Letter: Wording could have people drinking contaminated water

Editor,

The Navy and Coupeville’s “path forward” to the solution of the town’s PFAS-contaminated water supply is a slow one that won’t get people the clean water they expect.

The promised PFAS filter system is supposed to be finished in late 2019, three years after contamination was discovered.

The Navy admits that PFASs will be reduced, but not eliminated.

How much of which PFASs people will still be drinking is the question neither party to the memorandum of understanding will answer.

State-of-the-art filtration systems can drop PFASs levels to single digit parts per trillion. However, the town and Navy’s agreement doesn’t call for one, or for removal of PFASs to the greatest extent possible. Neither does it call for post-filter monitoring and reporting that will reveal the amounts of all PFASs that will remain.

At least seven have been found in Coupeville’s water.

The agreement says nothing about the PFHXS and PFHPA in the water. It only calls for reducing PFOA/PFOS to an amount below 70 parts per trillion.

This leaves wiggle room for PFASs to remain at levels above the Agency For Toxic Substances And Disease Registry’s proposed minimum risk levels.

The filter is supposed to have “adaptive alternatives” to address “future applicable federal or state drinking water regulations.”

This wording allows PFASs to remain that are not regulated or likely to be regulated in the near future.

The Navy and Coupeville have a history of using detection limits that allowed for some PFASs to go undetected and unreported. Neither will identify the detection limits to be used in the post-filter sampling.

This benefits people most concerned about public image and tourist dollars, not those who want to know what’s in their drinking water.

For reasons yet unexplained, the decision was made against relocating the town’s main supply well to an uncontaminated area. Doing so might have cost the Navy more money, but it would have assured PFAS free drinking water.

The terms of the agreement will expire in 10 years, or “whenever the Navy determines the response action is no longer needed.” This kind of wording can leave people drinking PFAS contaminated water and sticking taxpayers with costs the Navy should pay.

The MOU can and should be altered by mutual agreement

Rick Abraham

Greenbank

More in Letters to the Editor

Letter: Any Democrat would be better than Donald Trump

Editor, A recent letter to the editor posed a couple of questions… Continue reading

Letter: Paper’s editorial about FOI states what needed said

Editor, Thanks so much for putting in print what needed to be… Continue reading

Letter: Training at OLF Coupeville a matter of life and death

Editor, It’s been over two years since I retired as the deputy… Continue reading

Letter: AG’s lawsuit against Navy is a political spectacle

By Christine Cribb The mission of the Greater Oak Harbor Chamber of… Continue reading

Letter: Greenbank Progressive Club is back ‘home,’ come and see

Editor, The Greenbank Progressive Club is back home in our clubhouse and… Continue reading

Letter: Navy League uninterested in facts, science, solutions

Editor, It’s bad news for this community and our region that the… Continue reading

Rockin’ a Hard Place: Balkanizing the Rock: What distrust may lead to

I’m just back from a dream trip along the coast of Slovenia… Continue reading

Letter: How can one not notice our changing climate?

Editor, Mr. Gunther, thank you for your letter to the editor of… Continue reading

Letter: Growlers were designed to be loud, to be heard by all

Editor, We hear it all the time. We have the best military… Continue reading

Most Read