Here's some background info in case some are not current on the issue.

In December 2013, contractors completed a three-year, scheduled, routine maintenance upgrade on tank 5 at Red Hill.
This work included cleaning, inspecting, and repairing anomalies. At the conclusion of the overhaul in January 2014, the
Navy initiated a Return to Service evolution, refilling the tank with jet fuel (JP-8). During this process, the inventory
management alarms sounded. Red Hill operators first assumed the alarm system was malfunctioning or producing false
positives because the tank was recently overhauled and should not have been leaking. Eventually, the U.S. Navy
determined the alarms were not false and reported a 27,000 gallon jet fuel loss to the Hawaii Department of Health and
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.


Inside Red Hill Fuel Storage Facility.
Subsequent analysis indicated that the leak was the result of faulty work and poor quality control by the Navy's contractor,
compounded by a lack of quality assurance oversight by the Navy, as well as operator error. As a consequence, the Navy,
in accordance with the Administrative Order on Consent, significantly improved the tank inspection, repair, and
maintenance processes in their report submitted on October 11, 2016.

Regarding the 27,000 gallons of fuel, the Navy's first concern was the possibility of fuel entering the drinking water supply.
The nearest drinking water shaft (operated by the Navy) is 3,000 feet away and is one source that provides water to the
military families at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. The next closest drinking water shaft, Halawa shaft, which is located
approximately one mile away, provides drinking water to the city of Honolulu.

While all test results for contamination at the Navy drinking water shaft have come back well within safe drinking water
standards and results from the Halawa shaft have shown no jet fuel related contaminants, the Navy, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the Hawaii Department of Health conducted studies to evaluate groundwater conditions and any
potential impacts to groundwater resources in the area. Results taken in and around Tank 5 indicated a spike in levels of
hydrocarbons in soil vapor and groundwater. Drinking water monitoring results confirmed compliance with federal and
state safety standards for drinking water both before and after the January 2014 release.[4]

Following the tank 5 release in 2014, the Navy increased the testing frequency for drinking water and groundwater wells.
The Navy now sends drinking water samples every quarter to certified independent laboratories that use EPA methods to
analyze for contamination.

The newest groundwater monitoring well was scheduled to come on line by the end of April 2017. Commander Navy
Region Hawaii and Naval Surface Group Middle Pacific, Admiral Fuller noted, "there are have been detects of trace
amounts of fuel constituents near the Navy drinking water shaft." This is in the groundwater, not the drinking water.
"We're talking 17 parts per billion, as opposed to zero. The misperception is that there's a spike, but the numbers were
small enough that the testing facility had to estimate the amount because the numbers were so low. The 17 parts per
billion is below the threshold of something we should be concerned about, which is 100 parts per billion."[citation needed]

In December 2021, it was reported that more than 1,000 military families stationed in Hawaii had been forced from their
homes after apparent jet fuel contamination in the water supply at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. About 2,700 homes in
10 communities were in the affected area. Residents had complained about foul-smelling tap water bearing an oily sheen,
as well as symptoms such as nausea, diarrhea and intense headaches. Secretary of the Navy Carlos Del Toro told
residents, “I deeply apologize to each and every one of you and to the people of Hawaii that this incident may have been
destructive to your lives."[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hill_Underground_Fuel_Storage_Facility

Lots of other interesting articles on the construction and intended use of the facility since it was constructed in 1940.  Here's one I liked:

https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/hawaii/unique-tunnel-hi/

So, the problem appears to NOT be with the tanks just being there.  The problem was caused by a 3-year scheduled maintenance upgrade in 2010-2013, which resulted in "faulty work and poor quality control by the Navy's contractor, compounded by a lack of quality assurance oversight by the Navy, as well as operator error."

Now that the damage has been done and the impact to the water in the area admitted to, the question becomes "now what?"  Simply going off on the Navy for having the tanks in the first place is unproductive.  If the Navy has a plan to fix the problem without the cost and operational impact caused by draining all the tanks, maybe the issue lies in the state of Hawaii not being willing to consider a reasonable solution?

I guess we need to read the court documents to see what the real technical facts are.  The press is only going to feed us the emotional sound bites  the people on each side give them.

In regards to what Flapp posted, I agree that we always seem to make decisions based on emotions; like guns. The moment a person is shot we blame the gun - and here we are.

The decision of whether or not to permanently shut down the US imperial navy's fuel tanks is purely one of common sense and of public safety.

Would any experienced self-sufficient, off-the-grid, American patriot construct underground SHTF fuel storage tanks right above the aquifer that they exclusively use to pump water they utilize to drink and bathe?

I would even offer that any arguments in-favor of keeping those military fuel storage tanks operational is not only illogical, but clearly exemplifies a very blind pro-military emotional response to defend the US imperial military at any cost, even if it means potentially contaminating the water supply of all who live on Oahu now and generations into the future.

The decision of whether or not to permanently shut down the US imperial navy's fuel tanks is purely one of common sense and of public safety.

Would any experienced self-sufficient, off-the-grid, American patriot construct underground SHTF fuel storage tanks right above the aquifer that they exclusively use to pump water they utilize to drink and bathe?

I would even offer that any arguments in-favor of keeping those military fuel storage tanks operational is not only illogical, but clearly exemplifies a very blind pro-military emotional response to defend the US imperial military at any cost, even if it means potentially contaminating the water supply of all who live on Oahu now and generations into the future.

It's enough to simply argue the facts.  Accusing anyone who disagrees with you of "clearly [exemplifying] a very blind pro-military emotional response to defend the US imperial military at any cost, even if it means potentially contaminating the water supply of all who live on Oahu now and generations into the future" is a personal attack.

This facility has been there since 1940.  How long have you been this passionate about shutting it down?  Was the water in the area contaminated to unsafe levels before 2013?

Why does everything have to involve political ideologies and US imperialism?  Why can't this be about a discussion of the facts and alternative solutions?

There's more than one way to skin most cats.  Just because you believe your extreme position is the only right answer doesn't mean there's not an equally safe solution that's not as extreme which also makes 100% sense for the environment.

If you don't have fuel then you're mobility decreases significantly. If you don't have water you die. Fast.

Not much of a contest as far as priorities go.

If you don't have fuel then you're mobility decreases significantly. If you don't have water you die. Fast.

Not much of a contest as far as priorities go.

I saw on Twatter that if you ingest enough JP4 (Jet Fuel), you won't need any water.

You'll also never catch COVID-19 ... or anything else.

 

Accusing anyone who disagrees with you of "clearly [exemplifying] a very blind pro-military emotional response to defend the US imperial military at any cost, even if it means potentially contaminating the water supply of all who live on Oahu now and generations into the future" is a personal attack.

There is no personal attack.  How can there be a personal attack when the decision regarding the military fuel storage tanks could ultimately result in making Oahu unhabitable due to unsafe drinking water?

There's more than one way to skin most cats.  Just because you believe your extreme position is the only right answer doesn't mean there's not an equally safe solution that's not as extreme which also makes 100% sense for the environment.

From the article, Navy’s underground fuel tanks in Hawaii are impenetrable to attack — and that’s the problem (https://www.stripes.com/theaters/asia_pacific/navy-s-underground-fuel-tanks-in-hawaii-are-impenetrable-to-attack-and-that-s-the-problem-1.604488) published in October 2019, the following was reported regarding the possibility of retrofitting those storage fuel tanks:

‘It just won’t work’ Critics of the Red Hill fuel tanks have for years urged the Navy to retrofit them to ensure they will be leak proof. But the tank system’s greatest strength — its impregnability to outside force — also makes adding a buffer layer near impossible.

Steven Linder, a program manager for the EPA’s underground storage tank program, said at a public hearing earlier this month that both the EPA and Navy had brought in industry experts, including one who formerly managed Chevron’s fuel storage, to review technologies for retrofitting.

“Unfortunately, the Red Hill tanks are quite unusual — much taller and larger than what you usually see,” he said. “So, a lot of technologies that were designed for shorter, above-ground tanks that have much lower pressure on them can’t be used at Red Hill. It just won’t work.

“These tanks are mined into the mountain, into solid rock, over a huge area. There’s no technologies that allow us to basically get in there and around these tanks to make the area around the tanks impermeable.”


Based on the joint EPA / US Navy research regarding the possibility of anything short of shutting down those tanks, the current available technology does not exist.  Hence, the US imperial navy's continued use those fuel tanks, given the possibility of further damage to the drinking water under them, is needlessly reckless and is in this case the "extreme position".

It's enough to simply argue the facts.  Accusing anyone who disagrees with you of "clearly [exemplifying] a very blind pro-military emotional response to defend the US imperial military at any cost, even if it means potentially contaminating the water supply of all who live on Oahu now and generations into the future" is a personal attack.

This facility has been there since 1940.  How long have you been this passionate about shutting it down? Was the water in the area contaminated to unsafe levels before 2013?

Why does everything have to involve political ideologies and US imperialism?  Why can't this be about a discussion of the facts and alternative solutions?

There's more than one way to skin most cats.  Just because you believe your extreme position is the only right answer doesn't mean there's not an equally safe solution that's not as extreme which also makes 100% sense for the environment.

THIS^
inaction is action

THIS^
inaction is action

A very long time.

Creating awareness that further supports grassroot collective action.

So folks who don’t post are not taking any action? You a$$ume way too much.

Talk is cheap…

The decision of whether or not to permanently shut down the US imperial navy's fuel tanks is purely one of common sense and of public safety.

Common sense? Based on what info? Like common sense gun control?

I haven’t been directly involved with efforts to address, fix, improve the issue at hand but personally know many who are. Let me clue you on a little tidbit that folks that operate based on logic over emotion. The media reports more opinion and spin than facts.

Keep on whinging and thinking you’re taking action…

A very long time.

Since the fuel storage facility at Red Hill was classified from the time of it's creation until 1995, would your "very long time" have begun before or after the existence of the tanks was made public?

The facility was [declassified] in the 1990s, and is now considered to be one of Hawaii's greatest
engineering feats, placed alongside the Hoover Dam, Eiffel Tower, and the Panama Canal as an important
historic landmark. But yet, very few people actually know much about the secret facility, and even fewer
have been inside.

Are these the ICBM silos you were referencing on here "long ago?"

So folks who don’t post are not taking any action? You a$$ume way too much.

Talk is cheap…

You want to make this personal brah.

Since the fuel storage facility at Red Hill was classified from the time of it's creation until 1995, would your "very long time" have begun before or after the existence of the tanks was made public?

Just because things are classified does not mean people living in Hawaii did not know what's going on.

Just because things are classified does not mean people living in Hawaii did not know what's going on.

much like the ICBM silos...

You want to make this personal brah.

Uh, no. You’re the one making broad assertions, brah.

much like the ICBM silos...

Inter island?

Just because things are classified does not mean people living in Hawaii did not know what's going on.

You dodged the question.

Exactly WHEN did you learn of the fuel tanks' existence?  "A very long time" could mean decades, years, months ....

But, if you don't know, just say so.  I'm trying to get an idea of how long this problem was bothering you .. before or after the tanks were declassified?

Uh, no. You’re the one making broad assertions, brah.

Don't BS, I am discussing issues.

Your recent statements are trying to derail this thread by focusing on my involvement with the fuel tank situation, which is irrelevant and not your business.

Don't BS, I am discussing issues.

Your recent statements are trying to derail this thread by focusing on my involvement with the fuel tank situation, which is irrelevant and not your business.

But, somehow what others think about the tank situation IS your business in as much as you get to characterize our opinions as supporting an evil US Imperial Navy and not caring about the water contamination.

Can't cast stones at the rest of us and then pretend your own inaction regarding the tanks is off limits.