Column: Navy should do what’s right, not what’s easy at Red Hill

Assuming the Navy really will follow Gov. David Ige’s emergency order, it will need help with storing the fuel. In the short term, Par Hawaii has graciously offered to store about a third of the 180 million gallons that are probably in the tanks (shh, national secret). Tanker ships will hold the rest.

For the long run, the Navy lacks imagination. The Navy sees Red Hill as a zero-sum game, an “either-or” that has no middle ground. Either all 250 million gallons of fuel remain in the Red Hill tanks or we jeopardize national security. A saner alternative exists: Build double-walled, above-ground tanks that are not over the aquifer.

The Navy has replaced World War II-era underground tanks with modern, safe, above-ground tanks at Kitsap, Wash., and Point Loma, Calif. The blueprints already exist. They also found building new tanks cost less than continuing to maintain the WWII era tanks. Why are Pearl Harbor’s tanks any different?

The Navy also knows what sites are not over an aquifer. Honolulu’s Board of Water Supply has provided a map showing those locations. Conveniently, most of these areas are on land that the military already occupies — Waipio Peninsula, Ford Island, Kalaeloa, Mokapu Point, Hickam Field, Makalapa Crater Military Housing — so there is no land to buy or rent. Moreover, much of it is unimproved and will not require demolition of existing structures.

Putting the tanks above ground also complies with the AOC (Administrative Order on Consent), that charges the Navy to use BAPT (Best Available Practicable Technology) to store the fuel. Practicable means that which can be put into practice, as has been done at Kitsap and Point Loma.

The Navy contends that the sheer size of each Red Hill tank makes maintenance difficult and replication impossible. So don’t replicate; replace. Build multiple tanks that add up to the same capacity. Given modern warfare, it is unlikely we need the same capacity, saving taxpayers money.

The Navy says that the current tanks are cybersecure because they are encased in concrete and buried under 100 feet of soil, making them impenetrable and difficult to hack. Let’s use this. Don’t remove the existing tanks; instead, repurpose them. Use the empty, clean tanks for top- secret projects, for a secure, emergency command center, or to bunk high-value assets such as Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro or the president when they visit. (I assume, by then, they will not need to wash with bottled water as our families at Aliamanu Military Reservation and Halsey Terrace are doing.)

The Navy proudly boasts that the World War II tanks are an engineering marvel. They were. Let’s capitalize on this and turn them into a museum. The Navy can run shuttle tours from the Arizona Memorial, through the 2.5 miles of tunnel to the upper walkway where visitors can peer dramatically into one of the cavernous tanks, all the while boasting that the other 19 tanks house American secrets. Whether the Navy mentions the spilled fuel contamination of a sole source aquifer as the impetus for closing the tanks is up to them.

The Navy stubbornly holds onto what it has because it is the easier way forward. Admitting that you have hurt your own people, snubbed your hosts, destroyed the environment, lied to congressional leaders, and lost your way is hard. Fixing all of this is hard. But just because it is hard, doesn’t mean you don’t do it.

Navy, it is not a zero-sum game. It is not a game. The fuel can remain, just not where it is.

Melanie Lau, M.D., is one of the two public members on the AOC-sanctioned Fuel Tank Advisory Committee that meets semiannually.