CHAPTER IV, SECTIONS 8 and 9 The general topography of the various campsites permiticed the use of relatively short sewer lines with gravity flow. Because of the at terrain and consequent low gradients of the svstems, it was necessary that they be watched tor clogging. Disposal was effected through ocean or lagoon outfalls as determined hy cconomy of construction, These outfalls were of suffi- cient lengths to keep the beaches free of bacterial contamination. In general, vitrified clay pipe of 4”, 6” and a8” sizes was used tor the collecting lines and outfalls, Manholes were conveniently located to facilitate maintenance, though on the whole, little was required, SECTION 9 FUEL HANDLING AND STORAGE Bulk fuel was received from U.S. Navy Tankers at tank farms located on sites Elmer, Fred and Sugar. Vhese tankers were moored to POL buoys off each site and pumped through a submarine piping svstem consisting of 4” steel pipe and 4” reinforced rubber submarine hose. Prior to the arrival of tankers, the submarine system was hydrostatically tested, and anydefects found were corrected. The submarine lines were picked up and passed to the tanker and, on completion of fueling, the lines were recieved and laid on the hottom by H&N personnel. The first discharge through the svstem was always directed to the lagoon uriil the lines were clear of salt water. All lines were cross-connected so that mogas or diese! could be received through either of the lines. Bulk fuel was generalty distributed to Users from the tank farms hy tank trucks. The fuel was delivered directly to mobile equipment or into temporary distribution tanks xgenerally made of Navy pontoons. On Elmer, diesel oil was pumped directly to tanks adjacent to the distillation plant where it was entrifuged. It was delivered from this point via piping to the marine fuel station or tank trucks to other Users. Gesoline pumping stations for mogas were located on Elmer and Fred. All other gasoline stations consisted of clevated pontoon storage tanks with gravity feed to mobile equipment, H&N operated and maintained the fueling systems on all sites except that on Fred. At this site HEN was responsible for the maintenance of the tank farms and the .Armed Forces were responsible for operation of the entire systems. The main difficulty with handling of bulk fuel was in the maintenance of a leak-proof underwater piping system at sites Fred and Elmer. This was primarily due to the foul bottom conditions at thexe sites. This condition was aggravated during the operational phase by the necd for frequent replenishment of the tank farm at Fred with avgas and jet fuel due to the heavy usage during this period. If was not unusual to have the sea mule at this site four times a ‘veek to pick up and relay the hoses as required by standard uperating procedures. Leaks developed in both the steel tubing and rubber hose which in a number of cases required deep sea diving operations to effect repairs. The construction of a deep water pier with fueling lines at Elmer would eliminate the difficulties experienced with submarinelines at that site, The complete tank farm at Sugar was exnended in the test operations. The storage capacities at each tank farm are indicated below: ELMER No. ot Tanks 4 5 1 5 *3 Total: Type Capacity Gals. - Each iNind of Fuel Horizontal Horizontal 10,000 10,000 Mogas Diesel 42,000 Mogas 42.000 42,000 Diesel Diesel Vertical 2-Ring Invasion Vertical 2-Ring Invasion Vertical 1-Ring Invasion Diesel 3¢6,000 gals. Mogas 82,000 gals. *At CMR - Power Plant andfilled by tank a trucks. wd, Page 4-53 | no sparennae = = - ‘ a ye bee 1 ne Yat ge logs