Read the full article by Pat Elder (Military Poisons)
“The recent news article, ‘Maryland military facilities probing groundwater for “forever chemicals” by Capital News Service‘ (Dec. 6, 2023), reads like state-sponsored propaganda. And yet, the writers and the news agency aren’t culpable. They report what the authorities tell them.
The art of national propaganda is wicked. The specific mistruths conveyed below about PFAS contamination from US installations in Maryland are also prevalent in the for-profit press in Germany, South Korea, Japan, Hawaii, California, Vermont, and lots of places in between.
Governmental disinformation is a powerful device, and we can see it clearly here in Maryland, the Old Line State. Maryland is very small – defined by the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. This little state that borders Washington, D.C. is home to at least 21 contaminated military installations, most on the water. It’s not a good mix.
Maryland is a PFAS loser.
There are many things wrong with this Capital News Service article. Segments from the piece appear in bold followed by commentary.
WASHINGTON – Maryland military facilities are in the early stages of remedial investigations into ‘forever chemicals’ that jeopardize drinking water supplies in groundwater after a September report by the Department of Defense identified hundreds of military sites across the country as at risk for such chemicals.
This leads the reader to believe that we’re in the early stages of investigating PFAS on bases when the DOD published alarming data nearly 6 years ago on several Maryland installations.
Drinking water accounts for a very small amount of the PFAS in our bodies, especially in Maryland where many are served by the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission and other water providers that have been doing an excellent job largely ridding the carcinogens from the water.
The food we eat, especially the fish, is the greatest threat to human health. The press in Maryland has done a lousy job reporting on the widespread threat posed by contaminated surface waters and poisoned fish from military activities.
=================
The facilities include high-profile Joint Base Andrews, home to Air Force One, as well as Aberdeen Proving Ground, Fort Meade, Fort Detrick, Patuxent River Naval Air Station, and the Naval Research Laboratory-Chesapeake Bay Detachment in Calvert County.
The EPA says drinking water and ground water ought to be under .004 part per trillion for PFOA and under .02 ppt for PFOS. Here’s what we know about PFAS contamination of groundwater at these facilities. The levels are often millions of times over what is considered safe. The severe contamination poisons our streams, rivers, and the Chesapeake Bay. All of these bases are in the Chesapeake watershed. They are poisoning the fish, the crabs, and the oysters, despite what you may hear from the state.
Joint Base Andrews PFOA – 435,000 ppt; PFOS 33,000. The PFOA in the groundwater in Prince Georges County is 108.785 million times over the EPA threshold.
The EPA is a farce. Sure, they can take credit for publishing excellent studies, but they allow the military to do whatever it wants. The DOD dictates environmental policy while the Maryland Department of the Environment is a non-actor. The same truths apply in U.S. vassal states around the world. Maryland is no different than, say, Okinawa. We have no rights, no access to bases, and no redress, while the military has poisoned the life of this beautiful part of the world.
Aberdeen Proving Ground (Table 7-1) PFOS 64,000; PFOA 4,200; PFBS 5,000; PFHxS 42,000; PFNA 650. (115,850 ppt total for 5)
Fort Meade PFOA/PFOS – 87,000 ppt.
Fort Detrick PFOS – 43 ppt; PFOA – 41 ppt. This well sample was taken from 56 to 71 feet below the surface where firefighting foams were tested. Results may greatly vary at different depths.
Patuxent River NAS 37,000 ppt total PFAS
Naval Research Laboratory – Chesapeake Bay Detachment 234,000 ppt.
Patuxent River NAS – Webster Field 87,847 ppt total PFAS
PFAS contamination at the Webster Field Annex of the Patuxent River Naval Air Station, Maryland, (in ppt).
Although the Navy limits its reporting to three compounds, the foam sampled on the beach about 2,000 feet across the creek from the firehouse shown here contains 23 different compounds: PFBA, PFPeA, PFHxA, PFHpA, PFOA, PFNA, PFDA, PFBS, PFHxS, PFOS, 5:3 FTCA, 6:2 FTS, 8:2 FTS, 8Cl-PFOS, FBSA, FHxSA, PFECHS, PFHpS, PFNS, PFOSA, PFPeS, PFPrS, PFUnA. The foam, which arrives pretty much every day, had a total concentration of 6,449.2 ppt of PFAS in July, 2023. (No coverage here, but see this Japanese news story at 1:09.)
The oysters and crabs have thousands of parts per trillion in their meat here. Would you eat them?
The Maryland Department of the Environment’s top enforcement officer in these matters says the source of PFAS probably came from a municipal firehouse or landfill. The closest firehouse is 5 miles away, while the closest landfill is 11 miles away and neither are near the water. Why is the state covering for the Navy?
===================
The potential contamination involves chemicals known as per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, which are a family of thousands of chemicals used in firefighting foams, heat-resistant products, and many other items.
‘The potential contamination..’
Potential? Seriously? We know it exists! We have known for years.
California considers PFOS and PFOA to be carcinogens. Read what they have to say. Go to Pub Chem, a publication of the National Institute of Health, Search for a certain PFAS compound Scroll down to ‘Associated diseases and disorders.’ Look up the chemicals found across the creek from Webster Field.
They’ll repeat this ‘potential’ word as long as they can get away with it. It sows doubt. It is brilliant propaganda!
=====================
The Pentagon has been under fire for years from communities, environmental organizations, and Congress for failing to recognize the dangers of hazardous chemicals used in military operations and for being slow to clean up facilities.
It’s worse than this. The Pentagon recognizes the dangers! They claim ‘sovereign immunity’ in federal court, meaning they reserve the right to poison communities in the name of national security.
The DOD follows the CERCLA process in these matters. That’s the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. This process involves many steps. The first is the Preliminary Assessment. The second is the Site Inspection. The third is the Remedial Investigation. Different bases are at different stages of investigation. Very often, bases are given a cursory look in the preliminary investigation, and even though PFAS is found or suspected, the facility may not proceed to the next phase and further investigations are shut down. We’re seeing this with Army bases across the country.
===================
Some of these sites are part of aquifers that serve as primary or secondary drinking water sources. Robin Broder, deputy director of Waterkeepers Chesapeake, said PFAS is a known issue around military bases and is more likely to become a human health issue by contaminating water and crops.
There has always been too much emphasis placed on drinking water over the contaminated food – especially the fish. When the Army says the drinking water at Aberdeen is safe to drink and when the Air Force says the same thing about JB Andrews, or when the Navy claims the same at Chesapeake Beach, they’re likely telling the truth. Generally, the drinking water is not the problem.”…