5.0 0.70 0.35 ND U 5.0 0.70 0.35 Styrene 100 10 ND U 1.0 0.50 0.25 ND U 1.0 0.50 0.25 0 ND U 1.0 0.50 0.25 ND U 1.0 0.50 0.25 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1,2- 0.52 50,000 ND U 1.0 b 0.26 0.13 ND U 1.0 b 0.26 0.13 0 ND U 1.0 0.26 0.13 ND U 1.0 0.26 0.13 Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- 0.067 500 ND U 1.0 b 0.20 0.10 ND U 1.0 b 0.20 0.10 0 ND U 1.0 b 0.20 0.10 ND U 1.0 b 0.20 0.10 Tetrachloroethylene (Tetrachloroethene) 5 170 ND U 1.0 0.48 0.24 ND U 1.0 0.48 0.24 0 ND U 1.0 0.48 0.24 ND U 1.0 0.48 0.24 Toluene 1,000 40 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 0 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 ND U 1.0 0.34 0.17 trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene (trans-1,2-Dichloroethene) 100 260 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 0 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 Trichloroethylene (Trichloroethene) 5 310 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 0 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 ND U 1.0 0.32 0.16 Vinyl chloride 2 3,400 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 0 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 ND U 1.0 0.46 0.23 Xylenes 10,000 20 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 0 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 ND U 1.0 0.38 0.19 EPA 6020 Lead 15 5000 0.44 0.2 0.11 0.11 ND U 0.2 0.11 0.11 66.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Notes:

dup - duplicate GRO - gasoline range organics

LOD - limit of detection LOQ - limit of quantitation or reporting limit (RL) PAHs - polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons Q - data qualifier RPD - relative percent difference TPH - total petroleum hydrocarbons

VOC - volatile organic compound -- not analyzed LODs will be included in the final report Bold - Result exceeds one or both DOH EALs Trip Blank 1 (04/26/2012)

EPA 8270D SIM (PAHs)

EPA 8260B (VOCs) ES072 DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EALs a Method Chemical DOH Drinking Water EALs for Human Toxicity a

1,200 1,100 Trip Blank (04/26/2012)

RPD Duplicate

(%) RHMW02

ES071

Result Result RHMW02

U - Indicates the compound or analyte was analyzed for, but not detected. The result is reported as ND. a DOH EALs (DOH, 2009): Table D-1b. Groundwater Action Levels (Groundwater is a current or potential drinking water resource; surface water body is not located within 150 meters of
b In the case where an EAL for a specific chemical is less than the LOQ for a commercial laboratory, it is generally acceptable to consider the LOQ in place of the action level (DOH, and Groundwater 2008, updated March 2009).

J - Estimated result. Indicates that the compound was identified, but the concentration was above the DL and below the LOQ. DRO - diesel range organics DL - detection limit or method detection limit (MDL) ++ - Analyst has noted that the chromatogram of this sample is mainly non-diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fuel. All units are in micrograms per liter (μg/L)

.Table 3-3: Historical and Current Groundwater Sample Analytical Results, August 2009 through April 2012Result Q LOQ LOD DL Result Q LOQ LOD DL Result Q LOQ LOD DL Result Q LOQ LOD DLAugust 2009 ND U 457 NA 171 ND U 100 NA 30 -- -- -- NA -- -- -- -- NA --October 2009 ND U 444 NA 167 ND U 100 NA 30 ND U 494 NA 185 ND U 100 NA 30January 20101,490440 NA 165 ND U 100 NA 30322J 460 NA 172 ND U 100 NA 30April 2010288J 471 NA 176 ND U 100 NA 30 ND U 471 NA 176 ND U 100 NA 30July 2010 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ND U 426 -- 160 ND U 100 -- 30October 2010 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06January 2011 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06April 2011 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06July 2011 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06October 2011 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06January 2012 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06 ND U 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06April 2012220++ 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06160++ 150 80.8 40.4 ND U 20.0 12.1 6.06Notes:++ - Analyst noted that the chromatogram of this sample is mainly non-diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fuel.LOD - limit of detectionDOH Drinking Water EALs for Human Toxicitya:TPH-DRO = 210 μg/L; TPH-GRO = 100 μg/LDOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EALsa: TPH-DRO = 100 μg/L; TPH-GRO = 100 μg/LaDOH EALs (DOH, 2009): Table D-1b. Groundwater Action Levels (Groundwater is a current or potential drinking water resource; surface water bodyTPH-DROTPH-GROOWDFMW01HDMW2253-03TPH-DROTPH-GROBold - Result exceeds one or both DOH EALs-- The monitoring well was not sampled.is not located within 150 meters of release site).All units are in micrograms per liter (μg/L)U - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for, but not detected. The result is reported as ND.ND - not detectedQ - data qualifierJ - Estimated result. Indicates that the compound was identified, but the concentration was above the DL and below the LOQ.DL - detection limit or method detection limit (MDL)LOQ - limit of quantitation or reporting limit (RL)NA - not availableQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu , Hawai‘i Section 4 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations July 2012

4

- 1 

# Section 4 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
4.1 Summary

TPH

- DRO was detected at concentrations of 220 μ g/L and 160 μ g/L in monitoring wells OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03
, respectively during the April 2012 groundwater monitoring event. The concentration detected at monitoring well OWDFMW01 was above both the DOH Dr inking Water EAL (210 μ g/L) and the DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (100 μ g/L). The concentration at monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 was above the DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (100 μ g/L). Lead was detected at a concentration of 0.71 μ g/L in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03, which was below the DOH Drinking Water EAL (5 μ g/L) and the DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (5,000 μ g/L). Acetone was detected at an estimated concentration of 2.8 μ g/L in monitoring well OWDFMW01, which is belo w the DOH Drinking Water EAL (22,000 μ g/L) and the DOH Gross Contamination EAL (20,000 μ g/L). Benzene was detected at a estimated concentrations of 0.71 μ g/L and 0.20 μ g/L in monitoring wells OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03
, respectively, which are below the DOH Drinking Water EAL (5 μ g/L) and the DOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL (170 μ g/L). No other COPCs were detected in monitoring wells HDMW2253

- 03 and OWDFMW01 during the April 2012 monitoring event. 

## 4.2 Conclusions

Concentrations of PAHs and VOCs were previously not detected above the EALs during the August 2009, October 2009, January 2010, April 2010, July 2010, October 2010, January 2011, April 2011, July 2011, October 2011 , and January 2012 groundwater monitoring events. PAHs and VOCs were also not detected above the EALs during the April 2012 monitoring event. The data continue s to suggest that historically
, TPH

- DRO was the only COPC present in any notable quantity for the site

.
TPH

- DRO concentrations in OWDFMW01 significantly decreased from January 2010 (1,490 μg/L) to April 2010 (288 μg/L) and were not detected in the subsequent six monitoring events (Table 3

- 3). The concentrations of TPH

- DRO at HDMW2253

- 03 decreased from 322 μ g/L in January 2010 to non

- detectable levels for the eight consecutive quarterly monitoring events from April 2010 to January 2012. During the April 2012 monitoring event
, the TPH

- DRO concentration from OWDFMW01 increased to a level above the DOH Drinking Water EAL. TPH

- DRO concentration in HDMW2253

- 03 also increased but to a level below the DOH Drinking Water EAL

. The laboratory flagged both results noting that the chromatogram s of the samples indicated mainly non

- diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of diesel fuel. MADEP EPH analytical results in the October 2011 monitoring event indicated that the detected hydrocarbons were most likely from non

- petroleum sources. The true TPH

- DRO concentration s of the samples are likely lower, but a re reported at higher concentration s as a result of non

- diesel hydrocarbons detected by the analytical method.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu , Hawai‘i Section 4 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations July 2012

4

- 2 The October 2010 detection of acetone at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL was the first at monitoring well OWDFMW01. Acetone was also detected at an estimated concentration in the trip blank sample in October 2010. Acetone was not detected in the subsequent five monitoring events. This strongly suggest ed that acetone was introduced to the samples during tran sport to and from the laboratory. D uring the April 2012 monitoring event , acetone was again detected at an estimated concentration in monitoring well OWDFMW01 below the DOH Drinking Water EAL. N one of the trip blanks for the April 2012 monitoring event c ontained traces of the analyte, indicating that acetone was present at very low levels in the groundwater.
The October 2010 detections of lead at concentrations below the DOH Drinking Water EAL were the first at these two monitoring wells (OWDFMW01 and HDM W2253

- 03). Lead was not detected in any samples during the January 2011 monitoring event or during the April 2011 monitoring event. Lead was detected at estimated concentrations below the DOH Drinking Water EAL at both monitoring wells during the July 20 11 monitoring event. Lead was detected in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 at a concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL and in monitoring well OWDFMW01 at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL during the October 2011 monitoring eve nt. Lead was detected in monitoring wells OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03 at estimated concentrations below the DOH Drinking Water EAL during the January 2012 monitoring event. Lead was detected in monitoring well HDMW2253

- 03 below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in the April 2012 monitoring event. Lead concentration s in both monitoring wells have fluctuated at very low levels below the DOH Drinking Water EAL.
The January 2011 detection of benzene at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in OWDFMW01 was the first at this monitoring well. Benzene was detected at an estimated concentration in the duplicate sample collected from OWDFMW01 in April 2011; however
, it was not detected in the July 2011 and October 2011 monitoring events. It was dete cted at an estimated concentration below the DOH Drinking Water EAL in HDMW2253

- 03 in the October 2011 monitoring event. Benzene was detected at an estimated concentration in monitoring well OWDFMW01 during the January 2012 monitoring event
, which was bel ow the Drinking Water EAL. B enzene was detected at estimated concentrations below the DOH Drinking Water EAL at monitoring wells OWDFMW01 and HDMW2253

- 03 during the April 2012 monitoring event

. Benzene concentration s have fluctuated in both mon i toring we lls at very low levels below the DOH Drinking Water EAL.
The April 2011 detections of xylenes and toluene in OWDFMW01 were the first at these monitoring wells. Xylenes and toluene were not detected in the July 2011
, October 2011
, January 2012 , and April 2 012 monitoring events. Xylene and toluene concentrations have exhibit ed no trend s , and the April 201 1 detection s of both analytes w ere very low to be of

concern re lative the DOH Drinking Water EALs. 

## 4.3 Recommendations

TPH

- DRO w as detected above the DOH Drinking Water EAL at monitoring well OWDFMW01 during the April 2012 monitoring event

. The TPH

- DRO concentration detected above the EAL is believed to be the result of non

- diesel hydrocarbons within the boiling point range of dieselQuarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu , Hawai‘i Section 4 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations July 2012

4

- 3 fuel being detecte d by the analytical method

. MADEP EPH analytical results in the October 2011 monitoring event indicated that the detected hydrocarbons were most likely from

non

- petroleum sources. It is recommended that quarterly sampling remain the same and attention b e paid to concentration levels at both monitoring wells for signs of contaminant migration

.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu , Hawai‘i Section 4 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations July 2012

4

- 4 This page is intentionally left blank.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 5 References July 2012

5

- 1 

# Section 5 References

AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc., 2002. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Investigation Report, Prepared for NAVFAC Pacific . August.
Dawson Group, Inc., 2006. Fourth Quarter 2005 Groundwater Sampling Report, Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility, Hawaii. February.
DOH, 20 09

. Evaluation of Environmental Hazards at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater . Updated March 20 09

. DON, 2007. Project Procedures Manual, U.S. Navy Environmental Restoration Program, NAVFAC Pacific . February.
Earth Tech, Inc, 2000. Remedial Investigation Phase II, Volume I, Technical Report, Red Hill Oily Waste Disposal Facility, Halawa, Oahu, Hawaii . Septembe r.
Environet, 2010. Work Plan, Long

- Term Monitoring, Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Pearl Harbor, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i . September.
Hawai‘i Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 281, Subchapter 7.
TEC, 2006. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Final

- Addendum Planning Documents, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii . May.
_____, 2008. Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, Final Groundwater Protection Plan, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii . January 2008 revised in December 2009.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2005. Aerial Image. http://hawaii.wr.usgs.gov/index.html.Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report

– Outside (Non

- Tunnel) Wells Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, JBPHH, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Section 5 References July 2012

5

- 2 This page is intentionally left blank.

# Appendix A DOH Correspondence

# Appendix B Field Notebook

# Appendix C Groundwater Sampling LogsWELL ID: LOCATION: PROJECT NO:

INITIAL WATER LEVEL: DATE: TIME:

TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: PERSONNEL INVOLVED:

LENGTH OF SATURATED ZONE: WEATHER CONDITIONS:

VOLUME OF WATER TO BE REMOVED: METHOD OF REMOVAL:

WATER LEVEL AFTER PURGING: PUMPING RATE:

WELL PURGE DATA:
TIME VOLUME REMOVED pH COND ( mS/cm ) TURBIDITY ( NTU ) DO (mg/l) TEMP ( o C) SALINITY (pp t ) REDOX (ORP) ( mV ) 0952 3 L 4.35 0.004 184 7.47 25.91 - 263
0955 6 L 6.17 0.437 38.6 2.55 24.91 - -55
1000 9 L 6.76 0.423 43.3 2.04 24.57 - -85

SAMPLE RETRIEVAL METHOD: APPEARANCE OF SAMPLE: COLOR Greenish brown SAMPLE ID: TURBIDITY High SAMPLE COLLECTION TIME: SEDIMENT None SAMPLED BY: OTHER None

COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS: PID = 0.0 ppm

LABORATORY ANALYSIS PARAMETERS AND PRESERVATIVES: TPH-GRO (EPA 8260B) & VOCs (EPA 8260B) with no preservative

TPH-DRO (EPA8015B) & PAHs (EPA 8270C SIM) with no preservative, and dissolved lead (EPA 6020) with no preservative and not filt ered

NUMBER AND TYPES OF SAMPLE CONTAINERS FILLED:

DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES: SAMPLES DELIVERED TO: TRANSPORTERS: SAMPLE DELIVERY DATE: SAMPLE DELIVERY TIME:

CAPACITY OF CASING (GALLONS/LINEAR FOOT) 2"-0.16; 4"-0.65; 6"-1.47; 8"-2.61; 10"-4.08; 12"-5.87 4/26/2012 1300 N/A 0.75 L/min

Bailer

ES076

1030
MS, JT

(4) - 40 mL VOAs, (4) - 1 L amber bottle, (1) - 500 mL polyethylene bottle

Alconox, triple rinse with distilled water
APPL, Inc. MS, JT 1,575 feet bTOC MS, JT

N/A Sunny

N/A Bailer GROUNDWATER SAMPLING LOG

HDMW2253-03 Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility 1022-024

207.76 feet bTOC 4/26/2012 0948WELL ID: LOCATION: PROJECT NO:

INITIAL WATER LEVEL: DATE: TIME:

TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL: PERSONNEL INVOLVED:

LENGTH OF SATURATED ZONE: WEATHER CONDITIONS:

VOLUME OF WATER TO BE REMOVED: METHOD OF REMOVAL:

WATER LEVEL AFTER PURGING: PUMPING RATE:

WELL PURGE DATA:
TIME VOLUME REMOVED pH COND ( mS/cm ) TURBIDITY ( NTU ) DO (mg/l) TEMP ( o C) SALINITY ( % ) REDOX (ORP) ( mV ) 1104 3 L 11.11 3.25 15.5 5.03 26.04 - -91
1109 6 L 11.33 3.29 18.5 4.17 26.42 - -85
1114 9 L 11.35 3.30 17.2 4.19 26.42 - -80

SAMPLE RETRIEVAL METHOD: APPEARANCE OF SAMPLE: COLOR Clear SAMPLE ID: TURBIDITY None SAMPLE COLLECTION TIME: SEDIMENT None SAMPLED BY: OTHER None

COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS: PID = 0.0 ppm

LABORATORY ANALYSIS PARAMETERS AND PRESERVATIVES: TPH-GRO (EPA 8260B) & VOCs (EPA 8260B) with no preservative

TPH-DRO (EPA8015B) & PAHs (EPA 8270C SIM) with no preservative, and dissolved lead (EPA 6020) with no preservative and not filt ered

NUMBER AND TYPES OF SAMPLE CONTAINERS FILLED:

DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES: SAMPLES DELIVERED TO: TRANSPORTERS: SAMPLE DELIVERY DATE: SAMPLE DELIVERY TIME:

CAPACITY OF CASING (GALLONS/LINEAR FOOT) 2"-0.16; 4"-0.65; 6"-1.47; 8"-2.61; 10"-4.08; 12"-5.87 4/26/2012 1300 N/A 0.64 L/min

Bailer

ES077 MS/MSD

1130
MS, JT

Primary: (9) - 40 mL VOAs, (9) - 1 L amber bottle, (1) - 500 mL polyethylene bottle,

Alconox, triple rinse with distilled water
APPL, Inc. MS, JT 142.8 feet bTOC MS, JT

22.51 feet Sunny

N/A Bailer GROUNDWATER SAMPLING LOG

OWDFMW01 Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility 1022-024

120.29 feet bTOC 4/26/2012 1057

# Appendix D Laboratory Analytical Results, April 2012 (on CD

- ROM)