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 

December 2009 

Prepared by: 

TEC Inc. 

1001 Bishop St. Suite 1400 

American Savings Bank 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 December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

i 

Table of Contents 

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

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

1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Project Objective .............................................................................................................. 6

1.2 Previous Reports .............................................................................................................. 6

1.3 Background ...................................................................................................................... 7

1.3.1 Site Description ......................................................................................................... 7

1.3.2 Facility Information .................................................................................................. 7

1.3.3 UST Information ....................................................................................................... 7

1.4 Previous Environmental Investigations ............................................................................ 7

1.5 Regulatory Updates ........................................................................................................ 10

1.6 RHMW05 Installation .................................................................................................... 10

2.0 Sample Collection and Analyses ........................................................................................ 10

2.1 Monitoring Well Purging ............................................................................................... 11

2.2 Groundwater Sample Collection .................................................................................... 11

2.3 Groundwater Sample Analyses ...................................................................................... 11

3.1 October 2009 Sample Analytical Results ....................................................................... 12

3.2 Groundwater Contaminant Trend ................................................................................... 14

3.3 Results of Oil/Water Interface Measurements ............................................................... 15

3.4 Groundwater Status ........................................................................................................ 16

4.0 Summary and Conclusions ................................................................................................. 19

5.0 References .......................................................................................................................... 23

List of Tables 

Table 1 Analytical Results for Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Release Response Report ..13 

Table 2 Oil/Water Interface Measurements ..............................................................................16 

Table 3 Action Levels for Compounds of Concern ..................................................................16 

Table 4 Results Categories and Responses to Groundwater Monitoring Results .....................17 

List of Figures 

Figure 1 TPH Trends in Groundwater, Round 17 (October 13 and 14, 2009) ...........................20 

Figure 2 PAH Trends in Groundwater, Round 17 (October 13 and 14, 2009) ..........................21 

List of Appendices 

Appendix A – Laboratory Analytical Reports 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

1 

Executive Summary 

This quarterly groundwater monitoring report presents the results of groundwater sampling 

conducted on October 13 and 14, 2009 at the United States (US) Navy Bulk Fuel Storage 

Facility at Red Hill, Oahu, Hawaii (the Facility). The sampling and reporting was conducted by 

TEC Inc. (TEC) for the Fleet and Industrial Supply Center (FISC) at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. This 

report is part of a series of quarterly groundwater monitoring reports provided by the US Navy to 

the State of Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) in accordance with HDOH’s release response 

requirements. Currently, there are 18 active and 2 inactive, 12.5 million gallon, field-constructed 

underground storage tanks (USTs) located at the Facility. 

Background 

In 2002, the US Navy installed a groundwater monitoring well (currently named RHMW01) into 

the basal aquifer, directly down-gradient from the Facility, within the lower access tunnel. 

Groundwater samples from this well indicated that petroleum from the Facility has migrated to 

the basal aquifer (AMEC, 2002). In 2005, the US Navy began quarterly monitoring of the 

aquifer to protect their down-gradient drinking water resource associated with the US Navy Well 

2254-01. US Navy Well 2254-01 is located approximately 3,000 feet down-gradient from the 

Facility USTs and provides approximately 24 % of the potable water to the Pearl Harbor Water 

System (PHWS). 

By September 2005, the US Navy had installed two more groundwater monitoring wells 

(RHMW02 and RHMW03) within the Facility UST system, a background groundwater 

monitoring well (RHMW04) up-gradient from the Facility adjacent to the US Navy Firing Range, 

and a groundwater monitoring well within the US Navy Well 2254-01 infiltration gallery 

(RHMW2254-01). 

All five wells were sampled twice as part of a comprehensive environmental investigation and 

risk assessment (TEC, 2006). For this investigation, groundwater samples were analyzed for 

petroleum constituents and compared against HDOH Drinking Water Environmental Action 

Levels (EALs) (HDOH, July 2005). In addition, a three-dimensional (3-D) groundwater model 

was developed to produce site-specific risk-based levels (SSRBLs) for compounds of concern. 

The results of this modeling effort indicated that Jet Propulsion (JP)–5 fuel presented the biggest 

risk to the US Navy water supply, due to its mobility and toxicity. Finally, the model 

determined that a non-aqueous plume (free product) of JP-5 would need to migrate to within 

1,100 feet of the US Navy Well 2254-01 infiltration gallery for HDOH EALs to be exceeded 

within the gallery. Based on this, free-product must be observed at RHMW01 for EALs to be 

exceeded at the US Navy Well 2254-01. 

In April 2009, another groundwater monitoring well (RHMW05) was installed down-gradient 

from the Facility, within the lower access tunnel between RHMW01 and RHMW2254-01. It 

was installed to identify the extent of contaminant migration down-gradient before it reaches the 

infiltration gallery at RHMW2254-01 (see Figure 1). 

 

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

changes to the action levels associated with methylnaphthalenes. The HDOH Drinking Water 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

2 

toxicity EAL for these compounds was 240 g/L. This concentration assumed that 

methylnaphthalenes were not human carcinogens. Once evidence emerged and was accepted by 

the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) that methylnaphthalenes are carcinogenic to 

humans, HDOH adopted more rigorous EALs of 4.7 g/L for 1-methylnaphthalene and 24 g/L 

for 2-methylnaphthalene (HDOH, 2008). 

The HDOH Drinking Water EAL for naphthalene was also updated during this process. 

Previously, HDOH based their naphthalene EAL on USEPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation 

Goal (USEPA PRG) of 6.2 g/L, which is associated with a non-cancer Hazard Index of 1. In 

deference to the California Department of Public Health’s Drinking Water Notification Levels, 

(HDOH, 2008) HDOH updated their naphthalene drinking water EAL to 17 g/L. 

Finally, the HDOH Drinking Water EAL for TPH-DRO was increased from 100 g/L to 210 

g/L, although the Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL for TPH-DRO remains 100 g/L. 

Groundwater Protection Plan 

In 2008, the US Navy completed the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Final Groundwater 

Protection Plan (TEC, 2008), which specified SSRBLs and various required actions based on the 

category status (i.e., categories 1 through 4) of each groundwater monitoring well. The main 

objective of the Plan is to protect the groundwater quality of US Navy Well 2254-01, which 

provides potable water to the PHWS. This is accomplished by comparing petroleum 

concentrations in the Facility wells to established SSRBLs and taking appropriate action. A 

secondary, but important objective of the Plan is to identify leaking USTs by evaluating 

increasing concentration trends, or the presence of free product in one or more groundwater 

monitoring wells. This quarterly report compares observed water quality to these established 

categories and associated actions. 

Current Results 

On October 13 and 14, 2009, five groundwater samples (i.e., RHMW01, RHMW02, RHMW03, 

RHMW05 and RHMW2254-01), along with the required quality control samples (duplicate, 

matrix spike, spike duplicate, and trip blank) were collected for analysis. Samples were analyzed 

for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) quantified as Diesel-Range Organics (DRO) and 

Gasoline Range Organics (GRO), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Polynuclear Aromatic 

Hydrocarbons (PAHs), and dissolved lead. 

TPH-DRO

TPH-DRO was detected at 299 micrograms per liter (μg/L) in RHMW01, 2,570 μg/L (i.e., the 

average of normal and duplicate samples) in RHMW02, and at 673 μg/L in RHMW05. TPHDRO was not detected above the laboratory method detection limit (MDL) at RHMW03 and 

RHMW2254-01. The HDOH Drinking Water EAL and SSRBL for TPH-DRO are 210 μg/L and 

4,500 μg/L, respectively. 

TPH-GRO

For TPH-GRO the HDOH Drinking Water EAL is 100 μg/L. In samples RHMW01, 

RHMW02D (i.e., the duplicate sample collected), RHMW03, RHMW05, and RHMW2254-01 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

3 

TPH-GRO was not observed above the laboratory MDL (i.e., 30 μg/L). In the regular sample 

from RHMW02, TPH-GRO was detected at 36.9F μg/L [F indicates that the compound was 

identified, but the concentration was above the MDL and below the reporting limit (RL), 

therefore is considered an estimate], just above the laboratory MDL. 

Other Parameters above HDOH Drinking Water EALs

At RHMW02, the average concentration between the normal and duplicate sample of 

naphthalene was 21.65 μg/L. This is above the HDOH Drinking Water EAL for naphthalene of 

17 μg/L. 

Trend Analysis 

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

two or more recent consecutive sampling events, 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 concentration (i.e., 248 

μg/L) recorded in July 2009. In October 2009, this trend changed as TPH-DRO increased 

slightly to 299F μg/L. 

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). 

However, there has been a decreasing trend since the SSRBL was exceeded in October 2008 to 

below 50 percent of the SSRBL in May and July 2009. However, in October 2009, TPH-DRO 

increased to 2,570 μg/L, above 50 percent of the SSRBL. 

For other parameters, 1-methylnaphthalene and 2-methylnaphthalene have almost consistently 

averaged concentrations above HDOH Drinking Water EALs (i.e., 4.7 g/L and 24 g/L, 

respectively) since September 2005. However, a significantly decreasing trend since October 

2008 has since brought these concentrations below the HDOH Drinking Water EALs. In October 

2009, 1-methylnaphthalene decreased from the previous round with an average concentration 

(i.e., 3.245 g/L) being the lowest of any round since September 2005. 2-methylnaphthalene 

decreased to an average concentration of 0.6345 g/L after increasing in July 2009 from the 

lowest concentration recorded in May 2009. Naphthalene has exhibited a historical trend similar 

to 2-methylnaphthalene at RHMW02. However, in October 2009 naphthalene increased to an 

averaged 21.65 g/L, greater than the HDOH Drinking Water EAL of 17 g/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, during the last three sampling events (i.e., May, July, and 

October 2009), TPH-DRO was not detected above the laboratory MDLs. These results represent 

a continuing decreasing trend for TPH-DRO that has existed since October 2008. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

4 

RHMW05

At RHMW05 there is an increasing trend for TPH-DRO. The October 2009 concentration was 

673 μg/L, an increase as compared with the May and July 2009 concentrations of 200 μg/L and 

491 μg/L, respectively. The October 2009 concentration remains above the HDOH EAL and 

below 25 percent of the SSRBL for TPH-DRO. 

US Navy Well 2254-01

At US Navy Well 2254-01, no compounds have been detected above the laboratory MDLs since 

trace concentrations of TPH-GRO and 2-methylnaphthalene that were observed in the February 

and May 2009. 

Current Groundwater Status 

To date, there is no observation of a trend (i.e., two or more consecutive events) of light-non 

aqueous phased liquids (LNAPL), otherwise known as free product, presence on groundwater at 

any of the Facility monitoring wells. 

US Navy Well 2254-01

Based upon the October 2009 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 October 2009 sampling event, RHMW03 is not eligible for any category status 

change since no compounds were detected above the laboratory MDLs. 

Category 1 Status Locations

There are no Category 1 status locations. 

Category 2 Status Locations

RHMW01 

The October 2009 sampling event indicates that RHMW01 should remain in Category 2 status. 

This is because the TPH-DRO concentration of 299F 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). 

RHMW05

Based upon the October 2009 sampling event RHMW05 should remain in a Category 2 status. 

TPH-DRO at RHMW05 (i.e., 673 μg/L) is above the drinking water EAL of 210 μg/L and has 

been showing an increasing trend over the last three rounds (i.e., 200 μg/L in May 2009 and 491 

μg/L in July 2009). 

 

Category 2 for RHMW01 and RHMW05 requires: 

1. Quarterly reports to be sent to HDOH; and 

2. Initiation of a leak determination program to identify if tanks are leaking. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

5 

Category 3 Status Locations

RHMW02 

Results from the October 2009 sampling event indicate that RHMW02 is presently in Category 3 

status (i.e., upgraded from Category 2 status observed during the July 2009 sampling event), 

since TPH-DRO [2,570 g/L and 2,570 g/L (duplicate)] is greater than the HDOH Drinking 

Water EAL (210 g/L), and is between one half and the established SSRBL value of 4,500 g/L 

(estimated solubility limit of JP-5). In addition, the HDOH Drinking Water EAL of 17 g/L for 

naphthalene was exceeded [i.e., 23.3 g/L and 20 g/L (duplicate)]. 

Category 3 response at RHMW02 requires: 

1. Send quarterly reports to HDOH; 

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

3. Increase free product 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; and 

6. Immediately evaluate tanks for leaks. 

 

Category 4 Status Locations

There are no Category 4 status locations. 

Conclusions and Recommendations 

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

Navy Well 2254-01 as a result in the October 2009 data. Based upon the October 2009 data, the 

US Navy Well 2254-01 is not eligible for a category status change since no compounds were 

detected above the laboratory MDLs. 

With the exception of RHMW03 and RHMW2254-01, compound concentrations for all the other 

monitoring wells (i.e., RHMW01, RHMW02, and RHMW05) are exhibiting increasing 

contaminant trends for TPH-DRO relative to the concentrations observed in July 2009, among 

the lowest since September 2005. However, current results are still at concentration levels on the 

lower end of the historical range, with the exception of RHMW05. As a result of the October 

2009 sampling event, RHMW03 is not eligible for a category status change. 

Quarterly groundwater sampling for TPH-DRO, TPH-GRO, VOCs, PAHs, and dissolved lead 

will continue at the Facility until such time that data indicates that a different monitoring plan is 

warranted. It is recommended that future quarterly analytical results be closely assessed at 

RHMW05, since it continues to exhibit an increasing contaminant trend (i.e., 200 μg/L in May 

2009, 491μg/L in July 2009, and 673 μg/L in October 2009 for TPH-DRO). 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

6 

1.0 Introduction

This report presents the results of the 17th groundwater sampling event, conducted in October 

2009 at the Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility, Oahu, Hawaii (hereafter referred to as “the Facility”). 

The Facility consists of 18 active and 2 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], 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); 

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

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

7 

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

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

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 Halawa Heights on 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 hydraulically down-gradient 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% 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 2 inactive USTs operated by Navy FISC Pearl Harbor. 

Each UST has a capacity of 12.5 million gallons. The Facility 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 constructed of steel and currently 

contain Jet Propulsion (JP)–5 fuel 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). 

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). 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

8 

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. Lead may have been part of the Facility 

construction material (TEC, 2007). 

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 hydraulically 

upgradient of the USTs to provide geochemistry 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 US Navy 

Well 2254-01) 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. 

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 are current and provide action levels for more chemicals, and are 

much 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 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

9 

screening levels presented in HAR Section 11-281-78 would no longer be used to evaluate 

environmental impact at the Facility. 

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 MDL; 

 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; 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, and 

July 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 EAL, in February and May 

2009; 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

10 

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

sampling events; 

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

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

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; 

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

May or July; and 

 TPH-DRO exceeded HDOH Drinking Water EAL at RHMW05 during the July 2009 

sampling event. 

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). 

The drinking water EAL for naphthalene has also been updated during this process. Previously, 

HDOH based their naphthalene EAL on USEPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goal 

(USEPA PRG) of 6.2 g/L, which is associated with a non-cancer Hazard Index of 1. HDOH 

has updated their naphthalene drinking water EAL to 17 g/L, in deference to the California 

Department of Public Health’s Drinking Water Notification Levels, a Hazard Index of 2.7 

(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 downgradient from the Facility, within the lower access tunnel between RHMW01 and RHMW2254-

01(located at the US Navy Well 2254-01). It was installed to identify the extent of contaminant 

migration down-gradient prior to contaminants reaching the infiltration gallery at the US Navy 

Well 2254-01. 

2.0 Sample Collection and Analyses 

Field activities relating to groundwater sample collection were conducted on October 13 and 14, 

2009. Groundwater samples were collected from four monitoring wells located inside the 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

11 

Facility lower access tunnel and one monitoring well located at the Red Hill 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 monitoring wells were purged prior to sampling. 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 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, except for RHMW02 and RHMW05. 

RHMW02 and RHMW05 were sampled using disposable bailers. 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. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

12 

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 Red Hill 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 October 2009 Sample Analytical Results 

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

lead. The results for each groundwater monitoring well are discussed below. 

RHMW01

TPH-DRO at 299F μg/L exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EALs of 210 μg/L. 

Concentrations of acenaphthene, flourene, naphthalene, and methyl isobutyl ketone (2-butanone) 

were detected at 0.0177F μg/L, 0.0288F μg/L, 0.193 μg/L, and 4.27F μg/L, respectfully (Table 

1). All of these concentrations are below the HDOH EALS for each constituent. No other 

constituents were detected above the laboratory MDL. 

RHMW02

TPH-DRO, TPH-GRO, 1-methylnaphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, acenaphthene, flourene, and 

naphthalene were detected at RHMW02. TPH-DRO was detected at RHMW02 in the normal 

and duplicate samples at 2,570 μg/L. This result exceeded the HDOH EAL of 210 μg/L, but not 

the site-specific risk based level (SSRBL) of 4,500 μg/L. TPH-GRO was detected above the 

laboratory MDL of 30 μg/L in the normal sample only (i.e., 36.9F μg/L). 

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

Method 8260B produced the highest naphthalene concentrations, which averaged 21.65 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 at average 

concentrations of 3.245 μg/L, 0.6345 μg/L, 0.205 μg/L, and 0.0957 μg/L, respectively (Table 1). 

All of these concentrations are below the HDOH EALS for each constituent. No other 

constituents were detected above the laboratory MDL. 

RHMW03

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

RHMW05

TPH-DRO was detected at a concentration of 673 μg/L. This concentration exceeds the HDOH 

Drinking Water EAL of 210 μg/L and the HDOH Groundwater Gross Contamination EAL of 

100 μg/L. The only other constituent that was detected above the laboratory MDL was pyrene at 

0.0173F, just above the laboratory MDL and well below the HDOH EALs (Table 1). 
Table 1. Analytical Results for Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Release Response Report (October 13 and 14, 2009)

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii

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

TPH as DIESEL RANGE ORGANICS 210 100 299 F 165 440 2570 169 449 2570 170 455 ND U 

TPH as GASOLINE RANGE ORGANICS 100 100 ND U 30 100 36.9 F 30 100 ND U 30 100 ND U 1-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 4.7 10 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 2.46 0.017 0.0568 4.03 0.0893 0.298 ND U 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE 24 10 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 0.486 0.017 0.0568 0.783 0.0179 0.0595 ND U ACENAPHTHENE 370 20 0.0177 F 0.0174 0.0581 0.2 0.017 0.0568 0.21 0.0179 0.0595 ND U ACENAPHTHYLENE 240 2000 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U ANTHRACENE 1800 22 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE 0.092 4.7 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U BENZO(a)PYRENE 0.2 0.81 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U BENZO(b)FLUORANTHENE 0.092 0.75 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U BENZO(g,h,i)PERYLENE 1500 0.13 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U BENZO(k)FLUORANTHENE 0.92 0.4 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U CHRYSENE 9.2 1 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U DIBENZ(a,h)ANTHRACENE 0.0092 0.52 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U 

FLUORANTHENE 1500 130 ND U 0 0174 0 0581 ND U 0 017 0 0568 ND U 0 0179 0 0595 ND U 

8015B (Petroleum)

8270C SIM 

(PAHs)

October 14, 2009 October 13, 2009 October 13, 2009

RHMW02

UG/L

RHMW02D

UG/L

RH

U

Method

HDOH Drinking Water 

EALs1

for Human Toxicity 

UG/L

HDOH Groundwater 

Gross Contamination 

EALs2

UG/L

Chemical

RHMW01

UG/L

Octobe

FLUORANTHENE 1500 130 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U FLUORENE 240 950 0.0288 F 0.0174 0.0581 0.0979 0.017 0.0568 0.0935 0.0179 0.0595 ND U INDENO(1,2,3-c,d)PYRENE 0.092 0.095 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U NAPHTHALENE 17 21 0.193 0.036 0.116 6.77 0.176 0.568 7.82 0.185 0.595 ND U PHENANTHRENE 240 410 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U PYRENE 180 68 ND U 0.0174 0.0581 ND U 0.017 0.0568 ND U 0.0179 0.0595 ND U 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 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE 200 970 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE 5 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 1,1-DICHLOROETHANE 2.4 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE 70 3000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 1,2-DIBROMOETHANE (EDB) 0.0065 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE 600 10 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE 5 10 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE 180 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 ACETONE 22000 20000 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U BENZENE BENZENE 5 170 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U 0.12 0.4 ND U BROMODICHLOROMETHANE 0.22 50000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U BROMOFORM 100 510 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U BROMOMETHANE 8.7 50000 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U 0.94 3 ND U CARBON TETRACHLORIDE 5 520 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U CHLOROBENZENE 100 50 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U CHLOROETHANE 8600 16 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U CHLOROFORM 70 2400 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1 ND U 0.3 1 ND U CHLOROMETHANE 1.8 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U cis-1,2-DICHLOROETHYLENE 70 50000 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE 0.16 50000 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U 0.15 0.5 ND U ETHYLBENZENE 700 30 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE 0.86 6 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 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 METHYL ETHYL KETONE (2-BUTANONE) 7100 8400 4.27 F 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 3.1 10 ND U 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 METHYLENE CHLORIDE 4.8 9100 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5 ND U 1 5 ND U NAPHTHALENE 17 21 ND U 0.62 2 23.3 0.62 2 20 0.62 2 ND U 

STYRENE 100 10 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U TETRACHLOROETHYLENE(PCE) 5 170 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U TOLUENE 1000 40 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 

8260B 

(VOCs)

trans-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE 100 260 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U TRICHLOROETHYLENE (TCE) 5 310 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U VINYL CHLORIDE 2 3400 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U 0.31 1 ND U XYLENES, TOTAL 10000 20 ND U 1 2 ND U 1 2 ND U 1 2 ND U 

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

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 lim

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

12

Final Drinking Water Action Levels for Human Toxicity, Table D-3a, Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater , HDOH, 2009Groundwater Gross Contamination Action Levels, Table G-1, Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater , HDOH, 2009

200

Page 1 of 1
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

14 

US Navy Well 2254-01

No parameters were detected above the laboratory MDLs at the US Navy Well 2254-01 (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, 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 

was exhibiting a decreasing trend since October 2008 with the lowest concentration observed 

during July 2009. In October 2009, TPH-DRO at RHMW01 increased slightly from the July 

2009 concentration. 

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 has shown a decreasing trend since October 2008. The May 

2009 average concentration (i.e., 1,810 g/L) and the July 2009 average concentration (i.e., 

1,375 μg/L) exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EAL, but were below 50 percent of the 

SSRBL of 4,500 μg/L. 

The October 2009 average TPH-DRO concentration shows an increase from the May and July 

2009 sampling events. TPH-DRO is within the historical range from when TPH-DRO was 

considered relatively stable at RHMW02 (i.e., 2,570 μg/L), between September 2005 and July 

2008. TPH-DRO at RHMW02 exceeds the HDOH Drinking Water EAL and 50 percent of the 

SSRBL. 

For other parameters, the average concentration for 1-methylnaphthalene (i.e., 3.245 g/L) 

continues to exhibit a decreasing trend and no longer exceeds the HDOH Drinking Water EAL 

of 4.7 g/L. Naphthalene however, is showing an increasing trend since its lowest concentration 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

15 

in May 2009. Naphthalene at RHMW02 (i.e., 21.65 μg/L) exceeds the HDOH Drinking Water 

EAL of 17 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, during the last three sampling events (i.e., May, July, and 

October 2009), TPH-DRO was not detected above the laboratory MDL. These results represent 

a continuing decreasing trend for TPH-DRO that has existed since October 2008. 

RHMW05

At RHMW05 there is an increasing trend for TPH-DRO. The October 2009 concentration was 

673 μg/L, an increase as compared with the May and July 2009 concentrations of 200 μg/L and 

491 μg/L, respectively. The October 2009 concentration remains above the HDOH EAL and 

below 25 percent of the SSRBL for TPH-DRO. 

US Navy Well 2254-01

At US Navy Well 2254-01, no compounds have been detected above the laboratory MDLs since 

trace concentrations of TPH-GRO and 2-methylnaphthalene that were observed in the February 

and May 2009. 

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 3). 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 < 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 the October 2009 sampling round. At the end of October and November, 

subsequent rounds of oil/water interface measurements were conducted. During the last three 

rounds of measurements, no free product was observed in any of these wells. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

16 

Table 2. Oil/Water Interface Measurements 

            

Date 

RHMW01 RHMW02 RHMW03 RHMW05 

SWL 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

SWL 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

SWL 

(ft) 

LNAPL 

(ft) 

SWL 

(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 17.91 0.00 

August 2009 18.37 0.00 18.30 0.00 18.47 0.00 17.49 0.00 

September 2009 18.20 0.00 18.17 0.00 18.24 0.00 17.39 0.00 

October 2009 18.17 0.00 18.14 0.00 18.24 0.00 17.38 0.00 

November 2009 18.50 0.00 18.45 0.00 18.50 0.00 17.75 0.00 

SWL - Static water level, elevation above mean sea level (for RHMW05 this is estimated until the top well casing elevation has been determined) 

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 

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

Oil/water interface measurements were not taken during in April 2008 

3.4 Groundwater Status 

Constituents of concern are defined as petroleum-related chemicals that have been observed in 

the groundwater samples above the HDOH EALs. In accordance with the Red Hill Bulk Fuel 

Storage Facility Final Groundwater Protection Plan (TEC, 2008), Table 4 defines the 

constituents of concern in groundwater at the Facility and the SSRBLs and updated EALs for 

each (HDOH 2008). 

Table 3. Action Levels for Constituents 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 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

17 

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 and the US 

Navy Well 2254-01, and requires specific responses when these categories are observed during 

quarterly groundwater sampling. Table 5 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 

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 determine leaking tank 

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

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 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

18 

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 (Table 3). To date, there is no trend (i.e., two or 

more consecutive events) of fuel presence on groundwater at any of these wells. 

US Navy Well 2254-01

Based upon the October 2009 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 October 2009 sampling event, RHMW03 is not eligible for any category status 

change since no compounds were detected above the laboratory MDLs. 

Category 1 Status Locations

There are no Category 1 status locations. 

Category 2 Status Locations

RHMW01 

The October 2009 sampling event indicates that RHMW01 should remain in Category 2 status. 

This is because the TPH-DRO concentration of 299F 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). 

RHMW05

Based upon the October 2009 sampling event RHMW05 should remain in a Category 2 status. 

TPH-DRO at RHMW05 (i.e., 673 μg/L) is above the drinking water EAL of 210 μg/L and has 

been showing an increasing trend over the last three rounds (i.e., 200 μg/L in May 2009 and 491 

μg/L in July 2009). 

 

Category 2 for RHMW01 and RHMW05 requires: 

1. Quarterly reports to be sent to HDOH; and 

2. Initiation of a leak determination program to identify if tanks are leaking. 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

19 

Category 3 Status Locations

RHMW02 

Results from the October 2009 sampling event indicate that RHMW02 is presently in Category 3 

status (i.e., upgraded from Category 2 status observed during the July 2009 sampling event), 

since TPH-DRO [2,570 g/L and 2,570 g/L (duplicate)] is greater than the HDOH Drinking 

Water EAL (210 g/L), and is between one half and the established SSRBL value of 4,500 g/L 

(estimated solubility limit of JP-5). In addition, the HDOH Drinking Water EAL of 17 g/L for 

naphthalene was exceeded [i.e., 23.3 g/L and 20 g/L (duplicate)]. 

Category 3 response at RHMW02 requires: 

1. Send quarterly reports to HDOH; 

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

3. Increase free product 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; and 

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 in the October 2009 data. As a result of the October 2009 

sampling event, the US Navy Well 2254-01 is not eligible for a category status change. 

With the exception of RHMW03 and RHMW2254-01, compound concentrations for all other 

Facility monitoring wells (i.e., RHMW01, RHMW02, and RHMW05) are exhibiting increasing 

contaminant trends relative to the concentrations observed in July 2009, among the lowest since 

September 2005. However, current results are still at concentration levels on the lower end of 

the historical range, with the exception of RHMW05. As a result of the October 2009 sampling 

event, RHMW03 is not eligible for a category status change. Currently, RHMW01 and 

RHMW05 maintain a Category 2 status, while RHMW02 has been upgraded to Category 3 status. 

Conclusions/Recommendations

 To date, there is no trend (i.e., two or more consecutive events) of fuel presence on 

groundwater at the Facility wells (Table 3). In fact, fuel on the groundwater has been 

observed only once (i.e., in January 2008 in RHMW01 and RHMW02 at less than 0.01 

ft.). It is recommended that the Facility continue regular monitoring of Facility wells for 

the presence of fuel on groundwater. 

 The concentration of TPH-DRO measured at the new monitoring well, RHMW05, in 

October 2009 (i.e., 673 g/L) exceeded the HDOH Drinking Water EAL, but was less 
Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Report 

Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

20 

than half of the SSRBL. RHMW05 is located between RHMW01 and the US Navy Well 

2254-01. It is recommended that future quarterly analytical results continue to be closely 

assessed at RHMW05 since this well continues to exhibit an increasing contaminant trend 

(i.e., 200 μg/L in May 2009, 491μg/L in July 2009, and 673 in October 2009 for TPHDRO). 

 RHMW01 and RHMW02 are exhibiting increasing contaminant trends, however, are still 

at concentration levels on the lower end of the historical range. It is recommended that 

quarterly monitoring of the Facility wells continue so that overall groundwater quality 

trends may be established/observed and proactive action taken if the groundwater quality 

shows greater evidence of deterioration. 

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

monitoring should continue to evaluate the extent of contaminant migration from upgradient locations. 

 The following activities are planned to monitor and/or clarify the groundwater 

contamination situation at the Facility: 

1. Re-evaluate risk assessment and groundwater model (TEC, 2007) to ensure both 

are valid and protective of human health and the environment under the existing 

conditions; 

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

RHMW03, and RHMW05; 

3. Collect samples from nearby Halawa Deep Monitoring Well (2253-03), OWDF 

MW01, and RHMW04 to assess regional groundwater trends; 

4. Prepare for alternative water source at US Navy Well 2254-01, if appropriate. 

5. Continue quarterly groundwater monitoring of Facility wells for TPH-DRO, TPHGRO, VOCs, PAHs, and lead until such time that new data indicates that a 

different monitoring program is warranted. 
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 December 2009 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

23 

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. 
Appendix A 

Laboratory Analytical Reports