One Small Step on PFAS in Maryland
By Pat Elder
January 11, 2021
By Pat Elder
January 11, 2021
Toxic PFAS foam gathers on the beach on St. Inigoes Creek in St. Mary's County, MD.
There’s a bill making its way through the General Assembly, SB 195/HB 22 that would regulate the use of products containing PFAS, (per-and poly fluoroalkyl substances). The bill is a small step in the right direction toward protecting human health from the scourge of these chemicals, although it leaves most of the serious legislative work untouched.
This bill would prohibit using firefighting foams containing PFAS, although it doesn’t apply to federal installations that are required to use PFAS-laden foams. If foams containing PFAS are used, the chemicals must not be released into the environment. Additionally, PFAS foams are prohibited from being incinerated or buried in landfills; Rugs and carpets may not be sold that contain PFAS materials; and the bill bans the sale or use of food packaging containing PFAS.
SB 195/HB 22 is lacking in several important respects. It nibbles at the periphery of the problem, although the Hogan administration is our first line of defense and it has failed us miserably.
Military hangars are fitted with overhead suppression systems containing PFAS-laden foams.
PFAS is harmful in the tiniest amounts. The stuff is linked to a host of cancers, fetal abnormalities, and several childhood diseases. Almost all of the PFAS in our bodies comes from the food (especially seafood) we eat. A small percentage comes from the water we drink. A very tiny amount comes from carpets and packaging.
Many states have enacted regulations limiting PFAS in drinking water to 20 parts per trillion while failing to limit the concentration of the chemicals in the food we eat.
PFAS levels in fish are extremely high in locations impacted by military installations. For instance:
Wurtsmith AFB, MI, PFOS – 9,580,000 ppt, MDHHS, 2015;
Barksdale AFB, LA, PFOS – 9,349,000 ppt, Lanza et al., 2017.
Fish caught near the burn pits and overhead suppression systems in the hangars of military bases may have astronomical levels of PFAS while regulators are almost entirely focused on the drinking water. Public health officials are warning us not to consume more than 1 ppt of these substances in water per day.
Many states have enacted regulations limiting PFAS in drinking water to 20 parts per trillion while failing to limit the concentration of the chemicals in the food we eat.
PFAS levels in fish are extremely high in locations impacted by military installations. For instance:
Wurtsmith AFB, MI, PFOS – 9,580,000 ppt, MDHHS, 2015;
Barksdale AFB, LA, PFOS – 9,349,000 ppt, Lanza et al., 2017.
Fish caught near the burn pits and overhead suppression systems in the hangars of military bases may have astronomical levels of PFAS while regulators are almost entirely focused on the drinking water. Public health officials are warning us not to consume more than 1 ppt of these substances in water per day.
Spraying PFAS foams on the shores of the Chesapeake Bay at the Chesapeake Bay Detachment of the Naval Research Laboratory.
Bases across Maryland dug massive 3 foot deep, 200-foot-wide craters and filled them with jet fuel. They ignited it and extinguished the flames using thousands of gallons of the toxic foams in routine practice exercises. The pollutants course through groundwater and travel in surface water to poison the seafood. The PFAS finds its way into sanitary sewer systems and is discharged into the rivers, while the sludge is spread on farm fields. The stuff never goes away. It never breaks down, and it bioaccumulates in the fish - and in us.
I live 1,600 feet across the creek from a small naval facility in St. Mary’s County, MD with no history of a burn pit and a runway too small for jet traffic. These things factor in to how much PFAS is in the surrounding surface water. I tested an oyster (2,200 ppt), a crab, (6,500 ppt) and a rockfish (23,100 ppt.) and they’re all unsafe to eat. See the test results here. Maryland needs to deal with this.
I live 1,600 feet across the creek from a small naval facility in St. Mary’s County, MD with no history of a burn pit and a runway too small for jet traffic. These things factor in to how much PFAS is in the surrounding surface water. I tested an oyster (2,200 ppt), a crab, (6,500 ppt) and a rockfish (23,100 ppt.) and they’re all unsafe to eat. See the test results here. Maryland needs to deal with this.
Actually, they already have. They don’t give a damn, and they’re lying to the Maryland public about the threat. The Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) published a report claiming there was no PFAS contamination in oysters. They failed to look for contamination of any variety of PFAS at levels under 1,000 ppt. I teamed up with one of the country’s preeminent chemical patent attorneys to make it clear that the screening criteria used by MDE was questionable, resulting in a misleading of the public, and providing a deceptive and false sense of safety.
When I reported 1,894.3 parts per trillion of 14 types of PFAS in the water at my beach on St. Inigoes Creek the state’s top environmental regulator said the chemicals in the water - if they existed - probably came from a municipal firehouse or a landfill. The nearest firehouse is 6 miles away and the closest landfill is 11 miles away.
One retired MDE scientist asked me, “What do you want them to do - ban eating seafood from the Chesapeake?” Yes, I answered, if an independent testing regime verifies my findings. The state may be looking at the necessity of rolling out a program, like the tobacco buyout, for compensating watermen and others affected.
The seafood is poisonous. Don’t eat it.
Maryland is behind most of the states in regulating these killers. Aside from a weak provision regarding municipal firefighting foams last year, the state has done nothing.
When I reported 1,894.3 parts per trillion of 14 types of PFAS in the water at my beach on St. Inigoes Creek the state’s top environmental regulator said the chemicals in the water - if they existed - probably came from a municipal firehouse or a landfill. The nearest firehouse is 6 miles away and the closest landfill is 11 miles away.
One retired MDE scientist asked me, “What do you want them to do - ban eating seafood from the Chesapeake?” Yes, I answered, if an independent testing regime verifies my findings. The state may be looking at the necessity of rolling out a program, like the tobacco buyout, for compensating watermen and others affected.
The seafood is poisonous. Don’t eat it.
Maryland is behind most of the states in regulating these killers. Aside from a weak provision regarding municipal firefighting foams last year, the state has done nothing.
The Hogan administration has failed to address PFAS contamination.
It’s obvious the Hogan administration isn’t going to take the necessary steps to protect our health, and the EPA is out to lunch, so the legislature ought to focus on the following items other states are pursuing:
- Testing surface waters throughout the state for the presence of PFAS, especially in locations near military and industrial sites known to use or have had a history of using PFAS.
- Setting surface water level standards for PFAS. (Copy and paste from states like Michigan and Wisconsin so it doesn’t take too long..)
- Establishing fish advisories for PFAS.
- Testing sewer sludge and wastewater throughout the state for the presence of PFAS and make the results public. Test fish and shellfish, as well as the soils and crops where sludge is spread. All prior test results by civil and military authorities should be immediately released.
- Testing drinking water in all municipal water systems and in the most vulnerable private wells located near military and industrial sites known to use, or have had a history of using, PFAS.
- Establishing a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 1 part per trillion, (ppt.) in groundwater and drinking water for all PFAS types combined.
- Publishing an emergency health warning specifically targeting women who are pregnant or may become pregnant. They must be told of the potential danger in their food and water. (always the bottom line)
- Suing the makers of PFAS
- Suing the military
