Air Force can't walk away from Pease health study

The U.S. Air Force is kidding itself if it thinks it is simply going to walk away from its responsibility for contaminating the groundwater at Pease and exposing adults and children to health risks.

Air Force representatives, on May 30, told the Pease Community Assistance Panel and more than 100 residents they simply don't have the resources, the expertise or the authority to conduct a public health study on the more than 1,500 adults and children with elevated levels of perfluorochemicals in their blood.

We suspect the $10 million to $15 million price tag probably has more to do with the Air Force's reluctance than concerns about their statutory authority.

The site of Pease International Tradeport was an Air Force base from the mid 1950s until 1991. During that time the Air Force used a firefighting foam that contained perfluorochemicals, commonly known as PFCs. In May 2014, the city of Portsmouth closed the Haven well on Pease Tradeport after testing detected PFCs at levels 12.5 times higher than the federal government considered safe. Blood tests conducted in 2015 and 2016 on adults and children who drank or were otherwise exposed to Pease water, found more than 1,500 had higher than normal levels of these chemicals in their blood.

PFCs have been linked to numerous health problems including cancer, thyroid disease, ulcerative colitis, high cholesterol, pregnancy induced hypertension and preeclampsia.

We applaud our congressional delegation as well as local members of the Pease Community Assistance Panel for pushing back hard on the Air Force's statement that it cannot pay for the health study.

"We're not taking no for an answer, not even close," said Portsmouth resident and CAP member Andrea Amico.

During a June 6Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen put the question about Pease water contamination directly to U.S. Air Force Secretary Dr. Heather Wilson.

Reminding Wilson of the groundwater contamination and potential health impacts, Shaheen asked how the Navy was able to fund a public health assessment at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, after Marines and their families were exposed to volatile organic compounds and lead in the drinking water.

"What's the difference between the Navy's ability to do that and the Air Force?" Shaheen asked. "Is that just willingness or is there some other issue there?"

Secretary Wilson said the Air Force's general counsel would reach out to their counterparts in the Navy and Marines to find out how they got funding and authority for the Camp Lejeune study.

The problem for the Air Force and every other entity that has used PFCs in its operations, is that there is no way of knowing what the total financial exposure will be to address both the cleanup and health problems created by the drinking water contamination.

The EPA only recently mandated testing for PFCs. The Pease contamination was uncovered quickly, only because the Air Force decided to get a jump on the testing. Across the country more than 660 PFC contaminated sites have been identified. If doing health studies on those affected by just one site would cost $10 million to $15 million, you can understand why the Air Force is cautious about making commitments. That said, a health study at Pease would provide valuable insights that could be applied across the nation about the impact of PFCs on human health.

Air Force's money comes from the American taxpayer and it's hard to imagine the American taxpayer does not support innocent adults and children exposed to toxic chemicals learning the health risks of that exposure and what, if anything, they can do to mitigate those risks.

We urge our Congressional delegation to push hard for the authorization and funding of the health study. Once the Air Force knows where the money we will come from we expect they'll be far more cooperative.