Navy won’t release PFAS data in Hawaii, citing national security concerns

By Pat Elder
April 11, 2023

Airmen transport drums containing PFAS-contaminated soil from the Red Hill fuel facility in Honolulu after the November 23, 2022 spill.

After the massive release of firefighting foam concentrate on November 29, 2022 at the Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility, the EPA sent the Navy a Request for information letter on the status of the release of 1,300 gallons of the PFAS-laced toxins.

The Navy has now responded to the EPA by refusing to release the video of the toxic spill or information on the specific concentrations of PFAS compounds in a variety of environmental media. See the peculiar file here. The DOD often publishes sensitive environmental memos without including essentials like a letterhead, the date, the author, or the responsible office.

The Navy says it has provided a weekly Situation Report (SITREP) to the Hawai’i Department of Health (DOH) that satisfies the EPA’s request for public information. However, the Navy explained that the SITREP reports are considered to be “Controlled Unclassified Information, (CUI)” and are not publicly releasable.

The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency defines Controlled Unclassified Information as military-created or owned information “that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls consistent with applicable laws, regulations and government wide policies.”

CUI is not classified information. However, the EPA and the Hawaii Department of Health have not resisted the Navy’s desire to keep the information hidden from the public.

The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency explains the rationale for withholding the release of Controlled Unclassified Information, (CUI):

 “Because there are fewer controls over CUI as compared to classified information, CUI is the path of least resistance for adversaries. Loss of aggregated CUI is one of the most significant risks to national security, directly affecting lethality of our warfighters.”

We must understand their insolence.

We are the adversaries of the United States Navy. In their judgement, our advocacy poses a significant risk to national security because we demand to know specific levels of AFFF releases in various locations to take the necessary steps to protect human health and the environment. The Navy is telling us that divulging this information – which will aid us in protecting public health, directly affects the lethality of American warfighters.

How does this work, exactly?  

What are the potential scenarios the DOD envisions that may hamper warfighters if PFAS data is released? What are they afraid of?

The Navy is concerned that public indignation over deadly contamination in Hawaii, or anywhere for that matter, may conspire to alienate the hosting civilian population from the naval command. In their thinking, it is better to display the façade of transparency while holding on to information that might ignite the fuse to an unprecedented explosion of civilian resentment.

The Navy intends to control the narrative by focusing the conversation on drinking water while taking steps to produce drinking water largely free from PFAS. They’re hoping the issue will de-escalate with time as a small handful of activists become frustrated and the general population loses interest. It comes down to controlling unclassified information while influencing a poorly informed public.  The Navy has had a lot of practice.

Oahu is so profoundly contaminated with PFAS that it can never be cleaned up while the health of residents may be imperiled forever. The soil, subsurface soil, sediment, groundwater, surface water and the air are toxic. Farmers are raising produce that is laced with PFAS. The fish are contaminated. It is paradise lost.

We know this because of the sheer size and number of installations on the tiny island known to have used PFAS in firefighting foam – and continue to use it in a host of industrial applications. We know this because similar military installations in the continental US have released detailed analytical results on PFAS concentrations in several environmental media.    We know what to expect here.

Neither the Navy nor the EPA, nor the state of Hawaii are willing to tell us much.

The Navy is warring against the American public and they’re winning. They’re poisoning us while citing the “loss of aggregated CUI.” 

The Navy was asked to provide information for each release of PFAS and its impact on wastewater and storm sewers. The Navy denied the request, citing Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).

The Navy was asked to provide data from the Navy’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system for the AFFF fire suppression lines at Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility from November 28, 2022 to December 1, 2022. The Navy denied the request claiming the investigation is ongoing.

The Navy was asked to describe their efforts to “remediate” the November 29, 2022 release of AFFF and to explain how recovered AFFF were stored, treated and/or disposed of.  The Navy denied the request to make the information public. Perhaps the Navy’s definition of “public” only refers to public agencies like the EPA and the Hawaii Department of Health that prefer to toe the line by not letting the rest of us know what’s really going on.

The Navy was asked to describe its plan for addressing detections of PFAS in the sole source drinking water aquifer. The command responded by saying the Navy follows the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, or Superfund process). The Navy has failed to release a single set of PFAS data pursuant to the completion of CERCLA-mandated Site Inspections. The Army and the Air Force are also stonewalling the Hawaiian public, something not terribly difficult to do.

The Navy claims they “use the CERCLA process to investigate potential releases from Navy activities, prioritize responses, and determine the appropriate cleanup actions based on risk to human health and the environment.” It sounds good, but the Navy hides behind CERCLA claiming the process is tedious and time consuming.

The Navy is worried about a handful of individuals and organizations in Hawaii. They’re betting on disseminating a continued stream of misinformation while public apathy dominates, and the issue subsides. However, Hawaii is proving to be a tough case for the Navy.  The issue of contaminated water never goes away in Hawaii! The Wai Ola (Water is Life) Alliance is making sure of that.  Alliance members always knew that the Red Hill Facility posed an imminent danger to the island’s freshwater sole source aquifer because of 80 years of corrosion, disrepair, and lack of adequate testing and maintenance.

Melodie Aduja is the Co-chair of the Environmental Caucus of the Democratic Party of Hawaii and a Plaintiff in a suit against the Navy in US District Court for ongoing violations of the Clean Water Act stemming from the operation of the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility.  See Wai Ola Alliance et. al. v. U.S. Dept. of the Navy.

Asked for her reaction to the Navy citing national security as the rationale for withholding PFAS data pertaining to the November 29, 2022 spill, Aduja said, “Repairing the loss of trust has a lot to do with the Navy becoming more transparent. Releasing information on contamination would be a step in the right direction.”  

Financial support from the  Downs Law Group makes this work possible.

The firm is working to provide legal representation to individuals with a high likelihood of exposure to PFAS and other contaminants.

Interested in joining a multi-base class action law suit pertaining to illnesses stemming from various kinds of environmental contamination?

Join the Veterans & Civilians Clean Water Alliance Facebook group.
(2.3 K members and growing rapidly.)