“Calvert County Times” Buries the Lead on PFAS Contamination of the Chesapeake Bay
by Pat Elder
June 28, 2021
A lazy stream loaded with PFAS runs from the Naval Research Laboratory - Chesapeake Bay Detachment in Chesapeake Beach, Maryland between Bayside Road and 2nd St. en route to the Chesapeake Bay. - Photo by Richard Ochs
The Calvert County Times recently published a story on PFAS contamination at the Naval Research Laboratory - Chesapeake Bay Detachment in Chesapeake Beach, Maryland. The June 24th article, “Navy Investigating Contaminant Surface Runoff,” is somewhat misleading and deserves closer scrutiny. Excerpts from the article by Dick Myers are followed by my commentary. (1900 words)
County Times: The Naval Research Laboratory - Chesapeake Bay Detachment (NRL-CBD) located just south of Chesapeake Beach is continuing to investigate potential contamination to drinking water wells and surrounding waterways from testing done there.
Military Poisons: Navy records clearly show that drinking wells and surrounding waterways are contaminated with high levels of PFAS. Why does the County Times report “potential contamination” when it has been clearly verified? Why is the paper burying the lead of the story? The last line of the article quotes the Navy’s top environmental official admitting that PFAS is running into the bay.
To say that the Navy is “continuing to investigate” makes it sound as if this is a novel situation and the Navy is earnestly looking to discover new things. The Navy has used aqueous film-forming foam in Chesapeake Beach since 1968 - longer than anywhere on earth. The Navy has known the chemicals threaten human health since the early 1970’s and they’re fully aware of the dangers and amounts of PFAS they’ve used in Chesapeake Beach. They know where the underground plumes are located and they know where they’re heading. They also know the exact levels of each PFAS contaminant leaving the base in surface water. Most importantly, they’re aware that the PFAS levels in the subsurface soil on the base are among the highest anywhere on earth.
Articles like this desensitize the public to the dangers posed by these chemicals.
County Times: According to a release from the Town of Chesapeake Beach, “NRL-CBD occupies approximately 160 acres along the western shoreline of the Chesapeake Bay. Fire suppressant testing at NRL-CBD, including the testing of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), has been ongoing since 1968. Some AFFF contains per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS. “
Military Poisons: By definition, all AFFF contains PFAS.
County Times: Results of a recent on-base groundwater investigation indicates that these substances are present in shallow groundwater as a result of historical activities at NRL-CBD; as a result, may have impacted off-base shallow groundwater which may be used for drinking water.
Military Poisons: Generally, people in this region do not use shallow wells for drinking water. The Navy understands this but continues to market this particular line in an attempt to defuse the situation. Most people reading this will assume they’re not affected by the contamination because they receive their water from the town or they have deep artesian wells.
County Times: The Navy conducted drinking water sampling for certain PFAS in drinking water wells in the vicinity of NRL-CBD; however, the town’s drinking water source was not considered as a part of the testing due to the depth of the town’s water source.”
Military Poisons: The Navy released results for three varieties of PFAS: PFOS, PFOA, and PFBS, while it is likely they ran tests capable of determining levels of 29 varieties of the chemicals.
The overwhelming percentage of PFAS in our bodies is derived from the food we eat, especially seafood taken from contaminated waters. The DOD would prefer, however, to fix the public’s attention on the drinking water. It’s cheaper to remediate.
County Times: “According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPOA), “Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of man-made chemicals that includes PFOA, PFOS, GenX, and many other chemicals. PFAS have been manufactured and used in a variety of industries around the globe, including in the United States since the 1940s. PFOA and PFOS have been the most extensively produced and studied of these chemicals. Both chemicals are very persistent in the environment and in the human body – meaning they don’t break down and they can accumulate over time. There is evidence that exposure to PFAS can lead to adverse human health effects.”
Military Poisons: The EPA is downplaying the human health effects of PFAS. The U.S. is the epicenter of PFAS use in the world and Chesapeake Beach has the highest readings of the chemicals in the soil anywhere on earth. 3M and other manufacturers have known of the devastating health impacts of the chemicals since the 1970’s and kept the information from the public. PFAS chemicals in concentrations as low as a few parts per trillion may affect us and our unborn in a myriad of ways. Some of these compounds may affect newborn weight, and reproductive health. Others may impact respiratory and cardiovascular health. Some have an effect on gastrointestinal health and some are linked to renal and hematological troubles. Some may impact ocular health, others, dermal health. PFAS are linked to a host of cancers, including prostate, testicular, kidney, liver and breast cancers. Many have an impact on the body’s endocrine system. Some, like PFBA, found in Maryland crabs, are linked to people who die more quickly from COVID. Some, like PFOS, travel far distances in water and bioaccumulate in aquatic life.
County Times: The report from Town Manager Holly Wahl presented at the June 18 town meeting went on to say: “Even though the town was not a part of the additional testing, the Town of Chesapeake Beach has taken additional voluntary precautionary measures to test the town’s drinking water, and publicly reported that the town’s drinking water has no traces of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Tests were conducted on all town drinking wells, which draw from the Aquia Aquifer.”
Military Poisons: The town’s testing results raise several questions. Although they tested the water using the correct EPA method 537.1, they only released results for 6 of the 29 varieties of PFAS the test can detect. The town has been asked for more information but it has not responded to two requests. The lab the town used apparently does not possess qualification/certification status for testing PFAS using this method. Certainly, the information is not part of the public record. Also, the water samples were collected on 2/23/2021, before the Navy published its new results and before the public outcry. The town has not released the depth of the wells tested.
County Times: Wahl’s report added, “All continued monitoring is on a voluntary basis and is not required of the Town of Chesapeake Beach by any regulating agency. The town is coordinating with the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE), who serves as the regulating agency for the NRL-CBD site, to expand testing with the municipal boundary.
Military Poisons: Sadly, the MDE is part of the problem. Unlike other states, Maryland has not been proactive by testing for PFAS in groundwater, surface water, soils, and wastewater effluent. The MDE has known of the exorbitant levels of PFAS at Chesapeake Beach for many years and has preferred to remain silent. The statement by the town that it is voluntarily testing the water next door to a Navy base that has been known for years to have dangerous levels of the toxins in the groundwater, soil, and surface water, - is indicative of a broken environmental regulatory system.
Calvert County Times: The Town is coordinating to test:
• Oysters- samples will be taken from older oyster and younger oyster as a comparison from the Chesapeake Beach Oyster Cultivation Society reef.
• Bayfront Park waters at the creek and at the beachfront – this test was collected Tuesday June 8, 2021; results take 10-14 days.
• WRTP (water reclamation treatment plant) effluent- testing is planned to be completed in the month of June.
• Continual monitoring of the town’s drinking water- there is no regulation on monitoring frequency on a clear water testing result.
Military Poisons: Can we trust the results?
In September 2020, the MDE released a report entitled St. Mary’s River Pilot Study of PFAS Occurrence in Surface Water and Oysters that analyzed the levels of PFAS in seawater and oysters. The study concluded that although PFAS is present in tidal waters the concentrations are “significantly below risk based recreational use screening criteria and oyster consumption site-specific screening criteria.”
While the report makes these broad conclusions, the analytical methods and basis for the screening criteria used by MDE are questionable, resulting in a misleading of the public, and providing a deceptive and false sense of safety. The firm the state used has been fined $700,000 by the state of Massachusetts for manipulating data.
The MDE tests had a detection limit for oysters at one microgram per kilogram (1 µg/kg) which is equivalent to 1 part per billion, or 1,000 parts per trillion. (ppt.) Consequently, as each PFAS compound is detected individually, the analytical method employed was unable to detect any one PFAS present at an amount of less than 1,000 parts per trillion.
Tests performed by Eurofins on behalf of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility found 2,070 ppt of PFAS in an oyster, 6,650 ppt in a crab, and 23,100 ppt in a rockfish in the St. Mary’s River. Meanwhile, several public health organizations say we shouldn’t be drinking water that exceeds 1 ppt daily.
Would the town of Chesapeake Beach consent to testing performed by an independent third party? It’s a fair question because the Wisconsin Department of the Environment says there’s a threat to public health when PFAS levels in surface waters exceed 2 parts per trillion, due to the tendency of these chemicals to bioaccumulate in fish. The Navy says there’s 5,464 ppt of PFAS in surface water leaving their base. Most of it is in the form of PFOS which is the greatest threat to aquatic life.
Calvert County Times: Naval Facilities Engineering Command Washington project manager Ryan Mayer appeared at the town meeting to answer questions from the council. Mayer noted that during NRL-CBD’s last Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) meeting on May 18, “We went over the status of our environmental investigations.” He said the minutes on that meeting would be posted soon on their website.
Military Poisons: The minutes still aren’t up on the NAVFAC site.
See this report on the Navy’s RAB meeting. See the compelling, yet unanswered questions by the public in this transcript of the NRL-CBD RAB Chat Room.
Calvert County Times: Councilman Greg Morris asked, “Is it true that PFAS contamination is not contained to your site?” Mayer responded that they’ve sampled 42 wells off site, and in four, “we did find some detections through the wells, which was well below the health advisory level. So, the drinking water in that area is safe to drink; it’s safe on base, safe off base.”
But Morris said he was really asking about surface runoff. Mayer said, “The surface water results, we just received those, those are not in the initial sampling that we did. We do have some high levels, I’ll be honest with you. Those levels are high, and that’s what we’re looking at as far as the interim measures, so that we can bring down those levels.”
Morris then asked, “Has the Navy confirmed PFAS leaving the site via streams that are discharging to the Bay?” He responded, “Well, that seems to be the case from the sampling that we have.”
Military Poisons: Credit goes to Councilmember Morris for asking the right questions.
How, exactly does the Navy intend to bring down the levels of surface runoff? Will they wait a thousand years? The lead in the Calvert County Times story is buried in these last few lines. Rather than the headline saying, “Navy Investigating Contaminant Surface Runoff,” it ought to say, “Navy Finally Admits PFAS Contamination of the Bay.”
Thank you,
Pat Elder pelder@militarypoisons.org