Today, November 20, 2024, marks the third anniversary of the catastrophic 2021 Red Hill fuel spill, which contaminated the drinking water for thousands of our families and exposed deep flaws in the Navy’s management of its fuel storage facilities. On this solemn occasion, the Community Representation Initiative (CRI) reflects on the ongoing harm caused by the spill and calls for decisive action in light of recent Department of Defense Inspector General (DoD IG) and Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that confirm widespread mismanagement by the Navy and Department of Defense.
Impacted family member and U.S. Army Major, Mandy Feindt, states, “The DoD IG found that Navy officials failed to take precautionary measures to protect human health, including not issuing adequate or timely public notices to warn residents users of the contamination and not immediately providing alternate drinking water. I hope these documents will serve as a basis to finally hold the commander’s in charge of this crisis accountable.”
The recently released DoD IG and GAO reports provide a scathing assessment of the Navy’s handling of the Red Hill facility, citing various management failures and facilities in disrepair. Shockingly, the DoD IG found that Navy personnel failed to follow their own hazardous substance response protocols during the 2021 fuel spill and subsequent incidents. A lack of training, poor leadership, and fragmented oversight created conditions where contractors and Navy personnel alike contributed to the crisis.
Further, the GAO detailed how the Navy’s reliance on a fragmented and decentralized structure led to blurred lines of accountability at Red Hill. Contractors played critical roles in maintenance and operations, but oversight mechanisms before 2021 were insufficient to ensure compliance or address systemic issues. The Navy’s shift to noncompetitive contracting after the 2021 leaks underscores the urgency and gravity of the facility’s risks, but it raises questions about transparency and the effectiveness of these contracts in addressing safety concerns.
Since 2021, the Navy has made numerous promises to remediate the Red Hill site and improve transparency. However, several critical questions remain unanswered:
● Why were failures repeatedly allowed to persist? Reports from the DoD IG and GAO highlight widespread mismanagement, including insufficient training, fragmented oversight, and an over-reliance on contractors with minimal accountability. These failures reflect not just isolated mistakes but a pattern of mismanagement that has yet to be fully addressed.
● Who will be held accountable, and how? Both reports raise serious concerns about management and oversight issues. Will the GAO’s report lead to any changes in contracting practices, given the negligence found?
● How will the Navy and DoD include the community’s concerns? The Navy has not attended a CRI meeting since March 2024, much to the community’s dismay. Despite their attempts to justify this behavior by pointing to other opportunities of community engagement, we still lack a clear understanding of how they are integrating the community’s voices into decisions.
In light of the DoD IG findings, we emphasize our demands for the following:
1. Independent Verification: Require independent experts to evaluate all remediation efforts and confirm the safety of the aquifer.
2. Public Transparency: Release comprehensive updates on environmental monitoring, health impacts, and remediation progress.
3. Commitment to Closure and Remediation: Commit to an enforceable timeline for the permanent closure of the facility, rather than a suggested one.
As CRI member Healani Sonoda-Pale emphasized, “For the community, this anniversary is not a time to celebrate incremental progress. It is a time to reflect on the failure to prevent this disaster, the ongoing harm to our community, and the urgent need to hold those responsible accountable. We are still in the fight for our wai, our future, and the generations to come. As of this moment, we still don’t know the full extent of the damage to our aquifer and land from the Red Hill fuel leaks—and that is unacceptable.”
CRI member and affected family member Mai Hall reflected, “These reports confirm what thousands of affected family members already know; that the Navy was negligent and as a result, we were poisoned by fuel laced water. The families of service men and women are having to juggle the pressures of ʻmilitary readinessʻ and caring for our ill keiki.”
COMMENTS