Navy faces key ruling in Hawaii fuel contamination case

A federal judge is weighing whether the Navy committed ongoing Clean Water Act violations at Red Hill, where fuel leaks contaminated drinking water for thousands of military families in Hawaii.

by Jeremy Yurow, Court House News, June 20, 2025

HONOLULU (CN) — A federal judge is deciding whether the U.S. Navy should be held liable for 543 Clean Water Act violations at its Red Hill fuel facility, a World War II-era site where leaks contaminated the drinking water of thousands of military families in and around Honolulu.

The Wai Ola Alliance, a coalition of Native Hawaiian leaders and environmental groups, is asking for partial summary judgment, arguing the Navy discharged petroleum into Pearl Harbor from two piers between March 2020 and September 2021. The motion focuses on Hotel and Kilo piers, where the Navy itself reported fuel leaking through seawall cracks into the harbor.

At a hearing Friday, Senior U.S. District Judge Leslie Kobayashi appeared inclined to find the plaintiffs have standing but said she needed more clarity on whether the violations could be considered ongoing — a key factor in Clean Water Act enforcement.

"I could find standing, but is there a material issue of fact as to whether there's a continuing likelihood of a recurrence?" the Barack Obama appointee asked during the hearing.

Plaintiffs' attorney Daniel Cooper said the court had jurisdiction when the lawsuit was filed in June 2022, based on public reports that discharges were still happening at the time.

"The Navy put out and described ongoing discharges to Pearl Harbor and said that they had not identified the source of the discharge at that point," Cooper said. "So a reasonable fact finder would conclude that the violations were ongoing, and that meets the jurisdictional standard."

But Navy attorney Paul Cirino argued the discharges ended months before the lawsuit was filed.

"Their entire motion is based on the premise that these were self-reported releases, not self-reported violations," Cirino said. "The releases occurred between March 17, 2020, and Sept. 23, 2021. So your Honor, by definition, those releases had an end date prior to the filing of the complaint. Therefore, they cannot be considered ongoing."

The case is part of a broader effort to hold the Navy accountable for decades of environmental issues tied to the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility. The massive underground tanks, built during World War II and located just 100 feet above Oahu's main aquifer, became the focus of national attention in late 2021 after fuel from the facility contaminated the Navy's water system. Thousands of families fell ill, and many had to relocate.

The fallout led to multiple lawsuits and state orders demanding the facility's shutdown. In March 2022, the Department of Defense agreed to permanently close Red Hill, citing both the contamination and a reduced need for the site.

The Navy argued that repairs in 2021, including taking leaking pipelines out of service, resolved the issue. Cirino cited expert testimony from engineers and facility specialists who found no ongoing discharges.

Cooper reaffirmed his argument that the Clean Water Act doesn't require proof that violations are happening today, just that they occurred during the statutory period.

"During the statutory period — which these violations are clearly within — we've established a discharge from a point source of pollutants to water without a permit," he said.

He said the Wai Ola Alliance is seeking broader accountability for damage to culturally and environmentally significant waters, as well as long-term solutions for the site. If Kobayashi grants partial summary judgment, the group will focus the rest of the case on proving more violations and securing remedies.

"We thought to streamline the trial, we would get liability on those subsets, and then as we go to trial, we will prove additional violations and then address remedy," Cooper said.

Kobayashi ended the hearing by taking the matter under advisement and said the court would issue a written ruling later.