Brunswick must sink the navy’s ship of deceit. They have turned you into a ship of fools.
PFAS concentrations reported here are the highest on earth.
.By Pat Elder
August 27, 2024
The navy is poisoning you and they are lying to you.
Dear Mainers,
I am sorry about the recent tragedy at the former Brunswick Naval Air Station involving another massive release of firefighting foam containing carcinogenic per-and poly fluoroalkyl substances, (PFAS). This will seriously impact your health and the health of your progeny for generations. You will breathe, drink and eat these chemicals and they will take a horrible toll on you.
Recent tests at the renamed Brunswick Executive Airport show that Per Fluoro Octane Sulfonic acid, (PFOS) was found in a chemical tank that spewed foam into the environment containing 3,200,000,000 parts per trillion, (3.2 billion ppt.) All PFAS compounds totaled 3.78 billion ppt. The state is reporting the release of 1,450 gallons, (5,489 liters), of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF).
This is the highest concentration of the carcinogens ever released into the earth’s environment - by several orders of magnitude. This changes everything for Brunswick forever, despite what the Navy and your state health and environment officials are telling you. Your real estate values will plummet so it would be good to get out now. Call it alarmist. Call it demagoguery. Call it anti-militarism. Call it whatever you want, but take care of yourself.
You have the Navy and your weak fourth estate to blame.
The release of the deadly foam is nothing new here. The Navy has been getting away with poisoning you and the environment with PFAS chemicals for more than 50 years because the state has been largely quiet about it and has allowed it to happen. Your newspapers have been along for the ride, rarely reporting anything other than the pablum fed to them by the Navy.
Almost all the PFAS in our bodies is from the food we eat, especially the fish, mussels, lobsters, etc. This is what we should be focusing on, followed by the contamination in other foods, private drinking water wells, airborne contamination, and dust contamination. Municipal drinking water providers can filter the majority of these chemicals out of the water and most of them do. Your environmental authorities will likely assure you that your drinking water is pretty much OK, and they’ll hope the issue goes away. It’s distressing that these chemicals have also been used - and continue to be used in industrial applications and a host of products at the former base. It’s a daily, chronic problem as well.
See the August, 2023 DOD publication on critical PFAS uses to gain a sense of what we’re dealing with here. The same applications and products identified by the DOD are also used in various industries. There is no simple solution. We cannot expect to ban these chemicals overnight because we have become dependent upon them, especially in the manufacturing of computer microchip circuitry and other electronic applications.
We must be wary when we hear the term “clean-up” being used. We don’t know how to clean it up and we don’t know how to dispose of PFAS. We have created chemistry we don’t know how to control.
Your landfills are contaminated where products containing the nearly ubiquitous chemicals are disposed of. The soils, groundwater and surface water draining from these facilities are seriously contaminated. The discharges of the carcinogenic foams and PFAS from other sources have been sent to the sanitary sewer system, leading to serious issues with the Brunswick Sewer District.
Wastewater treatment processes typically do not treat for PFAS. The carcinogenic liquid effluent containing PFAS is sent, untreated into the Androscoggin River. Until recently, the solid sludge from the treatment process was spread on agricultural fields, poisoning soils, animals, crops, groundwater, and surface water. All of these areas and products must be regularly tested.
I want to provide information here for locals who want to know what they’re up against. I have written extensively on the problem in Maine and all around this PFAS-polluted world, so I want to share what I know, because I care about human health, especially the health of women who are pregnant or may become pregnant.
Maine leads the nation in dealing with these chemicals in several respects, but this, quite frankly, isn’t saying much.
I will critique the report of the Navy’s Restoration Advisory Board, from May 22, 2024, and follow this with links to the articles I’ve written. These articles are invaluable because several include graphics and data from the Navy that are no longer available online.
To date, the EPA has not finalized aquatic life or surface water quality criteria for either PFOS, PFOA, or any other PFAS compound. In plain words, the EPA has not set enforceable limits for any PFAS compounds in surface water or fish. This amounts to criminal negligence. They’re failing us. It’s up to each individual state and most are floundering.
Maine has not established mandatory standards for PFAS in surface water, although it has published 8-ounce meal advice for allowable levels for one compound - PFOS - in fish. This is an important step because there is a correlation between individual PFAS compounds in the water and their proclivity to bio accumulate in aquatic life. Using values for an 8 oz fish meal size for adults, Maine’s CDC calculates fish tissue PFOS concentrations that correspond to specified meal frequencies.
Ng/g is nanograms per gram, which is the same as parts per billion. One part per billion is the same as 1,000 parts per trillion, so the state is saying it’s OK to consume one 8-ounce fish containing 3,500 parts per trillion of PFOS weekly. Many would disagree. Although the fish contain many other toxic compounds of PFAS, the state is only concerned with PFOS.
We must keep in mind that “parts per trillion” refers to a concentration of the chemicals rather than an amount. Let’s look at the math to derive an amount allowed weekly.
· Maine has established a fish tissue action level for PFOS at 3.5 ng/g based on a fish consumption rate of 227 grams (8 oz) per week.
· 3.5 ng/g x 227 grams = 795 nanograms of PFOS.
· Maine says it’s OK to consume 795 nanograms of PFOS in fish weekly. Is it really?
PFOS (per fluoro octane sulfonic acid) is one kind of PFAS. There are more than 15,000 kinds of PFAS and we’re pretty sure they’re all toxic. The EPA is now enforcing a limit of 4 ppt in drinking water for PFOS.
The sediment in your ponds and creeks and streams and rivers and bays are coated with these industrial contaminants. Invertebrates, the small crawly critters in the water, are profoundly impacted and they are the base of the entire food chain. The riverbanks will be coated with these carcinogens forever. When the water level drops, the sun bakes the poisons, and they are lifted into the air to settle in your lungs and in your homes as deadly dust. Concern regarding the ingestion of airborne contamination cannot be overstated. Homes in Martinsburg, West Virginia near the Shepherd Field Air National Guard base that also recklessly used the carcinogenic foams had 13.9 million ppt of PFOS n dust. This is believed to be the primary route of exposure for small children. Vacuuming and sweeping are hazardous to your health. Changing the vacuum cleaner bag may be the single most toxic activity many of us routinely endure. Air conditioner filters should be changed more frequently.
The Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention has issued freshwater fish consumption advisories on seven waterbodies in Maine in response to data on PFOS levels in fish collected in 2023. Saltwater seafood is also contaminated but the state doesn’t care to address this.
Maine recently added a few water bodies adjacent to the Brunswick facility to the advisory list, even though they’ve been aware how dangerous these chemicals are - and many of us have been trying to tell them - for a very long time. The Navy has known of the disastrous health impacts of PFAS since the early 1970’s but they care more about their mission than our health.
There is something counter-intuitive about the Maine CDC’s new advisory warning people not to eat fish caught near the former naval air base in Brunswick because of elevated PFAS levels.
Read this from several news sources:
The U.S. Navy has been monitoring environmental contamination from the historic use of a fire-fighting foam there. They collected data in 2023 and shared the findings with the Maine CDC this spring, where officials later determined that the PFAS levels were too high for recommended consumption.
The announcement comes shortly after the accidental release of PFAS-containing fire-fighting foam on Aug. 19, but this recommendation is based on prior findings. Officials don’t expect the recent spill to impact the advisory.
The Maine CDC says to avoid eating any fish from Picnic Pond, Site 8 Stream, or Merriconeag Stream. They say not to eat any fish from the section of Mere Brook on the Eastern side of the runway and to limit fish from the Western side of Mere Brook to no more than six meals per year.
Maine’s CDC is treating this as Breaking News! Their lack of action is reprehensible. They are aware that a Brook Trout had 1,080,000 ppt of PFAS just outside of the burn pit at Loring Air Force Base in Maine. They just don’t want you to know about it. They are covering for the military, like all the other states. There’s no accountability. Even when a state like Michigan sues the DOD for harm created by PFAS, the military will claim “sovereign immunity.” Citing national security, they claim they have the right to poison you.
Let’s examine the chart below published by the Navy on “Project Screening Levels” for “Surface Water/Stormwater/Porewater.” Screening levels are used to identify contaminated media at a site that may need further investigation. In general, if a contaminant concentration is below the screening level, no further action or investigation is needed. No one I have spoken to in the scientific community is familiar with Navy’s “Project Screening Levels” or PSL’s, as the Navy calls them. All of the numbers below are ridiculously high so it is imperative that we question how they were derived. They certainly don't appear to be health or risk-based. The health of this community is seriously on the line.
From the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) former Naval Air Station Brunswick
May, 2024 publication:
These stormwater screening levels don’t make any sense.
Maine limits the combined total of these six compounds to 20 ppt in drinking water: PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, PFHpA, and PFDA. If any one of these compounds exceeds 20 ppt, the water is deemed unsuitable for drinking. Why then, the wide variations? For instance, the standard above for PFOS is set at 203 ppt while the threshold for PFHxS is 1,750.
The Navy is saying we don’t have to be concerned if levels under these above are in your surface waters. All these compounds bioaccumulate in living organisms (like fish and humans). Let’s look at the PFOS. The Navy is telling us that PFOS levels in surface water up to 203 ppt are not a concern. Please study the charts below released by the Navy about the levels they say are safe in seafood.
From the Navy’s Restoration Advisory Board:
Shellfish Tissue Project Screening Levels
Finned Fish Project Screening Levels
These totals are in parts per billion so we have to multiply by 1,000 to come up with parts per trillion. The screening level for PFOS in shellfish is 552 ppt and 521 ppt in finned fish.
According to the EPA, “PFOS has been shown to accumulate to levels of concern in fish. The estimated bioconcentration factor in fish ranges from 1,000 to 4,000.” (EFSA 2008; MDH 2017a)
According to the EPA fish in the area may be expected to contain hundreds of thousands, or even millions of parts per trillion of PFOS in fish. Meanwhile, the EPA says we should be consuming no more than 4 ppt of PFOS in drinking water. We have seen fish near military fire training areas and hangars, where routine releases and accidents frequently occur, in the millions of parts per trillion. A fish near Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Michigan contained close to 10 million parts per trillion while most of the news stories in that state have been about the drinking water that is mostly in the single digits now. With the recent release at Brunswick, we may expect to see plenty fish loaded with the deadly carcinogens.
Compare the shellfish to the finned fish limits above. This is very curious.
See the ratios of the Navy’s screening levels for finfish over shellfish:
Compound Ratio
PFOA .933
PFOS .932
PFBS .933
PFHxA .929
PFHxS .932
PFNA .933
HFPO-DA .933
How can the Navy defend the proposition that - in terms of the impact on public health - the concentration of given PFAS compounds between shellfish and finfish is somehow calibrated at the same ratio? Again, this doesn’t make sense. They are more worried about concentrations of PFOS in trout and bass than lobsters and mussels? This is absurd while no one is calling them out on this.
Why is the Navy in the business of testing fish? They are in the business of contaminating it. We should not trust them with any of this!
Again, look at the table above. Ug/kg is micrograms per kilogram. This is the same as parts per billion, so we can multiply these screening levels by 1,000 to reach parts per trillion. The Navy is OK with shellfish containing 280,000 ppt of PFBA. This compound has been used as an unregulated substitute for PFOS and PFOA in the firefighting foams. PFBA bioaccumulates in shellfish and it is associated with poor covid outcomes, according to the world- renowned scientist and PFAS pioneer Phillippe Grandjean of Harvard University.
The Navy is not concerned with fish that may have less than 521 ppt of PFOS. (.521 ppb x 1,000 = 521 ppt.) This arbitrary level is 130 times greater than the EPA’s limit on drinking water for PFOS.
We saw above the Navy set a surface water limit at 203 ppt while they tell us that the Eastern Flightline area reported stormwater leaving the base with concentrations of 18,600 ppt of PFOS. What’s the point of setting these arbitrary guidelines when they are routinely ignored by the Navy, the state, and the EPA?
Go to Pub Chem, a service of the National Institutes of Health to see the 70 diseases and disorders associated with PFOS.
The Navy doesn’t provide any PFAS results in the fish in this RAB report. They tell us, however, that PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, and PFNA exceeded their screening levels. Apparently, they hiked the screening levels high enough to not have to worry about the other four PFAS compounds. They tell us the highest concentrations of PFAS were in samples collected from Picnic Pond and Merriconeag Stream.
Here, crappie, eel, and shiner are identified as having more than a thousand times the artificially high screening levels. Where are the results for all compounds tested, and why did it take many years for Maine’s environmental authorities to take the smallest steps to protect human health when they knew how bad it was?
Following is a chronological listing of the articles I’ve written on Maine’s PFAS health crisis:
America’s Fish are Contaminated with PFAS - June 18, 2021
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/americas-fish-are-contaminated-with-pfas?rq=maine
Former Naval Air Station Brunswick
has contaminated the Mussels in Maine November 2, 2021
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/former-naval-air-station-brunswick-has-contaminated-the-mussels-in-maine?rq=maine
Maine Environmental Group finds high levels of PFAS
in the Androscoggin River - January 3, 2022
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/maine-environmental-group-finds-high-levels-of-pfas-in-the-androscoggin-river?rq=maine
Vampire fish have lots of PFAS - January 16, 2022
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/vampire-fish-have-lots-of-pfas?rq=maine\
High levels of PFAS still draining from
the Former Brunswick Naval Air Station - June 3, 2022
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/high-levels-of-pfas-still-draining-from-the-former-brunswick-naval-air-station?rq=maine
Lots of PFAS in Maine’s Lobsters - May 24, 2023
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/lots-of-pfas-in-maines-lobsters?rq=maine
PFAS in Maine - another fish story? - June 12, 2023
Fish like this Smallmouth Bass in Maine’s Kennebec River
are loaded with carcinogens while the state says they’re OK to eat.
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/pfas-in-maine-another-fish-storynbsp?rq=maine
Adding Insult to Injury - December 26, 2023
The former Loring AFB in Maine is highly contaminated with PFAS.
Plans to redevelop the base into a fuel facility may be jeopardized.
https://www.militarypoisons.org/latest-news/adding-insult-to-injury?rq=maine
Dirogo (to lead) or Sequitur (to follow)? January 14, 2020
This is an important piece of journalism because it captures images and data from the
Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) that no longer exist online.
https://patelder.weebly.com/maine.html
The Downs Law Group helps to make this work possible. Their support allows us to research and write about military contamination around the world.
The firm is working to provide legal representation to individuals in the U.S. and abroad with a high likelihood of exposure to a host of contaminants.
The Downs Law Group employs attorneys accredited by the Department of Veterans Affairs to assist those who have served in obtaining VA Compensation and Pension Benefits they are rightly owed.
If you spent time in the military and you think you or your dependents may be sick as a result of your service, think about joining this group to learn from others with similar issues.
Are you interested in joining a multi-base class action lawsuit pertaining to illnesses stemming from various kinds of environmental contamination? Contact James Bussey at busride1969@hotmail.com
Consider joining the Veterans & Civilians Clean Water Alliance Facebook group. 2,700 members and growing.