Aua petroleum contamination needs no further action, says Army Corps

American Samoa Power Authority is “aghast at the dismissive” nature of the US Army Corps of Engineer’s letter in which the federal agency has closed, without taking any further action on the “Aua Fuel Pipeline” project, says ASPA Executive Director Utu Abe Malae.

ASPA has serious concerns with contamination, in the form of fuel oil left behind by the US Navy, polluting the soil and groundwater throughout Aua village and along the coastline, says Jason Jaskowiak who is ASPA’s chief engineer.

During World War II, the US Navy operated a fuel farm in Aua to store and supply diesel fuel to the U.S. Navy. Although the fuel farm was dismantled after the war, residents reported the presence of subsurface petroleum contamination at numerous locations within the village, according to the Army Corps’ “Aua Fuel Farm Pipeline Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study” fact sheet report released earlier this year.

The investigation found that the risk assessment determined that there was no human health risk to residents, visitors, industrial site workers, and future construction workers, the report says. Additionally, the Final Remedial Investigation report “concluded [that] the residual petroleum contamination in soil and groundwater at the project site does not pose a risk to human health and recommended no further action.”

In response to the “no further action” recommendation, Utu submitted a May 26 two-page comment letter, objecting to the recommendation. He argued that US Department of Defense (DOD) infrastructure, which included both the Aua fuel farm pipeline, stretching from Aua to the Atuu, and the fuel farm itself, encompassing the majority of Aua, “has left behind environmental contaminants, which will burden the people and the Government of American Samoa.”

“While the available studies indicate that risk to human health is minimal, this assessment does not consider the unique situations here in American Samoa and the customs of its indigenous people,” Utu pointed out. “Additionally, the report does not address the environmental and financial impacts that the community will bear as a result of the contamination left by the DOD.”

Utu further argued that the presence of contaminants in Aua, and along the pipeline, directly impact the local residents in these areas. He pointed out that homeowners commonly perform their own construction and have reported the presence of petroleum contamination when digging foundations.

Additionally, Aua residents have also reported finding oil upon their skin after contact with local surface waters in the past. Further, these dermal, ingestion and inhalation exposure pathways have only been considered for construction workers, not the full time residents.

“The investigations have identified containments in concentrations which exceed regulatory standards, but are justified through claims of limited exposure and ‘acceptable risk’,” Utu said. “We do not consider any increased risk with regards to cancer or other potentially fatal conditions as acceptable.”

In response to Utu’s letter, Honolulu-based Army Corps official Helene Takemoto said in a one-paragraph Nov. 9 letter that, “In discussion with our attorneys, we have been advised to close the project since there is no risk to human health. As a result, we will not be taking any further action on the project and will be closing the project.”

Asked if he has replied to Takemoto’s letter, Utu said last Friday,“We have not written a response because the [Army Corps] announcement was more of a ‘take it or leave it’ mandate issued by superiors.”

Asked for comments to the Army Corps decision to “close the project”, Utu said, “We are aghast at the dismissive and terse nature of the letter and the refusal of the agency to take any responsibility for the damage caused to the environment by the military during the occupation of Tutuila circa WWII.”

“There is oil in the ground and that oil was the result of spillage from tank farm operations in Aua village during WW II at a time when there were few environmental standards to follow,” he argued.

Utu went on to explain that ASPA is about to dig sewer lines, which are deeper than water lines, so there is more excavation and chance of encountering oil.

“Cleaning oily water is costly because unlike uncontaminated groundwater, you cannot just pump it away from the construction site,” he said. “However, as much as we were disappointed in the notice from the agency, at least they responded. Two previous communications from ASG regarding Fagatogo-Fagaalu watershed improvements just went unanswered.”

Jaskowiak said he and others have been trying to hold the Army Corps responsible for managing the mess they have left behind. “This contamination will cost ASPA and the American Samoa Government millions of dollars over the years to come and it will put villagers in direct contact with contamination if they dig in Aua,” he told Samoa News last Friday.

“Anytime a person or agency digs into the contaminated areas, special measures will have to be taken, [and] this will pose high costs for sewer lines, water lines and all other underground utilities,” he said, adding that “American Samoa is a great contributor to the US Armed Forces and it is a disgrace that they are abandoning the people with this contamination.”

US Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 Infrastructure section manager Douglas E. Eberhardt submitted a June 6 four-page letter requesting the Army Corps to reconsider its “No Further Action” on the Aua pipeline project.

He said a no further action determination “will burden American Samoa with having to address left-behind contamination by this formally used defense site [that] continues to be a concern to health and the environment.”

He also said that “petroleum contamination along the Aua pipeline and in Aua village represents a direct risk and impact to human health and imposes undue financial burdens now and in the future on the undeserved, low-income communities on Tutuila” island.

Samoa News will report later this week on specific arguments cited in letters from Utu and Eberhardt to the Army Corps