30 Questions for the Navy, EPA, and Maryland Department of the Environment regarding recent disclosures of PFAS contamination from the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in St. Mary’s County, Maryland

The questions below have been prepared for the public in preparation of the upcoming virtual Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) to be held by the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Lexington Park, Maryland. The Navy, EPA, and the Maryland Department of the Environment will address the severe contamination of Southern Maryland’s environment with per- and  polyfluoroalkyl substances, (PFAS) on Wednesday, April 28, 2021 from 6-7 p.m. EDT on Microsoft Teams.

The public can join the virtual meeting by clicking on this link to the Microsoft Teams Meeting.

The Navy has released this presentation and is expected to closely adhere to its script as it does everywhere.

Questions for those who allow us to be poisoned: (Navy, EPA, MDE)

1. For the Navy: Why does the Navy call PFAS “chemicals of emerging concern” when they knew they were dangerous in the 1970’s?

2. For the Navy:   Why doesn’t the Navy’s presentation address the contamination of aquatic life they’ve caused?

3. For the Navy:  Why does the Navy’s presentation “prioritize the protection of drinking water” when we know that food (and especially seafood) is the number one source of PFAS ingestion in humans?

4. For the Navy:  Public Employees for Environmental  Responsibility (PEER) tested the seafood in St. Inigoes Creek. They used Eurofins, a leading national testing firm. They found oysters containing 2,070 ppt, crabs containing 6,650 ppt, and rockfish containing 23,100 ppt of the chemicals.  Is it OK to eat the seafood from the creek? The county’s health department says we ought to ask you.

5. For the Navy:  Is it OK for the children on the beach on St. Inigoes Creek to play in the foam that regularly accumulates there?

6. For the Navy:  Is rockfish in the lower Potomac OK to eat if it contains 23,100 ppt, including more than 15,000 ppt of PFOS? .  

7. For the Navy:   Is it OK to eat the crabs? Do you accept any responsibility for the contamination of the crabs which I’ve eaten all my life but won’t anymore?

8. For the Navy:  Have you done any studies linking PFBA to terrible COVID outcomes? The crabs in St. Inigoes Creek were found to contain 800 ppt. Where else could the PFAS contamination be coming from? Your buddies at the MDE say it’s probably coming from the St. Andrews Landfill, 11 miles away

9. For the Navy: Are you prepared to release PFAS testing results of Harper Creek, Pearson Creek, Goose Creek, the Patuxent River, and the Chesapeake Bay?

10. For the Navy:  When the Navy says there are “No known concerns with off-base drinking water supplies” is that because private wells of people who live off of Villa Rd haven’t had their water tested or is it because you are 100% convinced there is no contamination? One answer or the other, please.  

11. For the Navy:  Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft Hangar 2133  shown in slide 41 shows a maximum concentration of PFOS at 135.83 ppt and a maximum concentration of PFOA at 1138.18 ppt. There have been multiple releases of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) in 2002, 2005, and 2010 from the suppression system in the hangar.  In at least one incident the entire system inadvertently went off. Are the levels reported at Pax River commensurate with groundwater results for PFAS found where these frequent mishaps have occurred at other military facilities?

12. For the Navy:   Uses of AFFF in firefighting and fire suppression systems are considered to have the greatest potential for release of PFAS to the environment. PFAS levels are orders of magnitude higher at other similar - sized installations, often because of discharges from overhead suppression systems. Shouldn’t Hangar 2133 be retested by an outside firm or must all of the testing be done under the Navy’s ultimate control?

13. For the Navy:   How many times did you test the overhead system at Hangar 2133 and how many gallons of AFFF were used?

14. For the Navy: How many gallons of AFF have been sent into Metcom’s sanitary sewer system from all of the hangars?

15. For the Navy:   Materials containing PFAS have been shipped from Pax River to an impoverished community in Cohoes, NY to be incinerated. Will you commit to ending this practice?

16. For the Navy: Why wasn’t Patuxent River NAS included in the DOD’s report,    “Addressing Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Maureen Sullivan Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment, Safety & Occupational Health) March 2018?”

Questions for the EPA

17. For the EPA:  To what degree is the astronomical liability facing the DOD for its reckless use of PFAS, while knowing it was a killer, informing your decisions regarding the regulation of the substances?

18. For the EPA - Why doesn’t the agency consider all PFAS as hazardous substances and begin regulating them?

19. For the EPA  -  Is it OK for us to eat the oysters, fish, and crabs caught near the Webster Field base? Is it OK at the Pax River base?  Is it OK near any naval facility, here, or anywhere on earth?

20. For the EPA  - Is it OK for children to play in PFAS foam?

21. For the EPA - Can you say with 100% certainty that PFAS found at the Pax River base is not contaminating the wells of people in Hermanville who live just south of the base? Also, can you say you’re 100% sure the groundwater from Webster Field is not contaminating the wells of residents in St. Inigoes?

Questions for the Maryland Department of the Environment, (MDE)

22. For the MDE -  The US Geological Survey found PFAS levels of 574,000 ppt in a Smallmouth Bass near the historic bridge at the Antietam Battlefield. People eat this fish. Women who are pregnant or may become pregnant eat this fish. Levels of PFOA at .1 part per trillion are deemed to be dangerous while the chemicals are known to impede fetal development and they’re linked to a host of childhood diseases. Are you going to warn these women?  

23. For the MDE - What percent of the 3,653 public water systems in the state have you tested for PFAS? Several states have tested all of their systems.

24. For the MDE - Many states have tested surface waters for PFAS. Have you?  If not, are you planning to do so?

25. For the MDE - Many states are testing wastewater and sludge for PFAS. Have you?  If not, are you planning to do so?

26. For the MDE - Are you planning to test seafood throughout the state for PFAS? The state of Michigan just published  its results. They tested 2,841 fish and found the average fish contained 93,000 ppt of PFOS alone.

27. For the MDE - Are you planning to set Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL’s) in drinking water? How much longer do you think this will take?  Many states are setting limits for 5 types of PFAS under 20 ppt. Maryland is behind most states  in regulating PFAS. Why is that?

28. For the MDE -  Will the state soon develop a program to provide for the testing of private wells within a few miles of military and industrial sites that are known to contaminate groundwater with the substances?

29. For the MDE - Why haven’t you been leading the charge to ban the use of PFAS in a multitude of consumer products - from food packaging to cookware to cosmetics? 

30. For the MDE - Will you ban the incineration of PFAS in the state and will you ban the transport of PFAS? The stuff winds up being burned or buried. Either way, people are getting sick.

One Question for the Maryland Health Department  -  Do you consider your agency to be a player in all of this - or just a spectator?